Curse

Str0b0 · Apr 14, 2006, 11:07 PM // 23:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ira Blinks

Edit:
thats just a nice wording for an ugly thing.
Once again - apparently elementalist AoE skills were broken. I fail to see fundamental difference between elementalists AoE and either Barrage or SS. Thus later are broken as well. This logic is as basic as it ever gets.

As for skill: Thats a worst piece of bull i ever heard.
Oh yes, repeatedly clickin barrage button requires alot of skill... Putting up two hexes and goin to get coffee while mobs wacking themselves to death apparently does to

I bet you never played nuker in places like FoW and have no idea how much micromanagement required to avoid being interrupted in the middle of 5 seconds spell, to keep covering up attunement, to time spells properly, to avoid being murdered by melee when some moron broke aggro, to manage energy... and all that for barely half effectiveness of your "skilled" players. Dont even start me on interrupt mesmers - that profession is all about skill.

Ok your "logic" is based upon the assumption that the nerf was actually a good idea. I don't think it was. By your rationale just because something happens it must therefore be right so why don't we start rounding people up and putting them back in concentration camps because hell it happened twice therefore it must be right. Logically I can prove that only one inhabited planet exists in the entire universe but that doesn't make it so. You're reaching here and you're falling back upon "balancing" updates and thumping them like a preacher talking hellfire and damnation from the pulpit. You're completely ignoring the metagame, which it could be argued is really the only aspect of the game that people really play. Everything else is based off the metagame from how missions are run to how PvP strategies unfold.

EDIT:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ira Blinks

Im not sure if you noticed but you have just totaly supported my point. If I want to enjoy the game I have to forget about ele and make myself necro or whatever (which i in fact did). That does prove that eles and mesmers are broken in the first place.

And no you just proved my point. People are lazy and don't want to play the metagame. I am not saying at all that you have to abandon an ele or a mesmer I am saying you have to figure out how to make them work. They will work you just haven't figured it out yet. As some of the mesmer's in the community have pointed out there are effective PvE builds they just aren't shared as thoroughly. I already mentioned my highly effective ele build. Stop being lazy and wanting people to fix things and dumb them down to your level. If you want to play a dumbed down game with all the synergies laid out for you then go play Diablo 2. they list everything for you nice and easy and there is no real metagame involved there at all.

Ira Blinks · Apr 14, 2006, 11:15 PM // 23:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Str0b0

Ok your "logic" is based upon the assumption that the nerf was actually a good idea. I don't think it was. By your rationale just because something happens it must therefore be right so why don't we start rounding people up and putting them back in concentration camps because hell it happened twice therefore it must be right.

You are correct. My proof is based on assumption that AoE nerf was a right thing to do. Your conclusion however is totaly random. I dont see a reason for word logic to be enquoted either. You have totaly confused fact (expression that always holds true) and right/moral thing to do.

Quote:

Logically I can prove that only one person exists in the entire univers but that doesn't make it so.

give it a try. Logic, my friend, is not a common sense. Logic is an application of math. It has very strict rules and not something to make fun of just because you cant use it.

Quote:

You're reaching here and you're falling back upon "balancing" updates and thumping them like a preacher talking hellfire and damantion from the pull pit. You're completely ignoring the metagame, which it could be argued is really the only aspect of the game that people really play. Everything else is based off the metagame from how missions are run to how PvP strategies unfold.

metagame is ethereal word you have just made up. I dont even know what you talking about. That I dont see a bigger picture? Ok... well, show me the big picture then.

Phoenix Ex · Apr 14, 2006, 11:16 PM // 23:16

Well...AoE patch debate yet again.

All I can say is I would rather use barrage then use an aoe ele skill and having 3 bladed aataxes fly off the tank and then straight to the monk and kill him in two hit. Even if the group manages to survive it usually ends up in a slow dodging and chasing war between casters, aataxes and the tanks.

As for mesmers...they are god at owning a single monster at a time...but I would rather kill a group of 10 at a fraction of the time since I don't have hours and hours per day to kill one by one...

