Difference between revisions of "Combo Shells"

Jump to navigation Jump to search
277 bytes removed ,  19:25, 17 January 2022
Line 2: Line 2:
Combo shells are a type of theory shell read when some ''combination'' of arguments are abusive. That is, Argument <math>A</math> might not be abusive alone, and Argument <math>B</math> might not be abusive alone, but combining Arguments <math>A</math> and <math>B</math> produces some abuse story.
Combo shells are a type of theory shell read when some ''combination'' of arguments are abusive. That is, Argument <math>A</math> might not be abusive alone, and Argument <math>B</math> might not be abusive alone, but combining Arguments <math>A</math> and <math>B</math> produces some abuse story.


For example, suppose that the negative says the affirmative should not get access to 1AR theory, and that the affirmative should also not get RVIs. The affirmative might read a combo shell on this, saying that these two arguments combined deny the affirmative access to offense on the theory layer since they cannot read their own shell, and they also can't get offense without the RVI.


 
Notice how the abuse is conjunctive – denying the affirmative access to 1AR theory might be fine on its own, or denying the affirmative access to the RVI might be fine on its own, but when combined, these two arguments become abusive.  
For example, if the affirmative makes a claim that the judge should evaluate the theory debate after the 1ar (they decide who wins the theory flow when the 1ar is over) and that aff gets theory in the 1ar that is drop the debater (the abusive debater should lose for being abusive), then that is bad because affs can make new theory shells in the 1ar and auto-win since the 2nr can’t respond to them due to the debate being evaluated after the 1ar.
 
Notice how the abuse is conjunctive–claiming theory in the 1ar is drop the debater is fine if you don’t evaluate the theory debate after the 1ar because then the 2nr can answer the shell. The converse also applies–evaluating the theory debate after the 1ar is fine if the 1ar does not get theory that is drop the debater, because then they can only win on arguments that have already been answered by the 1nc, not completely new 1ar arguments.
== Strategically Deploying Combo Shells==
== Strategically Deploying Combo Shells==
Combo shells are strategic because the abuse story between them is generally true if done correctly. A few tips can be used to maximize strategic potential:
Combo shells are strategic because the abuse story between them is generally true if done correctly. A few tips can be used to maximize strategic potential:

Navigation menu