Remove Purify Proc: Y/N. We had it coming!

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

klys wrote: »

colors

Yeah, I do. Adroit's viewing it from one side without considering how the other procs are affected in similar situations.


1. Oh? So defensive and offensive procs will activate under the same situations and will only benefit from the exact same things? Well, okay if you say so.. I mean you so obviously know what you're talking about.

2. Oh, yeah because the results are completely accurate and unbiased.

3. So when people for Purify Spell post it's productive and non-spammy? But when I post against it, and not even the same argument each time but a counter-argument to what people post, it's spam? Yeah, okay bro. There is no one-sided flaming, it's coming from both sides. People thinking something stupid is true if it's unopposed could be a reason that I keep posting, though it's mostly because when it comes to Purify Spell a lot of people (mostly the Casters) seem to be unable to comprehend how it breaks balance and needs a change. However, rather than acknowledge this, they fight tooth and nail to find any and every reason they can to keep it because "durr no taekz mah pruk cuz me no wan die 2 aps or new r9z cuz dey hit hard!!!!!" When aps has been ineffectual for ages now, and even with a cooldown the proc would be a boost to the class and in no way hinder overall gameplay.

That last line I admit I did repeat, but only because for some reason it seems as if people believe nerfing the proc would nerf every single arcane class severely, when it wouldn't.

klys

Zanryu - Dreamweaver wrote: »

it's spam? Yeah

Hey look you agree

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

klys wrote: »

Hey look you agree

Oh? No rebuttal?

If all you can do is pick out a part of my post and use it out of context to try, and fail, to make me look bad then you have no business here kind sir. b:chuckle

klys

Actually you did exactly what I expected.
You realized that I took something out of context and made an argument with it.

Do you see the similarity in what you are doing throughout this entire thread?

Also, try not to use walls of text to respond to people- I know you like to hide your lack of a legit argument behind lots of nonesense.

Why don't you keep doing what i suggested earlier in the thread and keep your "argument" to 2-3 sentences.

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

klys wrote: »

Actually you did exactly what I expected.
You realized that I took something out of context and made an argument with it.

Do you see the similarity in what you are doing throughout this entire thread?

Also, try not to use walls of text to respond to people- I know you like to hide your lack of a legit argument behind lots of nonesense.

Why don't you keep doing what i suggested earlier in the thread and keep your "argument" to 2-3 sentences.

Can't say I do. Because I don't take things out of context, I examine the entire argument and base my reply on what's said. You took one thing and focused on it, what you do and what I do are completely different. I may have done what you expected, but that doesn't change the fact that your assumptions are wrong.

I don't like walls of text, however it seems to be impossible to convey just how wrong you and others are with one or two sentences. I dislike reading the walls of text that have been posted, so I suppose the least I can do is return the favor and have people read my walls.

Please, show me where I've taken things out of context.

klys

My assumptions are wrong because you said so- seems like a legit argument.

Your're unable to respond without walls of text- because you're trying to prove others are wrong instead of proving that you are right.

If you had legit arguments- the arguments would win themselves.

Scroll up/ hit the back button- if you want to see things taken outta context and twisted to suit your "argument"

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

klys wrote: »

My assumptions are wrong because you said so- seems like a legit argument.

You're wrong because I say so, also a legit argument.

Your're unable to respond without walls of text- because you're trying to prove others are wrong instead of proving that you are right.

I can respond without walls of text, as proven by this response. However, the amount of text I use to respond is irrelevant. You're just nitpicking.

If you had legit arguments- the arguments would win themselves.

One could argue the same thing for those in favor of Purify Spell.

Scroll up/ hit the back button- if you want to see things taken outta context and twisted to suit your "argument"

So you say I take things out of context, yet you offer no actual proof. Interesting.

u2kewl4me

klys

I'm glad we're making progress.

Adroit - Lost City

Zanryu - Dreamweaver wrote: »

That last line I admit I did repeat, but only because for some reason it seems as if people believe nerfing the proc would nerf every single arcane class severely, when it wouldn't.