So ya, Eles and mesmers are workable, just nowhere even CLOSE to the efficency of warrior, necros, and rangers. (Which are decent, NOT overpowered, so stop the whine to nerf SS and Barrage already)

Str0b0 · Apr 14, 2006, 11:28 PM // 23:28

Ok I take that back I can do you one step better and logically prove that there are no inhabited planets in the universe or that there are no uninhabited planets in the universe. We know that both of these statements are false but according to mathematical logic they are true. The universe is infinite. Therefore there is an infinite area for planets to exist in. Because of this there can be an infinite number of inhabited and an infinite number of uninhabited planets. This also means there are an infinite number of planets period. However if we want to narrow the scope to just the inhabited planets then we would subtract the number of uninhabited planets from the total number of planets. Since , as you pointed out logic must deal with math then we will use the mathematical concept of infinity which is a number that continues forever. Still the one undeniable rule of math is that if you subtract a number from itself the total is zero therefore there are no inhabited planets in the universe according to math and if there are no inhabited planets then there are no pepole so we all must be figments of a nonexistant imagination. Sorry for the off topic. Now shut up about logic and stop being lazy and play the metagame.

Now as for the metagame the metagame can be defined as the thought, strategy and planning that takes place outside of the game environment itself. In other words it is everything you should be doing when you start building a character. It is the strategy you go through when you decide what you want the character to do. It is the consideration of which skills will best help to achieve your goal and which ones will be applicable in as many situations as possible. If you aren't willing to do this and instead think that every combination of skills you just slap together should instantly dominate the game then you've already missed the skill aspect of the game.

Ira Blinks · Apr 14, 2006, 11:42 PM // 23:42

Quote:

We know that both of these statements are false but according to mathematical logic they are true

err... what? You call this a proof?

Ok this is a proof:

Theorem: spell Spiteful Spirit should have a property "trigger scattering"
Proven theorems available: Any DOT (damage over time) AoE spell should have property "trigger scattering"

First we prove that SS is an instance of DOT AoE spell.
By definition of DOT AoE. AoE is a spell with given properties:
1) dealing damage more than once per single cast
2) dealing damage to target foe and adjacent foes at the same time.

Both of those properties are true for SS, thus SS is a DOT AoE spell.

So now we left with very simple expression.
(DOT AoE has "trigger scattering" == true => SS has "trigger scattering" == true) == true
Which is simplified to:
(true => SS has "trigger scattering" == true) == true
Which is simplified to:
(SS has "trigger scattering" == true) == true
Which is simplified to:
SS has "trigger scattering"

makosi · Apr 14, 2006, 11:44 PM // 23:44

First post i read: redundany/uselessness of mesmers + eles.
Last post i read: philosophy.

wtf... a wee bit off topic.

Anyway...

Remember the days when everyone wanted a tank, healer, bonder, MM and nuker for SF farming? It took months for people to realise that SS and Spinal Shivers was more effective- people are stubborn about changing their 'builds' despite the fact that SS is blatently better than meteors at dealing concentrated area dmg. My point is, people seem to find a build they are comfortable with and use it and on the rare occasion something new is introduced. Rangers were never considered good farming chars but they dominate tombs and FoW now. Its just a matter of time until a new build is designed and we'll see 'GLF MESMERS'... or is that just wishful thinkng?

Ira Blinks · Apr 14, 2006, 11:51 PM // 23:51

Quote:

If you aren't willing to do this and instead think that every combination of skills you just slap together should instantly dominate the game then you've already missed the skill aspect of the game.

Thats exactly what my problem is. You pul SS and echo on you skillbar and you DO dominate the game. Same goes for Barrage and 1-2 spirits.
On the opposite end we have ele who will dedicate his whole skill bar to just dealing damage and still fail at it. And dont you even dare to tell me Im not good at playing ele (nuker in particular). I perfected nuker profession. I squezed every bit of effectiveness out of it. And Im still subpar to necro/rangers who dont even know what skill is.

Phoenix Ex · Apr 14, 2006, 11:52 PM // 23:52

I doubt mesmer will ever have a build that is on par with Meteor Shower and SS. Just look at all their skills and there's barely any that has the word adjacent, or nearby, or in the area with a dmg number that is worthwhile...

P.S. Chaos Storm is absolute junk, fix it please....

