Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Gloomlord [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't know about that. Troxx asks you to return the favour on the parsing, and you refuse by citing the excuse that group DPS is open to too many variables. You then, however, cite your Solo DPS parse as applicable for some reason. You think that's an honest viewpoint in regards to this discussion?

Forget autism. Don't know why people said that. You're a sociopath at this point.

The problem here is you are making the assumption that Troxx's request is required to prove basic DPS maths. It isn't.

I have provided the correct evidence, which is superior to Troxx's because it is video data with logs that can be cross referenced to the video.

I am sorry you have to resort to trolling because you can't get over the fact that data doesn't have to be gathered in the manner you request.

The maths are also correct, nobody has been able to explain why 20 x 10 x 60 = 12000 mana per hour via meditation is incorrect. That is an example of "napkin math", which you claim is incorrect.

[cyxthryth]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The problem here is you are making the assumption that Troxx's request is required to prove basic DPS maths. It isn't.

I have provided the correct evidence, which is superior to Troxx's because it is video data with logs that can be cross referenced to the video.

I am sorry you have to resort to trolling because you can't get over the fact that data doesn't have to be gathered in the manner you request.

The maths are also correct, nobody has been able to explain why 20 x 10 x 60 = 12000 mana per hour via meditation is incorrect. That is an example of "napkin math", which you claim is incorrect.

I am not sure what - relevant - point you think you are making or what fact you think you are refuting in the above Quote. Remember, irrelevant information is simply not relevant to the discussion. The above Quote would appear to simply be an example of you sharing that it is your opinion that you have provided the correct evidence, and that it is superior to Troxx's; which is simply your opinion.

Solo =/= "4 person all caster/priest group"
"Correct" =/= "Relevant"
4 =/= 5

You tried to claim:

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Assuming your group plays correctly, you will DPS the same way every time, the same as if you were solo.

and then you simply contradicted yourself by subsequently posting:

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

in a group setting, there are too many variables out of your control that can skew the data

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Once you add in outside variables, that changes the DPS equation NOT because of what the class can do, but because of what other players are doing.

As I have repeatedly stated to you - it is not always clear to other posters what particular position/claim/"argument*" you are defending at any given time due to how often you have moved the goalposts & edited your posts. This really isn't hard hehe.

Which belief do you currently hold/"argue" hehe? Please elaborate for the sake of civil discussion.

[Troxx]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Gloomlord]

Wait, so now he wants video evidence of a parse for it to be legit?

When do these goalposts end? I feel my body drain in exasperation with this creature.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Gloomlord [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Wait, so now he wants video evidence of a parse for it to be legit?

When do these goalposts end? I feel my body drain in exasperation with this creature.

My evidence is provable to come from P99 and from a Shaman. There is no way to actually show that Troxx's data comes from a group, from P99, or from a Mage. He can't even meet his own standards.

[Troxx]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

My evidence is provable to come from P99 and from a Shaman. There is no way to actually show that Troxx's data comes from a group, from P99, or from a Mage.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ah there it is. I called it like 250 pages ago. I knew you’d come out and say it.

Clearly I have fabricated the parses provided. Regardless of the fact that ally’s numbers were shockingly similar.

What a tool.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Troxx [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ah there it is. I called it like 250 pages ago. I knew you’d come out and say it.

Clearly I have fabricated the parses provided. Regardless of the fact that ally’s numbers were shockingly similar.

What a tool.

This is what you have been doing to my evidence for 250 pages. I am simply pointing out you can't prove your data matches the standards you keep trying to claim I must meet.

It is just nonsense. If everybody in this thread wants to claim data must come from a group, then you don't have the evidence to show it came from a group.

This is why asking people to prove a negative is silly. It is what you have been doing the entire time to me.

Allishia's numbers were way different from yours, because she provided log data. Your pet's DPS is much lower. Your average pet DPS was 56 on the individual parses, and 40 on the combined. Her pet is also an Epic Pet.

[cyxthryth]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is what you have been doing to my evidence for 250 pages. I am simply pointing out you can't prove your data matches the standards you keep trying to claim I must meet.

What "standards" do you believe are being requested/required here? The only requirement that I am aware of your data not meeting is that the data must be relevant, i.e. the data must be capture/recorded/collected in a relevant environment/scenario/context. This has been explained to you multiple times by myself & multiple other posters, so I am not sure why your post would seem to indicate that you do not know this (or are pretending not to know) or that you have forgotten this (or are pretending that you have forgotten).

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It is just nonsense. If everybody in this thread wants to claim data must come from a group, then you don't have the evidence to show it came from a group.

You have not provided the definition that you are using for "nonsense", can you please provide this for the sake of civil discussion?

There is data of the performance of other players in Troxx's data. Do you deny this for some reason, and if so - why?

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is why asking people to prove a negative is silly.

You have not provided the definition that you are using for "silly", can you please provide that for the sake of civil discussion?

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Also Allishia's numbers were way different from yours

Your post to Allishia when they provided their initial data:

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Thanks for the data! I'll get the logs from you a bit later today. Just looking at it here, the numbers are the same as Troxx's data.

As I have repeatedly stated to you - it is not always clear to other posters what particular position/claim/"argument*" you are defending at any given time due to how often you have moved the goalposts & edited your posts. This really isn't hard hehe.

Which belief do you currently hold/"argue" hehe? Please elaborate for the sake of civil discussion.

[Troxx]

DSM he is quoting you verbatim.

You really should reply.

[Gloomlord]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]