+- World Beyblade Organization by Fighting Spirits Inc. (https://worldbeyblade.org)
+-- Forum: Beyblade Discussion (https://worldbeyblade.org/Forum-Beyblade-Discussion)
+--- Forum: Beyblade General (https://worldbeyblade.org/Forum-Beyblade-General)
+--- Thread: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? (/Thread-The-ongoing-debate-Defensive-tracks-is-C145-still-top-tier)
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Mc Frown - Aug. 22, 2010
MF CH120CS version is much better imo.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Daegor42 - Aug. 22, 2010
(Aug. 22, 2010 7:54 PM)Ozzy Wrote: It's safe to disagree with things. People have been being immature lately and others just bandwagonning and speaking just to have something to say.
Who's been jumping on the bandwagon? You kept accusing Mc Frown of that, iirc, but he was the only one holding to his points. That's a pretty small bandwagon.
Annnnnnnnyways. It's good that you apologized.
And for the record, I would just like to say that as long as ED145 is on the top tier list, C145 should not be taken off.
C145 > ED145 by a large margin.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Ozzy - Aug. 22, 2010
(Aug. 22, 2010 8:00 PM)Daegor42 Wrote:(Aug. 22, 2010 7:54 PM)Ozzy Wrote: It's safe to disagree with things. People have been being immature lately and others just bandwagonning and speaking just to have something to say.
Who's been jumping on the bandwagon? You kept accusing Mc Frown of that, iirc, but he was the only one holding to his points. That's a pretty small bandwagon.
Annnnnnnnyways. It's good that you apologized.
And for the record, I would just like to say that as long as ED145 is on the top tier list, C145 should not be taken off.
C145 > ED145 by a large margin.
I was referring to a situation that happened outside of this thread. I was not directly speaking about McFrown.
(Aug. 22, 2010 8:00 PM)Mc Frown Wrote: MF CH120CS version is much better.
You should edit this. It may cause some confusion. Just saying.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Ultra - Aug. 22, 2010
(Aug. 22, 2010 8:00 PM)Mc Frown Wrote: MF CH120CS version is much better.
Do you have any proof to back that up?
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Mc Frown - Aug. 22, 2010
Not really because I don't own a CS.
But the results for it are good and I have little to no success with Quetz 90RF.
Just an opinion, I guess.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Marco - Aug. 22, 2010
Then your assumption is invalid, because as you said in another thread you have to test is against the exact same combo as the one that CS was facing. Still, it is your opinion and I respect it, I think that they are both equal in a sense and should both stay as alternates to each other.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Mc Frown - Aug. 22, 2010
I can dig up results from flighty's thread later.
I also know a good member or two that hates Quetz 90RF.
Cpt. Squirell iirc and <3.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Ultra - Aug. 22, 2010
So basically your saying that you think that Quetz 90RF isn't good because you can't use it? That's a great reason. I suck carp with leone but I don't say that it's bad.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Ozzy - Aug. 22, 2010
(Aug. 22, 2010 8:15 PM)Marco Wrote: Then your assumption is invalid, because as you said in another thread you have to test is against the exact same combo as the one that CS was facing. Still, it is your opinion and I respect it, I think that they are both equal in a sense and should both stay as alternates to each other.
Very well said. Things are turning out better already but I think we should have this discussion in a seperate thread for the Quetz combos.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Marco - Aug. 22, 2010
(Aug. 22, 2010 8:17 PM)megablader2 Wrote: So basically your saying that you think that Quetz 90RF isn't good because you can't use it? That's a great reason. I suck carp with leone but I don't say that it's bad.
Yeah I agree with this and also as a back-up I can't get carp results with MF Rock Leone CH120RF but I respect your testing and videos, and furthermore as yet another example, moomoo hurricane is only usable by one member but nobody has disagreed with The LVJ LOL.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Mc Frown - Aug. 22, 2010
(Aug. 22, 2010 8:17 PM)megablader2 Wrote: So basically your saying that you think that Quetz 90RF isn't good because you can't use it? That's a great reason. I suck carp with leone but I don't say that it's bad.
The two of them are more reliable members than you :V
I have 0 success with it, and I don't think it's a problem with crappy shots or anything.
Did you watch the video?
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Ultra - Aug. 22, 2010
I did see the video and you can't make an proper opinion on a few battles.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - xCiegex - Aug. 23, 2010
(Aug. 22, 2010 8:16 PM)Mc Frown Wrote: I can dig up results from flighty's thread later.
I also know a good member or two that hates Quetz 90RF.
Cpt. Squirell iirc and <3.
Thats because they can't use quetz because when they launch it, it scrapes the floor not because it isn't good. It's is also because quetz has a hard time with the 145 height on heavy blades, against anything else it is still dominant. If you look on the MF Libra CH120 Rf to use 145 height when facing quetz.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Serotonin - Aug. 23, 2010
(Aug. 23, 2010 12:02 AM)xCiegex Wrote:(Aug. 22, 2010 8:16 PM)Mc Frown Wrote: I can dig up results from flighty's thread later.
I also know a good member or two that hates Quetz 90RF.
Cpt. Squirell iirc and <3.
thats because they can't use quetz because when they launch it, it scrapes the floor not because it isn't good.
okay
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - xCiegex - Aug. 23, 2010
Okay what? I'm just assuming that's what you meant because thats why cpt squirrel doesn't like quetz. Sorry if i'm wrong about you.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Kai-V - Aug. 23, 2010
(Aug. 22, 2010 7:34 PM)Mc Frown Wrote: I agree wholeheartedly with Captain Squirell, except on the point that C145 is top tier.I do not think you believe(d) that C145 was "still good and should be recommended", because you seriously kept telling everybody that "it sucks", which was the issue here.