If I were fighting people like you, nerfing proc wouldn't be much of an issue. Fighting people with equivalent gear and know how to pvp, nerfing proc would be a major issue.

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

If I were fighting people like you, nerfing proc wouldn't be much of an issue. Fighting people with equivalent gear and know how to pvp, nerfing proc would be a major issue.

I'd have to disagree. Wizards especially are perfectly capable of beating other classes 1v1 without the aid of a suped up proc, you'd still get to break locks at random while suffering no downside for it. Tell us WHY giving Purify Spell a cooldown would negatively impact 1v1 in such a way as to prevent you from landing kills, or as to guarantee death against certain classes and then perhaps we'll take you seriously. As it stands it's mainly to counteract an APS setup, meaning were it to be nerfed DPH would not gain much more utility than it already has against casters, a nerf would mainly allow for APS to be used again to a degree, and seeing as that's had its usefullness severely reduced even without Purify, I'm failing to see an issue with adding a cooldown to the skill to balance group PvP a bit while keeping 1v1s roughly the same.

Sooo yeah, let's hear it. How will giving Purify Spell a cooldown make it so that you're unable to kill people 1v1 or assure your death? Because if it doesn't, there's no argument you can make against adding a cooldown unless it has to do with group PvP. Which has already been argued into the ground.

klys

I like how you completely avoided that burn
and went straight for the wall of text that has nothing to do with anything.

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

klys wrote: »

I like how you completely avoided that burn
and went straight for the wall of text that has nothing to do with anything.

What burn would that be? I'm aware that my gear is is sub-par compared to end game and can't compete effectively. If you're referring to the possible implication that I'm unskilled, I can't say I'm offended in the least considering I don't actually know Adroit. His personal opinion of me or my skill at the game mean nothing to me.

As I said before the amount of text is irrelevant so long as the point I'm trying to convey gets across, though I suppose with someone like you who can do nothing but nitpick over one or two things that won't happen. Oh well.

ovenusarmanio

Brillance - Raging Tide wrote: »

So can a Break in the Clouds, or simple Falling Petals buff, or a piece of crab, but that has what to do with a purify proc on a Magic Weapon??

Idk, maybe you take damage and proc a purify and suddenly you are all healed, but my char has never worked that way, lol. There has to be a heal involved somehow, or no one is healing. The proc wont heal anyone, just free them.

You do know you have to be half dead for your charm to tick, right? When's the last time an undergeared noob made an R9T3+12 JosD half dead?

Sorry, I missed this edit last night, Venus. *shrugs*

You claimed the proc won't save someone being attacked by a group. That it will never be the reason someone can't kill a caster. The proc can save someone. What would be it's use if it didn't? Caster half dead, heavily debuffed, puri procs, no more debuffs, avoids the killing blow, charm ticks=saved by purify proc. Even if you don't think it's overpowered, at least admit it could be the reason a caster is saved in a group situation. :P What would be the point in this entire debate, if it was never the reason someone couldn't kill a caster? What would be the point if it's never saved battles the caster would have otherwise lost? As I said before, I don't even necessarily think Purify should be nerfed. SO far the main problems I've been hearing is NW, and there is nothing stopping the devs from tweaking flag running to make these some of these speed skills less effective. I do think that a BM being punished because he cannot control the actions of the people around him is a legitimate criticism of the proc. But that's a problem really mostly in NW. In group PK, you can target and kill the people who won't listen. TW faction leaders can just not take undergeared people into the faction, or kick them if they won't listen. In NW, R999 bms are being punished for the actions of strangers, over whom they have no control. I find that a legitimate criticism.

Horosho - Lost City

68 pages o_o

klys

Zanryu - Dreamweaver wrote: »

I'm aware that my gear is is sub-par compared to end game and can't compete effectively.

You're an expert on stuff that you have no experience with?