Str0b0 · Apr 14, 2006, 11:52 PM // 23:52

Fine then we will represent it this way. A = the number of inhabited planets B= the number of uninhabited planets and C = the total number of planets. According to the mathematical concept of infinity A=B=C. therefore C-B=0. Or is your "logic" selective in it's application? That's the way it seems to me. You deny solid mathematical proof and then go about using metamath and calling it mathematical logic. Basically your little "proof" up there is like me saying "Apples+Lemons=Oranges because red and yellow make the color orange and both apples and lemons are kind of roundish like an orange. Just because something is similar does not make it the same nor does it make the rules that govern one applicable to the other. By the way you are also using a contrapost sentence in your proof. One does not imply the other.

I would never dare to tell you you aren't any good at playing an ele however maybe you just aren't trying the right skill combinations? Or perhaps your secondary class selections do not have synergy with your primary. Unless you have tried every possible skill combination then you cannot say that it is impossible for an ele to be as effective as an SS necro.

Ira Blinks · Apr 14, 2006, 11:54 PM // 23:54

Quote:

C-B=0

incorrect.

Str0b0 · Apr 15, 2006, 12:03 AM // 00:03

Really? I'd love to know how. Lets put less ephemeral numbers to it. Let us say that infinity can instead be reduced to the number 2. So we substitute 2 for all instances of infinity in the above proof. What you are basically saying is that 2-2 does not equal 0. In fact you are implying that any number subtracted from itself does not equal zero.

Ira Blinks · Apr 15, 2006, 12:08 AM // 00:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Str0b0

Really? I'd love to know how. Lets put less ephemeral numbers to it. Let us say that infinity can instead be reduced to the number 2. So we substitute 2 for all instances of infinity in the above proof. What you are basically saying is that 2-2 does not equal 0.

find yourself an algebra book or something...
Infinity has a limited set of allowed operations. Result of operation
Infinity - Infinity
is undefined.
Simply because
Infinity + Infinity = Infinity (and not 2x Infinity as you might have expect)

That is already given that i've let you get away with horrible misconcept of variable versus infinity value in A=B=C expression.

Str0b0 · Apr 15, 2006, 12:11 AM // 00:11

Absolutely not. Infinity may not be terminated at a single number therefore it may not be added to ,but when working in terms of infinity it may indeed be subtracted from itself and divided into itself. The problem that you suggest only occurs when you try to subtract a finite number from or divide a finite number into infinity. If infinity could not be subtracted from itself then there would be no starting point for a time line. You could argue that infinity existed prior to the big bang but that is also a fallacy . As Stephen Hawking once pointed out, everything prior to the big bang did not effect anything afterwards and therefore is inconsequential. So infinity may indeed start from a given point and because of that it may also be reduced back to that point by subtracting it from itself. Even if you allow for omnidirectional expansion as a model of infinity that expansion must also start from a central point and therefore it can be reduced back to that point.

Ira Blinks · Apr 15, 2006, 12:13 AM // 00:13

as i said before:

Quote:

find yourself an algebra book or something...

Edit: first link from google on "math infinity operation" http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/55764.html

Str0b0 · Apr 15, 2006, 12:22 AM // 00:22

Yeah algebra...I remember that from 8th grade. When you get to more advanced mathematics you'll find that algebra does not have all the answers. Infinity must start from somewhere. Anything that has a starting point may be reduced to that starting point by subtracting it from itself. That's just the way things work. If you start a number line then if you subtract the total points on that number line from that number of points you end up with zero, the beginning of the number line. That maxim you posted like it's a universal law, certainly holds true for low level mathematics but for higher maths it doesn't. It can be argued that infinity does not exist in any number system however that isn't entirely true. Infinity is a number system in and of itself. It contains the sum total of all the numbers in existence. It behaves according to it's own rules. You have not provided any logical argument to counter mine you just posted an arbitrary rule used to deal with a concept that is difficult to define in mathematics. Because of that they basically fudged over it. Basically your supporting proof is like me saying that no vehicle can go over 65 on the freeway because the speedlimit is 65. Arbitrary rules do not make for a convincing or necessarily correct argument.

Ira Blinks · Apr 15, 2006, 12:27 AM // 00:27

gosh... This IS more advanced math. And what you talking about IS school primitives.
You can NOT substract the same amount of points because that amount is NOT equal to the given amount. Simply put Infinity = Infinity == false. There is no "same" amount - that is exactly why substract operation is undefined.

