Originally posted by Q99
Or, if she is that strong, it's neither CIS or PIS.And her being that strong makes sense.
Given a choice between it being CIS and PIS, or it just being her actual power level, considering we'd barely seen her fight before that, it being her power level works.
No, I consider his innaction, when it was clearly a trap, to be CIS which turns it to PIS.
He could have averted the entire situation. We have to rely on him being "stupid" which goes against Kishi's intentions with his character.
I would feel better about this particular point if you arguged that Kishi was trying to show Madara's vulnerability.
At least it's a supportable line of reasoning instead of just two opinions colliding.
However, I'd still argue against that by pointing out that he had just built up Madara as some sort of master planner and his plans were never really foiled but the first...but rather, they succeeded. Meaning, a clear contradiction because something as simple as, "oh, lol..it's an obvious trap. I may want to port away to take a dump all over this trap. BRB, lol."
Originally posted by Q99
But I've already gone over why I feel you're underestimating her strength too. I think you're vastly overrating her weakness (both it's effectiveness and it's commonness. Basic elemental advantage weaknesses are much more common, if I counted it that big I'd have to do the same for everyone else), underrating her strengths, she's shown that her attacks are plentiful in quantity and can be hard to avoid as well as being flexible, she has not shown speed problems, etc. etc..
No, I think I've nailed her weakness fairly well. It don't think it's a massive weakness, but I think it's significant.
I don't consider elemental weaknesses as big as this one, however.
Originally posted by Q99
Rather than going over all that again, I'm just pointing out we have two interpretations, one of which makes CIS and PIS and the other is consistent with none of those problem.
I disagree because your angle on my thoughts about the CIS turned PIS is still not being applied in the way I intend it to be.
Originally posted by Q99
It's basically like saying, Person 1 says Car A can qualify in the Indy 500, Person 2 doesn't think it has what it takes. Car A qualified in the Indy 500. We can either make excuses for why Person 2's reason and the result don't match up, or we can note that it did in fact do just as person 1 says.
Actually, using your example, it's like this:
Person 1 says Character A qualifies for the Indy 500 because one of the top racers in the Indy 500 says Character A qualifies (indirectly).
Person 2 says Character A probably does qualify for the Indy 500 but says Character A's feats of playing Forza Motor Sports 3, in a state of the art system, for hours on end (and mastering the tracks) is quite awesome, but no the same as actually being there. Technically, it's there...but not quite.
Originally posted by Q99
Wanna pick one? 🙂
I can't. I needed to see one more feat that showcased A-level strategy to push more towards A-. OR..I needed to see a weak attempt at something that failed to put him in B+. I just can't decide.