Jump to content

Nisslol

Member Since 04 Feb 2011
Offline Last Active Jul 04 2015 07:25 AM
***--

Posts I've Made

In Topic: What's a FUN change that Blizzard could do in next expansion that'd m...

03 July 2015 - 03:00 PM

No jumper cables can help this horse.

In Topic: This Fabio guy..

19 June 2015 - 04:30 PM

The amount of verbal abuse going on and the fact you even care to post that and then go on about "tryharding in a dead game". He might be cancer, but you're hep b.

In Topic: Honorbuddy won't work in arena anymore (y)

28 May 2015 - 02:45 PM

View PostBawn, on 28 May 2015 - 01:12 PM, said:

you know you reached the lowest of lows when the people who made the bots tell you its immoral to use the bot the way you're using it

its like when your dealer refuses to give you another bag and tells you to get a grip

#streetsmart

In Topic: A challenge

27 May 2015 - 04:08 PM

View PostProdeGaming, on 27 May 2015 - 01:25 PM, said:

Conditions:
•WoW is as perfect as it can be of your own preference
•Can't detect PvP-PvE differences, because let's say Battle Fatigue affects the whole game, but from PvP PoV it's still the equal change.
•No knowledge of, if abilities had different values before, because say you haven't played the game,just trying it now.


Problem:
I'm telling you that this perfect game has Battle Fatigue in it.
Can always divide all healing by 1 - Posted Image, and point finger on the result numbers that those were the original values.


Task:
Refute that there could've been Battle Fatigue in the game.


The task is not possible.


Conclusion:
If the perfect game could've been achieved via Battle Fatigue, then suggesting that BF is always, in any circumstances a bad change is plain false. This is also the case for any other general change, such as Resilience for example.

So every complaint that would always be true about BF, like 'it affects classes differently' or 'lazy change' can not mean barrier to its necessity/application, because they would suggest BF is always a bad change, which is false. Some of similar concerns may tighten the temporary % change, but by no means deny application.


Consequently, any considerable legitimate concern that is raised against the application of BF must not be an always present concern. So if the concern could always be told about the nature of BF, the concern is inappropriate to deny application.





The idea is not that overnight put 50% Battle Fatigue on to Live servers. Yes, BF does require additional changes after application, since it affects classes differently. But for example gradually increasing BF needs much less adjustments, all the while PvP is getting fixed in general, the benefits are massive.
During longer testing periods, for example a beta, the testing environment is given for even considerably larger amount of needed adjustments after possibly higher BF % application.

To be very concise, general issues ought to be solved not solely, but by the aid of general changes, such as generally high burst/CC.




Note: The game has to have healing in it, and the alleged Battle Fatigue is   0%< Battle Fatigue <100%.

Posted Image

In Topic: Rip Router

26 May 2015 - 12:11 PM

that feel when people don't use vpns

hey guys you should check my new movie out:

http://www.warcraftmovies.cn/movie.exe

<