Str0b0 · Apr 15, 2006, 12:33 AM // 00:33

Ok so please educate me on how subtracting two numbers that are defined the same way does not equal zero? You're trying to tell me that infinity has changed since I typed the first mention of it? That sounds like a massive leap of faith there. Even if given a constantly mutating number if you subtract that number from itself it must still equal zero because the numbers are the same even if they are in a constant state of flux because even the way in which they change must be equal. Even if we expand that to an entire function it still holds true. the clone of a fractal function will express the exact same mutations as the original equation. If they are both subtracted from each other at the same point in time then they still equal zero. The only way your argument works is if you add a fourth dimension to mathematical processes and say that time is a factor. That is to say that the infinity you originally decided to subtract becomes static at the time you decide to subtract it and so if you subtract your frozen infinity from dynamic infinity you will not end up with zero. I concede that point but that's adding a variable into the mix which was not originally defined.

Hadoken13 · Apr 15, 2006, 12:37 AM // 00:37

JESUS TAP-DANCING CHRIST?!?!?!??!!?! WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE??????
what does logic have to do with anything??? even if nerfing ss and barrage are the right things to do arena net won't do it! think about it, regardless of who ever is right do you think that ANet want's to make more people angry at them? angry people=no sales, that's my logic. some like to farm some don't. your idea of fun may be the metagame(whatever that is) while mine may be playing the game the way the devs intended. who cares???!?!?!?!??!?!

back on the topic-
it is true that mesmers can't solo farm as efficiently as other proffs. but that is because they were never meant to be the damage dealing class. elems on the other hand....i have to dissagree, they can do as much damage (if not quite as quickly) it is just that their builds are not popular right now. i remember a time where my guildy couldn't get a pug cuz she was a necro, but now necros are all the rage! in a month or so once factions comes out i am sure that the whole thing will change and someone else will be the new farmer. then we can all complain about them.
---also at above poster infinity is undefined you cannot add or subtract it and have an answer---

M3lk0r · Apr 15, 2006, 12:39 AM // 00:39

As I said in my last post in Riverside (which got deleted) "What a load of total shyte"

Such things have been happening since the begaining of the game. Was no one there when "farm groups" started out? NOBODY took rangers, necros or mesmers. It was all tank war, dual echo ele and bond monk. You had 0 chance of getting a group if someone of the "holy trinity" was already present. UW ranger-trap groups were the only exceptions I might add.

The AoE Update changed everyting, though I believe it was primarily targeted at 55 monks doing UW (and coming back with 10 ectos a run), the one-trick ele took the biggest hit. Numerous petitions flared up (written by 12 years by the looks of it) and a minority exchanged their accounts for Runescape items (yes Runescape!!).

Now people started realising SS and the beauties of Minion Masters (mind, "suggestions" for Nerfs on both came quickly in Sardelic). Anyways Necros finally got the their place in the holy trinity. Barrage rangers were still not really popular (though people did try then in SF) untill the ruined Tombs came out. Thanks to a really tight map design, body blocking with pets and minions became effective and ZOMG ele's and war had to be left out.

Mesmers are the biggest loosers in all of this. No easy to use idiot-friendly build is PvE metagame yet. And bs on Ele being not invited, a echo-nukers are still ussed en masse in FoW. And here I thought my warder would be put to good use :-/

Ira Blinks · Apr 15, 2006, 12:43 AM // 00:43

I told you, you have no concept of variable versus value. Infinity is a value, however we denote it with word "infinity" which is variable. In this case variables are the same, but values are not. Unfortunately I dont know how to type Infinity sign into forum message, so lets pretend X is infinity sign (as value), so:
A = X (assign value X to A)
B = X (assign value X to B)
Now is A==B? Answer is no. Why may you ask? Bacause:
X + 1 == X (does not require proof i hope)
=>
A == X + 1
=>
A + 1 == X
=>
A + 1 == B

In case you still dont get it. Infinity is defined as number being greater than (less than for negative infinity) any other number. But since Infinity ny itself is also a number, then Infinity is greater than Infinity.