It's still good, and should be reccomended, but I don't feels it deserves to be on the competitve combos thread, it seems like more of a budget option than anything.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Ozzy - Aug. 23, 2010
(Aug. 23, 2010 12:14 AM)Kai-V Wrote:(Aug. 22, 2010 7:34 PM)Mc Frown Wrote: I agree wholeheartedly with Captain Squirell, except on the point that C145 is top tier.I do not think you believe(d) that C145 was "still good and should be recommende", because you seriously kept telling everybody that "it sucks", which was the issue here.
It's still good, and should be reccomended, but I don't feels it deserves to be on the competitve combos thread, it seems like more of a budget option than anything.
I have been trying to say this but of course it kept getting ignored. That's one of the reasons I just apologized and seeked to end it. Very well said.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Cpt. Squirrel - Aug. 23, 2010
(Aug. 23, 2010 12:14 AM)Kai-V Wrote: I do not think you believe(d) that C145 was "still good and should be recommended", because you seriously kept telling everybody that "it sucks", which was the issue here.
Nah, I thought he meant it in comparison to GB145 only, not to the rest of the defence tracks, though it would be nice if he explicitly told us lol. But that's Mc Frown for ya!
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Kai-V - Aug. 23, 2010
(Aug. 23, 2010 1:32 AM)Cpt. Squirrel Wrote: Nah, I thought he meant it in comparison to GB145 only, not to the rest of the defence tracks, though it would be nice if he explicitly told us lol. But that's Mc Frown for ya!I remember reading a clear "C145 sucks" post, and that is something that any member can read too and believe, especially since I think it was at the top of a new page. Those unexperienced users can take it "out of context", if there was one, and just believe it. Therefore it always has to be clarified : "it sucks, but [...]".
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Ozzy - Aug. 23, 2010
(Aug. 23, 2010 1:34 AM)Kai-V Wrote:(Aug. 23, 2010 1:32 AM)Cpt. Squirrel Wrote: Nah, I thought he meant it in comparison to GB145 only, not to the rest of the defence tracks, though it would be nice if he explicitly told us lol. But that's Mc Frown for ya!I remember reading a clear "C145 sucks" post, and that is something that any member can read too and believe, especially since I think it was at the top of a new page. Those unexperienced users can take it "out of context", if there was one, and just believe it. Therefore it always has to be clarified : "it sucks, but [...]".
Thank you Kai-V for stepping in and saying what I have tried to say. It seems to be more accepted by you even if I was saying the same thing the whole time so I appreciate it. People are still learning the game so to say that just isn't right and can't be acceptable. For those who are relying on Hasbro's releases and cannot import beyblades could take that and say, "well since I can't use this and it sucks, I have no choice but to use something less effective since it is my only other option or just avoid defense as a whole". I'm not a defensive blader at all but I still like C145 just as much as GB145. They can serve purposes outside of defense but that can't be explored if one is assumed to "suck".
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Mc Frown - Aug. 23, 2010
Something only a moron wouldn't understand :V
GB145 preforms better than C145 in almost every situation, and because they preform equally in the situation where C145 excells, that there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON to EVER pick C145 > GB145, as GB145 will preform just as well, and generally better than C145 in EVERY situation. When customizing the safe option is ALWAYS GB145, therefore C145 is essentially outclassed, and is not top-tier.
C145 doesn't "suck", and is infinitely better than CH120 and ED145 for defense, but it's still worse than/equal to GB145 at everything.
tl;dr C145 is never a better choice than GB145, and is pretty much a budget option, albeit a good one.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Kai-V - Aug. 23, 2010
(Aug. 23, 2010 2:31 AM)Mc Frown Wrote: Something only a moron wouldn't understand :VCool, so copy and paste that whenever you want to post "C145 sucks" again. Seriously, even if you did mean the above and that it is true in most situations, your messages were simply not clear enough, and you have to remember that people outside the veterans also read your posts sometimes.
GB145 preforms better than C145 in almost every situation, and because they preform equally in the situation where C145 excells, that there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON to EVER pick C145 > GB145, as GB145 will preform just as well, and generally better than C145 in EVERY situation. When customizing the safe option is ALWAYS GB145, therefore C145 is essentially outclassed, and is not top-tier.
C145 doesn't "suck", and is infinitely better than CH120 and ED145 for defense, but it's still worse than/equal to GB145 at everything.
So, I think the case is cleared. I would still want to see more test results posted though, if possible.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Mc Frown - Aug. 23, 2010
That's what I tried at first, saying it's outclassed, but it didn't stick :V
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Marco - Aug. 23, 2010
Mc Frown I have kind of noticed something, you seem to make very brash statements most of the time and although a lot of the times I understand you need to keep in mind that other less experienced members take is seriously. C145 is or is not a top tier part? Yes. Saying it sucks misleads other members. (Obviously it's even worse when you don't have a GB and say it's better than C145 but that's a different story.) You say Quetz 90RF sucks, same as before, you say quetz is better when with MF Quetz CH120CS, have you ever tested it yourself? No. You say storm sucks. Is it top tier? Yes. My point being, yes there are other better alternatives to storm, GB is good in most situations Quetz CH120 should be top tier, but if you say it sucks at least expand a little, so members don't get mislead. I remember having to tell a member to disregard what you said about C145 because he took it literally. Just, watch what you say is all.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Kai-V - Aug. 23, 2010
I think he understands by now ...