Jump to content
FORUMS
Sign in to follow this  
Starym

Tank Kicked from Torghast Group Because of Low RIO Score

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, jamesw71 said:

I know, been there done that, gear does not equate experience and I won't waste my time with idiots who bought their gear or got run thru or just had pvp gear and no pve experience to show.

Really glad the people that buy their gear won't have an inflated RaiderIO or achievements they didn't earn themselves... Oh wait...

This entire thread is a reason why the game is in a bad state. Where is he supposed to "learn to tank"? It's absolutely the easiest PVE content he could learn on at max level.

There's a higher chance of people dying trying to cross chains in torgast than there is dying to the actual mobs or mechanics because of tanking.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, req0 said:

People like everywhere. Nothing to be bothered around. His team his rules. If you don't want you don't have to play with such people. 

Unfortunately you still have to be exposed to his comments. This was my point in the article. His rules are fine (if extreme), it's the WAY he speaks to other players that is the problem.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lunestro said:

Why the hell is this a topic?

Oh, it's Starym.

Alternatively:
"Oh, it's a hot topic in the community and has been for ages, and maybe needs talking about while players treat each other like trash".

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Oxygen said:

It goes deeper than that.

Starym is actually the blue-geared mage.

He's into humiliation.

HEY! I told you that in confidence!

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jamesw71 said:

The little PVP remark was from the tank...not the mage...but please get butthurt over nothing.  Fairly obvious the mage didn't want his time wasted by someone he didn't know and who hadn't done very much PVE....sure you can say it is just Torghast...but not everyone is skilled enough for Torghast reqardless of their gear.  The tank in this situation only had PVP experience...then says he tanks...but he has no score for tanking M+ or Raids...so no he doesn't have tanking experience and if I was running the group I wouldn't invite him either.  If the tank wants to complain about groups, he can create his own and do the runs and get his score up so others can see he has experience not sit there and whine because he wasn't good enough for someone who has probably had their time wasted by geared but inexperienced tanks in the past.

I know, been there done that, gear does not equate experience and I won't waste my time with idiots who bought their gear or got run thru or just had pvp gear and no pve experience to show.

Um, no? The "nope" is the mage, which is a comment on the PvP thing. That's how I read it anyway, could be wrong I guess.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Starym said:

Um, no? The "nope" is the mage, which is a comment on the PvP thing. That's how I read it anyway, could be wrong I guess.

Exactly. I understood that the Mage answered him PvPers can't do Torghast.

It's hilarious when you know how much PvP  demands skill, especially compare to PvE which demands barely nothing than a lil part of a brain (which is not giving to anyone, I must admit). Real players know it perfectly, capable people having experienced those two things at many levels.

Torghast is ridiculously easy. I did Layer 9 with my Lock at 170 ilvl and got medium powers (not bad but clearly not great).

PvE is easy as hell and the only thing it demands is organization, group cohesion. Nothing else as long as you know the bases of your class which isn't skill. I don't understand how people can talk about skill in PvE when you just have to fight an AI. Is it about knowing his class, how to play it against a defined program ? oO

Not even mention the whole tools who assist the players like the addons :

•T
elling them what to do for some,
•Warning them in advance of incoming spells, holding players by the hand. They are assisted, no more and no less, and that comes to teach lessons (yes, I have already seen on WoW forums arrogant people but playing with this kind of addon of assisted and the worst is that they did not do better than the targeted person), pulling their "level" down.

All of this for saying that I still don't get people like this Mage and things like IO are just making things worse.

I saw someone said, in this thread, that the tool is not crap, the crap is just how people are using it.
He's wrong.
The tool IS crap as long as it induced players to act like douche (for using this word like others did^^).
The tool IS crap as long as it contribute to ruining the overall gaming experience (which is the case).

Anyway.. It's better to let these kind of people playing in their weird world, with people like them. They'll never accomplish anything worthwhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a surprise.  Because anytime some game issue comes up and people say "that will only affect a very small percentage of the playerbase," I think to myself "NOT with the stupid, elitist, asshat community we have."  They are all sheep and I think they feel better doing this to other people.  In content that does NOT require that (or much of any) kind of assessment, people STILL find ways to evaluate and reject people.  THIS is among the MANY reasons that a lot of people don't enjoy pugging.

