Mvq
2016 TC Champion
You're actually the stupidest ducking **** in this bracket
Didn't you or Ephidel start the discussion regarding 3 Druids? I'm surprised if you didn't. If not, who did?
You're actually the stupidest ducking **** in this bracket
Slimey ducking scab of a personDidn't you or Ephidel start the discussion regarding 3 Druids? I'm surprised if you didn't. If not, who did?
Didn't you or Ephidel start the discussion regarding 3 Druids? I'm surprised if you didn't. If not, who did?
Secondly, the rule regarding the 3 Druid and 3 Monk rule was a potential mistake on my part when writing up the post I believe. I was under the impression that people were able to run 3 monks (1BM, 1 WW and 1 MW) and 3 Druids (2x Resto 1 Boomy with or without a rogue / 2x Resto 1 Guardian with or without a rogue / 2x Guardian 1 Resto with no rogue / 1 Resto 1 Guardian 1 Boomy with no rogue) and with it stating in the rules that only 1 boomkin is allowed that those are the only forms of compositions available to both classes. Again, this will have to be spoken about by the committee to make sure that all agree that it is not intended to be that way.
I was in the belief that i was merely writing down existing rules that usually do not get stated and i did this to try and make sure that everything was covered to make sure that reinforcing ruling could be more transparent. Things sometimes can come across incorrect when people sit down for over 13 hours straight concocting a post like this, i apologize for any inconvenience it may have caused people and i do ask that people try to refrain from articulating their opinions in a disrespectful / passive-aggressive manner in the future on this thread as it may result in posts being removed.
Didn't you or Ephidel start the discussion regarding 3 Druids? I'm surprised if you didn't. If not, who did?
Secondly, the rule regarding the 3 Druid and 3 Monk rule was a potential mistake on my part when writing up the post I believe. I was under the impression that people were able to run 3 monks (1BM, 1 WW and 1 MW) and 3 Druids (2x Resto 1 Boomy with or without a rogue / 2x Resto 1 Guardian with or without a rogue / 2x Guardian 1 Resto with no rogue / 1 Resto 1 Guardian 1 Boomy with no rogue) and with it stating in the rules that only 1 boomkin is allowed that those are the only forms of compositions available to both classes. Again, this will have to be spoken about by the committee to make sure that all agree that it is not intended to be that way.
no chillYou're actually the stupidest ducking **** in this bracket. Mouth breathing sack of shit waste of my ducking time. I am disgusted that I even know of your existence
I believe i already said that it was my fault and that i thought i was putting existing rules that hadn't been mentioned in previous events into words. It was nothing to do with anyone else other than myself.
why does every thread on xpoff turn into mvq vs devm ?
You make me hate Avril Lavigne, and that means ALOT.
I believe i already said that it was my fault and that i thought i was putting existing rules that hadn't been mentioned in previous events into words. It was nothing to do with anyone else other than myself.
Obviously Muskie and Ephidel are trying to get the rules go their way with the Guardian dream. It's frustrating to see.
Still confused as to where this came from. More than 2 of a class was never allowed.
So is this going to stay as is?
3druids but no 2x boomy
3monks but no 2x bm
Secondly, the rule regarding the 3 Druid and 3 Monk rule was a potential mistake on my part when writing up the post I believe. I was under the impression that people were able to run 3 monks (1BM, 1 WW and 1 MW) and 3 Druids (2x Resto 1 Boomy with or without a rogue / 2x Resto 1 Guardian with or without a rogue / 2x Guardian 1 Resto with no rogue / 1 Resto 1 Guardian 1 Boomy with no rogue) and with it stating in the rules that only 1 boomkin is allowed that those are the only forms of compositions available to both classes. Again, this will have to be spoken about by the committee to make sure that all agree that it is not intended to be that way.
Before changes can be made, even if it may well be a mistake it needs to be spoken about with the committee before a change can be finalized. It's the system that has been put in place and the committee will diligently abide by it.
After all of the uproar of it, after putting some further thought into it myself i personally feel that it is a very interesting change indeed. However i do feel that this close to the date of the actual cup changing such things that can potentially impact the meta is a risky move to make and thus is why the decision should be revised.i mean i think its an interesting addition and dont mind im just hoping to have clarification soon