Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
The pro Mage side for 300 pages now has been trying to constrain the discussion to a vary narrow scope to paint Mages in the best light possible:
|
The above Quote is simply an example of you sharing that it is your opinion that "The pro Mage side for 300 pages now has been trying to constrain the discussion to a vary narrow scope to paint Mages in the best light possible"; which is simply your opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
A group of four level 60's is chain pulling trash mobs (in this case high 40's Sebilis mobs with around 8000 HP). Additionally, they are saying the Shaman cannot root/rot trash mobs that Shamans could normally solo and root rot. I have no idea why, since this would increase DPS with no additional risk.
|
I am not sure why you are - seemingly - unable or unwilling to provide evidence of your Shaman root/rotting such trash mobs in the specifically/particularly relevant (to this discussion) environment/context/scenario, despite having been requested to multiple times by multiple posters, as that particular data would be relevant to the discussion (as has been explained to you multiple times, by multiple posters) - unlike the data/evidence you continue to copy/paste, and/or the various opinions you seemingly hold which you have - seemingly - attempted to - laughably - claim/state as objective fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I personally think this is strange, because a group of four level 60's it typically not going to just be chain pulling trash mobs. They will be doing money camps like Fungi King, Ixiblat Fer, Chardok, etc. In those situations You are 100% correct a Shaman's DPS will be better due to them being able to use DoTs fully.
|
The above Quote is simply an example of you sharing what you would - presumably, seemingly - like to convey to other posters (or a particular/specific other poster) that you - personally - think, and what you - personally - think "will be better", and what you would - presumably, seemingly - like to convey you believe a group of four level 60's "will be doing".
If you were to attempt to utilize the fact that another particular/specific poster seemed to agree with you on one or more particular points to attempt to claim, state, or otherwise imply/reveal/betray/expose (intentionally or otherwise) that you believe that could, would, or did somehow strengthen your argument, that would simply be an example of you claiming your argument is strengthened due to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum - like you previously (intentionally or otherwise) attempted to claim by attempting to claim/imply that it was relevant that you and OP both (apparently) believe that "OP's post was/is general", and that that somehow meant there are no goalposts and/or that you have not moved the goalposts, simply due to you (and OP) making and agreeing with that claim. You have - laughably - still not provided the meaning that you were attempting to convey by "general" (or what meaning you believed the OP was attempting to convey causing you to - seemingly - agree with them).
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
DoT DPS is still not as good as a Mage when talking about single targets, but the math shows the difference in DPS isn't really giving you anything even when looking at a Shaman's worst possible DPS. You have already reached the proper DPS breakpoints.
|
For the sake of civil discussion, can you please go into a bit more detail about what meaning you are attempting to convey via the use of "isn't really giving you anything"?