Try to get your shaman above 1800 in Arenas and tell me Shamans are balanced in pvp.
Edit: now it makes sense.
Razom Level 70 Troll Rogue on Moonglade.
Bellu Level 64 Blood Elf Priest on Moonglade.
Lesan Level 66 Tauren Druid on Moonglade.
Sinna Level 39 Human Mage on The Sha'tar.
Probably the four strongest pvp classes......... rofl Of COURSE pvp is balanced. hahaha
Edited, Oct 24th 2008 6:25pm by Jiade
- Forums
- World of Warcraft
- Class Discussion
- Upcoming Shaman Changes
Upcoming Shaman ChangesFollow
'Cause holy priest are teh hawtz in PvP. And 'cause 0/30/30 specced (level 66) druids are teh hawtz in PvP. And 'cause level 48 fire mages are also teh hawtz in PvP.
And for god's sake, if you keep twisting my words assaulting me becomes really easy doesn't it?
I said Shamans aren't incredibly underpowered. It's better to say 'fairly balanced'.
But hell peeps, let's keep downrating me so we can keep the /emo goggles on and ignore arguments.
Edited, Oct 25th 2008 1:47am by Mozared
And for god's sake, if you keep twisting my words assaulting me becomes really easy doesn't it?
Quote:
Try to get your shaman above 1800 in Arenas and tell me Shamans are balanced in pvp.
I said Shamans aren't incredibly underpowered. It's better to say 'fairly balanced'.
But hell peeps, let's keep downrating me so we can keep the /emo goggles on and ignore arguments.
Edited, Oct 25th 2008 1:47am by Mozared
Well, I'm not downrating you, although you might consider why some people might be. I know Gaudion and jmmfmfmfmfb don't generally DR people for disagreement unless things get really out of hand.
That is the basis of the disagreement with the other guys; they argue that the situation you describe is unacceptable, and that the '|' you have drawn are actually evidence of chronic imbalance, and by your own evidence will persist into the future. Incidentally 'current Retadins' are screwed against Arcane Barrage Mages, there's really not a great deal you can do against them unless you are in S3/S4 gear and can weather the initial burst; all new Ret advantages are linked to hitting people, with AB Mages you don't get the chance to try. That doesnt make Ret balanced, either, just because there's a Scissors to the Paper.
Ehm... how is anything in Risk an unfair fight? Even a vastly superior offensive force is often whittled down by the defensive roll advantage (equal = defense wins) and in any case, it is the opposite of the WoW PvP situation.
In Risk if I need a greater chance of success I just move some troops around or wait a few turns to stack the odds in my favour, ie I use 'skill' to improve my chances. In WoW, beneath the watchful eye of your Rock-Paper-Scissors system, you have only a single 'troop', your character, and there cases in which (to over-extend your metaphor) Yellow troops can barely ever beat Black troops, and Black troops can rarely beat Blue ones etc.
A Risk game is decided by the decisions you make leading up to combat; in WoW, it is currently decided by what colour troops you chose at the start of the game. Your example actually illustrates my argument perfectly.
Quote:
The two |'s are the borders. In between them is "balanced", everything outside is slightly to badly under/overpowered (I.E; nearly impossible to kill at all, or such insane healing/DPS that nobody stands a chance... Think current Retardins).
That is the basis of the disagreement with the other guys; they argue that the situation you describe is unacceptable, and that the '|' you have drawn are actually evidence of chronic imbalance, and by your own evidence will persist into the future. Incidentally 'current Retadins' are screwed against Arcane Barrage Mages, there's really not a great deal you can do against them unless you are in S3/S4 gear and can weather the initial burst; all new Ret advantages are linked to hitting people, with AB Mages you don't get the chance to try. That doesnt make Ret balanced, either, just because there's a Scissors to the Paper.
Quote:
With that reasoning you must hate a game like stratego or risk?
Ehm... how is anything in Risk an unfair fight? Even a vastly superior offensive force is often whittled down by the defensive roll advantage (equal = defense wins) and in any case, it is the opposite of the WoW PvP situation.
