And I died again ...

Read through the topic more or less, didn't notice much logic or facts. Noticed a lot of non emphathetic attitudes towards a player making some suggestions based on his experiences though.

OP says: i died even though i was outside of the deadly mechanic = rightful observation.

Antagonizer says : git gud. = ok...lol xD

"

Paldamus wrote:

Read through the topic more or less, didn't notice much logic or facts. Noticed a lot of non emphathetic attitudes towards a player making some suggestions based on his experiences though.

OP says: i died even though i was outside of the deadly mechanic = rightful observation.

Antagonizer says : git gud. = ok...lol xD

lolz.

"rightful?" is it antonym day?

and "antagonizer?" really? you just proved MY point.

"

robmafia wrote:

"

Paldamus wrote:

Read through the topic more or less, didn't notice much logic or facts. Noticed a lot of non emphathetic attitudes towards a player making some suggestions based on his experiences though.

OP says: i died even though i was outside of the deadly mechanic = rightful observation.

Antagonizer says : git gud. = ok...lol xD

lolz.

"rightful?" is it antonym day?

and "antagonizer?" really? you just proved MY point.

Yeah rightful observation.
Didn't prove your point at all. If someone is an antagonizer, it's proper to claim that they are one ;)

rightful = wrongful now.

i can see why you'd want to dismiss others as trolls and antagonizers.

Rightful = wrongful, huh? Are you trying to derail this convo by writing things that make no sense or? Ok xD

says the one that determined that OP was one-shot by a flameblast while outside the flameblast's range.

with zero evidence to support the above.

and with the OP even admitting that he was inside the range (which, duh).

tell me more, your position is air-tight and logically sound. /s

"

robmafia wrote:

says the one that determined that OP was one-shot by a flameblast while outside the flameblast's range.

with zero evidence to support the above.

and with the OP even admitting that he was inside the range (which, duh).

tell me more, your position is air-tight and logically sound. /s

Yeah that's what he said and since there's no evidence to the contrary, what else is there to say? Nothing. I mean unless you want to start an FBI investigation as to if he is making this up or not and use a time machine to go back in time to see it for yourself, then there is nothing you can really do, to make it seem like he is making it up. Why does it bother you anyway that he died to a flameblast outside of it?
He was outside of the FB on his screen and got killed. It's obvious that this would spark disconent and then he came to the forum and made a feedback post about.
Then known forum antagonizers flocked to it and you know the rest.

1. occam's razor
2. desync was fixed by lockstep years ago, making his claim impossible (unless he chose to play in predictive mode, which makes it his own fault, anyway)
3. OP admitting being mistaken and changing his argument to trying to run away from the flameblast

congrats on picking up an already debunked claim and running with it, in some bizarre attempt to imply i'm antagonizing by using facts/logic.

Amazing that a topic about a player with 5k life dying to a fully charged flameblast can get 9 pages of posts.

"

Frostride wrote:

Amazing that a topic about a player with 5k life dying to a fully charged flameblast can get 9 pages of posts.

It's literally a few people just saying we're bullies LOL