Except i also mentioned other sources of information which you ignored.
it’s not on me to provide evidence. You made claims, provide evidence as i asked. Screenshots of talk are not video footage of testing. I could talk with someone, say this and that but it would not provide me with proof that the person was in fact properly maneuvering at x altitudes and speeds which is crucial.
Simple, its not on me. You have footage, drop it here.
Yeah i will confirm the testing results align with the message screenshotted
I didnt film it, because idk why i would
Simple. To provide footage so everyone knows what your maneuvering was like instead of us having to assume wether you were just flying straight and calling it “maneuvering”, did something wrong or if there was any other stupid things in there.
I’m going to assume that neither of you recorded it, there is so far no evidence where i can make the conclusion that pantsir can’t be dodged because there is no footage of your maneuvers being proper, so even if i assume that you did indeed get shot down, the maneuvering may simply have been shit.
If neither of you has video, then ill accept a different way of proving your claim which i will talk about in around 10 minutes.
@Panther2995 the other person admitted to not having footage. Are you also going to admit the same?
Yeah im not storing gigabytes of footage, potentially transcoding it to trash quality for what was a minor test on a small dispute in a forum thread for perpetuity.
Both no manouvering, light manouvering and iirc heavy manouvering was tested in the altitude and range listed.
Ans also if see the claim listed in the screenshot, Pantsir was dodgeable. Its just not as easy as implied in manual mode.
You can simply cut out any irrelevant parts where the missiles are not being fired, optionally you only need a few clips that all are each less than a minute long. Don’t make claims and then cite your testing if you don’t have footage of that testing.
Except Warthunder wiki doesnt explain full picture.
İ already provided, DiamondLag testimony lies on those screenshot.
Sure then lets make test, im waiting.
And again, this is why there are other sources of information than just 1 like war thunder wiki alone or stat card alone where you expect them to provide a full picture (strawman)
It is easy that this or that happened, however it is talk not proof.
If you don’t have the footage feel free to repeat your test with your buddy and actually record the footage. You’re citing the test, you are responsible for the footage alone. Otherwise it is pointless to cite said test.
If you want to pay me for videoediting. Then ill do it next time.
But hey, 2 otherwise unaffiliated people agreeing with a written down claim is more than nothing. If you want to contest the claim i suggest taking up the offer and do some testing
Claiming both statcards and wiki informations are more reliable then owning and using the Pantsir is quite funny, shows how desperate you are.
More excuses to not to admit your fault, not surprised.
And where is your proof btw?
You dont have the Pantsir, you refuse to believe other person testimony and you also refuse to take participate in test.
İts obvious only reason you keep claiming the same thing its because you cant accept the fact you’re wrong.
Such a miserable way to keep this discussion on.
You complained about the “gigabytes”. If you can’t self sufficiently provide the footage than i’m just going to ignore any citing to a test where there is no footage of it.
More than nothing, yet not enough to prove the claims that were made because the claims regarded maneuvering and hitting/not hitting. All the talk proves is both of you engaged in a test.
Videos, accounts of others, wiki, stat cards all combined is more reliable than a sole claim “i own this vehicle so it must be so” in face of the possibility of others saying the opposite while also owning the vehicle.
Its not my fault that you don’t have footage of the tests you are citing
I believed the testimony to the extent where the testimony can be reliable - To the extent that both of you participate in the same test. It is however not reliable enough to prove that the maneuvering is as claimed, you’re gonna need footage for that not just talk.
Didnt saw any videos from you.
Same excuses, “ i dont own the vehicle but i know how it performs better then you”.
Quite desperate moves i would say.
And its not my fault that you dont own the vehicle, refuse to believe other person testimony and not taking participate in new test.
Having Pantsir in the first place and claiming same things with DiamondLag is actually much more reliable then your empty claims.
Either take a participate in test or stop wasting my time already.
pretty much ignored the part where your argument falls if your only argument is “i own the vehicle”. your argument falls when others owning the vehicle say the opposite.
Its on you to provide footage of the test you cited though, that is your responsibility.
Its not my responsibility to participate in your test though.
And where is your solid proof on that part? Also i dont care about other people’s claims, if you’re gonna claim something then own the vehicle, make a test and confirm the result with either the person you did the test together or provide solid evidence.
Quite the opposite.
İ already provided evidence its your turn to do the same thing.
But since you’re liar you will refuse to take participate in a test and will claiming same thing over and over again.
Next time dont bother to quote me unless you’re gonna participate in test, this is last time im wasting my time on you.
alviswisla has been the one to most have the opposite opinion to yours. “i don’t care about other peoples claims”, so what? It disproves your argument where having a vehicle means that you can now speak about the capabilities without being wrong. 2 opposite opinions, therefore one of you must be wrong regardless of owning the vehicle. Your argument falls down on that.
Your “evidence” was enough only to conclude that a test happened. There wasn’t much talk about the specific maneuvers done for durations of time at x speeds y altitudes at what weapon loads and what you did to counteract the maneuvering (“i just aimed” is not enough).
And ofcourse more than that would be needed to actually build a constant image because situations are fluid which is why testimony won’t be enough proof of the maneuvering being done, so no footage of the cited tests = i’m just going to consider the claims made to be unproven. Thodin also was with an opposite opinion.
Like i Said dont bother me unless you’re gonna agree what i offered.
Until then our cheeky liar.
Edit: Thodin is a German Main who believes Pantsir is op, you can find his replies under most Pantsir discussions.
I’m agreeing with you providing actual footage of tests that you make under your own responsibility. I’m not responsible to participate in anything, they are your claims.
I haven’t lied. war thunder forum rules prohibit ad hominem/personal attacks
Regardless, alviswisla has the pantsir. One count is enough. Others who we have are Thisconnect, ma_wee_wee_go, history_boi109, no2dad etc. And funny thing with thodin saying some opposite stuff despite him also believing the pantsir is op, this adds credibility to his words despite him not owning the pantsir, as he does have top tier planes to compete against pantsir with.
Thats funny considering me and DiamondLag did that test because of Alviswislas claims and turns out he was the one who got wrong.
Never Said Thodin was a good source, you need to improve your comprehending skills :)
Both replies were dedicated to AlvisWisla’s claims.
Also AlvisWisla claims TOR-M1 is actually better then Pantsir and Pantsir is equal to ITO-90M and Flarakrad in terms of AA capabilites, using his claims are not good i’il tell you that.
You got anything other then cheap baits? Cause any sane person knows that Pantsir is the best SPAA system in this game and nothing come close to it.
Regardless of who is wrong either of you is wrong which proves how your logic around owning the vehicle = being correct is not a valid logic
It doesn’t matter, it is easy to conclude what he was talking about
and you aren’t actually proving wrong despite making your own claims and statements about a test because there is no footage to verify those claims and statements with
Empt talkings empty talkings.
My offer still stands, until then dont bother me again.
This time i mean it.
Ofcourse, you disregard everything as empty because you can’t counter argue anything that is correct.
As usual, your offer should be “i will provide my own proof for my own claims autonomously”.
Burden of proof is universally acknowledged standard where we can conclude wether a claim is valid or invalid based on the evidence you bring on the table by yourself. So, make your own footage to support your own claims as is your responsibility. I don’t need to bother with it, it’s your claims.
