lol
you all know i am right 
u cant defend certain cheap tactics cause u like and use them well but be agaist others cause you suck at them and dont use them.
thats like saying all muslims are terrorists or all germans are nazis.
wedge = hipocrit
Well, I don’t use any of these tactics… so that not entirely, I have defended tactics that I find annoying but I think they are legit… I rarely, if ever, kami anything into anything… only exception I can think of is colls into gravs…
Ok lags, let me do you a favor and explain to you WHY you are losing this arguement big time - because clearly you have no idea why.
It is simple really: you refuse to put forth a logical arguement.
A logical arguement consists of an assertion (this is what you are trying to convince people of) followed by valid evidence that supports it.
Lets look at your last post:
This is where you made your assertion. Your assertion is essentially “You can’t defend some cheap tactics and support others.”
Now that you have made your assertion, you have to convince others that it is correct. This is what the evidence is for. Lets examine all of your “evidence” and point out what is wrong with it.
I don’t think i even need to touch that one. It is another assertion that is not supported with any evidence (a smiley face is not evidence).
Here you presented some evidence while making your assertion. This is fine but this part of your agruement is flawed in several ways:
First, you are presenting what is called a “false dilemma.” Basically, forcing a choice between two options. The choices you give are “support them all” or “be against them all.” People actually don’t have to pick one of those choices. They can support and/or be against any combination of the “cheap” tactics for whatever reasons that they choose.
Second, you are commiting another logical fallacy referred to as “attributing false cause.” Basically this means that you are incorrectly identifying the cause of something. In your arguement you say that people support cheap tactics that they use and oppose cheap tactics that they are bad at. I would argue that you have it backwards: People don’t oppose the tactics because they don’t use them; they don’t use the tactics because they oppose them.
You support your previous statement with this:
This is “reasoning that does not follow,” also known as non sequitur. You previously argued FOR absolutes: “either support them ALL or oppose them ALL.” This analogy argues AGAINST absolutes because it is pretty self-evident that “all muslims are terrorists or all germans are nazis” isn’t true. So what you have done is support the other side of the arguement with with this piece of evidence.
You end with
This is an ad hominem arguement - attacking me as a person rather than my ideas based on their merrits. Calling me names does nothing to advance your agruement or to discredit mine.
This is how a logical arguement goes:
People CAN support some of the “cheap” tactics and oppose others. This is because they are not all equally cheap.<— my assertion
Here is where I put my evidence.
Scuttling a probe and scuttling a resource collector have differen’t costs. A probe only costs 30 RUs and a collector costs 650 RUs (fact) And scuttling a MS has much greater cost than scuttling a probe because the MS is irreplacable and therefor much more valuable.
Also, the results of these polls has shown that nearly everyone supports some and opposes others. Probe bomb is currently at 1 supporter and 7 opposers. (fact) MS Ram, on the other hand, has 6 supporters and 0 opposers. (fact) The others have more mixed results. This shows that the vast majority of voters have supported at least one, and opposed at least one other. (logical deduction drawn from those facts, which is a fact in itself) Therefore if supporting some and opposing others makes you a hypocirt then almost everyone who voted is a hypocrit.
See how that works?
lol you just proved me right now u left out all the detailed explinations on how to counter rep kami and probe bomb.
wich only shows you know they are as easy to counter as coll bomb and MS ram and research ram.
basicly if you have even basic skillz ( not novice skill or just having read a few strats ) but know what your doing you can avoid any of them at any time ( unless you being doubled or tripled then u cant realy watch your MS )
gg wedge you lost you know it since u never provided one viable reason that proves RC kami and PB are cheaper then coll bomb and ramming.
just the fact that u know how to use coll bomb and ramming and u use ramming often so u defend it.
put it this way as long as you use ram i will use all of the rest 
.
And that is called the “red herring fallacy.” You failed to address my arguement. Insted you brought up a different “stinky” topic to distract attention away for the point being discussed. Namely, your assertion that all of the cheap tactics are equally cheap.
like u did every time i posted the details on how to counter PB and rep kami u ignored it then say i failed to ever provide a viable counter making me type it all up again 
your the one that keeps changing the topic corse.
i am done its not worth my time to keep proving you wrong
I seem to recall addressing each of your “counters” for a PB, explaining why each of them either didn’t work or put you at a disadvantage tactically. Your rebuttal was something on the order of “you can’t pull it off because you are a noob.” Which, as I explained previously, is an example of an ad hominem arguement - which is a logical fallacy.
I’m sure you have your reasons for holding the opinions that you do but until you are able to present a logical arguement to support them nobody is going to be swayed by them.
We have a debate team member here folks, step away slowly and don’t make any sudden movements.
Fiirks loves it when Wedgie gives good solid arguements.
that was way too many big words strung together there… I feel small now… 
Well, as i posted in the other one..:
pbs aren’t cheap, because its part of the probes tactical usefulness. that would be like taking away mines, because they kill far more than there cost..
hey, i voted for no, whatta happen ta me vote…i count to0 you know 
as far as i am concernced anything thin that is actualy part of the games programming ( scuttle ) is acceptable specialy when its as easy to avoid as probe bombing for real not that hard go back up and read reply number 5.
also in strat area counters to PB , ramming , coll bomb, and rep kami all posted that work for me every time.
All I’m saying is that I don’t think that it is right. You can minimize the damage from one of them using one of the methods that you have suggested but you can’t avoid it altoghther. Me and mouse played a 2v2 vs ahab and i think foggy on HG slugfest. You know how close that map is. Mouse likes his X’s of 5. He was going lights inters caps. He had 2 X’s of inters by his wall. Ahab zippd a probe down (yes, a 3D move) through his X’s and nailed them both. The attack started about 6 seconds later. That loss of ten interceptors cost us dearly. Granted, it wasn’t very bright to have fighters close together when playing a notorious probe bomber but still… best case scenerio would have been the loss of 5 fighters.
And because of the closeness of the map and the speed of the probe, there couldn’t have been more than 3 seconds between the time the probe started to move and the time that it blew up. If you can identify the probe as a threat, identify its target, select the target, and move it to safty in 3 seconds then you are a better man than I.
For me, the main difference between PB and the other cheap tactics that you have brought up is that the others can be completely avoided without too much trouble. With PB it is impossible to completely avoid it. All you can do is try to minimize your losses and make it as difficult for the PBer as you can.
If you still think that it is right to do this then I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree because agrueing about it is getting us nowhere.
thats his own fault for letting them get so close and not paying attention. specialy vs a known PBer.
ahab has never gotten me with a PB to date since my return in 2004 back in 99-2002 he got me once yes only once. come to think of it i never got hit with a PB in the 2004 till now time of playing. so i guess u guys just dont know how to use the avoidance as well as me then or u just suck at multitasking.
practice more.
hrrm incoming probe * 1 control click drag * wow that took all of what 1 second to do OMG so hard that probe was so hard to avoid ono i am screwed now that i lost no fighters to his weak attempt and now he is at my mercy cause he put so much time and effort into angling that probe and trying to get me while starting research and builds late i am about 3-5 fighters up in swarm and 3-4 lights up on him ono i am fecked now.
I voted yes cause it dosen’t work. the reason is that you can’t build more than 10 probes and you cannot select more than one probe at a time. so I don’t know what you guys are going on about.
elder if you give a probe orders to move and manage to angle it so it will pass trough enemy fighters and time the scuttle just right cause at the speed of a probe there is a delay in the scuttle order. u can take out as many as 8 fighters that are sitting in perade at MS or a full group if they are bunched realy close in one spot but only if u angle it right and time teh scuttle right other wise u just wasted RU