In Risk if I need a greater chance of success I just move some troops around or wait a few turns to stack the odds in my favour, ie I use 'skill' to improve my chances. In WoW, beneath the watchful eye of your Rock-Paper-Scissors system, you have only a single 'troop', your character, and there cases in which (to over-extend your metaphor) Yellow troops can barely ever beat Black troops, and Black troops can rarely beat Blue ones etc.
A Risk game is decided by the decisions you make leading up to combat; in WoW, it is currently decided by what colour troops you chose at the start of the game. Your example actually illustrates my argument perfectly.
Nicely said sinstralis.
There are 30 different specs atm. Assuming they are all equally pvp viable, if one can counter more than 15 of them over a majority of the time, there is imbalance. This means player skill has less to do with the outcome than spec/class of the two people. Because specs/classes aren't equal... there is an imbalance in pvp.
There are 30 different specs atm. Assuming they are all equally pvp viable, if one can counter more than 15 of them over a majority of the time, there is imbalance. This means player skill has less to do with the outcome than spec/class of the two people. Because specs/classes aren't equal... there is an imbalance in pvp.
Man you people really don't seem to like my name at all sheesh!
So I don't mean to derail the current topic being discussed but with the changes to Enhancement does it mean a piece of armor covered in Int, Crit, Spell Power, Haste, and maybe even some Hit work ok running around with DW and FT for giggles? it seems like with the change in enhancement to support spells more something like this would be kind of fun no?
I could almost imagine running around with like 1500 spell damage 1000 AP 40% crit and using maybe Lightning Capacitor and Romulo's Poison Vial
and having some fun with my Wub's Cursed Hex Blade and whatever off hand with nice stats I could find?
So any one try this for giggles? Is it fun?
So I don't mean to derail the current topic being discussed but with the changes to Enhancement does it mean a piece of armor covered in Int, Crit, Spell Power, Haste, and maybe even some Hit work ok running around with DW and FT for giggles? it seems like with the change in enhancement to support spells more something like this would be kind of fun no?
I could almost imagine running around with like 1500 spell damage 1000 AP 40% crit and using maybe Lightning Capacitor and Romulo's Poison Vial
and having some fun with my Wub's Cursed Hex Blade and whatever off hand with nice stats I could find?
So any one try this for giggles? Is it fun?
Quote:
Well, I'm not downrating you, although you might consider why some people might be. I know Gaudion and jmmfmfmfmfb don't generally DR people for disagreement unless things get really out of hand.
First, I state PvP has been fairly balanced since launch. It takes me 3+ posts to make people understand exactly what I'm saying. Then as none of my arguments defending my claim get countered, people insist on moving the discussion to current days' arena. Now that I've explained what I think about that people STILL seem to not understand what I'm on about. I'm not saying something is balanced because there is ONE class that can tackle it (which is exactly what you're claiming in the upcoming quote). In fact, if you follow the 'measurements' I set apart in my previous post, Ret's would indeed fall into 'overpowered'.
Trust me, I've done plenty of considering why I get downrated. It's just that everytime the result is that I'm either A) being misunderstood or B) am right (and end up not being countered, unless you count "/facepalm" as a counter-argument). I'm still waiting for you to show me why you are so right in downrating me. But the fact that all my arguments get misinterpreted or ignored don't help.
Quote:
That is the basis of the disagreement with the other guys; they argue that the situation you describe is unacceptable, and that the '|' you have drawn are actually evidence of chronic imbalance, and by your own evidence will persist into the future. Incidentally 'current Retadins' are screwed against Arcane Barrage Mages, there's really not a great deal you can do against them unless you are in S3/S4 gear and can weather the initial burst; all new Ret advantages are linked to hitting people, with AB Mages you don't get the chance to try. That doesnt make Ret balanced, either, just because there's a Scissors to the Paper.
Nope. As it is now, Ret would need 3 scissors to the paper to be balanced. It falls outside the borders of 'fairly balanced'.
Quote:
Ehm... how is anything in Risk an unfair fight? Even a vastly superior offensive force is often whittled down by the defensive roll advantage (equal = defense wins) and in any case, it is the opposite of the WoW PvP situation.
The fact that you need to roll dice to win. Even when everything is equal the game doens't ensure the player with the most 'skill' wins. Sure, 'black troops' rarely beat 'blue ones' (are we talking about the same game btw?), but there's still a chance to get your 'skillfully obtained' blue troop beaten by a black one. You can use your skill to improve your chances, but you cannot use your skill to ensure a win. I suppose Stratego's a better example though, since you seem to be on about a different version of Risk than I know (I've never played with "black" or "blue" pieces).
