Bloodmystics Up-to-date, Comprehensive, Living, Breathing Wizard Guide

ugysekell wrote: »

'hardest to play classes in the game'

BM's are no doubt hard too. But you have defenses.

I don't see BMs dying at low levels on simple quests (if you do, I'd submit that BM isn't the class for you) or AoE bosses in FBs.

And PvE at level 8x+ is totally different than PvE 1-39.

And are you really comparing lvl 17 bm to a lvl 82 wizard?

And you think a cleric is more fun than a wizard? That's all I need to hear to realize that you do not represent the consensus of players, let alone wizards.

Mamma mia, let me try to correct you.

Galox - Heavens Tear wrote: »

Why Put people Off playing a Wizard, Wizards are fun! b:cute

I specifically said wizards are fun. "Most fun" class to play, I think I said. Again, inventing something I didn't say to argue about. Do you all take a class for this stuff? Really, I'd like to know.

Galox - Heavens Tear wrote: »

YES, I'm on a PvE server, but just the other day, a level 100 Barb got RAAAPED by a level 85 Wizard. Ooo, imo, that seems Wizards be OP o.o

You make up your opinion over a single encounter? Well then, I'm not writing for you. You are too easily swayed by a single incident to learn much.

Why do people try to attack what are admitted to be, and intended to be, generalizations with a specific example? When did that become a legitimate method of argument?

But yes, I would put barbs towards the bottom of the pk list as well. Along with clerics. And wizards. The difference being - clerics with their heals and sleeps, and barbs with their high hp - are much harder for most classes to kill than a wizard is.

Galox - Heavens Tear wrote: »

What are We, really:
~Best Class at One Shotting People
~I hear we are ok at TW..
We haz our Good Points!

I said this too. Again, you apparently find disagreement where I see none.

Galox - Heavens Tear wrote: »

Wizards are really quite OP against any other class (Sins/Archers Excluded,)

No, they aren't. Only in TW and (arguably) large scale/group pvp.

Galox - Heavens Tear wrote: »

We need more Positivism (?) !

You want to make a "GALOX'S GUIDE TO WIZARD CHEERLEADING", noones stopping you. That isn't what this is supposed to be, however.

Galox - Heavens Tear wrote: »

Haha, you go Full-Attack Mode way too easily b:cute

Everyone needs a comfort zone - thats mine.

Oh, and you didn't get FULL attack mode, ijs. Even Adroit hasn't gotten that.

Galox - Heavens Tear wrote: »

Who said I was directing my comments at you? b:chuckle I was aiming it at the wider Wizard...ing Community

This is a forum. I am the op of this thread. Its an assumption, sure, but not an invalid one to assume you were addressing me when you didn't specify another.

Galox - Heavens Tear wrote: »

And Besides, Even if I was pointing something out, you should take what others have to say onboard as Constructive Criticism if people do suggest improvements! Too Much Gamerage and Hate in PWI

I would. I see no constructive criticism really. Do you?

Galox - Heavens Tear wrote: »

EDIT: If I said what You Said..Then Shouldn't you be pleased that somebody would agree with one of your statements?

I am only pleased when everyone agrees with ALL of my statements, unless I am speaking in terms of my person opinions or my personal preferences. Then all are free to have their own.

The problem is, on these forums in particular, you say a heal skills intended purpose is to heal, and people say things like "no it isn't, I use it for chi more than healing" and "who are you to say what its intended purpose is".

People are entitled to their own opinions, they are not entitled to their own facts.

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

@BLOOD -

rofl, I don't even know where to begin. Guess the easiest place to start is your whining and complaining that I recommend using hailstorm and pitfall in pvp. Besides the fact that it makes sense to use them while kiting for the chance at immobilize (you haven't argued that point.. wonder why?) but you focus on the fact that I don't use them much in my videos.

I'll tell you where to begin. How about with where I did. And not (as is your custom) where I did not.

I didn't now complain that you recommended them. Not at all.

YOU said I overlooked them.

I merely pointed out that, in practice, you did the same, thus revealing you to be the hypocritical troll you are, willing to argue against your own tactics in an attempt to make yourself look good, and others look bad.

Its sad, really. I feel sorry for you. I really do. You must be a very lonely person in real life.

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

@BLOOD -
Your quoting me out of from outside this thread (and not even recent.. aka out of context) doesn't even help your case either. Me saying that I'd use hailstorm for the chance to stop a barb actually helps my case.. as using any other skill would be just stupid. A chance to stop the barb with hailstorm is a whole lot better than using a skill like pyro that has no chance at all.

You love this "quoting out of context" garbage, don't you.

First, anyone who wants the context can go and get it. See that little red dot in the quote? There, you learned something today. You really can't quote out of context when the forums provide the context with every quote.

Second, I never said to NOT use them. I said they were not effective. You said you only used it "out of despiration". Thats the same thing.

So once again, you try to troll me for my opinion of hailstorm, when you yourself have publicly posted the very same opinion.

