[GavinGill]

But more importantly, why is it that robots can't grow mustaches?

[Kevin]

^ Gavin, Your logic yet again has left me speechless. +1 if I could Karma.

[Allie]

I still believe my several walls of text explaining my logic is good enough.
None of you can convince me otherwise: there cannot be a "best PvPer" because everyones tactics are different versus opponents, and everyone has strengths and weaknesses.
The only way to be the "best" is to have NO weaknesses at all, and be perfect in the game.
The chances of someone being like this is absolute 0.

[Ray_Kalm]

I still believe my several walls of text explaining my logic is good enough.
None of you can convince me otherwise: there cannot be a "best PvPer" because everyones tactics are different versus opponents, and everyone has strengths and weaknesses.
The only way to be the "best" is to have NO weaknesses at all, and be perfect in the game.
The chances of someone being like this is absolute 0.

You're trying to confuse yourself with 'best' by describing it with 'perfect'.

[Allie]

Definition of "the best":
someone who tops all others

No one can fit this description unless they are perfect.

[iwasbobo]

Definition of "the best":
someone who tops all others

No one can fit this description unless they are perfect.

Some tall guy could. =O

[Allie]

Iunno.
That's one comment that didn't beat me, and I admit when I've been beaten by word play.

[Optimism]

Definition of "the best":
someone who tops all others

No one can fit this description unless they are perfect.

What? This is a complete logical fallacy.

I'll make this simplistic parallel to facilitate your understanding. Certainly, there must be some context to gauge skill level. If your implications were indeed plausible, then there is nothing separating a level 1 from a level 200, is there? According to your logic, one wouldn't be able to separate the better player because both aren't infinitely skillful (lolwut?). There is always some tangible facet to gauge the ability of a player; thus, there is certainly a way to gauge who the best player is. To be the richest within this game, does that player have to have infinite gigas? No. There are facets used to gauge who is the richest player -- the aforesaid gigas. Similarly the player with the highest win ratio vs players is the better player.

[Allie]

I didn't read your paragraph because it has huge words in it.
Reply with smaller words please.

[iwasbobo]

What? This is a complete logical fallacy.

I'll make this simplistic parallel to facilitate your understanding. Certainly, there must be some context to gauge skill level. If your implications were indeed plausible, then there is nothing separating a level 1 from a level 200, is there? According to your logic, one wouldn't be able to separate the better player because both aren't infinitely skillful (lolwut?). There is always some tangible facet to gauge the ability of a player; thus, there is certainly a way to gauge who the best player is. To be the richest within this game, does that player have to have infinite gigas? No. There are facets used to gauge who is the richest player -- the aforesaid gigas. Similarly the player with the highest win ratio vs players is the better player.

Stop using a thesaurus. D:<

[Optimism]

I didn't read your paragraph because it has huge words in it.
Reply with smaller words please.

Ughmm...

Someone else do it D:.

<3 allie.

[Jeffalo13]

I'm sorry, but you guys all need to get your panties out of a bunch, and be mature.  Opti, you don't need to write paragraphs about how he sucks and you're officially #1.  How about you play the game for the love of the game, and just have fun.

[Styx]

jeff wins

[Meta]

To me, being "the best" means to have never lost a single game, "the best" should have endless wins. no1 in the community is "the best" nor is anyone perfect.

[zomniethe4]

Cept zom, cause he aint afraid of anything.