Dramatized
Legend
this certainly does not apply to this bracket.
Tough Love is recruiting 2.0
- Thread starter Arkant
- Start date
this certainly does not apply to this bracket.
OP
OP
Arkant
Freedom~
You obviously do not deserve an honest answer since your two posts in this thread were nothing but off topic and insulting, along with the fact that you apparently don't even play this bracket since you referred to your level 20 hunter.
The Saint
I won't like you
considering he dont play the bracket he pretty much nailed it though....no, wait, he's obviously "lost". maybe you should lend him that map you need to tie your shoe laces
waiting for contact from nicozy btw...
MilaMan
Legend
considering he dont play the bracket he pretty much nailed it though....no, wait, he's obviously "lost". maybe you should lend him that map you need to tie your shoe laces
waiting for contact from nicozy btw...
I lol'd.
I'm not sure if the "this certainly does not apply to this bracket" line by Dramatized was sarcasm or not, but I'm hoping that it was. Skill > Class. In every bracket, in every situation, in every case. Period. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either A) whining because they get killed by a particular class a lot and haven't figured out how to utilize their own skills / talents to even the odds (this is true for me with rogues. No matter what class I'm on, I can NOT figure out how to beat a rogue 1 on 1. So, before anyone assumes that I'm being condescending or talking out my ***, I fully admit I'm guilty of this very thing) or B) just being intentionally ignorant. For this I have no advice / response, except to reiterate, as I said earlier, that anyone who uses dishonesty or falsehood to "back up" their opinions isn't worth anyone's time.
OP seems to think that I was being intentionally confrontational / trolling / speaking off topic. The original posts themselves were about, as far as I could tell - correct me if I'm wrong - recruiting more twinks for a PvP guild in the eventual hope that having scheduled premades will force the Alliance to start twinking / premaking better, or more often. Am I wrong so far? I don't think so? I've re-read it a few times, and the first couple of pages seem to be saying exactly this? So, how is my comment of "making premades under the guise of promoting competition is a giant steaming pile of Kodo droppings" (I'm paraphrasing) off topic, when that was, in essence, the topic all along? Aristotle, having read your continuing nonsense, Mr. OP, is now doing somersaults and, it appears, teaching himself the foxtrot in his grave (as opposed to his earlier, simpler rolling).
Do I dislike you, Mr. OP? Of course I do; you're arrogant, self-righteous and blatantly ignorant to simple, basic facts and logic. I dislike anyone of your caliber, regardless if I know them personally, or simply read a few things from a forum. Is my tone unnecessarily rude or have too much snark? Possibly, but I have my reasons (and anyone who thrives off sarcasm and debate, as I do, is probably smiling as much as I am as they read my comments...tho, I'm a crotchety old man, so who knows? I might just be amusing myself and droodelf). Have I been, and this is a direct quote, "off-topic and insulting"? No, I have not. Insulting, debatable, off-topic, absolutely not.
TL/DR: I lol'd and am standing by my earlier statements that OP is an ignorant fool.
Footnote: Since, in a lot of cases, people don't actually know the definition of "debate", I thought I would clarify something else; an ARGUMENT (in the layman definition) is when two people of opposing opinions simply disagree with each other and talk circles around each other. This form of conversation usually involves a lot of fluff and baggage that has nothing to do with the topic at hand (think of the last time you and a significant other had an argument. Did s/he or you bring up a bunch of past stuff that didn't apply to what you were currently arguing about? My point exactly). This form should NOT be confused with the collegiate, logic-based term argument, in which a set of proofs is given to support a main point. Above I said I thrive off DEBATE. This is different than argument in two key ways; firstly, debating involves the use of fact and evidence to support claims and points, and secondly, doesn't necessarily require a "winner" or a person who is "right", but merely the sharing of ideas and personal experience (ie, my point earlier about the Alliance having far more premades than the Horde when I WSG: some people took that as fallacy, others as off-topic, but the fact remains it was neither, in a debate sense).
Footnote TL/DR: When I said I thrive off debate, I don't expect to be flamed for being argumentative.
