Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

It's fucking comical to me that he thinks we're all trolls and the best way for him to "win" is to keep falling for our troll posts over and over. It's the most hilariously backwards thing I've ever heard. If someone is REALLY trolling you there's only 2 possible ways to win. Either you troll them back harder or you disengage and don't respond to them. We've established DSM has no idea what he's talking about when it comes to everquest (calling mages a teleport class, saying warriors solo better than enchanters.etc.etc) but now it almost seems like he doesn't understand the entire internet. Falling for trolls isn't how you beat trolls.

You must really feel comfortable in all of the strawmen you created. You don't have to think at all.

It is sad you think the only way to have a discussion is to troll people into silence.

You haven't disproven my points yet. I am not here to "win". I am here to ensure the facts are available to the community, and they don't get drowned out by trolls.

[cyxthryth]

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

You must really feel comfortable in all of the strawmen you created. You don't have to think at all.

It is sad you think the only way to have a discussion is to troll people into silence.

You haven't disproven my points yet. I am not here to "win". I am here to ensure the facts are available to the community, and they don't get drowned out by trolls.

What points/stance/belief/"argument" do you currently hold/"argue"?

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - of DSM attempting to move the goalposts by bringing a 5th "pocket" character into his "arguments" (even though this is intended to be a civil discussion - not an argument) pertaining to the "Best 4 person all caster/priest group" discussion":

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

OP never said you couldn't have a pocket cleric. I am not sure why people keep thinking this is not a possible route to take. Between four people it would be trivial to level a cleric to 39. It is pretty common for people to make pocket clerics on P99.

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - that DSM attempted to accuse others of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum:

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

The post history is clear. You are now including cyxthryth to try and strengthen your https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum argument because you have nothing else. I find it highly amusing.

Here is my reply to DSM's attempt, in which I point out to him the irrefutable fact - which cannot be refuted - that DSM himself attempted - laughably - to claim (intentionally or otherwise) that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum strengthened his argument when one (1) single other person seemed to agree with him:

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

Your post would seem to betray that you are aware that you have moved goalposts, because you are now attempting (disingenuously) to validate said goalpost-moving by stating that it is objectively true that the OP's post "is general" and that this somehow means "you are not moving the goalposts" by changing the basis of the discussion (from being about 4 priests/casters, to being about 4 priests/casters plus X amount of pocket Clerics, or other pocket classes). It is not objectively true that you are "not moving the goalposts" just because you and OP both agree that the OP's post "was general" and that that somehow means "you are not moving the goalposts". That is simply you - laughably - claiming you (and OP) are correct due to argumentum ad populum hehe. This really isn't hard.

Please clarify what you mean by stating OP's post "was general"?

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - that DSM has claimed:

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.

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

I am very confident it won't change in a group scenario.

Here re is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - that DSM has also claimed:

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.

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - of DSM's post in which he claimed Troxx's numbers were way different from Allishia's:

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

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - of DSM's post to Allishia when they provided their initial data in which he claimed Allishia's numbers were the same as Troxx's:

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 - it is not always clear to other posters what particular position/claim/"argument"(s) DSM is defending at any given time due to how often he has moved the goalposts & edited his posts.

For these reasons - which I have repeatedly stated - I am not sure which particular/specific belief/claim/stance/"argument"(s) that DSM is currently holding/defending/"arguing"; it would be helpful if he could elaborate/clarify/specify for the sake of civil discussion.

I am also not sure why DSM has continued to copy/paste his - irrelevant - data, after this exchange occured - which cannot be refuted & is visible and clear in the cleary visible post history - which DSM has as of yet not replied to/acknowledged/defended/challenged/attempted to refute:

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

The reason why I am reposting the information is because the trolls are trying to hide the information.

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

No. The content of your post seems to include a claim that "the trolls" are trying to "hide the information". The first problem is that your post would seem to indicate that you believe that information will be "hidden" if additional posts are made - that is objectively false/incorrect DSM. Even if additional posts are made after a specific post, the post history is - and will remain - clear hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Now that you have been advised and/or reminded of this irrefutable fact - which cannot be refuted - you should not need to continue to copy/paste to make sure your posts do not get "hidden" hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I am also not sure why your post(s) would seemingly indicate that you think that the particular data/information that you keep providing in your copy/pasted posts - which includes data/information of your Shaman's performance in an environment/context/scenario that is contrary to the environment/context/scenario relevant to this discussion, as has been pointed out to you multiple times by multiple posters - is somehow relevant to this discussion. It is not. It is simply irrelevant for reasons explained in multiple posts by multiple posters (including in this very post).

