Quote:
Originally Posted by Gloomlord
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
You did "admit" you were wrong in a very weaselly way that suggested the message was so rare that it was unreliable. Hence why Troxx is mocking you for using /con on the mob to see if it scowls -- because that's completely pointless.
|
Your opinion that it was "weaselly" is unfounded. The fact that 80% of your posts are specifically attacking me proves you have a bias against me, which means you have a pre-disposition to look at everything I say in a negative light. 70 "fallen to the ground" messages out of 3221 FD attempts is rare. I am not sure why you are suggesting otherwise.
Using /con is a great way to check if the mob is still aggroed on you while you are FD, because you can check if they are still threatening/scowling. Your opinion on whether or not you like to use it is irrelevant to it's factual usefulness. Please do not try to obfuscate facts because you want to be right or troll others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gloomlord
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Also, I would like to remind you that calling me a troll to undermine my arguments is what we call an "ad hominem". You should be very thankful I was open enough about being banned on Blizzard forums -- something you automatically assumed I deserved without knowing the full context.
You only go for underhanded moves because you know you're wrong. Am I right?
|
You have no arguments to undermine. None of your posts have been related to this topic. You are literally just attacking me unprovoked with biased and unproven opinions. You yourself admit that they are just opinions about me. I am simply defending myself from these accusations. There is plenty of evidence to establish that you have a pattern of trolling on these forums, and you admitted to being banned on another forum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gloomlord
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Edit: in regards to your edit, we already told you why a FD can fail without the innate chance of "falling to the ground". You had a spell cast on you, or you left autoattack on by mistake.
|
You can riposte at the same time while FDing, which will result in a failure without a message. You cannot turn off ripostes. This is one scenario in which you will get a failure without a message.
Also, I am not sure why you are saying "we told you FD can fail without the 'fallen to the ground' message". That is what I have been saying lol. The entire debate was that there are indeed scenarios in which FD fails without a message, and therefore the message is unreliable. This is one reason why /con is useful.