>>89052877>Didn't realize we were specifically talking 3.5, but no, I don't think it's balanced.I meant 3 and no, i don't think you ever brought 3 up in this thread with me, you kinda came to me and said i wanted balance, like some sort of nerd.
>resolution mechanicsso what is infinity better and better balanced?
>comeback mechanicsare actually shit
>, instead of responding to any competition with plugged ears and screaming with denial.i mean no, you're autistic and i've proved that in detail, your issue appears to be fucking nebulousness but because argument is itself a competition i'm not required to actually give you the benefit of the doubt or good will, least of all here, 20 posts into this thread. you've not explained yourself. you've stamped your feet, bitched cried, accused others of doing the same when it's pointed out and only now when i've asked questions do we even seem to come close to your ideas.
proving my point above again, that you are autistic,you are unable to cope with the fact we aren't a hive mind and we don't attached the same concepts you do.
you could fully be correct but you've made no fucking attempt to argue the point.
Even in your response to me you have contradictions, 3.0 warhammer was balanced, reasonably differences were limited and firepower was low. you've decided rules being inconsistent is an example of bad balance. even though these differences clearly have their own balance, monsters for instance have a very set balance compared to vehicles, vehicles can live ambigiously and require higher and higher s values, monsters have set life values and can be threatened by small arms, especially posion or killed by ID but don't have to worry about facing, can be cheaper
universality isn't balance, you've said it yourself here.
But it also doesn't matter because the goal is similiation. if you want to play a game of balance, universal rules that are consistent play fucking chess. look at what it's trying to do instead.
