Curse

Evilsod · Jul 14, 2007, 06:55 PM // 18:55

Will you 2 shut up with the RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing quote stacks... NOBODY is reading them but you 2... nobody is going to care what points you bring up in them because NOBODY IS READING THEM!

What is the point of this thread anymore... half of your posts are just countering off-topic crap and the rest is you been too stupid to figure out that nobody is offering suggestions and numbers because nobody wants it changed.

Fitz Rinley · Jul 14, 2007, 10:48 PM // 22:48

Deleted: I checked three times to see if this posted and it always said no. So, I reconstructed and reposted my response.

Fitz Rinley · Jul 14, 2007, 11:39 PM // 23:39

Quote:

Curse You:

Quote:

Fitz Rinley:
Incorrect. First, it is not my logic pattern but yours. You reasoned that a person should not want to change something when they do not like it. The inverse is they should want to change the things they like. Both patterns are flawed. The pattern is yours. You now add an additional element of outside influence/interaction in order to attempt to wiggle out of your flawed logical protocol. Such would be: –(P) =/= -P if -|P|∩Q.

I reasoned that it is ignorant for a single person to want to change something that effects others, simply for their own personal reasons.

No you stated:

Quote:

Curse You:
From that, I get that you feel that just because you don't like it, it needs to be changed.

There is no reference to influence from or to others. Ignorance is a matter of lacking knowledge. It should not be confused with having inspiration, interest, volition, or passion. Too many young people use this term incorrectly.

Quote:

Curse You:
The skill is underused because (as was said earlier) people are generally very bad at interrupting. Since this skill requires a person to be a good interrupter, many people don't like to use it. It is not because it is a bad skill.

If many, as in a majority, of the consumer are incapable of using the product as designed for the purpose for which it is designed then by default it is a bad product. You have just validated that there is something wrong with Concussion Shot.

Quote:

Curse You:
Right. You yourself, in the exact thing I quoted said, "Certainly, I should expect poor performance and lousy tracking." Don't just try telling me the opposite, just because you realized that you messed up. If you had some decency, you could at least mention your error, rather than just flat out contradicting yourself. Just because you have difficulties in a area with lots of stuff to process (all those bots), don't go telling me about how it must be a problem on their end, when you've admitted to having a weak computer.

I actually made no such admission. The game requires 2.0 GHz normal, I have 2.4 GHz Duo Core. The game requires 1 GB Ram, I exceed this. The game requires nVidia GeForce FX 5700, mine is nVidia 7900. So, in fact, I did not mess up – I was sarcastic and gave stats that should have shown this.

Quote:

Curse You:
New? Buddy, I've posted more things than you (a lot more), and so it could be assumed that I know more when it comes to this kind of stuff. And from the looks of things, I do.
You cannot call a secondary profession's attribute a part of your primary, that's not how it works.
I also know well enough that a R/Mo with healing prayers (or any martial based primary) is never a good combo. Sure you may be able to heal yourself, but isn't that what the monk is for? There are a number of skills that could assist you that belong to your primary, as well as the attribute you're already using, rather than those belonging to you secondary.
And frankly, I can easily use my warrior with Strength 8, Axe 10, Tactics 12.

The number of times you have posted is irrelevant. I have acquired titles, but I do not display them because they are meaningless. Sheepskin, by any amount of decoration, is just dead flesh with ink on it and does not imply capability.

I have not called a secondary profession attribute a primary, I have allotted normal wise distribution for those that are courteous enough to carry a res of some sort. Those who are capable may carry something better than res sig. Those who are not must use the latter as a back up. Those that party with no resurrection are ill mannered players. When I stated Heal, I generally gave it low marks and the skill applied: Resurrection Chant. A Wa/Mo that does not have health should not spend time rezzing, especially if there are foes in agro. I did not recommend a Ranger take heals from Healing Prayers. I have quite successfully used, in the Ring of Fire, Healing Spring and Troll Ungeant. You again completely miss the point, just as with the numbers. Yes, I could spend a couple of days drawing up charts of every attribute combination within 3, 4, 5, 6, or all attribute possibilities. I have the analytical background and training to do this. And if you understand what I have said, then you understand why you do not use your warrior as Wa/Ele with Str 7, Sword 7, Tac 7, Hammer 7, Axe 7, Earth 7, Fire 7, and remainder 4.

Quote:

Curse You:
I can easily make a poison ranger work with Expertise 12, Marksmanship 10, Wilderness 8. Poison is an easy condition to apply.

Also, why do you seem to think that the only mix with three attributes is 12, 12, 3?