And most people who make that kind of remarks, I believe, want to be carried themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/10/2021 at 7:44 AM, ResoWho said:

where is the rest of the chat? im missing the beginning and the end for context. could also have started like tank joinig the grp and calling out the mage for his blue gear and wants him replaced. then mage says his gear is good enough and tank says okaaay and so on. strange that no one questioned that and just took a pitchfork and sides with the tank. doesnt a short text passage screenshot from the middle of the chat doesnt look suspicious to you?

Well considering that at the top of the chat log the tank seemingly linked his "credentials" by linking the two leggo's he has. Right after the mage says "Fair enough". Doesnt sound like any sort of instigation was started at the beginning besides in the middle in which the mage clearly states that the tank isn't actually a tank, and that he isn't going to "carry". As the tank has stated "its torgast", meaning that people shouldn't take Torgast as seriously as mythic raiding. Which is a true statement. The facts are all there. It's as clear as black and white. 

Also the chat ends with the mage saying Nope to the tank stating "so what pvpers can't tank?". Meaning that the mage most definitely kicked him. Either way the tank has no incentive to be a douche to the party leader and say " let's kick him". 

Edited by Rhondis
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, jamesw71 said:

The little PVP remark was from the tank...not the mage...but please get butthurt over nothing.  Fairly obvious the mage didn't want his time wasted by someone he didn't know and who hadn't done very much PVE....sure you can say it is just Torghast...but not everyone is skilled enough for Torghast reqardless of their gear.  The tank in this situation only had PVP experience...then says he tanks...but he has no score for tanking M+ or Raids...so no he doesn't have tanking experience and if I was running the group I wouldn't invite him either.  If the tank wants to complain about groups, he can create his own and do the runs and get his score up so others can see he has experience not sit there and whine because he wasn't good enough for someone who has probably had their time wasted by geared but inexperienced tanks in the past.

This is a grey area. Just because the "tank" only does PvP doesn't mean they don't have any tanking experience prior to PvP. We don't know who this individual is, how long they have played for, what content they played in other expacs etc etc. It could just be that he transitioned from PvE to PvP because they enjoy that content more. Regardless, it's Torghast. It's not arena, it's not mythic raiding, and it's not a m+. Torghast is a complete faceroll with 5 individuals, it really is. There are a wide varieties of screwing up a torghast run, and just being strictly pvp doesn't mean they have no pve knowledge. I ran Torghast runs with people who cleared heroic Sanctum, yet pull really sloppy or die to simple traps on the floor. And these are people who have heroic raiding experience. Long story short, don't judge a book by its cover.

Edited by Rhondis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rhondis said:

Well considering that at the top of the chat log the tank seemingly linked his "credentials" by linking the two leggo's he has. Right after the mage says "Fair enough". Doesnt sound like any sort of instigation was started at the beginning besides in the middle in which the mage clearly states that the tank isn't actually a tank, and that he isn't going to "carry". As the tank has stated "its torgast", meaning that people shouldn't take Torgast as seriously as mythic raiding. Which is a true statement. The facts are all there. It's as clear as black and white. 

why would the mage respond "good enough" ? he would just say that, if someone told him, he wasnt good enough for something or his equipt wasnt good enough for something, i cant imagine any other reason why he would write that with the little amount of context we got here. 

for me it looks like that they both argued with each other why the other one shouldnt be doing torghast. who started isnt evident here since we have just a tiny bit of the chat. who "won" at the end seems pretty clear since the tank got kicked and posted this.

2 hours ago, Rhondis said:

Also the chat ends with the mage saying Nope to the tank stating "so what pvpers can't tank?". Meaning that the mage most definitely kicked him. Either way the tank has no incentive to be a douche to the party leader and say " let's kick him". 

the chat doesnt end there. the opened window is a whispering window, which just contains the whole chat with the mage and nothing else. so you can see that its scrolled up and not at the end of the conversation nor at the start, the tank choosed exactly that tiny bit of the chat (which probably suits him the best). 

 

but sure it could be that the tank is an innocent newborn and the mage is the devil himself. im just saying that its not obvs like its suggested and seen by most people, its just a tiny bit of the chat in days we get animal rescue videos by people who harmed the animals themselfs just to get likes.

Edited by ResoWho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what they say. It doesn't matter what your gear is...

