You might apply this to yourself 1st, cuz instead of debating with clear arguments you try to bring it on "primary school" insult level. I won't follow you in such childish attempt, dear.
Then, while you're growing up, don't forget to bring some honesty in debate, will you :
I *never* said it was "more powerful" or "too powerful" : i EXACTLY said it brought unequal options/positions for each sides. Your previous message (quoting me) prooves it quite well.
As you clearly require details to understand the subtlety : the issue i state here
isn't coming from the RELATIVE POWER (analogy) of the omni/clan SB lines
but comes from their DIFFERENCES IN NATURE (ontology).
Are you still helpless ? Geez ... who's in primary school needing simple concept lesson ?
Meaned : even IF both SB lines had theorically same level of
power/faculty (one in def, one in off) they still create role unbalancement (def/off), hence specific
advantage/benefit for one side as i explained in OP - thing you even finally admitted rite here :
Btw, do i claim you're saying omni SB is "too powerfull" from this line ? No i am not.
I've been honest since start : i claimed equal AOE options for both sides OR AOE removal, basing on clear arguments. See, this makes sense :
i didn't claim to NERF omni SB (e.g. : shorten the roots) to make it "less powerful" -
as i would if i thought it was "too powerful". So your point makes no sense - and writing it
big & red is useless.
As comparison, you jumped in here to try convince us clan SB was (
"20 times" ... lol why not 100 ? 10 000 ?) "more powerful" & that i was kinda schizo (wich is ironic as you keep contradicting yourself ... call it
projection) while avoiding several issues (call, heal, DD) i mentionned in OP. And as last argument left, what you got ? Insults ... sorry for you, Schopenhauer.
Feel free to be more specific if there's any solid argument behind such assumption.
Or get yourself together & stop trying to biaise other's people statements ?
Thxrgardzbye.