Favorites, into battle! - 11.

if you wanted, instead of rushing to write your fundamentally important question, you could have checked everything yourself, because the answer is available to you

Why should I sift through any data set if you, who considers yourself objectively argumentative, according to your own beliefs, should have provided specific arguments before writing anything about the situation with Tant (since you wrote about a specific overpowered hero, Tant, who solves all problems in the Castle-Rampart pairing, and my answer was specifically about this pairing of cities)?
Or does someone owe you an argument, but you don't owe anyone anything, lol?
Once again.
I already specifically asked you how many times you lost to Tant specifically in this pairing (and given Caliban's input, it would also be helpful to answer the question - how many times you won with Tant specifically in this pairing)... You respond with a link to a data set, which, according to your twisted logic, someone should process for you...

Added after 32 minutes
And for the esteemed public, I will explain that in the data set provided by Alfein, there is NOT A SINGLE game of the declared Castle-Rampart pairing in which Tant was anyone's main hero.
The data set consists of about 190 games (about 194-195).
In total, in the provided data set, Tant was a "secondary main" (that is, not a starting hero) on Alfein's side 4 times: 2 games were lost - 2 were won.
At the same time, against Alfein, in the entire provided data set, there was not a single game played with a "secondary Tant".
Excellent argumentation - in 190 games, we won two games with a secondary Tant (and perhaps Tant wasn't there from the first day) and lost two (no doubt playing with friends), and against us, a secondary Tant was never played...
Enough with the demagoguery...