Dramatized
Legend
can't
stop
laughing
even sainttwink (droodelf) would agree with me on this one, just look at his previous posts and you'll understand what he thinks about OP classes.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Saint
I won't like you
or you could use your resto druid, or you respecing balance in mop?
can't
stop
laughing
even sainttwink (droodelf) would agree with me on this one, just look at his previous posts and you'll understand what he thinks about OP classes.
i kinda have to agree, i've never been a supporter of the whole "skilled" at wow thing. pressing buttons in a better order and/or faster than some other guy is not or never will be a skill
MilaMan
Legend
By this logic, sir, if I put someone who has little to no experience playing WoW on my computer with my hunter, and face him off against, say, you or Arkant or anyone else who seems to think that skill (or is experience the better word for what I mean? Hmm) is irrelevant, the non-player hunter will kill you most of the time.
I'm simply taking the "skill doesn't matter" argument to its' logical conclusion, which, obviously is complete fallacy.
I stand by what I said, speaking from personal experience; the only time I ever hear "oh this class is OP" is when the person saying it has been killed by that class an abnormal amount of times. Are certain *abilities* overpowered and silly at certain levels? Sure, no one can argue that; going back to my rogue rant earlier, I think it's ridiculous that the one way I have (as a hunter) to get away from their melee storm of death is disengage, yet disengage fails to actually work when (I believe?) crippling poison is applied (I'll be the first to admit that I despise them so thoroughly, I've never really played one extensively, and therefore don't fully know the names of all their abilities).
Again, saying skill, or experience, or knowledge, or whatever word in that vein you want to use is irrelevant is simply not true. Put a non-gamer, or a non-WoW'er, or an extremely new WoW'er on a hunter, and let's see who wins.
Sidenote: Also, another thing I thought of last night, that refutes the "hunters are too OP" argument. If you take two identical hunters (gear / spec / pet / etc) and have them played by two identical people (experience / reflex time / arm and finger dexterity / knowledge of the class / etc) then, by your logic ('your' being anyone who says they're OP - which is another way, basically, of saying you can't kill them), then the match would enter some kind of paradox time-loop, because neither of them should be able to kill the other. Or, you would have the reverse, and see an equal and exact moment of death. Are you all starting to see how silly the argument is? You can't possible say skill or experience don't matter, that certain classes are just unbeatable / overpowered / etc. The logic train derails every time.
Personal admission: I haven't enjoyed the game nearly as much since they dumb'd it down to the lowest common denominator, and probably won't go back to being a paying player because of this. Things like; making "Idiot's Guide to Talent Trees", the tooltips read like something out of a 1st grade reading pamphlet, gearing no longer matters as much as it used to (for things like tanking, anyway; removing class/spec specific stats and replacing them with an across-the-board stat is ridiculous), I could go on and on and on and on about how many things they've made "easier" (ie, completely removed any need for the player to actually research / test / practice / etc). So, in saying this, yes, we have come dangerously close to skill being irrelevant, since there's barely any need for the player to actually think anymore. But close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades, gentlemen.
Dramatized
Legend
Pro-tip for your future forum-carreer: try to cut down the text a bit so that someone actually can be arsed to read what you write.
You're not bringing any valid arguments either, the only comparison you actually made was between someone that hadn't played WoW ever before and someone that's been playing it for years. This is pure nonsense and I feel bad for you spending probably half an hour just to air that reply.
The Saint
I won't like you
all i'm saying is i cant/won't call playing wow (or any game) a skill, in all honesty, would any one call someone who's good at mario brothers "skilled".
Mesikämmen
pwner
6-man premade and you lose to a PuG 3-0
"QUICK LOG HUNTERS SO WE CAN WIN!"Eagerly waiting to see your excuses
Mesikämmen
pwner
No, I cant be bothered posting here after each bg dude. But how is it even possible for you to lose that bg rofl?
Mesikämmen
pwner
That was quite clever of a comeback, gentleman. Don't be mad because you lose premade vs pug on a daily basis, you know you can always log your hunter and go for a 5man hpala hunter premade to farm gy, right?
Mesikämmen
pwner
The Saint
I won't like you
6-man premade and you lose to a PuG 3-0
Eagerly waiting to see your excuses
give up mate it's a waste of time, every one knows they're useless.
this could fit someone else to peter, /wink
The Saint
I won't like you
you do realize in the last week or two of running your little bracket saving premades, you've lost more than some guilds do in a year?
