Your argument comes down to this: If someone uses terminology that is not generally known, the person is just asserting his superiority over everyone else.
No. If you read carefully, my argument is that using terminology usually goes hand-in-hand with flat-out dismissing arguments. And this isn't "my" argument either, others have actually brought that up before me, namely Cyrus.
Again, if two people aren't using the same terminology in their argument, they are really arguing with each other.
That's... good? Where's your problem?
You provided one video as your evidence, and it was a lone Roland that was panicked. I provided a single video of evidence, and it was two Rolands against two Mi-28's. One anecdote to counter another anecdote.
yes, I was implying that what we're doing here is kinda bull. i simply linked the first video as anecdotal evidence of my typical roland performance and it wasn't meant ment to be treated as hard evidence. that doesn't change my argument one bit however, NATO AA is inferior to the one-price-fits-all wonders of the WP. that doesn't mean that I am lobbying for a buff either, it's simply working as intended that WP has the stronger air presence of the two factions. WP can even helo in half of their infantry.