Honestly, you should just stop now. Even the casual reader is beginning to see that you are grasping at straws to puff yourself up at someone elses expense.

Fortunately, your attempt to deceive does not have enough intelligence behind it to be successful and is easily revealed for what it is.

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

@BLOOD -
Anyway, moving on.. I suppose we can move on to ele shell. You pick one out of the many aspects of the skill and arbitrarily say that the 1000% ele resists is the intended use of the skill. Please. I gave you a pretty simple definition on how the use of a skill is determined (common sense), and you throw it back at me in a furious RAGE saying this is some double standard.

Double standard. Hmmm, I didn't say that, but glad you recognized it.

And "furious rage" is hardly descriptive. I am not furious nor raging, I am merely showing you for what you are.

And yes, as I said before, if you are saying that the intended purpose of ele shell is chi gain, and I'm saying its purpose is an elemental resistance buff, I am happy to stand on that and let the reader decide for themselves. I like my chances.

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

You say that ele shell is not very good because the shell lasts 4 seconds and is only useful against other mages (although it is also useful against psychics/clerics.. though you neglected that). I say its amazing because of the free chi gain. Here's the good part, you then go on to say that the chi gain is not the intended/primary use (even though thats what everyone uses it for.. i.e. being that wizards near and far use it for chi.. that becomes its use), and then you continue to ignore the chi gain because you like to pretend it isn't important. This is just you trying to save face/change the topic.

Sure, you CAN use it against ANY element. I would think you would know that as well and I wouldn't have to point that out to you. Theoretically, you can use it against venos and archers as well. You didn't mention those either, so I suppose by your logic I should say "though you neglected that".

The point, again since you are so interested in trolling you never seem to get it, or intentionally avoid it, is that its really only good against wizards because that is the only class you can see casting a long channeling hard hitting skill. For someone that claims to have as much pvp experience as you do (god, do you say anything else about yourself), I would think you would know that.

You CAN use it against clerics, but they tend to hit mages with plume shot, which in case you didn't realize is effective because its a physical attack. In case you didn't know, elemental shell won't work.

And you CAN use it against psychics, but aside from spamming it (which is more useful for gaining chi) and getting lucky enough to have it active when they hit you heavy, no, its not terribly effective. Their channel time is generally too quick for you to see the skill and hit the resist to be very effective.

Again, CAN you use it. Sure. Can you get lucky with it? Sure. Does the fact that its only typically effective against mages or when you just happen to get lucky and get hit by another elemental attack within the 4 seconds after you use it to build chi mean that it is of marginal value. YES.

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

Here's the good part, you then go on to say that the chi gain is not the intended/primary use (even though thats what everyone uses it for.. i.e. being that wizards near and far use it for chi.. that becomes its use), and then you continue to ignore the chi gain because you like to pretend it isn't important. This is just you trying to save face/change the topic.

I don't ignore it, I ADMIT IT. What I don't do is list it (yet, but I've already told you it's use to gain chi will be in the guid eventually) as some wonderful benefit for the skill because its not what its intended use is. Building chi for pvp will be in the pvp section, as it should be, not in the skill description. I understand that that doesn't deflect your attempt at trolling for the sake of trolling, but sorry, the world doesn't revolve around you, and I least of all am going to change anything I do for fear of being trolled by the likes of you. You trolls are so lame and easily shown to be not only poorly conceived, but more often than not 100% false, I fear you not, Adroit, nor your naked scorn and ridicule when so poorly executed.

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

The last real point to this argument is control skills. Ordinarily I'd go into a long tangent about how ours are so AMAZING.. but really I don't think you'd follow a word of it anyway.

I leveled a wizard to 100 - twice - so I doubt there is much you could tell me about wizard skills I don't know. Sleep and FoW are fine, except for the cool down on sleep, the casting time on FoW and the fact that FoW is only a seal, not a stun or even a sleep, and the fact that they are our only ones.

And by the way, I am not the only one that feels that way. MOST wizards do. Maybe not you, maybe not your jock sniffing fan club, but MOST do. And that was the point, since you persistently miss it - to give the consensus of wizards. I understand that hearing opinions different than yours sends YOU into a furious rage, but quite frankly, idgaf, and I'm certainly not so afraid of the likes of YOU calling me fail to not post here.

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

What you've turned this argument into is a pissing contest where you are showing that your panties are in a bunch. The entire core of your posts are directed towards me as a person.. which is fine by me (I gotta admit.. I love the reactions of n00bs realizing they are n00bs xD). You've tried over and over to discredit my posts by putting together some poorly thought out idea followed by some mud flinging hoping something would stick. Just in your last couple posts you've tried to state that you've won/you're correct (who believes self proclaimed victory anyway?), you've tried to say that I don't practice what I preach by quoting old posts (ineffectively I might add) and citing old videos as current evidence, and even name calling! As much as I enjoy watching you so desperately try to save face, I must ask you to please at least attempt to direct posts toward wizard topics.. and any personal stuff sent to me via pm. Thanks!

b:cute

Go back and see how this all began and then tell me how I "turned" this into anything.

