Yeh, i hear ya, lol. I just believe that if you pound the logic hammer hard enough it might eventually, actually impact someone

All you've done here is provide a scenario already spoken about: 1) Stealth goes off node to cap it (either there's no one there, so he can cap, or he CCs so he can cap, or he has to 1v1 (DO GOOD DAMAGE) to cap. The OP's original question (and thus the context of the entire thread) was, is high damage meaningless? It wasn't, if I ran off and 1v1d someone to get an off node, is that useful towards winning a match? 2) In the case of stalling a node cap, it actually just further proves the point that you need to know how to do good damage to be useful, because if one operative is stalling 5 people from a cap, those 5 ppl are bad at doing damage (killing the operative), and thus not being useful.

I hear what you're saying. Unfortunately, I could give a flying fark about how people perceive my way of stating my points. A debate should be logical points being countered by other logical points in the correct context. If me following that format comes across as acrid, or me responding in kind to someone not following that format comes off as being an ***, then so be it. Despite that, I appreciate you taking the time to talk it out and say what you think. I may not care what people think, generally speaking, but I do appreciate it when someone takes the time to actually resolve a discussion. Most people just flake out, insult, and then leave. /salute

But this entire post is literally just making a simple thing complicated. It doesn't actually say anything or have any value. Saying 'it depends', and then backing up that statement with the notion that there are too many variables to give a definitive answer is INCORRECT. Because there is a definitive answer. The context of a question, the context of a point made, and the context of a counter point is the most important thing in a discussion of any kind. We can make relative statements all day, but that is out of context. As I said before, in the context of winning a match, there IS high damage that hurts. The context of the OP's question never changed. Avoiding that context allows you to stay statements that are true in one sense, but completely false in the actual context. My argument was that there weren't too many variables to give a definitive answer. There is a definitive answer. Any counterpoint must be made within that context and specific to the points I made explaining the definitive answer. I will also point out that this post does not track correctly with the discussion flow you and I had. You make post saying it depends->I post my information->another person says your post is correct->I say its not->other person provides no counterpoints->you jump in->I say why its incorrect->you say you are sticking to the point that damage never hurts->I say it does->discussion ensues

Hmm. I don't see the thin skinned part. If someone responds with no counter point and simply insults, I don't have a problem responding the same way. If I was thin skinned we wouldn't be at this point, talking like this. In our discussion, you blatantly said "no, I'm sticking with what I said, that high damage never hurts". That's a pretty clear line, it's not semantic at all. I argued on that. People in the thread kept bringing up the 'It depends' argument (your original argument) which is incorrect. It's like saying, 'it depends, do you have a computer or not? are you currently on the planet?" I mean, if you're gonna say it depends, you can come up with a million reasons why something could go either way. In the case of this discussion, it was additionally silly, because there is a very clear answer.

So you admit to being vague and that you didn't care if you were wrong (kind of defeats the point of discussion/debate). I personally dont consider answering someone's question (OPs) to be pointless or silly, especially if there is a pretty strong definitive answer. When you say better at expressing them, do you mean they're not succinct, or you don't like that I'm not nice (too logical) about it?

See, perfect example. You don't have a counterpoint to what I'm saying which is: "If you had admitted you were wrong, it would've been over immediately", so you move on to an insult about how I must have a rough life and this forum is my sole way of feeling better about myself ALL because I'm literally just debating with logic. Do you see how stupid that makes you look?

It is. you said something completely illogical in the context of the op's question. I pointed out why it was, and you got butthurt over it. You're still butthurt, because you're still replying. I will add that not at any point in the debate, did a single person offer a counterpoint to what I was saying. The counterpoints included: I'm an ***, I'm stupid, I'm trolling. You do what most other people do and avoid what you can't deny, by saying something non relevant. "if you had admitted you were wrong, the conversation would've been over immediately".

I never said you said I was wrong. I said you were wrong and you argued me on it. If you had admitted you were wrong, it would've been over instantly. It always baffles me that when people fight for logic, other people call them being an ***. "Hey look the sky is blue!" "what an ***!".

A wild logic appears!

Buffing other classes up creates an arms race. Right now mercs and snipers aren't fun to play because of how easy they are. There is essentially no challenge. No one wants all classes to be so easy to play there's no challenge. Merc and sniper damage and utility does not need to be nerfed whatsoever. Their defensives need to be nerfed.

It's a troll thread.

Mercs and snipers clearly have overpowered defensives atm. There's literally no way around that. In my opinion, their damage is fine, they just need a defensives rework. When a class is so easy, you get bored due to lack of challenge, it's overpowered.

ruined my formatting. boo.

Didn't trash talk whatsoever, I simply responded to people's points and made counter points, of which none were made for mine. For a discussion forum, people certainly seem to have an aversion to logic here. I hope you realize the irony of making that last statement AFTER your massive wall of text.