Which of the following best describes an off-case attack?

An off-case attack is characterized as a strategy that does not directly address the affirmative's main arguments or case. Instead, it seeks to introduce criticism or challenges that are external to the core case presented by the affirmative side. By focusing on points that are not directly tied to the affirmative's primary assertions, an off-case attack can present alternative frameworks, highlight potential flaws in the broader implications of the resolution, or raise issues that may undermine the affirmative's overall stance without directly contesting its specific arguments.

This ability to address peripheral aspects allows debaters to create a more comprehensive critique of the debate topic and can effectively divert attention from the affirmative's core claims. The other options suggest strategies that either engage directly with the affirmative's points or inadvertently support them, which does not align with the definition of an off-case attack. Thus, the choice that states an off-case attack does not directly reference the affirmative's case accurately encapsulates its essence.