View Single Post
  #60  
Old 06-17-2026, 02:32 PM
DeathsSilkyMist DeathsSilkyMist is online now
Planar Protector

DeathsSilkyMist's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 8,495
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crede [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Meanwhile dsms “trust me bro” arguments in favor of using the ROST because he finds targeting himself with ggr annoying. And claims it’s better for normal players by some false sense of authority lol. Classic. Yet still claims shamans can root rot to compete with mage dps even tho he’s too lazy to target himself. While still having not provided evidence years later. So sad.
As you can see, Crede has still not provided any evidence for his initial claim:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crede [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
But when talking about xp per hour instant invis is gonna give you more reliable breaks without risk of wasting extra mana to kill your old pet or trying to time the casting delay and lose your pet. This could be proved over a long period of testing I just don’t feel the need to because I’ve already seen it while leveling.
There is no evidence to suggest a skilled Enchanter cannot get the same kills per hour with RoST compared to GGR. He is just saying "trust me bro" over and over, with some insults and Argument from Authority fallacy sprinkled in. One day he may learn that when he makes a positive claim, he actually needs to back it up with evidence.

He is now flailing. It is strange to see someone suggest that obvious facts like "GGR + 1 Invis item take up two inventory slots" is a "trust me bro" argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crede [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Calling bs on this too. Has plenty of time to edit posts and make thousands of them. Raiding with a bat phone doesn’t take long.
Pretending that someone's current raid attendance is the only way to guage raid experience is a silly argument. We all know this. You are just flailing because you know you are wrong.
Reply With Quote