Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpai View Post
    It's saying that I want Survival AOE nerfed to "make BM's AOE look better" that makes a person look stupid.

    I've already explained the reasoning behind why I think SV's AOE should be nerfed. The fact that you disagree with the premises behind that reasoning is fine, but it doesn't give you license to simply disregard them and assign me new premises for my own reasoning. In other words, don't put words in my mouth just because you're not willing to agree to disagree.

    I believe that BM's AOE is too low and SV's AOE is too high. The two are mostly independent problems, and the solutions to the two that I suggested (buff BM, nerf SV) are not related; they could be implemented separately or together. Yes, there is an underlying problem - too much disparity between SV and the other specs in AOE - that would be solved by these fixes, but it's not the primary goal of what I'm suggesting.

    ---------- Post added 2013-03-04 at 03:46 AM ----------



    No, it doesn't. That was a mistake you are continuing to make in your interpretation. The fact that I mentioned my wish for a SV nerf in the same sentence does not mean both solutions target the same problem, namely BM's AOE. Arguing WITH ME about WHAT I think rather than whether or not what I think is right is a waste of both our time, so this is going to be the last post I type up explaining your mistaken interpretation. As for the state of SV's AOE as a standalone issue, we'll have to agree to disagree on that.
    you never gave any reason why SVs AoE is too high... simply because no logical argument can be made saying it too high. it is middle of the pack AoE. If you think middle of the pack is too high then what do you think of all the classes that do better AoE then SV?

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Nemesis003 View Post
    you never gave any reason why SVs AoE is too high... simply because no logical argument can be made saying it too high. it is middle of the pack AoE. If you think middle of the pack is too high then what do you think of all the classes that do better AoE then SV?
    I'm not here to argue about SV's AOE. My stance on it has been "agree to disagree".

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpai View Post
    I'm not here to argue about SV's AOE. My stance on it has been "agree to disagree".
    Care to elaborate on why you think it is too high then?

    Signature by Geekissexy Check out her Deviantart

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Tehstool View Post
    No, I'm not misinterpreting what you are saying. I'm saying nerfing SV's aoe wont do anything simply because it's not overpowered.
    Yes, you are misinterpreting if you think I'm interested in an argument about whether or not SV's AOE is too high. And I'm not misinterpretting what you say, I'm just not indulging you an argument about it. This is the point where we agree to disagree and part ways.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tehstool View Post
    Care to elaborate on why you think it is too high then?
    No.

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpai View Post
    Yes, you are misinterpreting if you think I'm interested in an argument about whether or not SV's AOE is too high. And I'm not misinterpretting what you say, I'm just not indulging you an argument about it. This is the point where we agree to disagree and part ways.
    No I'm not. I'm just telling you it's not overpowered. That's not misinterpreting you saying that it is overpowered. It may not be the point you were trying to make, but it sure isn't true.

    Signature by Geekissexy Check out her Deviantart

  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpai View Post
    That is NOT my point. I was speaking very specifically. I'm not going to be baited into a general discussion about AOE because I'm not interested in that. I'm talking about hunter specs here.



    For high damage AOE for demo, you spend about 40-50 seconds recovering your demonic fury. For a survival hunter, even without thrill of the hunt, you spend like 10 seconds tops.



    My point is that the gap is too large. That's fine if you disagree, but I'm not exactly lecturing on rocket science here. I think you either do understand my point but are pretending not to as a form of disagreement, or you're so eager to try to twist it into something absurd that you're missing the simplicity of it.
    lol so basically all you've said so far is SV aoe is too high based on absolutely nothing. No logs no evidence, just a gut feeling or you rolled a new hunter and pulled some mobs while questing and were like AMG so much pew pew! You have given absolutely no frame of reference as to it's too high compared to what ? Compared to BM ? we agree. Compared to demo locks ? it doesn't even come close. So what if you have to spend time recovering demonic fury ? While you spend it you do exponentially high aoe damage that even when you spend time to 'recover' your initial aoe dps tides you through. Much in the same way as arcane single target dps. It's just different rotations. Has nothing to do with the actual numbers. Arcane dps is dependant on standing on a rune. But even on fights like vizier or blade lord, they out dps hunters (a 100% mobile class). Why ? Cuz they do exponentially more damage while on the rune, so even when they have to move, it tides them through.

    But ofcourse you then mentioned that you didn't mean it as a comparison to other classes. Why did you give the warlock example in the first place then ?

    If it wasn't 'too high' compared to other classes then you meant too high compared to BM/MM. Which we all agree. But you have to be an idiot to just look at hunter specs and say oh nerf the higher spec to lessen the gap, while completely ignoring the rest of the classes. If you can't take into consideration class balance in your argument then that's just idiotic. But then again you mentioned nerfing SV aoe was not to make BM closer.

    So what the fuck is your point ? All you've done is say SV aoe is too high. And it needs a nerf. WHat is the point of the nerf ? WHY do you want to nerf it. You have yet to explain your reasoning. After your initial post all you've done is spout vague and nonsensical arguments based on semantics and full of contradictions. Which just leads me to believe you just simply mistakenly said SV aoe is too high without looking at any empirical evidence and now are too proud to admit you were wrong and are covering your tracks simply disagreeing to any couter argument claiming that it wasn't your 'point'.

    Well forget everything so far, explain to me clearly what is the actual point you were trying to make when you said 'nerf SV aoe'. Maybe you're not good at putting your thoughts into words. Maybe it was us that couldn't understand you clearly. Whatever the case, explain to us again why you think SV should be nerfed. What is the goal you are trying to accomplish by that ?

  7. #47
    today 5.2 release,tooltip still says 30%,is it wrong or has not been changed yet?

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Mettimo View Post
    today 5.2 release,tooltip still says 30%,is it wrong or has not been changed yet?
    With a brief testing period, it appears that it is in game, would like further confirmation on this though.

    Signature by Geekissexy Check out her Deviantart

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •