[quote=@LeeRoy]
[@Darth] This kind of logic is exactly why this god damned pillar of "guns r bad" has remained standing for so long. [/quote]

I never made that argument. I have literally never once said that guns are bad. I said that [i]guns are unbalanced in mild powers[/i]. My logic has nothing to do with why people think "guns are bad." My logic has to do with why guns aren't used in mild powers, but are considered completely acceptable at any power level beyond that.


[quote]hat convention is fucking stupid.[/quote]

It's not stupid, you've just decided that somehow I hate guns and that's a carte blanche to ignore the entire premise of my argument, which is entirely based on whether or not something is [b]fair and balanced for play in mild powers[/b].

[quote]A human with a gun is not equivalent to a mild-powered character, they may have a similar damage potential.[/quote]

You're right, they're not an equivalent: they're more powerful, and they have a great deal more damage potential. Any character that can potentially kill you from 500 feet in a single post without a single prep or cooldown being activated isn't in mild powers. That's more powerful than what mild powers allows, which is why the convention exists. In mild powers, you're not going to have a character that can potentially kill someone at long range on post two because that plainly supersedes the limits of the tier. As a general rule, things that go above and beyond a tier of power usually aren't allowed in that tier. That's rather the point of the whole notion.

[quote]At this point I see you won't move on your stance, because you're too ingrained in this belief. [/quote]

I don't have any reason to change my belief, you've provided zero evidence or reasoning to explain how guns are balanced and fair to fight against in mild powers, whereas I defined what I considered to be "mild powers" several pages ago and have since explained exactly why they're not balanced OR fair -- and you even agreed! That's what's funny: I give three reasons for why a gun is unbalanced in this context and you agree that all three are true, but then you proceed to ignore the information as if it has no bearing on the situation.

And no, I'm not "ingrained" in the belief. I've been fighting almost exclusively at mild powers for my entire time as roleplayer, from 2007 to now. If I really thought guns were capable of being fair and balanced, I would have discovered it at some point in nine years of fighting across a half-dozen different communities. I've run tournaments that have quadruple the number of people in them as the entire ranking board of Arena. Do you really think that, in a nine year run as both a fighter and an administrator, that I've never examined the issue, or that I've never developed any kind of first-hand experience in play-testing the idea?

I mean, give us some credit: I didn't spend all nine years making "super tite" jokes and posting [i]Trailer Park Boys[/i] gifs. 

Only most of those nine years were spent making those jokes and I didn't watch [i]Trailer Park Boys[/i] until 2010.

EDIT::

[quote=@DLL]I get the argument against firearms in Street Fighter-level lowbie fights - there's a reason no serious military force makes use of non-firearm infantry weapons in a primary capacity anymore.  A man with a rifle is going to be in a better spot to win a fight than a man with anything introduced before rifles existed.  I totally understand wanting to avoid the headache of dealing with guns in a dispowered/low-power setting, and in fact generally agree with the logic as proper firearms use is a game-winner at those levels.[/quote]

The last line is what I've been saying the entire time. We're using different terminology, but it's essentially the same claim.