I don’t it is the only mix which maxes two attributes. Maxed power is always better than minimum power when your only intended goal it absolute. The only intended goal is DP/DR or Damage Production over Damage Received. Everything done is to maximize damage produced and maximize reduction of damage received.

Quote:

Curse You:
In case you didn't notice, no one agrees with you. Also, Concussion Shot isn't the only interrupt skill for rangers. It's a skill intended to be used by someone who is able to interrupt to give them an easier time interrupting after their fist interrupt.

And again, once used it is so cost inefficient that it negates its value. In order to make it seem valuable you have to lose your elite slot and pump expertise at the expense of other attribute areas. And someone else agreeing or not does not change anything. I am an intuitor primary personality type, I am used to the majority being incapable of seeing what I see because the majority are not intuitors. This is scientific fact as delineated in years of studies under the Myers-Briggs Personality Profiling spectrum.

[QUOTE][QUOTE]Fitz Rinley:
You might try paying attention to what you read. But since you want a slightly better break down:

Quote:

Curse You:
I'm quite certain I understood it perfectly clear. It basically tells you that you agree that they have full rights to do whatever they choose with their game, even if it negatively effects you.

I don't see how your "speech" was at all relevant. Sure negativity isn't always bad, but when you start ranting about their actions being "immoral" I start opposing the negativity. If they want to change their game, that's their business. They choose to listen to their customers. They could also choose to do whatever they want. The only reason they don't is because they need customers to make money.

I've look at the positive points of your proposed change. I know that they are outweighed by the bad points.

Promotion of tyranny is immoral. The HoH/Favor system remains immoral because it is centered on the control of other peoples recreational lives by an elite few HoH players. At no point may the millions of GW players all be that elite few with control over their own choices and their own destinies. At least through faction purchases of Scrolls you may now enter the content areas of Factions. The campaign is no longer set so that an elite Faction Farming Zerg, who can pay players and bots to farm faction for them to get and maintain their control of say House zu Heltzer, no longer have absolute control over and the ability to charge fellow players to enter the content areas they purchased. The Factions assault against individuality, personal expression, and small guilds was either malicious or negligent toward customers – both are immoral according to business ethics. And, having studied this area, at one point specifically, I am actually qualified in determining a professional oppinion on when an ethical violation has been made.

Your ability to read the EULA was not in question. Your ability to comprehend what I have stated has been.

Curse You · Jul 15, 2007, 03:09 AM // 03:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

There is no reference to influence from or to others. Ignorance is a matter of lacking knowledge. It should not be confused with having inspiration, interest, volition, or passion. Too many young people use this term incorrectly.

Well then I feel sorry for you because everyone else knows that a skill being changed effects other people.

Oh look, I found ignorance in your speech about how you're not ignorant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

The number of times you have posted is irrelevant. I have acquired titles, but I do not display them because they are meaningless. Sheepskin, by any amount of decoration, is just dead flesh with ink on it and does not imply capability.

I disagree. If I've been to many threads, and posted there, I should have a good idea of what the community is like. You can't make changes to a game without first knowing something about the people playing it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

I have not called a secondary profession attribute a primary, I have allotted normal wise distribution for those that are courteous enough to carry a res of some sort.

Well then what's this;
"I know full well the ranger class is, unlike most, is especially geared with augmentive skills that are across 5 attribute areas."
Rangers only have 4 attributes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

I don’t it is the only mix which maxes two attributes. Maxed power is always better than minimum power when your only intended goal it absolute. The only intended goal is DP/DR or Damage Production over Damage Received. Everything done is to maximize damage produced and maximize reduction of damage received.

There are many skills which are still very effective, even with a low attribute level. Many such skills are found in the ranger attributes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

And again, once used it is so cost inefficient that it negates its value. In order to make it seem valuable you have to lose your elite slot and pump expertise at the expense of other attribute areas.

If I use Concussion Shot on a spell caster and interrupt them, then I don't have to use any other skills to interrupt their other spells, since the effect of daze only requires that I hit them to interrupt their spells. Also, since when did Concussion Shot make you loose an elite slot?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

Promotion of tyranny is immoral.

I don't see any tyranny here. I see a company that has been granted full control over all aspects of their game, by the community that they have influence over. You agreed to let them change their game as they see fit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evilsod

Will you 2 shut up with the RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing quote stacks... NOBODY is reading them but you 2... nobody is going to care what points you bring up in them because NOBODY IS READING THEM!

