Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

In different games. The shokk attack guns did roll a bit hot for str, and the double tap strat was used everytime. Granted, a 5++ wouldnt help vs tankbustas.

Martel732 wrote:
In different games. The shokk attack guns did roll a bit hot for str, and the double tap strat was used everytime. Granted, a 5++ wouldnt help vs tankbustas.

So that's a no then?

All you've stated is a Relic Shokk gun killed a vehicle. That's amazing. Really great evidence there. Considering the thing can take down a Knight in a single shooting phase, color me surprised that it can take down a transport/tank. /sarcasm.

Besides, a Land Raider can't be the epitome of bad, Drop Pods are a worse inventment and they're in the same codex.

Also; Stompas.

Believe what you want . It's really hard to accept judgment from someone who didn't even understand the fly-fall back mechanics until this thread.

If you don't think 15 double-firing tank bustas are a threat, go do the math on it.

Ultimately if you think this tank is good, you're going to use it. I'm not shelling out for the $$ for a tank that solves zero of the problems marine currently experience. If I want to build a list to smoke T8 with no invuln, that's easy to do with marines. And yes, baneblades are a headache. But they're not the meta, and not what is squeezing me out game after game.

Kill them before they arrive. They can’t be in a Trukk at 15 strong.

He kept them hidden until it was time and then used da jump.

Ohpleaseohpleaseohplease Da Jump some Tankbustas up to me.

Because then you're not jumping dem Boyz.

Against a tank-spam list that works. Against anything infantry heavy, not much. But you don't field Repulsors in infantry-heavy lists.

The Newman wrote:
Besides, a Land Raider can't be the epitome of bad, Drop Pods are a worse inventment and they're in the same codex.

Also; Stompas.

A drop pod is ( "a" ) another example of the epitome of bad. Really the way you figure it out is simple. You ask yourself. Is this thing a giant waste of points? If the answer is yes - it is the epitome of bad.

It need only be a perfect example of a unit that is way overcosted.

Bharring wrote:
Ohpleaseohpleaseohplease Da Jump some Tankbustas up to me.

Because then you're not jumping dem Boyz.

Against a tank-spam list that works. Against anything infantry heavy, not much. But you don't field Repulsors in infantry-heavy lists.

It was tank spam. The Ork guy won the whole thing. He knew what he was doing. He was VERY impressive. His Ghazgull disintegrated every big bug he touched in his Nid matchup. He trucked the Gman list he fought off the table easily. Turn 1: shokk attack kills repulsor 1. Turn 2: Tankbustas kill repulsor 2. Turn 3: mass assault from 100+ boyz on the predator line. GG.

Bharring wrote:
Ohpleaseohpleaseohplease Da Jump some Tankbustas up to me.

Because then you're not jumping dem Boyz.

Against a tank-spam list that works. Against anything infantry heavy, not much. But you don't field Repulsors in infantry-heavy lists.

You want 15 tank bustas shooting twice with more dakka? O thats right...you are an eldar player and just blow the unit up easily for 2 CP with forwarding....

 Xenomancers wrote:

The Newman wrote:
Besides, a Land Raider can't be the epitome of bad, Drop Pods are a worse inventment and they're in the same codex.

Also; Stompas.

A drop pod is ( "a" ) another example of the epitome of bad. Really the way you figure it out is simple. You ask yourself. Is this thing a giant waste of points? If the answer is yes - it is the epitome of bad.

It need only be a perfect example of a unit that is way overcosted.

Only if you define "perfect example" as "example".

To be completely, fair, the drop pod would a lot more reasonable if there were something worthwhile to load into it.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Ohpleaseohpleaseohplease Da Jump some Tankbustas up to me.

Because then you're not jumping dem Boyz.

Against a tank-spam list that works. Against anything infantry heavy, not much. But you don't field Repulsors in infantry-heavy lists.

You want 15 tank bustas shooting twice with more dakka? O thats right...you are an eldar player and just blow the unit up easily for 2 CP with forwarding....

Marines have Auspex Scan.

