Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mamba" data-source="post: 9026016" data-attributes="member: 7034611">no one is talking about always, nice strawman.All I said is that encounters need to be adjusted for fliers and they trivialize certain things. That has by now been essentially accepted, but somehow you insist on shifting the goalpost to show that I was wrong when I said so. Now they have to always be an issue that cannot be countered for fliers to be an issue at all.Earlier nothing else was allowed to also be problematic, because if anything else is, then that apparently means fliers are ok, as if two wrongs do make a right somehow, instead of the obvious ‘more than one thing can be a problem’.that was not my example, it was yours. You said a solo flier and a solo archer both can accomplish nothing. I showed one way how the flier can theoretically be a problem in a way that is much harder to impossible for the archer.I also did not say the flier is uniquely disruptive or the only thing that can be. Nice strawman again.I am not interested in continuing this. Basically everyone agreed to what I said initially but still wants to prove me wrong by showing cases where there is no problem, but I never said that fliers always are, so this proves nothing</blockquote>