As I said before the amount of text is irrelevant so long as the point I'm trying to convey gets across

How well has that worked out for you so far? How about trying to make your point with concise sentences. i know it's hard to do when there is no substance to what you're saying.

colors

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

oVenusArmanio wrote: »

You claimed the proc won't save someone being attacked by a group. That it will never be the reason someone can't kill a caster. The proc can save someone. What would be it's use if it didn't? Caster half dead, heavily debuffed, puri procs, no more debuffs, avoids the killing blow, charm ticks=saved by purify proc. Even if you don't think it's overpowered, at least admit it could be the reason a caster is saved in a group situation. :P What would be the point in this entire debate, if it was never the reason someone couldn't kill a caster? What would be the point if it's never saved battles the caster would have otherwise lost?

Now why would they do a silly thing like that? Admit that Purify Spell can do anything useful. Ha! Such nonsense! That's sarcasm, for those of you who might nitpick.

In response to klys:

Because I'm not at end game myself does not mean that I lack experience with how things work at that level.

My sentences are concise enough, I'm sorry for listing reasons and evidence to support what I think, I really should make baseless claims and speak nothing but pure ignorance like you. My bad, I'll try to do better.

Adroit - Lost City

Zanryu - Dreamweaver wrote: »

I'd have to disagree. Wizards especially are perfectly capable of beating other classes 1v1 without the aid of a suped up proc, you'd still get to break locks at random while suffering no downside for it. Tell us WHY giving Purify Spell a cooldown would negatively impact 1v1 in such a way as to prevent you from landing kills, or as to guarantee death against certain classes and then perhaps we'll take you seriously. As it stands it's mainly to counteract an APS setup, meaning were it to be nerfed DPH would not gain much more utility than it already has against casters, a nerf would mainly allow for APS to be used again to a degree, and seeing as that's had its usefullness severely reduced even without Purify, I'm failing to see an issue with adding a cooldown to the skill to balance group PvP a bit while keeping 1v1s roughly the same.

Sooo yeah, let's hear it. How will giving Purify Spell a cooldown make it so that you're unable to kill people 1v1 or assure your death? Because if it doesn't, there's no argument you can make against adding a cooldown unless it has to do with group PvP. Which has already been argued into the ground.

I've already explained this, just because you have the memory span of a goldfish doesn't mean I'm going to explain it again for you.

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

I've already explained this, just because you have the memory span of a goldfish doesn't mean I'm going to explain it again for you.

I can't be bothered going back however many pages or looking through however many pages just to find one argument. I really, truly can't.

Considering 20k Pdef and great Mdef self buffed only, along with a variety of CC skills if using genie and apo properly I don't see how, unless the opponent is better skilled/geared a Wizard would lose to anything by default just because it lacks Purify Spell or wields a watered down version. I don't see how any arcane class would really suffer that fate.

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

I know this is a double post, but this video is surprisingly relevant.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOe5Lmyyxiw

This is life without Purify Spell. Give Melee something to get the ants off of us b:cry

klys

Zanryu - Dreamweaver wrote: »

I can't be bothered going back however many pages or looking through however many pages just to find one argument. I really, truly can't.

That's your logic from the very beginning - which is why the thread is so long now.

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

klys wrote: »

That's your logic from the very beginning - which is why the thread is so long now.

So, let me get this straight. It's my fault the thread has reached 68 pages? Interesting.

Adroit - Lost City

Zanryu - Dreamweaver wrote: »

So, let me get this straight. It's my fault the thread has reached 68 pages? Interesting.

You are definitely a big reason for it being so long, you make a point.. it gets refuted and then a page or two later you say the exact same thing again thinking it is still somehow valid. If you want a detailed explanation as to why purify is necessary in end game pvp, you'll have to go through the thread again and actually read it.. but I'll give you the short version again. I am an end game caster that is very active in pvp (you are not an end game bm), and I'm telling you it is necessary. Until you can find an end game melee to disagree (probably more than one, there have been a few other end game casters that have agreed with me in this thread), my opinion trumps yours.