Quote:
There are 30 different specs atm. Assuming they are all equally pvp viable, if one can counter more than 15 of them over a majority of the time, there is imbalance. This means player skill has less to do with the outcome than spec/class of the two people. Because specs/classes aren't equal... there is an imbalance in pvp.
If you reason that "imbalance" is whenever something is not 100% balanced, yes, there is imbalance. That doesn't mean however, that every class that isn't 100% balanced is 100% imbalanced. As long as the imbalance falls between the two |'s, it is too minor to actually start yelling "omg imba op!!1!!11". Once it falls outside those borders, something is actually imbalanced enough to be called over/underpowered. That's also why I said "It's better to say 'fairly balanced'." in my previous post.
Quote:
If you reason that "imbalance" is whenever something is not 100% balanced, yes, there is imbalance.
Hence the definition of imbalance. In all honesty, you have 1 70 right? Not only do you have 1 70, but you also have a rogue as your point of reference. Rogues can literally be BAD at pvp and still feel that they are balanced because they have SO MANY advantages over other classes. This isn't supposed to be making fun of you, but your entire theory is based on your point of view. I have FOUR 70's. Mage, Shaman, Druid, and Priest. I can tell you... they aren't balanced. I'm the same player on all 4 and depending which class I'm on... it VASTLY changes my chance in pvp (world pvp, bg's, and arena).
You can scream they are balanced all day long, but you don't have the reference to really honestly say it. There are also no numbers to support what you're saying. Arena has been out for over 1.5 years and the statics from EACH SEASON show gross imbalances. Not to where one class is 100% winner, but to where certain classes are over-represented (and by more than a little). I'd say some classes are imbalanced to the point of "Z" from your little graph. I think "I" was the middle, then Y, then Z... then overpowered/underpowered. There are classes on the verge of being overpowered or underpowered. I'm sorry you play one of those classes and can't see the true plight of some other classes.
Quote:
Hence the definition of imbalance. In all honesty, you have 1 70 right? Not only do you have 1 70, but you also have a rogue as your point of reference. Rogues can literally be BAD at pvp and still feel that they are balanced because they have SO MANY advantages over other classes. This isn't supposed to be making fun of you, but your entire theory is based on your point of view. I have FOUR 70's. Mage, Shaman, Druid, and Priest. I can tell you... they aren't balanced. I'm the same player on all 4 and depending which class I'm on... it VASTLY changes my chance in pvp (world pvp, bg's, and arena).
Theory doesn't work. As for 70's; It's not much, but I'm on two rather than one. I've got however a 64 priest (which used to be my main a long time ago, I spend ~a year with him at 60) and a nearly 67 druid which I can't be ***** to level 70 anymore. My theories are rarely based on one point of view; if they are, I generally state so (for example when I attempt to give advice on a class I know fairly little about in terms of abilities).
For me, switching characters only has me change my role and playstyle. On my rogue, I go around, CC, and skill stuff. On my (70) priest, I live forever and heal. On my druid, I used to adept hellalot. On my mage, I used to stand back and hope to get pyro's off. The latter two aren't arena experiences, but I realize that. My mage wouldn't work because he focusses on spells with a cast time. My druid (0/27/34 at 70) would work well until a specific bracket, after which it'd suck.
That's all pre-patch talk though; post patch I haven't had any worthwhile PvP experience on anything but my rogue (I've done some PvP on my priest, but he's holy atm).
Quote:
You can scream they are balanced all day long, but you don't have the reference to really honestly say it. There are also no numbers to support what you're saying. Arena has been out for over 1.5 years and the statics from EACH SEASON show gross imbalances. Not to where one class is 100% winner, but to where certain classes are over-represented (and by more than a little). I'd say some classes are imbalanced to the point of "Z" from your little graph. I think "I" was the middle, then Y, then Z... then overpowered/underpowered. There are classes on the verge of being overpowered or underpowered. I'm sorry you play one of those classes and can't see the true plight of some other classes.
