Project 1999

Project 1999 (/forums/index.php)
-   Rants and Flames (/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=30)
-   -   To Foreful Entry / BDA (/forums/showthread.php?t=87484)

Nirgon 11-01-2012 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by radditsu (Post 759062)
Lower numbers and higher difficulty is what i always wanted. 18 to 24 good people should get anything down as its currently tuned. No 60 for inny b/s.

From what ive seen trak and vs are a little too squishy. Vs had less total hps because he lifetapped the shit out of the raid so if you didnt have dps he was a tough hombre. Trak.... I cant put my finger on it yet. I mean i soloed him on my sk in pop, but he just seems off for the era we are in.

Trak aoe WAY too easy to resist.

quido 11-01-2012 12:58 PM

What makes you say that, Nirgon? It's not all that easy really, even with like 350-400 resist poison.

Hurley 11-01-2012 01:01 PM

Yes i can tell. We have rejected apps because someone is masking or behind a proxy. I don't see the harm of viewing behind one, just apping.

Versus 11-01-2012 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nirgon (Post 759072)
Trak aoe WAY too easy to resist.

It wouldn't matter if it was straight unresistable, he dies before he gets a 3rd one off anyway, and the first one is eaten by a single person.

hatelore 11-01-2012 01:08 PM

I can agree on vs, he seems pretty weak. I thought the whole purpose of needing a warrior and enc's runes on vs encounter was because he proc'ed his lifetap on every swing. At least that is how I remember it in kunark times years and years ago. Warrior engages,discs ,when warrior disc was done enc's spammed runes until next disc warrior gained aggro? Maybe I'm wrong, this was many years ago, but I seem to remember it that way. not trying to derail thread.

Lexical 11-01-2012 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 (Post 759068)
Oh yes exactly, the guy i was refering to was asking about p1999 and i said the app was on FE. Dbl confounded. Also p99 doesnt block web anonymizers either.

blocked my proxies :confused: Oh well, someone might have gotten banned on it or something >.>

Autotune 11-01-2012 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hatelore (Post 759082)
I can agree on vs, he seems pretty weak. I thought the whole purpose of needing a warrior and enc's runes on vs encounter was because he proc'ed his lifetap on every swing. At least that is how I remember it in kunark times years and years ago. Warrior engages,discs ,when warrior disc was done enc's spammed runes until next disc warrior gained aggro? Maybe I'm wrong, this was many years ago, but I seem to remember it that way. not trying to derail thread.

lmfao, derail it from what...

Jacquouille 11-01-2012 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quido (Post 759070)
Packets of death, bro.

I've heard you play guitar.

this is for you, I happen to find it rather decent.

http://soundcloud.com/beatconnexion/01-sunburn

hatelore 11-01-2012 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hatelore (Post 759082)
I can agree on vs, he seems pretty weak. I thought the whole purpose of needing a warrior and enc's runes on vs encounter was because he proc'ed his lifetap on every swing. At least that is how I remember it in kunark times years and years ago. Warrior engages,discs ,when warrior disc was done enc's spammed runes until next disc warrior gained aggro? Maybe I'm wrong, this was many years ago, but I seem to remember it that way. not trying to derail thread.

and the reasoning behind this was because with (evasive?) disc, vs can't reheal from his lifetaps since the warrior evades most of the swings. Then rune spam also kept vs from healing until next warrior could gain aggro and disc. But my memory may be bad. I wish oricalum from inny played on here, he would know(since he tanked vs for us back then)

Diggles 11-01-2012 01:25 PM

http://i.imgur.com/R67Sx.png


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:14 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.