...you can't properly play a mage without inflated ego.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/10/2021 at 8:23 PM, Leodagan said:

I saw someone said, in this thread, that the tool is not crap, the crap is just how people are using it.
He's wrong.
The tool IS crap as long as it induced players to act like douche (for using this word like others did^^).
The tool IS crap as long as it contribute to ruining the overall gaming experience (which is the case).

Nope, not wrong. The tool just give you access to the Blizz scoreboards to say Bob has a total score of 2001, did NW 15 2m undertime, got a score of 150 for it. That run was with Jim Frank Lucy and Lui who all have scored of 3000 and his other runs are +2-5's outside of 2 15's in time for each run.

Most stop reading at the total part, which is where the issue comes in with boosters. If you take a second to look deeper, you'll see they were most likely boosted, and will perform *filtered*. Leading to the failed keys (this is the part where people act like a douche and it ruins the overall exp), and angry team mates all around.

I go back to my analogy, you can't blame the hammer for being *filtered* at putting screws in if it's just people using it wrong.

R.io isn't what causes people to act like a douche, it's the failed runs, the missed timers, and missed expectations of other players.

 

As for the rest, I can somewhat agree on the PvP side, though WF raiders a small exception since they're also fighting the bugs in the AI and tuning mishaps. 

I would also agree not everyone can do Torg, as shown by it's heavy nerfing in 9.0, and some players are just not good, but the mage was still a *filtered*.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bobbis said:

Nope, not wrong. The tool just give you access to the Blizz scoreboards to say Bob has a total score of 2001, did NW 15 2m undertime, got a score of 150 for it. That run was with Jim Frank Lucy and Lui who all have scored of 3000 and his other runs are +2-5's outside of 2 15's in time for each run.

Most stop reading at the total part, which is where the issue comes in with boosters. If you take a second to look deeper, you'll see they were most likely boosted, and will perform *filtered*. Leading to the failed keys (this is the part where people act like a douche and it ruins the overall exp), and angry team mates all around.

I go back to my analogy, you can't blame the hammer for being *filtered* at putting screws in if it's just people using it wrong.

R.io isn't what causes people to act like a douche, it's the failed runs, the missed timers, and missed expectations of other players.

 

As for the rest, I can somewhat agree on the PvP side, though WF raiders a small exception since they're also fighting the bugs in the AI and tuning mishaps. 

I would also agree not everyone can do Torg, as shown by it's heavy nerfing in 9.0, and some players are just not good, but the mage was still a *filtered*.

Yeah I might be little blinded, it's possible. 😄

About the tool, my point was people makes it crap so now it IS crap. I don't know if it's clear.

Basically, I agree with him, nothing is crap at the creation (more or less) but the fact is that it is now. They turned it into crap, I don't see a come back for this, sadly. 😕
The tool isn't directly responsible but it turned into sheyt now..

Your analogy could be good if we don't keep in mind the context. The hammer's purpose is clear and light and noboby (almost I hope) using it on screws instead of nails. Plus you can change your use easily AND this is not impacting anyone else than you (and, let's admit, your screws xD).

Here this is totally different :
For a change it will required MOST of people changing their use
•The wrong use impact everybody else using it

Basically again, the analogy could be okay, but it's clearly not when you dig a little a keep the context in mind.

Whatever the tool was made to first, it's crap now and there is nothing we can do alone.
It's a collective action or AB action. Until this, it will remain a crap tool globally. 😕 (only isolated exceptions for people using it the good way, which is not helping to solve the prob at all)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, ResoWho said:

why would the mage respond "good enough" ? he would just say that, if someone told him, he wasnt good enough for something or his equipt wasnt good enough for something, i cant imagine any other reason why he would write that with the little amount of context we got here. 

Again, it's pretty black and white here. In what scenario does an individual link their leggos for a torghast run and someone states "good enough". I can understand if maybe the tank linked the leggo's to show what he was trying to upgrade, but the mere fact that the mage says "good enough" gives us enough information that:

1. After inviting the tank he checks the IO score and possibly warcraft logs and notices that no PvE content was done.

2. After seeing that no PvE content was done he was probably thinking that the tank didn't have up to date leggos, and probably asked a question that was along the lines of "do you have legendaries?", which then prompted a "yes" at the start followed by two legendaries being linked.