Doesn't work outside 12". If forewarned were as limited as auspex scan, no one would complain about it.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Ohpleaseohpleaseohplease Da Jump some Tankbustas up to me.

Because then you're not jumping dem Boyz.

Against a tank-spam list that works. Against anything infantry heavy, not much. But you don't field Repulsors in infantry-heavy lists.

You want 15 tank bustas shooting twice with more dakka? O thats right...you are an eldar player and just blow the unit up easily for 2 CP with forwarding....

I love how I'm spending 2CP to blow up a 15man unit by killing only a couple doods. Even assuming a 10man Reaper squad (I run 3-5), you're looking at 8-9 dead guys. That's certainly not 'deleted'. And that's assuming he's dumb enough to put them in LOS of the Reapers *and* only DS one unit while I'm perfectly set up for it. "Just blow up the unit easily for 2 CP with forwarding [sic]" is just more hyperbole when you're looking at spending hundreds of points and depending on the opponent to play stupidly in order to cut them in half.

I don't *want* 15 Tank Bustas shooting twice with more dakka, but I'd take that over a max mob of Boyz T1 charging my frontlines no matter how far back I deploy. Believe it or not, Eldar players do fear some things



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Doesn't work outside 12".

Neither do Boyz mob charges.

It was a Gman tank party. No front lines to speak of. I'm sure against you, he'd jump da boyz. It was the right call and that repulsor disintegrated. He actually cleared 21W against it.

"Neither do Boyz mob charges."

Good thing he was using tankbustas in this particular instance.

Sorry, got caught up on the whole "Eldar are OP, so everything you say is wrong" line. Yes, Jumping the Tankbusters was the much better move. As Repulsors can't get locked in CC anyways, and it's a tank-heavy skew list.

My point was that, against many lists, you can't count on Da Jump for Tankbustas, as you need to get your Boyz (or something else) up fast. Which, I suppose is tangential.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

The Newman wrote:
Besides, a Land Raider can't be the epitome of bad, Drop Pods are a worse inventment and they're in the same codex.

Also; Stompas.

A drop pod is ( "a" ) another example of the epitome of bad. Really the way you figure it out is simple. You ask yourself. Is this thing a giant waste of points? If the answer is yes - it is the epitome of bad.

It need only be a perfect example of a unit that is way overcosted.

What, in your mind, is the difference between saying "[Thing] is [descriptor]" and "[Thing] is the epitome of [descriptor]"?

Also, if your bar for "perfect [descriptor]" is "[descriptor]", what does value or meaning does "perfect" have in your language?

Bharring wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Ohpleaseohpleaseohplease Da Jump some Tankbustas up to me.

Because then you're not jumping dem Boyz.

Against a tank-spam list that works. Against anything infantry heavy, not much. But you don't field Repulsors in infantry-heavy lists.

You want 15 tank bustas shooting twice with more dakka? O thats right...you are an eldar player and just blow the unit up easily for 2 CP with forwarding....

I love how I'm spending 2CP to blow up a 15man unit by killing only a couple doods. Even assuming a 10man Reaper squad (I run 3-5), you're looking at 8-9 dead guys. That's certainly not 'deleted'. And that's assuming he's dumb enough to put them in LOS of the Reapers *and* only DS one unit while I'm perfectly set up for it. "Just blow up the unit easily for 2 CP with forwarding [sic]" is just more hyperbole when you're looking at spending hundreds of points and depending on the opponent to play stupidly in order to cut them in half.

I don't *want* 15 Tank Bustas shooting twice with more dakka, but I'd take that over a max mob of Boyz T1 charging my frontlines no matter how far back I deploy. Believe it or not, Eldar players do fear some things



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Doesn't work outside 12".

Neither do Boyz mob charges.

How DARE you use facts and logic against hyperbolic arguments....

Martel732 wrote:
Doesn't work outside 12". If forewarned were as limited as auspex scan, no one would complain about it.

This also cuts both ways.

A unit can drop in within 12" and LOS of it's target (meltacide!) while being out of LOS of some seperate backfield unit hugging a Farseer. It cannot drop within 12" and LOS of it's target and be outside 12" and LOS of something that can Auspex.

