Answering a question with a question is a sign of bad manners. If this is not a clarification of the previous question, then most likely this is an attempt to evade an answer, change the subject, or end the conversation. If the question is considered an attack, then the answer is defense. If you use the principle - the best defense is an attack, then it is better not just to defend, but to counterattack.
Answering a question with a question will be such a counterattack, thus the status of the defender changes, and he becomes an attacker. Each time you can invent how to counterattack, or you can use a universal answer-question. One of these universal answer-questions is "What for?" You can troll anyone with this question.
One fool can ask so many questions that no smart one will answer.
From this saying, the following conclusions can be drawn: you don't need a lot of intelligence to troll someone, so you should not answer stupid questions and you should not try to answer all the questions, it is better to leave some questions unanswered. The question "What for?" it’s a question that’s best not to answer. As soon as such a question arises, it is better not to continue further. If you do not have the strength to remain silent in response to the next question "What for?", Then you can put an end to the answer "Because". It's a little rude, but if you need to stop the flow of questions, it will do.
On the other hand, if there is a desire to troll with the question "What for?", then it is better not to repeat the same thing like a parrot, but to use synonyms, for example, "Why?" or "What's the point?" These questions are also best left unanswered. Another universal answer-question is "So what?", but such an answer, in contrast to "What for?", rather tendsto end the conversation, rather than continue.