Quite the opposite, really... The past ~year I've been of the opinion that if anything rogues are overpowered since they're one of the few classes who can literally beat *any* (common) class/spec (Shockadin was my only downfall). I just don't think we're so bad we desperatly need a nerf. We're on the border rather than miles over it. And I've done a disc priest in 2v2, which generally isn't a wonderful experience either.
DarkRein wrote:
Hunter's are fair fail in PvP, no matter what you think, if you can't master the Jump-turn-shoot you will get destroyed.
If you can't master the jump-turn-shoot aka jump shot you should quit hunter.
Quote:
Trust me, I've done plenty of considering why I get downrated. It's just that everytime the result is that I'm either A) being misunderstood or B) am right (and end up not being countered, unless you count "/facepalm" as a counter-argument). I'm still waiting for you to show me why you are so right in downrating me. But the fact that all my arguments get misinterpreted or ignored don't help.
For a start have a care with this 'you' business because I rarely, if ever, downrate anyone, as I already stated. I am not interested in 'showing' you anything, either. The secret option C) is that your style of delivery is annoying to people, and a less aggressive and bellicose tone might be more succesful, but of course I'm no expert.
Quote:
(are we talking about the same game btw?)
My Risk edition has blue, black, green, yellow, red and orange troops, maybe more I dunno. I am open to the possibility that different colours of sh*tty plastic exist in other versions.
Quote:
The fact that you need to roll dice to win. Even when everything is equal the game doens't ensure the player with the most 'skill' wins. Sure, 'black troops' rarely beat 'blue ones' (are we talking about the same game btw?), but there's still a chance to get your 'skillfully obtained' blue troop beaten by a black one. You can use your skill to improve your chances, but you cannot use your skill to ensure a win.
That is life my friend. Nothing, anywhere, ever is decided purely on skill alone, it is antithetical to the very foundations of nature. There is always a random factor, when people say 'skill' they generally mean stacking the odds in your favour rather than eliminating the odds altogether. Risk is entirely 'fair' AND balanced because all sides are the same and all sides play under the same ruleset, however chance-based. I cant imagine what contest could be decided by skill alone unless it was a math competition between robots in a sealed room at the end of the universe...
Quote:
Nope. As it is now, Ret would need 3 scissors to the paper to be balanced. It falls outside the borders of 'fairly balanced'.
And yet can be defeated by Arcane Mages in a significant number of encounters. You essentially have a chip on your shoulder about Ret Paladins (who are being nerfed so I cant imagine why you're still annoyed) and are rotating your argument about that fulcrum. This is where Im confused about your definitions, because there have existed far worse imbalances in the past than exist now with Ret Paladins (the oft-quoted Warlocks/WF Shamans/S2 Rogues) and yet you declare most of the game to have been ok but now Ret Paladins have somehow queered the milk. That's just emotionally-charged circular argument. When I play my Warlock against Ret Paladins now I can kill them about 20-30% of the time; 2yrs ago when I faced pre-nerf Windfury Shamans I would be dead every single time, I'd be dead before my Shadow school got unlocked from when they interrupted Fear. Rogues.... I've never been able to beat Rogues. Not on my Shaman or Warlock, and even the Paladin has trouble with their PvP spec. That's worse than the current situation.
This of course is to ignore entirely my point that the disagreement is not that imbalance exists, just in what we should call 'imbalance' and what we should call 'fairly balanced', which seems to me to be fighting over a wooden spoon.
And it is to completely neglect the original point which is what does this spell for the future of Shamans; since even now you have conceded that Shamans are underpowered and Ret Paladins are grossly overpowered, it would seem that the notion of 'Fair and Balanced' applies about as much to Shaman PvP as it does to Fox News.
EDITS: dumb typos
Edited, Oct 26th 2008 11:16pm by Sinstralis
I understand exactly what Mozared's saying, and it's killing me that you guys aren't getting it. It's basically how Blizzard works.
If by 'exactly how Blizzard works' you mean essentially farming their client base by sequentially buffing/nerfing classes on a multi-year rotation to encourage people to roll alts/keep playing, I do get it completely. I actually believe Blizzard are capable of balancing all classes but in many cases choose not to invest the effort in doing so, and instead ensure that a certain group/spec is always overpowered. It's basically like turning a roasting pig on a spit, making sure that every part of the meat gets time in the heat.