I'm well aware that no one else is going to be reading this. That's why I've been trying reduce the overall amount of stuff in my post. This post should be about half the length of my last one. I've always hated long posts.
I also agree that this thread is really going nowhere at this point. Might be worth it to close the thread, since I don't think I have anything more to say on this topic, but Fitz might see otherwise.

Evilsod · Jul 15, 2007, 03:16 AM // 03:16

Fitz... ask the Ranger community what they think of Concussion Shot... i'm pretty sure most, if not all of them have no problem with it and understand that its extremely high energy is VERY justifiable.

Considering Fitz isn't really bringing up anything useful either, seriously, you actually think mentioning a Wammo is good? And then you're trying to justify how 5 attribute lines should be used... even when 1 of them is for a res thats completely irrelevant, thats not an extra attribute line.

I'm still waiting for an explanation as to how someone with so much knowledge of the Ranger class seems to think there are 5 attribute lines, and further more how a build can actually involve all 4 attributes lines effectively without just having 1 build that does everything badly instead of some things well.

HawkofStorms · Jul 15, 2007, 04:11 AM // 04:11

For the love of god, all you two (Fitz and Curse You) are doing is bitchering about typos and trying to find ways to call the other guy stupid by finding (with some doubious behavior) logical "flaws." Just stop.

Curse You · Jul 15, 2007, 04:17 AM // 04:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

For the love of god, all you two (Fitz and Curse You) are doing is bitchering about typos and trying to find ways to call the other guy stupid by finding (with some doubious behavior) logical "flaws." Just stop.

Just so you know, I've sent a request for this thread's closure. Also, you should have read the last bit of my last post.

Risa · Jul 15, 2007, 04:56 AM // 04:56

Cuncussion Shot does not need to be adjusted. It's actually a pretty good skill. Forgive me for having no interest in the countless quoted previous posts. I read a few posts...Until it was the same two people quoting each other about (probably) completely unrelated things to the topic...

Nevin · Jul 15, 2007, 06:29 AM // 06:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evilsod

Avatar of Lyssa is worth using, nobody uses that in PvP.
Meteor Shower is worth using, nobody uses that in PvP.

Just because its not used in PvP doesn't mean it sucks... people use Broadhead Arrow in PvP because Prot monks are very hard to interrupt.

This isn't Crude Swing or Power Shot... its an interrupt that inflicts the most powerful anti-cast condition in the game. Its very cost effective and there are many ways to cover the cost.

Wow.. I've seen plenty of people use Lyssa in PvP, along with Meteor shower... Even in the same build.

Evilsod · Jul 15, 2007, 12:55 PM // 12:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevin

Wow.. I've seen plenty of people use Lyssa in PvP, along with Meteor shower... Even in the same build.

RA/TA/AB builds don't count... for anything.

Although funnily enough i did just watch a GvG where the ele used GoSac Meteor Shower... although that was purely to make wards a danger zone........ once every 90 seconds... what a complete waste.

RhanoctJocosa · Jul 15, 2007, 01:13 PM // 13:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evilsod

RA/TA/AB builds don't count... for anything.

Although funnily enough i did just watch a GvG where the ele used GoSac Meteor Shower... although that was purely to make wards a danger zone........ once every 90 seconds... what a complete waste.

Depends on the conditions of the game. That GSMS could have provided the pressure for a huge push/morale boost.

EDIT: Fitz, trying to boast your intellectual prowess to a bunch of GAMERS on a GAMING forum just proves what a lowlife you are. Stop posting kthx?

around · Jul 15, 2007, 03:23 PM // 15:23

Glyph Sac+Meteor Shower is massive lulz at VoD.

I'll let you figure out why.

Evilsod · Jul 15, 2007, 07:45 PM // 19:45

I'm sure it is... on a ele who is speccing in Air, Prot and Energy Storage! Its adjacent... its not even big enough AoE to do anything at VoD since hte NPCs don't stand THAT close together. And how does Meteor Shower stop a flag runner or help a huge push? It was a complete waste of a skill, i assume GoSac was for Res Chant.

And thats all i have to say on this as its completely pointless.

Curse You · Jul 15, 2007, 07:53 PM // 19:53

Wow, this thread has truly gone. All that's happening now is people are beating it with a stick, talking about something totally unrelated to the topic.

Fitz Rinley · Jul 16, 2007, 03:18 AM // 03:18

Five is a number next to four on a keyboard. An intelligent person would see that. But then an intelligent person would understand the only way for a person to ''effect'' someone else is through reproduction. Since, I am an intelligent person I have always read this as ''affect'' instead.

