Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[Crede]

Originally Posted by Crede [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I concur, reading cyxthryth's posts and watching DSM blatantly ignore them has brought me the most enjoyment in this thread. This is due to the fact that everything he says are objective truths, whereas everything DSM says is an opinion, so there's really no way for DSM to refute anything he says. Cyxthryth's is just playing this forum logic chess game better than DSM. I think we should all stop responding so they can actually attempt to have a civil discussion, since DSM's constant ignores have forced him to go strictly into quoting mode.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Crede [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to comprehend.

Nobody is responding to his posts because they were all directed at you. What part of that is not clear to you?

He simply resorted to quoting the state of your discussion, because you refused to continue to engage him in discussion, despite the fact that you've engaged everyone else in discussion.

Had he directed at least 1 post at someone else, or implied he was willing to have a discussion, we would have. We've all noticed him, and agreed with him. You don't need to respond to someone to notice them, lol.

Unfortunately you are the only one ignoring, since you are deliberately choosing to not respond to his posts directed at you.

Oh it's very clear. People have been responding to other posts directed at me throughout this thread. There is no rule saying a post directed at user X can only be responded to by user X lol.

If he wasn't being ignored, he would have more people quoting him when making their points, which has been a common pattern with the other posters.

I am sorry you are this desperate that you have to include the one poster in this thread who's entire post history is nonsense.

The one common pattern in this thread has been the utter ignoring of cyxthryth by all users.

[Crede]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Oh it's very clear. People have been responding to other posts directed at me throughout this thread. There is no rule saying a post directed at user X can only be responded to by user X lol.

If he wasn't being ignored, he would have more people quoting him when making their points, which has been a common pattern.

I am sorry you are this desperate that you have to include the one poster in this thread who's entire post history is nonsense.

Lol, I'm not desperate, sorry?

You've proved nothing to anybody, per usual, other than you value wasted utility over dps.

I'm just here for the enjoyment, looking forward to continued posts from cyx.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Crede [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Lol, I'm not desperate, sorry?

You've proved nothing to anybody, per usual, other than you value wasted utility over dps.

I'm just here for the enjoyment, looking forward to continued posts from cyx.

The post history is clear. You are now including cyxthryth to try and strengthen your https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum argument because you have nothing else. I find it highly amusing.

Only someone who is trying to deceive themselves wouldn't notice cyxthryth has been ignored for the entire thread by everybody until very recently.

[slard271]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Please, don't let it get lost. It just strengthens my argument, because DPS has diminishing returns as you stack more. The more DPS an Enchanter does, the less useful the Mage is.

DPS stacks - mathematically, mind you, cuz data - linearly. "But meh utility and healz!" can more often than not in this fantasy scenario offer null returns or objectively less than a mage or necro. But it's not like it's possible to acknowledge anything other than delete-all-classes-but-shaman at this point so /shrug hehe.

[cyxthryth]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The post history is clear. You are now including cyxthryth to try and strengthen your https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum argument because you have nothing else. I find it highly amusing.

I am not sure what point you think you are making or what fact you think you are refuting by stating "You are now including cyxthryth to try and strengthen your https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum argument because you have nothing else", but I will remind you of the irrefutable fact - which you cannot refute - that you yourself attempted to use that very https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum "argument" when a mere single (1) person seemed to agree with you hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] I will remind you with your own quotes, which are viewable by all:

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

OP agrees I am not moving the goalposts, since his post was general. There is nothing that says you can't have a pocket cleric.

to which I already replied with the following:

Originally Posted by cyxthryth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Your post would seem to betray that you are aware that you have moved goalposts, because you are now attempting (disingenuously) to validate said goalpost-moving by stating that it is objectively true that the OP's post "is general" and that this somehow means "you are not moving the goalposts" by changing the basis of the discussion (from being about 4 priests/casters, to being about 4 priests/casters plus X amount of pocket Clerics, or other pocket classes). It is not objectively true that you are "not moving the goalposts" just because you and OP both agree that the OP's post "was general" and that that somehow means "you are not moving the goalposts". That is simply you - laughably - claiming you (and OP) are correct due to argumentum ad populum hehe. This really isn't hard.

Please clarify what you mean by stating OP's post "was general"?

You did not reply to my post (as usual). Hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Only someone who is trying to deceive themselves wouldn't notice cyxthryth has been ignored for the entire thread by everybody until very recently.

As has already been explained to you, it is you who my posts have been directed toward, and yes, as I have (repeatedly) stated, you are indeed ignoring my posts. The post history is clear. In all of that very clear post history, you have provided zero evidence to support your claims that I am a troll, that I am "silly", that my posts are nonsense, etc. This really isn't hard hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Troxx]

Originally Posted by slard271 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

DPS stacks - mathematically, mind you, cuz data - linearly. "But meh utility and healz!" can more often than not in this fantasy scenario offer null returns or objectively less than a mage or necro. But it's not like it's possible to acknowledge anything other than delete-all-classes-but-shaman at this point so /shrug hehe.

Well said.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by slard271 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

DPS stacks - mathematically, mind you, cuz data - linearly. "But meh utility and healz!" can more often than not in this fantasy scenario offer null returns or objectively less than a mage or necro. But it's not like it's possible to acknowledge anything other than delete-all-classes-but-shaman at this point so /shrug hehe.

Nice strawman claiming I only care about Shamans. You are also wrong about DPS stacking being relevant at all points. DPS has diminishing returns. It eventually offers nothing.

[Troxx]

I do also find it funny that he loves to pull out the Argumentum ad populum bs to refute the collective assertions from all of us … yet any time any one person says any single thing that even kind of jives with the point he wants to make, he clings to it like a starving raccoon who just found a half-eaten saltine cracker.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Toxigen]

Honestly, I may even take a druid over a shaman for 1-60 leveling in that enc / enc / cleric / XXX 4 man. If you did Warrens --> Perma --> CT --> Kedge --> Chardok you could always have an animal to charm, and this is also an insanely high ZEM pathway. Certainly not as good as mage / necro, but hell...it really isn't that far behind either.

Plenty of other dungeon options with animals too...plus the luxury of porting around...especially nice for an all caster group that needs to go get their spells!

Can't wait to watch DSM go through the roof when he reads this hot take.