Again, DSM - of course - continues not to (directly) reply to me for some reason, and has continued to label me and/or my posts as "a troll"/"trolling", without providing the definition of "troll" / "trolling" that he is using (nor what he meant by stating that OP's post "was general"), and whilst providing zero evidence to support his claims of my being a troll/trolling.

The ball is in DSM's court if he has relevant, factual data to support his various positions/claims/"argument"(s) - and is willing to clarify which particular position/claim/argument(s) he currently holds/"argues", as they change when he moves goalposts or edits his posts - and/or if he would like to provide the definitions he is using for "troll"/"trolling", "nonsense", "silly", "vitriol", and "win"for the sake of civil discussion hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[PlsNoBan]

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

You must really feel comfortable in all of the strawmen you created. You don't have to think at all.

It is sad you think the only way to have a discussion is to troll people into silence.

You haven't disproven my points yet. I am not here to "win". I am here to ensure the facts are available to the community, and they don't get drowned out by trolls.

When is the last time you posted any facts for the community? 99.9% of your posts are responses to trolls with no facts for anyone. If I'm really a troll then I'm 100% winning. You are responding to my bait almost every time I put it out. How is responding to me trolling you "ensuring facts are available to the community" exactly?

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

[Gloomlord]

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

It's fucking comical to me that he thinks we're all trolls and the best way for him to "win" is to keep falling for our troll posts over and over. It's the most hilariously backwards thing I've ever heard. If someone is REALLY trolling you there's only 2 possible ways to win. Either you troll them back harder or you disengage and don't respond to them. We've established DSM has no idea what he's talking about when it comes to everquest (calling mages a teleport class, saying warriors solo better than enchanters.etc.etc) but now it almost seems like he doesn't understand the entire internet. Falling for trolls isn't how you beat trolls. This shit is internet 101.

I argued with shills on the WoW forums who did indeed troll people to silence them. So, I can see where that comment might have merit.

The fact is, though: we're talking about a game that no longer has a sociopathic corporation watching over it. This man is just arguing for the sake of claiming that shamans are better than mages...even in a group DPS situation.

There's nothing at stake here other than one man having pride for something so insanely illogical.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

When is the last time you posted any facts for the community? 99.9% of your posts are responses to trolls with no facts for anyone. If I'm really a troll then I'm 100% winning. You are responding to my bait almost every time I put it out. How is responding to me trolling you "ensuring facts are available to the community" exactly?

You are 100% losing. You just look like a fool, and nobody will bother to listen to you. I repost the current state of the argument. Then you just troll it because you haven't been able to disprove anything in it.

It must be easy to just try silencing people.

[cyxthryth]

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

You are 100% losing. You just look like a fool, and nobody will bother to listen to you. I repost the current state of the argument. Then you just troll it because you haven't been able to disprove anything in it.

It must be easy to just try silencing people.

You have provided zero evidence to support the Quoted claims, therefore, they are simply unsubstantiated (and probably false).

[PlsNoBan]

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

You are 100% losing. You just look like a fool, and nobody will bother to listen to you. I repost the current state of the argument. Then you just troll it because you haven't been able to disprove anything in it.

It must be easy to just try silencing people.

Besides responding to my troll bait. What did the above post accomplish? What facts were presented to the community?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Besides responding to my troll bait. What did the above post accomplish? What facts were presented to the community?

It shows you are a troll, and people should be wary about what you post.

[Gloomlord]

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

You are 100% losing. You just look like a fool, and nobody will bother to listen to you. I repost the current state of the argument. Then you just troll it because you haven't been able to disprove anything in it.

It must be easy to just try silencing people.

Alright, I call your bluff:

If you're not trolling us, why are you even responding anymore?

What's the point of this, DSM?

[cyxthryth]

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

It shows you are a troll, and people should be wary about what you post.

That is simply an example of you sharing that it is your opinion that another person/poster is a "troll" (which you have not defined); which is simply your opinion.