Silver Sky Magician
Member
|
@Hun Kingq
I believe I have shown you respect. I have not flamed you or degraded you in any way, but merely expressed doubt about the truth of your statements. The reason why I take several hours to reply is not because I need several hours to find out the flaws in your argument, but because I don't spend my whole day on this forum. I definitely can't reply to you if I can't read what you have typed. It will probably be a few hours before you reply to this post as well. Should I say that you too 'need several hours to think properly'?
I do not think IsaiahtheMage or any of your critics are 'condescending' either, but that you refute their criticism with personal attacks and hold to your opinion, inevitably causing them to be frustrated. I aslo believe that your personal attacks are unjustified and that you may be overly sensitive. For example Firewallblast defended my using of a forum name that was separate from my character name, but you defended your choice of a forum name and counterattacked him. It seems like you had taken this innocuous statement as a personal provocation.
You seem to have misunderstood the basic premise of my argument. My problem is not with your reporting of facts, but rather with the inferences you draw using those facts, i.e. the mage class has been nerfed by this update. If you had merely reported that you had experienced such inconsistencies, I wouldn't have bothered replying to you. But that you used these inconsistencies to again say that mages have been nerfed and subsequently want buffs for them is problematic to me. There are only two ways you can refute an argument: attack the premises(evidence), which I did, and attack the link between the premises and the conclusion.
Since you maintain that your evidences are correct, and I can only disprove it through induction and not through direct observation, I have no choice but to let this matter pass, though I am still skeptical of your 'facts'. If they were true, then why have they, till now, not been reported as bugs? Could you answer this? Why have no other forum users supported your 'facts'?
Moreover you have a track record of reporting questionable 'facts', like 'multi shot and artillery strike do more damage than plasma rain because they are two-hit attacks'. With all these reasons to doubt your 'evidence', I think that it is quite reasonable for me or anyone else (as evidenced by the number of people questioning you) to do so.
I think what IsaiahtheMage and I have been saying regarding you is perfectly on topic. You are expressing your stand on this update. We are refuting that stand, mainly because the rationale and 'facts' behind it are so questionable. I do not see any digression, or our posts would have been deleted.
I would like to point out that your problems, if truly existent, affects everyone else, not just you or your class. Your argument on why mages are affected more hinges on the defensive skills of other classes. Are defense matrix and technician not just as efficient as their bounty hunter counterparts? Do you not have reroute? Do mercs and bounty hunters not have to add just as much to their defenses? They can't let their guard down just because they have hybrid armour or the more unreliable Shadow Arts.
As for your examples with overload, you did not add a considerable amount to the skill or have a significant amount of stats to boost its damage. Stun grenade and even artillery strike would do similarly little damage under the same conditions. I see no reason for you to complain regarding this.
< Message edited by Silver Sky Magician -- 4/14/2011 8:04:29 >
|
Printable Version
Icon Legend
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread
