Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Is there a point to spamming that on every page DSM? Not trolling, I'm genuinely just trying to get an answer out of you. Why does it matter so much? Just let people play what they want. You don't need perfect parsing and optimization for a 20+ year old long conquered game.

I am not forcing people to play anything. I am not sure where you got this idea. I can only assume you read one of the many strawmen created to attack me.

It is strange people think I am the bad guy, when the other posters here are the ones melting down and insulting/memeing/trolling anybody who disagrees with them. It's well over 1000 posts at this point of pure vitriol. They are why this thread is so bloated. They turned it into an RnF thread.

The reason why I am reposting the information is because the trolls are trying to hide the information. It is really that simple. Trolls don't get to win by hiding information they disagree with.

Factual data will help people determine which group combination they want to play. If you are someone that cares about the mathematical realities of the game, this information will help you. If you don't care, you are going to pick whatever you want to play anyway. It is better to have all the data available, and let people decide for themselves.

For some silly reason, the trolls are afraid of the basic mathematical realities of the game, and are trying to hide it. I can only assume they feel like a class they enjoy is being attacked, in this case a Mage. So they will defend the class at any cost, regardless of the truth.

None of the posters I have called trolls have been able to disprove any of the math so far in this thread, regardless of what they say. They just troll and hope I will go away.

Originally Posted by Kich867 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think that's DSM's entire point. That the mage helps kill things mildly faster but that time difference is irrelevant and you could instead use a 4th more flexible/supportive class instead. In his case, he's arguing heavily for shaman.

Well said. This is my point exactly.

[PlsNoBan]

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

For some silly reason, the trolls are afraid of the basic mathematical realities of the game, and are trying to hide it.

Ahh yes. All of us "trolls" are very very scared of your basic math reality.

2 + 2 = 4
Warrior solo > Enchanter solo
Redundant Shaman Utility > Everything
Everyone that disagrees with DSM nonsense = Troll

All basically equally valid mathematical equations

[Karanis]

bald.jpg

[cyxthryth]

OOPS! #400

Reposting the current state of the discussion:

DSM has repeatedly provided copy/pastes which simply do not contain any evidence or data of his Shaman performing DPS - or any other action/activity - in an environment/context/scenario that is (or would be) relevant to the discussion; hence his copy/pastes are irrelevant to this discussion.

While DSM is - seemingly - unable or unwilling to provide relevant evidence/data that supports his many claims/statements/positions (which change when he moves the goalposts & edits his posts), I have irrefutable proof of the following, which DSM has as of yet not replied to/acknowledged/defended/challenged/attempted to refute:

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - of DSM attempting to move the goalposts by bringing a 5th "pocket" character into his "arguments" (even though this is intended to be a civil discussion - not an argument) pertaining to the "Best 4 person all caster/priest group" discussion":

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

OP never said you couldn't have a pocket cleric. I am not sure why people keep thinking this is not a possible route to take. Between four people it would be trivial to level a cleric to 39. It is pretty common for people to make pocket clerics on P99.

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - that DSM attempted to accuse others of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

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.

and here is my reply to DSM's attempt, in which I point out to him the irrefutable fact - which cannot be refuted - that DSM himself attempted - laughably - to claim (intentionally or otherise) that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum strengthened his argument when one (1) single other person seemed to agree with him:

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"?

Again, DSM - of course - did not directly reply to me for some reason, and has continued to label me and/or my posts as "a troll"/"trolling", without providing the definition of "troll" / "trolling" that he is using (nor what he meant by stating that OP's post "was general"), and whilst providing zero evidence to support his claims of my being a troll/trolling.

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

[Troxx]

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

They are why this thread is so bloated.

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

[tadkins]

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

I am not forcing people to play anything. I am not sure where you got this idea. I can only assume you read one of the many strawmen created to attack me.

Not at all. I'm just reading all your data about how a mage does X and X more DPS and I'm sitting here like, "omg who cares, just invite the damn wizard!". Your math may or may not be correct, numbers have never been my strong suit so I can't say for sure or not. I'm only saying it shouldn't matter, as P99 doesn't have the equivalent of a WoW cutting edge mythic boss where that tight number crunching is necessary.

It strikes a nerve with me because that sort of optimization mindset is what's ruining the fun of the game for some. Wizard is my favorite class in the game but I genuinely feel like I can't play it on P99 because of attitudes like that.

Just how I feel personally. I wasn't influenced by anyone else.

[cyxthryth]

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

It is strange people think I am the bad guy, when the other posters here are the ones melting down and insulting/memeing/trolling anybody who disagrees with them.

No.

You have once again - laughably - attempted to make the claim that you are aware what others think (that they think you are "the bad guy" - whatever that is supposed to mean). You have provided zero evidence to support this claim, and therefore it is an unsubstantiated claim (and probably false).

Your post also seems to include a claim that "other posters hare are melting down".

For the sake of civil discussion, can you please provide the definitions of "bad guy", "troll"/"trolling", and "melting down" that you are using? [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.]

It's well over 1000 posts at this point of pure vitriol. They are why this thread is so bloated. They turned it into an RnF thread.

For the sake of civil discussion, can you please provide the definition of "vitriol" you are using? [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.]

The reason why I am reposting the information is because the trolls are trying to hide the information.