Now, the Marine version also has a -1-to-hit feature as well. I certainly agree that Auspex is weaker than Forewarned. But fixating on Auspex's downsides but not it's upsides isn't doing you any favors.

You know what? This thing sucks. I saw it get one shot by a dude last night with a Astraeus Super Heavy Tank.

Bharring wrote:
Sorry, got caught up on the whole "Eldar are OP, so everything you say is wrong" line. Yes, Jumping the Tankbusters was the much better move. As Repulsors can't get locked in CC anyways, and it's a tank-heavy skew list.

My point was that, against many lists, you can't count on Da Jump for Tankbustas, as you need to get your Boyz (or something else) up fast. Which, I suppose is tangential.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

The Newman wrote:
Besides, a Land Raider can't be the epitome of bad, Drop Pods are a worse inventment and they're in the same codex.

Also; Stompas.

A drop pod is ( "a" ) another example of the epitome of bad. Really the way you figure it out is simple. You ask yourself. Is this thing a giant waste of points? If the answer is yes - it is the epitome of bad.

It need only be a perfect example of a unit that is way overcosted.

What, in your mind, is the difference between saying "[Thing] is [descriptor]" and "[Thing] is the epitome of [descriptor]"?

Also, if your bar for "perfect [descriptor]" is "[descriptor]", what does value or meaning does "perfect" have in your language?

Eldar have a whopping 52% win rate as a primary. Without the Ynarri crutch, they are far from OP. Its just that marines are so damn bad.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Doesn't work outside 12". If forewarned were as limited as auspex scan, no one would complain about it.

This also cuts both ways.

A unit can drop in within 12" and LOS of it's target (meltacide!) while being out of LOS of some seperate backfield unit hugging a Farseer. It cannot drop within 12" and LOS of it's target and be outside 12" and LOS of something that can Auspex.

Now, the Marine version also has a -1-to-hit feature as well. I certainly agree that Auspex is weaker than Forewarned. But fixating on Auspex's downsides but not it's upsides isn't doing you any favors.

The real problem is that marines frequently don't field any units worth using auspex scan on.

I don't disagree that Eldar are more powerful than Marines. Some posters just read my posts as saying that and paint me in that light.

What I disagree with is basing discussions on things like Forewarned meaning any 15-man squad gets immediately deleted. Or if unit A is bad, it's the worst thing ever. And, if unit B is worse, it's the worst thing ever. But unit A is the worst thing ever, too...

Bharring wrote:
Sorry, got caught up on the whole "Eldar are OP, so everything you say is wrong" line. Yes, Jumping the Tankbusters was the much better move. As Repulsors can't get locked in CC anyways, and it's a tank-heavy skew list.

My point was that, against many lists, you can't count on Da Jump for Tankbustas, as you need to get your Boyz (or something else) up fast. Which, I suppose is tangential.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

The Newman wrote:
Besides, a Land Raider can't be the epitome of bad, Drop Pods are a worse inventment and they're in the same codex.

Also; Stompas.

A drop pod is ( "a" ) another example of the epitome of bad. Really the way you figure it out is simple. You ask yourself. Is this thing a giant waste of points? If the answer is yes - it is the epitome of bad.

It need only be a perfect example of a unit that is way overcosted.

What, in your mind, is the difference between saying "[Thing] is [descriptor]" and "[Thing] is the epitome of [descriptor]"?

Also, if your bar for "perfect [descriptor]" is "[descriptor]", what does value or meaning does "perfect" have in your language?

First of all I have no idea what you are talking about. This is some kind of literary gimnastic you are pulling.
Here is the first definition of the word perfect as an adjective. - "Having all the required or desirable elements, qualities, or characteristics; as good as it is possible to be."
What is required for a unit to be bad other than being 20% overcosted? Nothing. So it fits.
Also - the word is common usage is even more lenient. Ever hear people use the phrase? "you'd be perfect for that?" Do they literally mean youd be the best possible choice? Or just that you'd do well in that role? Pretty obvious.
You agree the LR is bad but then say it can't be the Epitome of bad because their might be some unnamed worse possible unit. This is unnecessary. In order to be the epitome of something you meerly need to be a really good example of. Which a LR is. Based on every possible metric you put on it.

