Author Topic: Old times argument: quantity or quality?  (Read 3801 times)

Did you just read the title and nothing else?
It literally says "SMG or Sniper" in the second line
And a forgetton of other things
do you even read the op.
he's using it as an example for topics and introduction if you actually read the big text

the title is the actual debate topic you ninnies

there's no right answer.  see: CS:GO, some people annihilate teams with an AWP while others annihilate teams with P90s.

likewise, a roman legionnaire with a sword and shield can kill many as much as a cloth/light-armored dagger expert may.

it's just dependent on the tactics and skill used and also the opponent.

depends on who's playing

speed or damage?
SMG or Sniper?
Dual swords or 2-Hand sword?
Rogue or knight?
Wizard or necromancer?

these are often some of the most debated topics amongst MLG and regular gamers alike. Which is best? What instances are best for each? Is it better to be accurate and deal more damage, or be less accurate with an even higher damage rate
Looks like this topic is about weapons at the least.

Looks like this topic is about weapons at the least.
where did op even go

I honestly can't tell what he's trying to tell us to argue about

does he mean quantity (rate of fire/speed) versus quality (damage)?

in which case why the forget would you rephrase it to match another age-old argument topic

Why do we have to choose one or another? Why is it impossible to have both at the same time?

what a magnificently accurate derailing
anyhow, quality. why have a ton of stuff when you can have a handful of gold.

One big bullet > lots of tiny bullets

where did op even go

I honestly can't tell what he's trying to tell us to argue about

does he mean quantity (rate of fire/speed) versus quality (damage)?

in which case why the forget would you rephrase it to match another age-old argument topic
How about "Any situation in which two similiar, yet very different options are debatable as two which is better, depending on who is asked"


he's using it as an example for topics and introduction if you actually read the big text

the title is the actual debate topic you ninnies
Right, he just typed half the OP on subjects he doesn't want us to discuss...

quantity, atleast when it comes to units. nothing beats the humilating death-by-a-thousand-cuts

there's no right answer.  see: CS:GO, some people annihilate teams with an AWP while others annihilate teams with P90s.

likewise, a roman legionnaire with a sword and shield can kill many as much as a cloth/light-armored dagger expert may.

it's just dependent on the tactics and skill used and also the opponent.
bullstuff

in close-quarters at a certain skill level the awp will be just as good as a p90.

p90 will just get demolished by the awp at any range if you're a pro. it all depends on how well you aim. if one person with a p90 and one person with an awp put each other in their crosshairs at any range then an awp shot to anywhere but the legs will kill faster than the p90.

it's the reason why nobody really uses the p90 at a high competitive level- once you reach a skill level where you can snap aim and control the recoil of the assault rifles the p90 just becomes useless because the assault rifles deal more damage and a good percent of them instantly kill on a headshot. and are more accurate at long range.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2014, 10:14:03 PM by ZombiLoin »

Right, he just typed half the OP on subjects he doesn't want us to discuss...
that's the point of an example, isn't it?

to relate to a general idea?

I like quality in large quantities.

that's the point of an example, isn't it?

to wet your appetite as to what's to come?
And then limit us to the one thing in the title
Sounds legit



that's the point of an example, isn't it?

to relate to a general idea?
except you're looking at the wrong general idea you dumb stuff lovable old hunk of meat.
it's right in the op, in bold 24 point font.