3. To reiterate, the mage then follows up with "GOOD ENOUGH" because this probably reassured him a tad bit that the tank might know what he is doing.

 

Now here's the interesting part. The tank was actually off put by that, as you can tell by the reaction of "okaaaay" they didn't seem to fully understand as to why they needed to do so. If the tank was truly a "douche" in this scenario he wouldn't have been confused by the request of his legendaries now would he? Especially since this is NOT THEIR GROUP. If anything the tank just wanted to fulfill the weird request and get into a group so they can knock torghast out for the week.

Then the mage has doubts again despite the leggos and points out that the tank isn't a tank. At this point the mage is pretty much instigating the tank and telling them that they have no experience whatsoever just in that one single instance. This prompted a response which is understandable of the tank pointing out that the mage is in all blue gear, which to some extent suggests that maybe the mage isn't equipped for the floor that they are planning to do. We are then led to the mage stating that it's skill not gear blah blah blah. Which then led to the tank saying "Bro it's torghast" which is a true statement, it's torghats, not M+. Not mythic raiding. So why make it a big deal? Torghast as I have stated is a faceroll, especially with 5 players. 

 

The last piece of evidence is "I pvp and I tank, so I guess pvpers can't tank? Lmao" and the mage says "nope". We can safely assume the mage kicked him at this point because the direction of the conversation was going. The mage was already hesitant because of lack of PvE content. He states the tank can't tank, tank punches back, mage didn't like that, and solidifies his decision to kick someone because of the lack of PvE content done. 

The mage was clearly the douche here. His run, his rules, I get it. But to question an individual who only does pvp and just wanted to get Torghast done, then promptly accuses the tank of having no experience followed by kicking him after the tank returns the insult is just plain wrong. This is as black and white as can be, I even pointed it out word for word.

A separate whisper window doesn't mean much because either party could have initiated, now how it started is a grey area, but it's safe to say that since this is NOT the tanks PARTY. If they were being as *filtered* in the whisper window to begin with, they would have been kicked right then and there. No logic to keep an *filtered* in the group if they are going to undermine others right? Your next argument of it "being cutoff" also doesn't hold any merit because again, it leads to my previous point that if the tank was being an *filtered*, he would have been kicked. The reason for a cutoff is showcase the main focus of the subject or argument, in this case, the mage undermining a tank who only pvps has no knowledge or experience of a tank. 

22 hours ago, ResoWho said:

but sure it could be that the tank is an innocent newborn and the mage is the devil himself. im just saying that its not obvs like its suggested and seen by most people, its just a tiny bit of the chat in days we get animal rescue videos by people who harmed the animals themselfs just to get likes.

Sure, in some scenarios people can easily be swindled to thinking X when Y really happened. But considering the genuine reaction of the tank being taken aback by the mage requesting his gear, then questioning the content that he has done easily paints the picture of someone who is expecting too much for a piece of content that doesn't require such credentials to begin with. And followed by the facts that:

1. The mage is the party leader here.

2. Typically people who get invited to parties don't whisper the party leader directly to be a douche because that easily leads to them being kicked. It's common sense.

3. The tank could have run an IO back on the mage prior to signing up, seeing his gear, his IO, etc. And wouldn't have signed up if he chose too because he might think it's a waste of time. But instead the tank was clearly willing to be in a group with a mage with all blue gear, because again as I have stated, Torghast is a faceroll and shouldn't require mythic raiders to do.

All I can say is that the tank was justified for punching back, as the saying goes, talk *filtered* get hit. The mage was a *filtered* and should learn to not have bad manners.

 

 

 

Edited by Rhondis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Rhondis said:

Again, it's pretty black and white here. In what scenario does an individual link their leggos for a torghast run and someone states "good enough". I can understand if maybe the tank linked the leggo's to show what he was trying to upgrade, but the mere fact that the mage says "good enough" gives us enough information that:

1. After inviting the tank he checks the IO score and possibly warcraft logs and notices that no PvE content was done.

2. After seeing that no PvE content was done he was probably thinking that the tank didn't have up to date leggos, and probably asked a question that was along the lines of "do you have legendaries?", which then prompted a "yes" at the start followed by two legendaries being linked.