No. The content of your post seems to include a claim that "the trolls" are trying to "hide the information". The first problem is that your post would seem to believe that information will be "hidden" if additional posts are made - that is objectively false/incorrect DSM. Even if additional posts are made after a specific post, the post history is - and will remain - clear hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Now that you have been advised and/or reminded of this irrefutable fact - which cannot be refuted - you should not need to continue to copy/paste to make sure your posts do not get "hidden" hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I am also not sure why your post(s) would seemingly indicate that you think that the particular data/information that you keep providing in your copy/pasted posts - which includes data/information of your Shaman's performance in an environment/context/scenario that is contrary to the environment/context/scenario relevant to this discussion, as has been pointed out to you multiple times by multiple posters - is somehow relevant to this discussion. It is not. It is simply irelevant for reasons explained in multiple posts by multiple posters (including in this very post).

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

It is really that simple. Trolls don't get to win by hiding information they disagree with.

The problem with your post - and the fact that you continue to ignore my posts - is that it seems to imply/indicate/reveal/betray/expose that you are not actually interested in engaging in a civil discussion in which all participants discuss civilly and back up their positions with relevant, factual data/evidence, and are instead interested in ensuring "trolls" do not "win".

For the sake of civil discussion, can you please provide the definition of "troll(s)" and "win" that you are using? [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.]

Factual data will help people determine which group combination they want to play.

The problem is that your post seems to indicate/reveal/betray/expose/confirm that you simply do not understand - or for some reason are seemingly attempting to pretend that you do not understand - that only relevant factual data is valuable. Data that is not relevant, would simply be irrelevant 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.]

If you are someone that cares about the mathematical realities of the game, this information will help you.
If you don't care, you are going to pick whatever you want to play anyway. It is better to have all the data available, and let people decide for themselves.

For some silly reason, the trolls are afraid of the basic mathematical realities of the game, and are trying to hide it. I can only assume they feel like a class they enjoy is being attacked, in this case a Mage. So they will defend the class at any cost, regardless of the truth.

The only data that will help is relevant data; as irrelevant data is simply not relevant, and thus that particular (irrelevant) data simply wouldn't help hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You have provided zero definitions for "troll" (or "silly"), and have provided zero evidence to support your seemingly apparent claim that "the trolls are afraid of the basic mathematical realities of the game, and are trying to hide it", therefore, it is unclear what point you think you are making or what fact you think you are refuting by simply calling others "trolls" (or "silly"), and additionally, the claim is simply unsubstantiated (and probably false).

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

None of the posters I have called trolls have been able to disprove any of the math so far in this thread, regardless of what they say. They just troll and hope I will go away.

The problem with your post is that it seems to indicate that you believe that it is relevant whether your - irrelevant - math has or has not been "disproven". Only relevant information/data/evidence is relevant, therefore, your data - which is not relevant - is irrelevant, and since that irrefutable fact - which cannot be refuted - has already been stated to you multiple times by multipel posters (including myself), I am not sure why your posts continue to reveal/betray/expose/confirm a lack of understanding of these simple truths.

Additionally, your post once again states "they just troll" and, again, it is unclear what point you think you are making or what fact you believe you are refuting by making such a statement because you have not provided the definition you are using to - repeatedly - label other posters or the content of their posts.

Yet another problem with your post is that it seems to indicate that you believe that other posters "hope you will go away". Oh quite the contrary! [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I am eagerly awaiting your replies which contain relevant, factual evidence to support your various claims (which change when you move goalposts or edit your posts) hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Not at all. I'm just reading all your data about how a mage does X and X more DPS and I'm sitting here like, "omg who cares, just invite the damn wizard!". Your math may or may not be correct, numbers have never been my strong suit so I can't say for sure or not. I'm only saying it shouldn't matter, as P99 doesn't have the equivalent of a WoW cutting edge mythic boss where that tight number crunching is necessary.

It strikes a nerve with me because that sort of optimization mindset is what's ruining the fun of the game for some. Wizard is my favorite class in the game but I genuinely feel like I can't play it on P99 because of attitudes like that.

Just how I feel personally. I wasn't influenced by anyone else.

I understand how you feel. I honestly don't know the optimal way to make everybody have a great experience.

Some people (like myself), enjoy the math of the game, and want to see how to optimize their play experience.

Some people (like yourself), just want to play and have some fun. They don't care what's optimal.

Both types of players are equally welcome on P99, so you can't really help one without hurting the other. If you keep the math fuzzy to enhance your play experience, then the math inclined suffer, and vice versa.

[cyxthryth]

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

I understand how you feel. I honestly don't know the optimal way to make everybody have a great experience.

Assuming - as the above Quote would seem to imply - that you are an intelligent and/or understanding enough individual to at least seemingly understand some basic things, and that - at a bare minimum - you are aware that some things have the ability/capacity to make people (the individuals which constitute "everybody") have a great (or not great) experiences... have you considered how it affects the experience of others when you do not back up your positions/claims/statements about them (which you make repeatedly) with relevant, factual data/evidence, and instead you simply - repeatedly - call them "trolls" / claim they are "trolling" or "silly", claim their posts are "nonsense/vitriol/memes"/etc.) or even simply completely ignore their posts (as if you doing so will refute or change any facts)?

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

Some people (like myself), enjoy the math of the game, and want to see how to optimize their play experience.

Some people (like yourself), just want to play and have some fun. They don't care what's optimal.

Both types of players are equally welcome on P99, so you can't really help one without hurting the other. If you keep the math fuzzy to keep the players like yourself happy, then the math inclined suffer, and vice versa.

For the sake of civil discussion, can you please explain what you are attempting to convey when you say "if you keep the math fuzzy"" and go into a bit more detail on how "the math inclined suffer"?

[PlsNoBan]

Cyxthryth is almost as persistent at trying to get DSM to respond to him as DSM is about how good shamans are at everything