I get that, I do, it is the foundation of my point and Mozared's; the difficulty is, I disagree that this is an acceptable sitation, I find it reprehensible and annoying. Mozared chooses to praise the development team for their acumen in perpetuating this upon us.
I praise Blizzard for many things, I think in general they are a wonderfully skilled development house; just look at Diablo and Starcraft for evidence of how expertly they are capable of balancing things when balance is their goal. Starcraft alone is an exquisite example of differential balancing; each side has Rock/Paper/Scissors in varying amounts but each adds up to the same overall capability. They do this because if a competetive RTS is imbalanced players just avoid it an buy a new one; if the Terran players are owning it up for 6 months because Siege Tanks are OP, the player base disappears.
WoW is different, because if a class is OP then people just roll that class, look at the sheer number of Rogue and (historically) Warlock alts that have appeared as a result of transitory (and deliberate) imbalance.
The difference is not in understanding, Zepoodle, but whether or not you praise or condemn the situation. I despise the reality that Shamans and (lately) Warlocks used to own, so now they have to suck and get rolled so other classes can bask in pre-eminence. I would consider a single class destroying all other classes 100% of the time to be an absurd suggestion, akin to suggesting a man is only drunk if he subsequently dies of alcohol poisoning.
Again, Mozared's only difference of opinion with others is on where the lines are drawn, I don't see why there is so much venom floating around.
I get that, I do, it is the foundation of my point and Mozared's; the difficulty is, I disagree that this is an acceptable sitation, I find it reprehensible and annoying. Mozared chooses to praise the development team for their acumen in perpetuating this upon us.
I praise Blizzard for many things, I think in general they are a wonderfully skilled development house; just look at Diablo and Starcraft for evidence of how expertly they are capable of balancing things when balance is their goal. Starcraft alone is an exquisite example of differential balancing; each side has Rock/Paper/Scissors in varying amounts but each adds up to the same overall capability. They do this because if a competetive RTS is imbalanced players just avoid it an buy a new one; if the Terran players are owning it up for 6 months because Siege Tanks are OP, the player base disappears.
WoW is different, because if a class is OP then people just roll that class, look at the sheer number of Rogue and (historically) Warlock alts that have appeared as a result of transitory (and deliberate) imbalance.
The difference is not in understanding, Zepoodle, but whether or not you praise or condemn the situation. I despise the reality that Shamans and (lately) Warlocks used to own, so now they have to suck and get rolled so other classes can bask in pre-eminence. I would consider a single class destroying all other classes 100% of the time to be an absurd suggestion, akin to suggesting a man is only drunk if he subsequently dies of alcohol poisoning.
Again, Mozared's only difference of opinion with others is on where the lines are drawn, I don't see why there is so much venom floating around.
Quote:
For a start have a care with this 'you' business because I rarely, if ever, downrate anyone, as I already stated. I am not interested in 'showing' you anything, either. The secret option C) is that your style of delivery is annoying to people, and a less aggressive and bellicose tone might be more succesful, but of course I'm no expert.
Yes; now I might be annoyed, because it's been the described way since my first post. All I see is me getting downrated for a reason which isn't even correct. If I end up *losing* the discussion, feel free to downrate all my posts to oblivion, all of you. At the moment it feels more like there's a discussion and people choose sides by trying to bring me down as a person. I'm willing to compare it to racist Americans who don't listen to what Obama has to say but tell him to sod off anyway. A very good example is the post where Jiade says the following about me:
"Probably the four strongest pvp classes......... rofl Of COURSE pvp is balanced. hahaha"
I've since then proved that 'argument' completely wrong since it is a completely invalid interpretation of my game experiences. But guess who'se rated up and guess who'se rate down?
I can somewhat understand this point of view - like has been said before, these boards are destined to be gloomy and it's easier to just 'accept' that your class sucks and throw mud at Blizzard rather than focussing on the good stuff (No, that isn't an accusation and I know not everybody's like that) - but that doesn't mean I agree.
As for the 'you' business; I'm not aiming my paintball gun at you specifically. Rather everybody who'se downrating me and claiming people are right in doing so. Speaking of paintball...