3. To reiterate, the mage then follows up with "GOOD ENOUGH" because this probably reassured him a tad bit that the tank might know what he is doing.

 

Now here's the interesting part. The tank was actually off put by that, as you can tell by the reaction of "okaaaay" they didn't seem to fully understand as to why they needed to do so. If the tank was truly a "douche" in this scenario he wouldn't have been confused by the request of his legendaries now would he? Especially since this is NOT THEIR GROUP. If anything the tank just wanted to fulfill the weird request and get into a group so they can knock torghast out for the week.

Then the mage has doubts again despite the leggos and points out that the tank isn't a tank. At this point the mage is pretty much instigating the tank and telling them that they have no experience whatsoever just in that one single instance. This prompted a response which is understandable of the tank pointing out that the mage is in all blue gear, which to some extent suggests that maybe the mage isn't equipped for the floor that they are planning to do. We are then led to the mage stating that it's skill not gear blah blah blah. Which then led to the tank saying "Bro it's torghast" which is a true statement, it's torghats, not M+. Not mythic raiding. So why make it a big deal? Torghast as I have stated is a faceroll, especially with 5 players. 

 

The last piece of evidence is "I pvp and I tank, so I guess pvpers can't tank? Lmao" and the mage says "nope". We can safely assume the mage kicked him at this point because the direction of the conversation was going. The mage was already hesitant because of lack of PvE content. He states the tank can't tank, tank punches back, mage didn't like that, and solidifies his decision to kick someone because of the lack of PvE content done. 

The mage was clearly the douche here. His run, his rules, I get it. But to question an individual who only does pvp and just wanted to get Torghast done, then promptly accuses the tank of having no experience followed by kicking him after the tank returns the insult is just plain wrong. This is as black and white as can be, I even pointed it out word for word.

A separate whisper window doesn't mean much because either party could have initiated, now how it started is a grey area, but it's safe to say that since this is NOT the tanks PARTY. If they were being as *filtered* in the whisper window to begin with, they would have been kicked right then and there. No logic to keep an *filtered* in the group if they are going to undermine others right? Your next argument of it "being cutoff" also doesn't hold any merit because again, it leads to my previous point that if the tank was being an *filtered*, he would have been kicked. The reason for a cutoff is showcase the main focus of the subject or argument, in this case, the mage undermining a tank who only pvps has no knowledge or experience of a tank. 

Sure, in some scenarios people can easily be swindled to thinking X when Y really happened. But considering the genuine reaction of the tank being taken aback by the mage requesting his gear, then questioning the content that he has done easily paints the picture of someone who is expecting too much for a piece of content that doesn't require such credentials to begin with. And followed by the facts that:

1. The mage is the party leader here.

2. Typically people who get invited to parties don't whisper the party leader directly to be a douche because that easily leads to them being kicked. It's common sense.

3. The tank could have run an IO back on the mage prior to signing up, seeing his gear, his IO, etc. And wouldn't have signed up if he chose too because he might think it's a waste of time. But instead the tank was clearly willing to be in a group with a mage with all blue gear, because again as I have stated, Torghast is a faceroll and shouldn't require mythic raiders to do.

All I can say is that the tank was justified for punching back, as the saying goes, talk *filtered* get hit. The mage was a *filtered* and should learn to not have bad manners.

 

 

 

uhm...thx for your afford but you didnt need to write an essay. i still got another opinion. the mage clearly is an idiot but without more context i still see a possibility that the tank could also have blamed the mage for his poor equipt (probably after the mage told him hes not a tank) so for me its not black and white. i still see the possibility that the tank got told hes not a tank and the tank says the mages equipt is bad, now the tank posting his tank legendaries to show off that hes a tank and the mage responds to the equipt part that it is "good enough" and the tank goes like okaaaay.

everyone got their own opinion and that okay thought. i never said yours is wrong, i just said that theres more possibilities then we are seeing in that little screenshot. the only part i would completely disagree with is your "black and white" point

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Leodagan said:

Yeah I might be little blinded, it's possible. 😄

About the tool, my point was people makes it crap so now it IS crap. I don't know if it's clear.

Basically, I agree with him, nothing is crap at the creation (more or less) but the fact is that it is now. They turned it into crap, I don't see a come back for this, sadly. 😕
The tool isn't directly responsible but it turned into sheyt now..