Bharring wrote:
I don't disagree that Eldar are more powerful than Marines. Some posters just read my posts as saying that and paint me in that light.

What I disagree with is basing discussions on things like Forewarned meaning any 15-man squad gets immediately deleted. Or if unit A is bad, it's the worst thing ever. And, if unit B is worse, it's the worst thing ever. But unit A is the worst thing ever, too...

More importantly, the dark reapers can probably whittle them down to the point where they aren't popping a valuable eldar target. You don't need to kill them all.

ON a side note, however the orks are getting exploding dice on a 5+ was not a necessary buff.

Go to 40kstats. It's really all about marines being trash, not Eldar being especially nutso. I've seen plenty of bad stuff happen to Eldar. Just not at the hands of marines usually.

Bharring wrote:
I don't disagree that Eldar are more powerful than Marines. Some posters just read my posts as saying that and paint me in that light.

What I disagree with is basing discussions on things like Forewarned meaning any 15-man squad gets immediately deleted. Or if unit A is bad, it's the worst thing ever. And, if unit B is worse, it's the worst thing ever. But unit A is the worst thing ever, too...

You only need to kill like 6-7 of the unit to make using the stratagems a waste of CP. Plus - you should easily kill the entire unit. They are t4 with 6+ saves. Now IDK what pure CWE armies are running these days. It's pretty variable it seems. However, I know what my friends use. A 3 man warwalker with scatter lasters is usually in there. or a wraithknight with suncannon and scatter lasers or starcannons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Doesn't work outside 12". If forewarned were as limited as auspex scan, no one would complain about it.

This also cuts both ways.

A unit can drop in within 12" and LOS of it's target (meltacide!) while being out of LOS of some seperate backfield unit hugging a Farseer. It cannot drop within 12" and LOS of it's target and be outside 12" and LOS of something that can Auspex.

Now, the Marine version also has a -1-to-hit feature as well. I certainly agree that Auspex is weaker than Forewarned. But fixating on Auspex's downsides but not it's upsides isn't doing you any favors.

Controlling your own fate is always better than relying on your opponent to drop into range of a unit. Plus the -1 makes the strat almost useless. Forwarding is also usable on vehicles. You can use it on a damn scorpion.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Sorry, got caught up on the whole "Eldar are OP, so everything you say is wrong" line. Yes, Jumping the Tankbusters was the much better move. As Repulsors can't get locked in CC anyways, and it's a tank-heavy skew list.

My point was that, against many lists, you can't count on Da Jump for Tankbustas, as you need to get your Boyz (or something else) up fast. Which, I suppose is tangential.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

The Newman wrote:
Besides, a Land Raider can't be the epitome of bad, Drop Pods are a worse inventment and they're in the same codex.

Also; Stompas.

A drop pod is ( "a" ) another example of the epitome of bad. Really the way you figure it out is simple. You ask yourself. Is this thing a giant waste of points? If the answer is yes - it is the epitome of bad.

It need only be a perfect example of a unit that is way overcosted.

What, in your mind, is the difference between saying "[Thing] is [descriptor]" and "[Thing] is the epitome of [descriptor]"?

Also, if your bar for "perfect [descriptor]" is "[descriptor]", what does value or meaning does "perfect" have in your language?

First of all I have no idea what you are talking about. This is some kind of literary gimnastic you are pulling.
Here is the first definition of the word perfect as an adjective. - "Having all the required or desirable elements, qualities, or characteristics; as good as it is possible to be."
What is required for a unit to be bad other than being 20% overcosted? Nothing. So it fits.

What you're calling 'literary gymnastics', I call "basic/common English usage".
Calling something "the epitome of [X]", in common usage, is a superlative meant to show how it's seen as the most [X] a thing can be. Naturally, like most perfection-based desciptors, it's usually used for hyperbole.
Likewise, "perfect", in the vernacular, is entirely like the definitions you gave: there's no missing quality, and it's not possible to be more [X].