Slivaf - Dreamweaver

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

You are definitely a big reason for it being so long, you make a point.. it gets refuted and then a page or two later you say the exact same thing again thinking it is still somehow valid. If you want a detailed explanation as to why purify is necessary in end game pvp, you'll have to go through the thread again and actually read it.. but I'll give you the short version again. I am an end game caster that is very active in pvp (you are not an end game bm), and I'm telling you it is necessary. Until you can find an end game melee to disagree (probably more than one, there have been a few other end game casters that have agreed with me in this thread), my opinion trumps yours.

Just because you diagree with his or anyone elses opinion, it does NOT make it wrong, the same is true for 'our' side too.

The fact remains that there IS places where the skill shines through to the heavens with badassery when it simply should not.

Also @ the argument between the sad attempts at trolling (that worked to some extent EDIT:... I can't really blame him fofalling for it, as I in all likely hood would have done the same thing, but it so wouldn't have been in the same words.) by klyss (spelling may be off) and zanryu. While zanny hasnt exactly... carried himself with grace, a lot of his points are extremely valid, and if there happens to be a wall of text around it, then get over it.

Its hard to trully convey a point, or even a counter argument, and accept it as a potential truth, when your reply to someone says "No, your wrong." Who would believe you/the so called 'counter argument?

While no one really likes writing or reading wall of texts, they could be worse, and are often needed by many people to properly conduct an argument, BOTH sides are doing this.

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

You are definitely a big reason for it being so long, you make a point.. it gets refuted and then a page or two later you say the exact same thing again thinking it is still somehow valid. If you want a detailed explanation as to why purify is necessary in end game pvp, you'll have to go through the thread again and actually read it.. but I'll give you the short version again. I am an end game caster that is very active in pvp (you are not an end game bm), and I'm telling you it is necessary. Until you can find an end game melee to disagree (probably more than one, there have been a few other end game casters that have agreed with me in this thread), my opinion trumps yours.

My arguments have not been the exact same, I have adjusted them to be relevant to whatever reply I was contesting. The overall point is the same, being that Purify should be nerfed, but I could argue that you post the exact same thing as well if I were to go by your overall opinion of it being fine as is.

The issue with finding people who share the same opinion and meet a certain requirement is that the forums are nowhere near as active as the game itself, even if there are people who agree with me it's very possible they don't post or even read the forums at all. I've noticed a lot of casters posting in favor of Purify Spell who aren't end game, are their opinions irrelevant solely because of that as well?

Sheer numbers do not decide whether or not an opinion is correct, if an opinion is correct it should be based off the logic involved, not the amount of support you receive from a select few members of a certain group. There are plenty of people supporting my view point, but I don't use them as numbers to back up what I say. My opinions have enough merit on their own that I don't need to do so, and until you can do the same your opinion does not trump mine. Until I have been proven wrong beyond a shadow of a doubt, which I have not, your opinion is not greater than mine because until that happens what I post is relevant so long as it stays on subject.

So far all that's happened lately is nitpicking on technicalities, wording, and the amount of text used in my posts. I implore you, Adroit, aside from the fact that I am not currently in end game gear what about my opinion is wrong? Because so far the general idea of your post is "You're wrong because I say so and I have better gear." That is not a valid reason.

VKnightV - Lost City

just as when aps for belee ehum bm come and lots and lots of ppl come to this forum to argue what did the one who abused its power.

adapt or reroll


so let me tell you that to you all and stop qq


adapt or reroll


b:chuckle

SashaGray - Heavens Tear

Zanryu - Dreamweaver wrote: »

So far all that's happened lately is nitpicking on technicalities, wording, and the amount of text used in my posts.