1st, before a single line was posted, you "reserved" the third spot, breaking up the continuity of the guide, to say "reserved for flaming" - so in the first instance spare me all your self-rightous clap trap about keeping it to wizard topics: you intended to troll this thread before even the first word was written.

Second, your first substantive post was couched in terms of your all too familiar "I am the only one that knows anything and you dont' know what you are talking about". And in fact, you do it in this last post as well.

Third, if I point out that your are merely trolling for the sake of trolling, or that your posts are hypocritical, its not personal against you, its describing your posts.

In fact, one of the ONLY things I think I posted that was more personal (perhaps) than anything you posted in reference to me was in this post here, and its only because I do truly feel sorry for you. But of course, you couldn't be refering to that, because at the time you posted this "qq, don't get personal" I hadn't posted that comment yet.

Oh, and by the way, for those that troll me for saying 1 vs 1 wizzies aren't the best and others are more suited for it, and especially those that say that I only say that because I am fail.

Here's a quote for you:

"In solo PvP you will have a hard time against most classes. You are a fragile class even with light armor and unless you have very good gear, there is not much you can do against most classes who have stuns and ways of stopping your movement."

You know who said that?

http://pwi-wiki.perfectworld.com/index.php/Everything_about_Wizards#Playing_Tips

THE original bad *** wizard. He hasn't played in how long? And still has more kills than Adroit according to the rankings.

inb4allthehistoricalrevisionismthatscomingsayinghaizwas failorplayedanoldgameandisn'trelevantnowandbigmouthadroitisking

ThanosQRt - Dreamweaver wrote: »

i love how u write a guide cause the old guides are outdated and then you quote old guides to support your views b:avoid

moreover, specifically mentioning that the author hasnt played for a loong timeb:chuckle

since i dont know anything about that wiz, i'm not going to say that the average wiz now severely outgears him.

I am not quoting him for my "views" - just one of them. And that is the "usefulness" of our control skills vs those of other classes, and tangentially I suppose its impact on our effectiveness at 1 vs 1 pk. If you knew anything, you would know that those skills really haven't changed. b:surrender

If anything, aside from the occasional barb bomb, there was no 1 shot a wizard had to contend with. Sins, psychics and rank 9 [insert class here], his statement of us as a fragile class is MORE true now, not less.

And as for gear (1) I'm pretty sure he had rank 8 before rank 8 was cool; and (2) yes, wizards can have better gear now, but so does every other class.

Nice try, but you've come to a knife fight armed with a spoon. b:bye

P.S.: spend some time on your level 25 wizard before you stick your nose in the wizard forums to troll.

MageFizban - Lost City wrote: »

Please stop making ad hominem arguments. It makes you look more conceited than I'm sure you are irl.

And stop writing novels. They're boring to read. I'd rather you triple post again.

I'll answer fire with fire, thank you very much.

Where were your admonitions against personal attacks here:

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

/reserved for flames

or here:

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

Don't really understand why you are making a guide the day after Ursa + Amour (best mage EVAR) start theirs.. but I can't really pass up this opportunity.

Just because you aren't good at 1v1s doesn't mean the class suffers from that problem.

perhaps you haven't grasped that our instant sleep is fkn amazing

or any of his posts which consist of attributing something to me that i didn't say then with a snear imply that the falsly attributed statement shows that im a moron who can't play his class and doesn't know what he is talking about.

And as for arrogance, I routinely say quite the opposite. But what I am not afraid to do is smack arrogant people back between the eyes when they go out of their way to personally insult someone on here, me or anyone else for that matter.

And if that involves me making ad hominem attacks, so be it. However, I would still assert I generally don't do that. Saying someone's statement "makes them look silly" is not an ad hominem, whereas saying "don't listed to someone because they are silly" is.

My statements are for the most part that Adroit's statements are filled with arrogance, are self-contradictory, and make him look silly on the one hand, and nothing more than someone out looking for a troll on the other.

HIS statements are that I don't know how to play my class, so noone should read what I write. Now I ask you, who is really guilty of adhominem attacks?

MageFizban - Lost City wrote: »

Then at least have the decency not to make posts taking up half the page b:laugh

Believe me, nothing would make me happier, but when people write 10 lines of statements like :

"I can't believe your so stupid as to say water isn't wet"

And I have to say things like:

"what are you talking about? I didn't say that water wasn't wet."
"I specifically said water is wet."
"I love water, I just said I wasn't thirsty right now"

You can see how my reply of necessity is 3x as long as their flip remarks filled with insults, intentional mischaracterizations, and false statements.

When people have the decency to read what I say and not respond to things I don't say, THEN I won't have to go on and on and on.

Now, see what your little one sentence comment made me do?