Once again, you're flipping "Bad" with "The epitome of bad". A unit that's 20% overcosted is bad. But is it the epitome of bad?
For the first half of your definition:
Is being 30% overcosted bad? If so, and a unit is between 20% and 30% overcosted, then clearly it's not "perfectly" bad.
Is being of lower toughness than 3 bad? Does the Land Raider have lower toughness than 3? Again, clearly, not "perfectly" bad.

For the second half of your definition:
Could the Land Raider cost 10 more points? Clearly it could be worse; so it's not "perfectly" bad.
Are there units that are even *more* bad ? Yes. Other units being even worse clearly means it's not as bad as "it is possible to be".

Also - the word is common usage is even more lenient. Ever hear people use the phrase? "you'd be perfect for that?" Do they literally mean youd be the best possible choice? Or just that you'd do well in that role? Pretty obvious.
You agree the LR is bad but then say it can't be the Epitome of bad because their might be some unnamed worse possible unit. This is unnecessary. In order to be the epitome of something you meerly need to be a really good example of. Which a LR is. Based on every possible metric you put on it.

That phrase is a perfect example. When people are saying "You'd be perfect for that", they're engaging in hyperbole to sell a point (that you fit whatever 'that' is well). They do *literally* mean you'd be the best possible choice, but they *figuratively* mean you'd be a good choice. What they (figuratively) mean is obvious. Hyperbole isn't a sin. It's used to great effect all the time. (See? Two hyperbolistic statements in a row to support a point.)

The difference is that, like most tools for emphasis, it should be used for emphasis. When everything is "Teh best EVAR" or "Absolute trash", neither phrase means anything.

Swearing is another tool for emphasis: I corrected a statement I made in an upper management meeting the other day to change "Stuff" to "the S-word". It was appropriate language. Because swearing is so rare in that forum, and because I so rarely use it, that change was impactful. And meaningful. If someone swore all the time, and dropped an F-bomb in casual conversation, that F-bomb means nothing.

The reason we bring this up is because you're conflating hyperbole with accurate statements. And you're flooding the conversation with hyperbole. The first is a problem because it can be difficult to follow a conversation where we have crazy, clearly contradictory claims clearly intended to be taken as true. The second is a problem because it means any linguistic flair that uses hyperbole to convey actual meaning gets lost in the noise that is all the superfluous excessive statements.

To bring this all together, people use "[X] is the epitome of [Y]" in common conversation to emphasize how much [X] is [Y] - almost always as hyperbole. The statement itself is fine, used contextually correctly and in moderation. The problems are when it's not properly understood to be hyperbole, or a speaker emphasizes everything ("if everything is important, nothing is"). It's made worse, in this case, because the speaker doesn't seem to know the statements are hyperbolic - meaning they're spouting stuff without knowing what they're saying.

This stuff isn't "linguistic gymnastics". It's basic human communications.

The land raider had its uses after ca. This new tank had its uses. But in both cases those uses arent applicable to a large enough percentage of the opponemt pool to render them undesirable.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
I don't disagree that Eldar are more powerful than Marines. Some posters just read my posts as saying that and paint me in that light.

What I disagree with is basing discussions on things like Forewarned meaning any 15-man squad gets immediately deleted. Or if unit A is bad, it's the worst thing ever. And, if unit B is worse, it's the worst thing ever. But unit A is the worst thing ever, too...

You only need to kill like 6-7 of the unit to make using the stratagems a waste of CP. Plus - you should easily kill the entire unit. They are t4 with 6+ saves. Now IDK what pure CWE armies are running these days. It's pretty variable it seems. However, I know what my friends use. A 3 man warwalker with scatter lasters is usually in there. or a wraithknight with suncannon and scatter lasers or starcannons.

3 WW with SLs: 3x4x2 shots, 2/3 hit, 2/3 wound = 10-11 dead Orkz.
WK won't get close either.
It takes a lot more Eldar firepower than you seem to realize to kill Orkz.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Doesn't work outside 12". If forewarned were as limited as auspex scan, no one would complain about it.

This also cuts both ways.

