Swan.9815

Please tell me where it "clearly" stated that if I select WvW or PvP I would be locked in to having those be my only way to complete the weekly completion chest instead of them adding optional ways to get the chest? Because I foolishly assumed that it would work the same way it has for years and clicked both those options and got some pretty god awful weeklies for PvP and WvW that I now have to do instead of getting them as options I could ignore.

And some people even come here to whine about people whining.

I don't think you actually understood a single word of what you quoted.

It does when you are claiming it is always true. I haven't said anything about bonus expertise at all. Remember when I said that I was letting others handle telling you were wrong about that aspect? Of course you don't. But since you've put some incorrect words in my mouth, I will point out that before you could always have 2-3 shades up without spamming off cooldown and that would get you 10-15% condi duration. Now if you don't spam you lose the entire 15% bonus for the time you would normally only lose 5% percent before. So to fix what you claimed I said: I did care about expertise before, I just didn't prioritize always having the full bonus. I do care now, but in order to get any bonus at all I have to use it off cooldown, which I'm not a fan of, hence my posting in a thread about the shades being more spammy than they used to be. Now that I've proven both of your original claims false you should probably just take the L and move on, but instead you'll not actually read what I say again and just keep digging in about about something you've already been proven false on.

And by being optional it proves A is not objectively true, which makes it false in the overarching statement you made. Why can't you just accept that people don't like being forced to do an equivalence of the Cairn CM mechanic just to use their class features?

Sigh, I didn't want to get pedantic, but here goes: If you make a claim that the reason to do a thing is A and B, and A is proven false then your whole statement could be considered false. What you want to say in this case is, the reason to do a thing is A and/or B, so that if only one claim is proven false you are still correct. Also, you're the one who has had trouble reading what I have said, not the other way around. I said I used Blood Magic before the changes, you somehow ignored the Blood Magic part and only focused on the changes part for some reason. Next up I told you the reason I was focusing on the first part of what you said was because others were disproving the rest, which you didn't seem to grasp by replying that I think "and" and a period are interchangeable.

I did, everyone else is disproving the rest of what you said, so I didn't feel the need to address it.

You said the reason to use Manifest Shade off cooldown was for Dhuumfire, Blood Magic doesn't have Dhuumfire, so your point was invalid for my build.

What if I was running Blood Magic instead of Soul Reaping before the changes? Yeah it was less golem dps, but I almost always kept up with every pug Scourge with Soul Reaping I ever saw in real combat scenarios.

You're doing a great job at ignoring the fact that you didn't have to cast the shade every 6-8 seconds before, even though you've been told multiple times that you could keep up three shades without doing so, keep up the good work!

Personally I'm not a fan of having to basically do the Cairn CM mechanic minus the teleporting, but more frequently, just to be able to use my class features.

con·de·scend·ing adjective having or showing a feeling of patronizing superiority. You said "It's not hard to understand" followed by making up something to make yourself sound like you know something the rest of us don't. I'm struggling to see the difference between that and "You're all not understanding something only an enlightened one such as myself could understand." Seems pretty condescending to me. And now you're following up with a "back in my day" which is also full of condescension. Scourge is about to do an insanely unhealthy amount of damage after the next patch, what are you even talking about? It could have had this same damage buff without the shade duration nerf and nothing would be different except you wouldn't have to use a ground targeted skill with a cast time that interrupts everything every 6-8 seconds or lose the ability to use your class features.

Did the balance team say that was their reasoning? Please provide a source for this extremally condescending claim.

I believe you when you say that that was not your intention, but it still can come off that way. That's kind of been what this is all about, sometimes what we intend to say is not what others hear. You meant to say that people have the option to stop playing the class, but it came off more as you demanding that they stop airing their grievances in the forum and just stop playing the class. What a strange accusation, I just saw someone be wrong on the internet and was pointing it out then they doubled down so I did the same, and eventually they somewhat admitted (through actions, not words) they were wrong and a I agreed with their new version of what they said. If it's of no concern for you why even bring it up?

You can keep asserting that, but it doesn't make it true. You've gone from telling people to stop playing the class to manipulate the metrics to make Anet look at the class, to: Those two things are not the same.

No one is triggered here but you. You said something, got called out on it and changed what you were saying. I'd also like to point out that every single reply you have had to me has been edited after the fact. I'm not accusing you of anything out right, it's just not a good look.

I agree that playing something else is a completely reasonable option for people who are playing things that don't work for them. Had you just said that in the first place we could have saved a lot of time, but you didn't. Instead you doubled down and just said you were right and after several posts added in the part about options. Is this new version what you meant when you said the original statement? Maybe, but it's not what you actually said and I don't live inside your head to know that's what you meant.

Again with the options thing that was no where in your original statement. Just admit your original statement was flawed.

It's the holier-than-thou attitude that's the difference. You've also proven the original statement you made is in fact unreasonable because you've had to spend several messages flailing around trying to justify it until you landed on this "I'm just giving people options" line that was no where in your original statement.

You weren't suggesting, you were just telling people what to do, all the option stuff came later when you got called out. So you are saying the BEST option is the one where only after an extreme case Anet will do anything?

This right here is the core of the problem. You think that playing 2nd health bar necro and thinking it needs to be fixed are this mutually exclusive thing when they aren't. As far as I can tell no one in this thread has said how much they love having a 2nd health bar (kinda the opposite), but let's say that the 2nd health bar is the only reason someone likes necro. What about their love of playing 2nd health bar necro has to do with thinking it is broken and needs fixing? A thing can be fixed without breaking what made it fun to someone in the first place.

You started at telling other people if they think necro needs to be fixed they should just stop playing necro. After getting called out on the absurdity of that you pivot to players have choices in the game. You bossing others around and players having choice are not the same thing.

Everything I've said has been about the statement: You are the one who keeps trying to change what you and I are talking about away from that statement.

Wow, what a pivot. There is nothing unreasonable about making your own choices, but that's not what we were talking about. We are talking about how you think that telling people who would like Necro fixed to just stop playing Necro is not a reasonable statement. You think the reasonable response to: is: What if I believe that Anet needs to fix the class AND the class does work for me? Both things can be true. That is why I am saying that your statement is not the pinnacle of reason you think it is.

I would like Anet to fix the class, you think it's reasonable to say don't play it then, which either means don't play the game or play a different class. You claim you are not telling me to play other classes, so you are telling me, reasonably somehow, to stop playing the game then?