Bossk is why we hate ships.

"ZAP;c-2051987" wrote:

"thecarterologist958;c-2051986" wrote:

"ZAP;c-2051958" wrote:


Oh cool, I get to out and own 3 of you now.

I have provided data and an explanation of why I think that data is relevant.

You, 3 stooges have provided exactly nothing, knuck knuck, woohoo woohoo, pow!

Look guys/gals, whatever, you’ve provided zero data or even an explanation of why you think HT is not OP. You could at least try and submit something?

"TVF;c-2051778" wrote:

You are arguing meta, not OP

"TVF;c-2051833" wrote:
you are still talking meta and not OP.

"TVF;c-2051881" wrote:
There is data that HT is meta.

There is no data showing HT is OP.

"CCyrilS;c-2051937" wrote:

You've still provided 0 data, other than your opinion, that HT is OP.

"ZAP;c-2051916" wrote:

JKR is not considered OP anymore, especially when looking at data of top arena teams. He was OP at time of release, but his OPness has waned as other chars and teams are released.

Or in other words, counters developed.

"ZAP;c-2051916" wrote:

DR is not considered OP anymore, but malak still kind of is as evidenced by data of top arena teams.

DR without Malak has never been OP, so it has only ever been Malak and isn't now. The rest wasn't particularly relevant, it was just you saying you felt HT was also OP because it was more plug and play. If you want to provide literally any validity, answer the points made and give a reason why meta is the same as OP to you.

I felt I already answered that.

Meta has only and always only lasted 6 months tops with specific teams around said “OP” character.

HT has lasted 18 months surrounded by multiple meta teams as a plug and play character.

Serious question, has anyone disputing this provided anything, even an explanation as to why they think HT is not OP?

How long did toons like DN Thrawn and Rex hang around in various forms on Meta arena squads? What's the difference?

"CCyrilS;c-2052020" wrote:

"ZAP;c-2051987" wrote:

"thecarterologist958;c-2051986" wrote:

"ZAP;c-2051958" wrote:


Oh cool, I get to out and own 3 of you now.

I have provided data and an explanation of why I think that data is relevant.

You, 3 stooges have provided exactly nothing, knuck knuck, woohoo woohoo, pow!

Look guys/gals, whatever, you’ve provided zero data or even an explanation of why you think HT is not OP. You could at least try and submit something?

"TVF;c-2051778" wrote:

You are arguing meta, not OP

"TVF;c-2051833" wrote:
you are still talking meta and not OP.

"TVF;c-2051881" wrote:
There is data that HT is meta.

There is no data showing HT is OP.

"CCyrilS;c-2051937" wrote:

You've still provided 0 data, other than your opinion, that HT is OP.

"ZAP;c-2051916" wrote:

JKR is not considered OP anymore, especially when looking at data of top arena teams. He was OP at time of release, but his OPness has waned as other chars and teams are released.

Or in other words, counters developed.

"ZAP;c-2051916" wrote:

DR is not considered OP anymore, but malak still kind of is as evidenced by data of top arena teams.

DR without Malak has never been OP, so it has only ever been Malak and isn't now. The rest wasn't particularly relevant, it was just you saying you felt HT was also OP because it was more plug and play. If you want to provide literally any validity, answer the points made and give a reason why meta is the same as OP to you.

I felt I already answered that.

Meta has only and always only lasted 6 months tops with specific teams around said “OP” character.

HT has lasted 18 months surrounded by multiple meta teams as a plug and play character.

Serious question, has anyone disputing this provided anything, even an explanation as to why they think HT is not OP?

How long did toons like DN Thrawn and Rex hang around in various forms on Meta arena squads? What's the difference?

Not as long as HT, guaranteed, based on data.

But you guys who “feel” anecdotal things wouldn’t understand anything about data though, so why bother explaining these things to you.

The only time you come out of the woodwork and talk about data is in regards to drop rates when all that work was done for you and is completely obvious.

Anyway, no point discussing this anymore as TVF and his followers don’t believe in OP toons/ships.

(checks thread)

Yep, made the right call.

"TVF;c-2052028" wrote:
(checks thread)

Yep, made the right call.

I have much to learn.

"TVF;c-2052028" wrote:
(checks thread)

Yep, made the right call.

Yep, you lost, as you have zero evidence or data to back up your “anecdotal feelings”

"ZAP;c-2052036" wrote:


Yep, you lost, as you have zero evidence or data to back up your “anecdotal feelings”

"ZAP;c-2051987" wrote:

I felt I already answered that.

On a separate note, nothing you said still explains why meta and OP are the same thing in your eyes, but out of sheer courtesy, meta and OP are not the same thing, as there is always a meta, not always based around an OP character. OP, or overpowered, means stronger than should be, which would imply no effective counter, hence it applied to Malak because they destroyed the counters people found to ensure he was OP. Meta means using the most effective tactic available to achieve your goal, which in arena battles would be the best team with fewest counters. HT is an effective choice to use if you have a slot free, but that in no way makes it a meta ship when it is so easily and often countered. Hence, it can be the most used ship in arena, so is meta, but is not OP as it makes no fleet unbeatable. Uses the definitions of the terms, the forums have left me too emotionally dead inside to decide things based on feelings. That wordy enough for you?

"thecarterologist958;c-2052062" wrote:

"ZAP;c-2052036" wrote:


Yep, you lost, as you have zero evidence or data to back up your “anecdotal feelings”

"ZAP;c-2051987" wrote:

I felt I already answered that.