To assume that common parlance with public oppinion is correct is to assume error. For someone who attempted to correct on the basis of pseudo-reasoning, this should already be in evidence. Federalist Paper No. 10 is based upon the fact that the majority can be wrong. A majority once found nothing wrong with slavery. And while I realize there are some here who will not bother to see a logical pattern, but will tie themselves up with the appearance of the word slavery rather than the use of the logical construct, it is a pattern which accurately communicates the error of assuming popular oppinion must be right.

I am fully aware also that there is a dearth in moral training in the Western World. Therefore, I would not expect those lacking specific training in ethics to easily identify ethical violation - which is socio-economic more often than political. The difference between what is lawful and what is ethical is a difference between what one can do and what one should do. Simply because any two adults may do anything together in private does not mean that they should do so. It is even more imperative in business where they, as public leaders, have an obligation to higher ethical standards of both behavior and provision of goods, services, and environment. Because they have the higher level of influence: economically, educationally, and intitutionally if they promote a caste system, elitism, etc. they are responsible for those social effects generated through those whom they affect.

jesusrunz · Jul 16, 2007, 03:57 AM // 03:57

Run it with prepared shot, as state above.

/not signed

Brad_Dick does not approve of this proposal.

Evilsod · Jul 16, 2007, 05:02 AM // 05:02

Fitz, what the hell are you trying to prove? That you can reel off some smart sounded crap on online forums?

Your last post, all 3 paragraphs of it wasn't even related to this thread.

PS, where did you copy/paste it from?

explodemyheart · Jul 16, 2007, 06:41 AM // 06:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

Five is a number next to four on a keyboard. An intelligent person would see that. But then an intelligent person would understand the only way for a person to ''effect'' someone else is through reproduction. Since, I am an intelligent person I have always read this as ''affect'' instead.

To assume that common parlance with public oppinion is correct is to assume error. For someone who attempted to correct on the basis of pseudo-reasoning, this should already be in evidence. Federalist Paper No. 10 is based upon the fact that the majority can be wrong. A majority once found nothing wrong with slavery. And while I realize there are some here who will not bother to see a logical pattern, but will tie themselves up with the appearance of the word slavery rather than the use of the logical construct, it is a pattern which accurately communicates the error of assuming popular oppinion must be right.

I am fully aware also that there is a dearth in moral training in the Western World. Therefore, I would not expect those lacking specific training in ethics to easily identify ethical violation - which is socio-economic more often than political. The difference between what is lawful and what is ethical is a difference between what one can do and what one should do. Simply because any two adults may do anything together in private does not mean that they should do so. It is even more imperative in business where they, as public leaders, have an obligation to higher ethical standards of both behavior and provision of goods, services, and environment. Because they have the higher level of influence: economically, educationally, and intitutionally if they promote a caste system, elitism, etc. they are responsible for those social effects generated through those whom they affect.

I suggest you go off on your self-righteous egomaniacal tirades elsewhere, nobody cares how smart you think you are. All they care about is what is supposed to be the topic at hand, which is whether concussion shot should be adjusted. And, obviously, you're in the minority.

Curse You · Jul 16, 2007, 06:59 AM // 06:59

Fitz, you comment on spelling, then mess up spelling a bunch of times in the following paragraphs. It doesn't matter if your finger slipped, the fact is that you can easily read over your post and check for such simple errors before posting. You're too much of a hypocrite, and you keep going off topic with your little "look at how smart I am" posts.

Who cares what "Federalist Paper No. 10" says. This is a gaming form, it's for talking about something that many people play. Skills only get changed for two reasons:
1. The majority of players find it to be too powerful/too weak
2. Arena Net finds it to be too underused.

If a single person was able to change a skill, without anyone else agreeing, the game would never work.

Concussion Shot is fine as it is. End of discussion. Can we get this thread closed already?

urania · Jul 16, 2007, 08:13 AM // 08:13

I can easily imagine that all the people who whine about the high cost conc shot has are the people who (apparently) use it on recharge or spam it randomly to catch sth...And btw, most of prot monks use at least 1 long cast spell - either holy veil or deny hexes and if you cant hit that, then u better run sth else or go train some more.

Like Conjure Nightmare, its fine the way it is and SHOULD require additional skills to be used in same bar to make it more "spammable".

How come you aren't requesting a fix to skills like warmongers and the like though?

with the ritualist buff for weapon spells lately, the skill is even more gay than it was but no one is whining about it...i wonder why -_-. Not to mention Steady stance w/d's.

Both of the above mentioned skills have been abused in TA and partially RA for several months now, but apparently the pvp level there is too negligable for anet to even bother looking at it because they cannot even fix the (in their view) important issues that are plaguing GWs atm. -_-