Moorguard puts the smackdown on a class whiner

Pronoia · 11-01-2006, 08:07 AM

Here:

http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/e...cending&page=1

I'm crap at thise linking stuff so find him yourself - big yellow title.

He also uses the word 'crap' <ghasp> I nearly reported his ass for that :P

Pro.

RadarX · 11-01-2006, 08:57 AM

Wow....nice reply.

Otis · 11-01-2006, 10:02 AM

That post is exactly why MG always rubbed me the wrong way.

Always eager to use "working as intended" as a crutch to prop up his opinion.

Skaer · 11-01-2006, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otis

That post is exactly why MG always rubbed me the wrong way.

Always eager to use "working as intended" as a crutch to prop up his opinion.

No, I believe itwas an honest and fair reply, truthful even.

alfi · 11-01-2006, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pronoia

Here:

http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/e...cending&page=1

I'm crap at thise linking stuff so find him yourself - big yellow title.

He also uses the word 'crap' <ghasp> I nearly reported his ass for that :P

Pro.

Hm isn't crap the stuff French ppl eat?

[k, bad joke]

Malachani · 11-01-2006, 11:39 AM

Not necessarily Otis. Read the whole thread, not just his reply. This person spends pages and pages of writing to talk about how monks are broken because most high end guilds only take one or two. Well, there's a few classes like that, and some classes that high end guilds don't take any of. Its one of the reasons I rerolled as a coercer when I found that getting into a guild as a pally was challenging. I love both classes, but I wanted to raid, so I did what I had to do.

If this person wants to raid, they can either roll another class to do so, or suck it up and wait his turn to get into a high end raid guild. Lord knows turnover is bad enough, a spot will open up. He just has to keep his eyes and options open.

Otis · 11-01-2006, 12:13 PM

My take on the thread is that people are discussing a wide gap in the desireability of classes in relation to each other for what they bring to a table for a raid guild.

MG is saying that you can successfully raid even with those less desireable classes when no one said anything to the contrary, not even the person he quoted.

kyros · 11-01-2006, 12:17 PM

point of view is everything.

Malachani · 11-01-2006, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otis

My take on the thread is that people are discussing a wide gap in the desireability of classes in relation to each other for what they bring to a table for a raid guild.

MG is saying that you can successfully raid even with those less desireable classes when no one said anything to the contrary, not even the person he quoted.

There is not a game out there that doesn't have "more desirable" and "less desireable" classes. EQ1 I was lucky to get into a raiding guild as a pally, even tho they were wanted, most guilds didn't keep around more than 2, maybe 3. Chanters were by far the more desired on raids, and most guilds housed 4-5 of them. Clerics were the most desired, some guilds with upwards of 10-15 clerics.

In DAOC, healers again topped the most desired classes, but I didn't play long enough to get into the raiding.

There is no game out there that the min-max'ers won't exclude some classes outright, prefer some classes to others, and highly desire a few select classes. If you want to raid in the high end game, you either make one of the desired classes, or you make one of the undesired and hope and pray you get a shot when an opening opens up (usually requiring a server transfer to get what you want).

So yeah, people who play an class that is unwanted in a raid guild, then cry that they can't high end raid are not cut out to high end raid anyway.

kaif · 11-02-2006, 08:48 PM

Look at Necros, how many guilds keep more then one or 2 necros? And according to half the world we are over powered.