Quote:
My Risk edition has blue, black, green, yellow, red and orange troops, maybe more I dunno. I am open to the possibility that different colours of sh*tty plastic exist in other versions.
Most of my experience in Risk comes from a computergame version of it... the colors basically represented the players rather than troop strength. But never mind this, it's a pointless discussion.
Quote:
That is life my friend. Nothing, anywhere, ever is decided purely on skill alone, it is antithetical to the very foundations of nature. There is always a random factor, when people say 'skill' they generally mean stacking the odds in your favour rather than eliminating the odds altogether. Risk is entirely 'fair' AND balanced because all sides are the same and all sides play under the same ruleset, however chance-based. I cant imagine what contest could be decided by skill alone unless it was a math competition between robots in a sealed room at the end of the universe...
Unreal Tournament? A game like that has nothing to do with odds and everything with skill (avoiding incoming fire and accuracy).
Quote:
And yet can be defeated by Arcane Mages in a significant number of encounters. You essentially have a chip on your shoulder about Ret Paladins (who are being nerfed so I cant imagine why you're still annoyed) and are rotating your argument about that fulcrum.
Not really... You still seem to think my argument is "If a class can be beat by at least one other class it is completely balanced". It is in fact a bit more hazy, like "If a class can be beat by at least ~three or more classes it is pretty balanced". And even that's not entirely right; if a class had above equal chances against any other class but got completely obliterated by one, I'd also consider it 'fairly balanced'. A Retardin would fall in the category where he doesn't have "above equal chances" against any other class, but where he completely owns every other class and gets obliterated by just one.
Not sure what you mean with annoyed though, did I say I was annoyed with Retardins?
Quote:
This is where Im confused about your definitions, because there have existed far worse imbalances in the past than exist now with Ret Paladins (the oft-quoted Warlocks/WF Shamans/S2 Rogues) and yet you declare most of the game to have been ok but now Ret Paladins have somehow queered the milk. That's just emotionally-charged circular argument. When I play my Warlock against Ret Paladins now I can kill them about 20-30% of the time; 2yrs ago when I faced pre-nerf Windfury Shamans I would be dead every single time, I'd be dead before my Shadow school got unlocked from when they interrupted Fear.
Maybe I've just been in the wrong place, but I seriously never had problems with any of those classes, except perhaps Rogues. I throw them all into the file cabinet that says "Injust whineage about random classes", next to that period where it was 'common sense' that a priest needed a shadow spec to PvP while I was topping the charts in all the BG's with healing. For as far as they were extreme though, cases like those have always been resolved rather quickly.
Quote:
Rogues.... I've never been able to beat Rogues. Not on my Shaman or Warlock, and even the Paladin has trouble with their PvP spec. That's worse than the current situation.
The reason I don't think Rogues are worse than Retardins is because Retardins now own everything hands down. Most classes have plenty of escape abilities against rogues. They'd work against retardins, but with rets you generally just die before you can use any. There isn't much a rogue can actually 3 or 4-shot at the moment even while blowing all CD's. And once your CD's are gone a kited rogue turns into a sitting duck. Retardins just walk up to somebody and kill him, that's all there is to it.
Quote:
And it is to completely neglect the original point which is what does this spell for the future of Shamans; since even now you have conceded that Shamans are underpowered and Ret Paladins are grossly overpowered, it would seem that the notion of 'Fair and Balanced' applies about as much to Shaman PvP as it does to Fox News.
All fair, but all this started with Jiade laughing at me for claiming PvP has been fairly balanced since launch. No, that's not to say every class has a 100% equal chance against every other class, but it Ãs stating that it really hasn't been that bad, and it's also stating that thát is the reason I've got a good hope for Shamans being boosted.
Quote:
Again, Mozared's only difference of opinion with others is on where the lines are drawn, I don't see why there is so much venom floating around.
That's possibly the most meaningful sentence in this topic.
Quote:
All fair, but all this started with Jiade laughing at me for claiming PvP has been fairly balanced since launch. No, that's not to say every class has a 100% equal chance against every other class, but it Ãs stating that it really hasn't been that bad, and it's also stating that thát is the reason I've got a good hope for Shamans being boosted.
If you were right, there would NEVER be patches to fix imbalances. You can't argue with that.
The only time when there would NEVER be patches to fix imbalances is if PvP was at all times COMPLETELY balanced.