On a separate note, nothing you said still explains why meta and OP are the same thing in your eyes, but out of sheer courtesy, meta and OP are not the same thing, as there is always a meta, not always based around an OP character. OP, or overpowered, means stronger than should be, which would imply no effective counter, hence it applied to Malak because they destroyed the counters people found to ensure he was OP. Meta means using the most effective tactic available to achieve your goal, which in arena battles would be the best team with fewest counters. HT is an effective choice to use if you have a slot free, but that in no way makes it a meta ship when it is so easily and often countered. Hence, it can be the most used ship in arena, so is meta, but is not OP as it makes no fleet unbeatable. Uses the definitions of the terms, the forums have left me too emotionally dead inside to decide things based on feelings. That wordy enough for you?

I certainly never said meta and OP are the same thing, where you got that is anyone’s guess but mine.

You may actually think you know what meta means in terms of games, but what you have written shows you absolutely do not, you just go with what everyone has termed it to mean now, but that’s an entirely different discussion and a distinction I’m sure you wouldn’t grasp.

I’ll concede to you though and bow to your infinite wisdom. HT is not OP, nor has any other char/ship ever been OP in this game.

You win sir and the original poster of this thread is wrong and HT is average at best.

Happy now?

At least you had more to say than that TVF guy, who loves to one word snipe people and then recoil when anyone challenges his ridiculous comments.

Oh and side question for you carterolgist958, how ya doing vs that HT in LSgeoTB? Not OP enough for ya I suppose?

"ZAP;c-2052066" wrote:

"thecarterologist958;c-2052062" wrote:

"ZAP;c-2052036" wrote:


Yep, you lost, as you have zero evidence or data to back up your “anecdotal feelings”

"ZAP;c-2051987" wrote:

I felt I already answered that.

On a separate note, nothing you said still explains why meta and OP are the same thing in your eyes, but out of sheer courtesy, meta and OP are not the same thing, as there is always a meta, not always based around an OP character. OP, or overpowered, means stronger than should be, which would imply no effective counter, hence it applied to Malak because they destroyed the counters people found to ensure he was OP. Meta means using the most effective tactic available to achieve your goal, which in arena battles would be the best team with fewest counters. HT is an effective choice to use if you have a slot free, but that in no way makes it a meta ship when it is so easily and often countered. Hence, it can be the most used ship in arena, so is meta, but is not OP as it makes no fleet unbeatable. Uses the definitions of the terms, the forums have left me too emotionally dead inside to decide things based on feelings. That wordy enough for you?

I certainly never said meta and OP are the same thing, where you got that is anyone’s guess but mine.

You may actually think you know what meta means in terms of games, but what you have written shows you absolutely do not, you just go with what everyone has termed it to mean now, but that’s an entirely different discussion and a distinction I’m sure you wouldn’t grasp.

I’ll concede to you though and bow to your infinite wisdom. HT is not OP, nor has any other char/ship ever been OP in this game.

You win sir and the original poster of this thread is wrong and HT is average at best.

Happy now?

At least you had more to say than that TVF guy, who loves to one word snipe people and then recoil when anyone challenges his ridiculous comments.

Your entire (failed) argument was based on the length of meta.

"ZAP;c-2051987" wrote:

"thecarterologist958;c-2051986" wrote:

"ZAP;c-2051958" wrote:


Oh cool, I get to out and own 3 of you now.

I have provided data and an explanation of why I think that data is relevant.

You, 3 stooges have provided exactly nothing, knuck knuck, woohoo woohoo, pow!

Look guys/gals, whatever, you’ve provided zero data or even an explanation of why you think HT is not OP. You could at least try and submit something?

"TVF;c-2051778" wrote:

You are arguing meta, not OP

"TVF;c-2051833" wrote:
you are still talking meta and not OP.

"TVF;c-2051881" wrote:
There is data that HT is meta.

There is no data showing HT is OP.

"CCyrilS;c-2051937" wrote:

You've still provided 0 data, other than your opinion, that HT is OP.

"ZAP;c-2051916" wrote:

JKR is not considered OP anymore, especially when looking at data of top arena teams. He was OP at time of release, but his OPness has waned as other chars and teams are released.

Or in other words, counters developed.

"ZAP;c-2051916" wrote:

DR is not considered OP anymore, but malak still kind of is as evidenced by data of top arena teams.

DR without Malak has never been OP, so it has only ever been Malak and isn't now. The rest wasn't particularly relevant, it was just you saying you felt HT was also OP because it was more plug and play. If you want to provide literally any validity, answer the points made and give a reason why meta is the same as OP to you.

I felt I already answered that.

Meta has only and always only lasted 6 months tops with specific teams around said “OP” character.

HT has lasted 18 months surrounded by multiple meta teams as a plug and play character.

Serious question, has anyone disputing this provided anything, even an explanation as to why they think HT is not OP?

I’m genuinely curious what you think. What data could be presented that would prove meta other than the data you presented yourself?
Those charts show HT is widely used, which falls under the meta category. IMO, just being versatile doesn’t necessarily make a toon OP. Also, keep in mind, the pool of available ships is much smaller than the pool of characters. That also plays a role in HT’s longevity. In the last 18 months, how many new ships did we get?
In my mind, to prove a toon is OP would require some type of win/loss percentage comparison of teams with and without HT. Do you have those numbers?