Originally posted by quanchi112
Not it is quite relevant.
Then explain why it is relevant, and why it should matter.
Also, just a FYI, even if you were right earlier, and Khan intended to hit the ground and walls, that alone makes him a retard for purposely striking invalid targets. So, I have a question to propose to you. Which is it? Does Khan occasionally miss, making your claim of 100% perfect accuracy invalid, or is Khan a mental reject for occasionally choosing to shoot invalid targets?
Think carefully about your answer to this before posting.
Originally posted by Darkstorm ZeroIf one shot hits the ground and takes two guys down preventing them from shooting you then it's an excellent shot. You really lack the intelligence to think on your own and often insult while piggybacking other posters argument.
Then explain why it is relevant, and why it should matter.Also, just a FYI, even if you were right earlier, and Khan intended to hit the ground and walls, that alone makes him a retard for purposely striking invalid targets. So, I have a question to propose to you. Which is it? Does Khan occasionally miss, making your claim of 100% perfect accuracy invalid, or is Khan a mental reject for occasionally choosing to shoot invalid targets?
Think carefully about your answer to this before posting.
I already have but you need to take your own advice.
Ah, I see what's going on here.
Quan is arguing that Khan was making use of cover fire and/or trying to pin the Klingons down. If Khan can force the Klingons to take cover behind something, they become less of a threat to him. Therefore, even if Khan doesn't actually hit them, he's still strategically getting them out of the way.
Too bad he accomplished all of absolutely nothing with this shot.
Originally posted by quanchi112
You don't know that. Obviously in a combat situation your number one goal is to prevent multiple fire from coming at you while taking out as many as effectively as possible. Again, there is no definitive proof he ever missed.
So you're shifting the burden of proof again?
Originally posted by quanchi112
If one shot hits the ground and takes two guys down preventing them from shooting you then it's an excellent shot. You really lack the intelligence to think on your own and often insult while piggybacking other posters argument.I already have but you need to take your own advice.
You failed to answer the first point. A goalpost shift and faulty logic, not to mention tragically dishonest in the 2nd point. And for the trifecta, a "No U!!!" thumbtacked on at the end.
Seriously Quan, you do realise the entire idea of suppressive fire flies in the face of your 100% perfect accuracy claim, because the very premise of suppressive fire is to cause your opponents to take cover, as in no direct hits. That's the very definition of innacurate.
Originally posted by The ScenarioWe don't see him shoot or what not. It isn't definitive in these cases so quite while you're behind.
Ah, I see what's going on here.Quan is arguing that Khan was making use of cover fire and/or trying to pin the Klingons down. If Khan can force the Klingons to take cover behind something, they become less of a threat to him. Therefore, even if Khan doesn't actually hit them, he's still strategically getting them out of the way.
Too bad he accomplished all of absolutely nothing with this shot.
Originally posted by Darkstorm ZeroIf he aimed at the ground to knock them on their asses then he is accurate. That's the point, shorty.
You failed to answer the first point. A goalpost shift and faulty logic, not to mention tragically dishonest in the 2nd point. And for the trifecta, a "No U!!!" thumbtacked on at the end.Seriously Quan, you do realise the entire idea of suppressive fire flies in the face of your 100% perfect accuracy claim, because the very premise of suppressive fire is to cause your opponents to take cover, as in no direct hits. That's the very definition of innacurate.
Originally posted by quanchi112
We don't see him shoot or what not. It isn't definitive in these cases so quite while you're behind.
"Or what not"? What do you mean by that?
Did that blast hit the wall or not?
http://i1349.photobucket.com/albums/p757/Scenario388/Other%20evidence/khanmiss5_zpsbaddc607.gif
^ Here's the direct link until bandwidth resets.
Originally posted by The ScenarioI saw it. We just don't see anything definitive.
"Or what not"? What do you mean by that?Did that blast hit the wall or not?
http://i1349.photobucket.com/albums/p757/Scenario388/Other%20evidence/khanmiss5_zpsbaddc607.gif
^ Here's the direct link until bandwidth resets.