If you still think that's what I'm stating I rest my case.
If you still think that's what I'm stating I rest my case.
Mozared wrote:
I rest my case.
God willing.
Sinstralis wrote:
I get that, I do, it is the foundation of my point and Mozared's; the difficulty is, I disagree that this is an acceptable sitation, I find it reprehensible and annoying. Mozared chooses to praise the development team for their acumen in perpetuating this upon us.
Well, if you find the practice that repugnant you could always quit. I've got no idea why one would hang around if one believes that the developers of the game are out to ***** one for one's money.
If you're confused about the origin of the venom in this here discourse, it's coming from the same place it always does; the other guy.
Quote:
Well, if you find the practice that repugnant you could always quit. I've got no idea why one would hang around if one believes that the developers of the game are out to ***** one for one's money.
You took that out of context. Sin was saying he feels the imbalance is not acceptable while moz is saying it's balanced enough so just deal with it. I'm sure Sin would quit IF blizzard just left the imbalance the way it is. As I have pointed out, PVP is imbalanced which is why you continually see patches attempting to balance (though they admit it is a secondary priority after balancing pve which is ALSO not balanced).
Edited, Oct 28th 2008 11:43am by Jiade
Oh please, Mozared. Must you infect EVERY forum here with your annoyingness? Those 1,000 posts of you, you posted them in what? 1 month? You sprout up everywhere and everywhere you come you start to argue and bicker with absolutely nothing to back you up. And every time again I think "I will post now to let him know" and then I do not do it.
Until this time.
Just stick to the rogue forum where noone can be ar$ed what you type. /please
Until this time.
Just stick to the rogue forum where noone can be ar$ed what you type. /please
You call sense annoyingness? I think it's to be honest a bit pathetic that even such a stupid post got an uprate (then again, anything that in some way attacks me seems to be uprated here). I'm trying to hold a senseful discussion. Now that that's pretty much ran it's course you show up and play a holy know-it-all. Me starting to argue with nothing to back me up? The irony of you stating that here is just killing me. I've started to wonder if people are just too stupid to realize how one-sided the last discussion was or if they're destined to hate me.
Now you can go emoplode on me and get more uprates. 'Cause that's how it goes here, isn't it?
Edited, Oct 28th 2008 9:59pm by Mozared
Now you can go emoplode on me and get more uprates. 'Cause that's how it goes here, isn't it?
Edited, Oct 28th 2008 9:59pm by Mozared
Moz, people are probably uprating him because they agree. They think it's BLATANTLY obvious that pvp is imbalanced and you arguing the contrary is the silliest thing they've ever heard. This would also explain why you've been downrated.
Jiade... I've just given up winding myself up over this, it's pointless. But seriously... And I'm saying this from a selfless point of view... Do yourself a favor and scroll back trough the discussion. It took me nearly a full page of posts before you even understood what I was on about, and all the while you never countered any of my arguments. Heck, even now you're still talking about "it's obvious that PvP is imbalanced". Out of the top of my head I think I could cite sentences from 3 different posts where I state explicitly that that's not what I'm trying to say.
Either way, I have to say I respect you. You could've said a lot of **** in that last post but even though I still don't think you got me, you're taking the high road. Props on that.
As for the rest of you... Keep assaulting me if it pleases you; as much as you drag the post off-topic in a personal battle with me, I'll respond if I see the need to. Aside from that, peace e-z.
Oh, just one more tiny note. You said "People are probably uprating him because they agree". Fair enough, but enough people agreeing with someone doesn't automatically mean that person is right. And I hope you understand and agree with me on that.
Either way, I have to say I respect you. You could've said a lot of **** in that last post but even though I still don't think you got me, you're taking the high road. Props on that.
As for the rest of you... Keep assaulting me if it pleases you; as much as you drag the post off-topic in a personal battle with me, I'll respond if I see the need to. Aside from that, peace e-z.
Oh, just one more tiny note. You said "People are probably uprating him because they agree". Fair enough, but enough people agreeing with someone doesn't automatically mean that person is right. And I hope you understand and agree with me on that.
Recent Visitors: 137
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (137)
- Forums
- World of Warcraft
- Class Discussion
- Upcoming Shaman Changes
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC