I personally take a liking to attack blades considering how their raw strength can pretty much( from my experiences of blading for 8 years) rips through almost any combo if used at full strength and does the job quickly and im an attack based blader..as for defensive blades, i find the boring because they make the battle seem so slow and you are just relying on outspining your opponent rather than trying to make contact that will win the matchand still create some sort of excitement...they may be good for tactical reasons if u are that type of blader but zombies can do that for you..so i would like people's opinion on what is better.....Attackers Or Defenders?

I prefer attackers. Defenders are a bit dull, and are usually sitting ducks in the middle of the stadium, waiting for attack types to take them out.

Please don't do this.

You already ruined my potential new customs thread with this nonsense.

---

seriously, quit it, we all know compacts r the best. XD no, but seriously, attacks beat endurance, endurance beat defense, and defense beat attacks. thats how it works. compacts are beaten by any blade concentrated on just one type (all attack, all defense, all endurance), i think, correct me if im wrong. your opinion isnt going to change the fact that defense are made to beat attacks, if they arent doing this, which is what they are to do, than they arent defensives.

---

Thanks, Kai-V, for my banner

seriously, quit it, we all know compacts r the best. XD no, but seriously, attacks beat endurance, endurance beat defense, and defense beat attacks. thats how it works. compacts are beaten by any blade concentrated on just one type (all attack, all defense, all endurance), i think, correct me if im wrong. your opinion isnt going to change the fact that defense are made to beat attacks, if they arent doing this, which is what they are to do, than they arent defensives.

This is probably the most (incorrect) sweeping generalization I have ever read.

Anyway, I'm locking this before it devolves any further.

---