A unit can drop in within 12" and LOS of it's target (meltacide!) while being out of LOS of some seperate backfield unit hugging a Farseer. It cannot drop within 12" and LOS of it's target and be outside 12" and LOS of something that can Auspex.

Now, the Marine version also has a -1-to-hit feature as well. I certainly agree that Auspex is weaker than Forewarned. But fixating on Auspex's downsides but not it's upsides isn't doing you any favors.

Controlling your own fate is always better than relying on your opponent to drop into range of a unit. Plus the -1 makes the strat almost useless.

So depending on an opponent to drop within range and LOS of a unit he's not shooting is more "controlling your own fate" than depending on an opponent to drop within range and LOS of what he wants to shoot? How so?

Sorry but human communication doesn't require tons of brackets and analogies to make a point. Your point is the LR could possibly be worse so it can't be the epitome of bad. That is an okay argument is suppose. It is unreasonable though because as pointed out the term "bad" is subjective. We are quibbling here. You agree the LR is bad - just not "that bad" okay...come on dude. What metric are you using to make that statement? Hyperbole is a big stretch.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Bharring wrote:
I don't disagree that Eldar are more powerful than Marines. Some posters just read my posts as saying that and paint me in that light.

What I disagree with is basing discussions on things like Forewarned meaning any 15-man squad gets immediately deleted. Or if unit A is bad, it's the worst thing ever. And, if unit B is worse, it's the worst thing ever. But unit A is the worst thing ever, too...

You only need to kill like 6-7 of the unit to make using the stratagems a waste of CP. Plus - you should easily kill the entire unit. They are t4 with 6+ saves. Now IDK what pure CWE armies are running these days. It's pretty variable it seems. However, I know what my friends use. A 3 man warwalker with scatter lasters is usually in there. or a wraithknight with suncannon and scatter lasers or starcannons.

3 WW with SLs: 3x4x2 shots, 2/3 hit, 2/3 wound = 10-11 dead Orkz.
WK won't get close either.
It takes a lot more Eldar firepower than you seem to realize to kill Orkz.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Doesn't work outside 12". If forewarned were as limited as auspex scan, no one would complain about it.

This also cuts both ways.

A unit can drop in within 12" and LOS of it's target (meltacide!) while being out of LOS of some seperate backfield unit hugging a Farseer. It cannot drop within 12" and LOS of it's target and be outside 12" and LOS of something that can Auspex.

Now, the Marine version also has a -1-to-hit feature as well. I certainly agree that Auspex is weaker than Forewarned. But fixating on Auspex's downsides but not it's upsides isn't doing you any favors.

Controlling your own fate is always better than relying on your opponent to drop into range of a unit. Plus the -1 makes the strat almost useless.

So depending on an opponent to drop within range and LOS of a unit he's not shooting is more "controlling your own fate" than depending on an opponent to drop within range and LOS of what he wants to shoot? How so?

4 ork rockets aren't going to do anything - then they gonna die to morale most likely because they are overextended. That is the point. Plus you should have an autarch there. It's the entire purpose for taking the WW to begin with. The WK is for forwarding against a unit with armor saves.

Correct me if I am wrong but you do control where your autarch and farseer all your units are placed don't you?

 Xenomancers wrote:
Sorry but human communication doesn't require tons of brackets and analogies to make a point.

Yes, most of the time these parts of human communication don't require tons of brackets or analogies to get across. Most people learn them naturally.

Your point is the LR could possibly be worse so it can't be the epitome of bad. That is an okay argument is suppose. It is unreasonable though because as pointed out the term "bad" is subjective.

Something being "good" or "bad" is subjective. Something being "worse" in a particular way is not, unless that particular way is subjective. For instance, Land Raiders being "good" or "bad" is subjective (although most people agree). Paying 300 points for a Land Raider being worse than paying 250 points is not subjective.

We are quibbling here. You agree the LR is bad - just not "that bad" okay...come on dude. What metric are you using to make that statement? Hyperbole is a big stretch.

The metric - which you provided - is "The epitome of bad" or "perfectly bad". Either of those are very clearly hyperbole, as it's very clearly not.