This thread would be great if it wasnt for all the f--king words

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

SashaGray - Heavens Tear wrote: »

This thread would be great if it wasnt for all the f--king words

ok we no use words so much

n fct we no use propr spelin so to sve time!!!

b:cute

Adroit - Lost City

Zanryu - Dreamweaver wrote: »

My arguments have not been the exact same, I have adjusted them to be relevant to whatever reply I was contesting. The overall point is the same, being that Purify should be nerfed, but I could argue that you post the exact same thing as well if I were to go by your overall opinion of it being fine as is.

The issue with finding people who share the same opinion and meet a certain requirement is that the forums are nowhere near as active as the game itself, even if there are people who agree with me it's very possible they don't post or even read the forums at all. I've noticed a lot of casters posting in favor of Purify Spell who aren't end game, are their opinions irrelevant solely because of that as well?

Sheer numbers do not decide whether or not an opinion is correct, if an opinion is correct it should be based off the logic involved, not the amount of support you receive from a select few members of a certain group. There are plenty of people supporting my view point, but I don't use them as numbers to back up what I say. My opinions have enough merit on their own that I don't need to do so, and until you can do the same your opinion does not trump mine. Until I have been proven wrong beyond a shadow of a doubt, which I have not, your opinion is not greater than mine because until that happens what I post is relevant so long as it stays on subject.

So far all that's happened lately is nitpicking on technicalities, wording, and the amount of text used in my posts. I implore you, Adroit, aside from the fact that I am not currently in end game gear what about my opinion is wrong? Because so far the general idea of your post is "You're wrong because I say so and I have better gear." That is not a valid reason.

Let me rephrase for you.. "I'm not an endgame BM, but my opinions on end game pvp should not only be taken seriously, but as equivalent to someone that is end game and very active in pvp.. because well.. I have no fking idea".

Slivaf - Dreamweaver

VKnightV - Lost City wrote: »

just as when aps for belee ehum bm come and lots and lots of ppl come to this forum to argue what did the one who abused its power.

adapt or reroll


so let me tell you that to you all and stop qq


adapt or reroll


b:chuckle

Err yea... as it was the case with aps. That would only compound the problem, and would create the illusion that everything is a-ok, when it is NOT. (see the examples of how the purfiy proc is oped throughout the whole thread. )

Really though, a lot of us have done "rerolled" it is a problem in nw, as there is fewer and fewer melee classes in nw, a few have even adapted to a certain extent, but it is NOT our place to state whether they are on one side or the other.

"You have got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything." Ijs (This of course doesnt make any single argument invalid, but really there nothign wrong for standing up for what you believe in. (It's absolutely asinine to ask ANYONE to stop posting their opinion on the matter.) ... Silence in this case, could easily be seen as acceptance, but it does NOT mean that if someones silent that they agree that it doesn't need a change, or even vice versa.

Eoria - Harshlands

Purify proc is needed because without it, a caster would be solely relying on AD and Badge to break out of stunlock and once AD's down and Badge fails, we'd be ****ed. Alternatively, a sin comes out of stealth and herp derp occult ice's us to death. This is not fun to play against. It really isn't. Sure, Purify may not be the funnest to play against either, but they also put in the tools to combat it (hello disarm and an extra three CC skills on top of that with the new Morai skills, BMs) and you can get around it by just forcing everyone to play better (hint: chain CC and debuff for the DDs that can take them out). If your main problem with it is in mass PVP, kill the idiot that keeps procing it like a dumbass. If your main problem with it is in NW, honestly, I think they should put a set speed cap on the flag runner (7.5m/s was the number suggested earlier in the thread, I think; that would work).

If you're going to suggest putting a CD system on it, there's problem with that: people will abuse the fact that it's on a CD to purposely tick it so that it can't be used a la what sins currently do to get around a wizzie's Arcane Defense. And well, it can also be ticked by mobs in this case.

Edit- Forgot to mention...archers, I sorta feel sorry for you. Honestly, you guys need a bit of an overhaul, but I'm at a loss as to where to start. Meanwhile, we have mainly sins and BMs here ******** about needing more perks when sins never needed anything more in the first place and BMs got their buffs via new skills and skill updates.