Your analogy could be good if we don't keep in mind the context. The hammer's purpose is clear and light and noboby (almost I hope) using it on screws instead of nails. Plus you can change your use easily AND this is not impacting anyone else than you (and, let's admit, your screws xD).

Here this is totally different :
For a change it will required MOST of people changing their use
•The wrong use impact everybody else using it

Basically again, the analogy could be okay, but it's clearly not when you dig a little a keep the context in mind.

Whatever the tool was made to first, it's crap now and there is nothing we can do alone.
It's a collective action or AB action. Until this, it will remain a crap tool globally. 😕 (only isolated exceptions for people using it the good way, which is not helping to solve the prob at all)

Eh I get your point. Either way, people=*filtered* 😛

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

think dude! I never said i didn't know how to use it. It is a seriously flawed addon that is ruining the game due to elitests thinking they are better than everyone when they use this addon,but the data is missing and its a bad addon. Learn things little kid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ResoWho said:

uhm...thx for your afford but you didnt need to write an essay.

It's a debate, you stated your thoughts and reasonings while stating your points of arguments. I only simply responded in kind, but provided more reasoning, logic, and a thorough breakdown of the conversation between the tank and the mage to clearly outline why people are taking the tanks side on the matter. Hence why I sent an a essay.

You are relying too heavily on "ambiguity" and "what if scenarios" as a point to attack those who don't look at both sides. Which only works if there is a lack of evidence or alot of grey present. In this case, it's quite clear as to what went down, so your argument of "ambiguity" falls completely on its head. 

19 hours ago, ResoWho said:

 so for me its not black and white. i still see the possibility that the tank got told hes not a tank and the tank says the mages equipt is bad, now the tank posting his tank legendaries to show off that hes a tank and the mage responds to the equipt part that it is "good enough" and the tank goes like okaaaay.

The mage is clearly bothered by the fact the tank mentioned his blue gear, which prompted a response in the later half of the message. If this scenario truly did occur, and the tank linked his legendaries whilst undermining the mages gear, the mage wouldn't have simply said "good enough". The logic doesn't add up. Might I also add that saying "good enough" is far too nonchalant for someone who might have seemingly been targeted with an insult. We can also see how quickly the mage got defensive there after, which is a big tell on its own.

Also, keep in mind that the mage is the party leader here. If the tank undermined him at the very start, the tank would have been kicked, and the conversation would be completely different to what it is now.

Edited by Rhondis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ResoWho said:

uhm...thx for your afford but you didnt need to write an essay. i still got another opinion. the mage clearly is an idiot but without more context i still see a possibility that the tank could also have blamed the mage for his poor equipt (probably after the mage told him hes not a tank) so for me its not black and white. i still see the possibility that the tank got told hes not a tank and the tank says the mages equipt is bad, now the tank posting his tank legendaries to show off that hes a tank and the mage responds to the equipt part that it is "good enough" and the tank goes like okaaaay.

everyone got their own opinion and that okay thought. i never said yours is wrong, i just said that theres more possibilities then we are seeing in that little screenshot. the only part i would completely disagree with is your "black and white" point

Here's the original source of the reddit post: 

 

The image I have provided is my conversation with the tank. The "okaaay" as I have pointed out in my essay, was genuine confusion but not by the linking of legendaries but because he was kicked after the mage ran an IO. The rest of the message between the tank and mage then ensues.

Screenshot_20210813-123257_Reddit.jpg

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rhondis said:

Here's the original source of the reddit post: 

 

The image I have provided is my conversation with the tank. The "okaaay" as I have pointed out in my essay, was genuine confusion but not by the linking of legendaries but because he was kicked after the mage ran an IO. The rest of the message between the tank and mage then ensues.

Screenshot_20210813-123257_Reddit.jpg

wow dont you have any other hobbies? you even put words into my mouth which i never said. i never said, that i believe that the tank instigated the whole thing, i actually said due to too less context i cant say if the tank was innocent or not nor if the mage started or not. i just said there more possibilities then just the most obvious one. im also not debatting with you since you seem not to get my quintessence. i wasnt even trying to convince you to believe something else, my whole point just was that there more possibilities due to a lack of context.

you can pray down again what i can see and read in the screenshot myself if you want but i understand whats written there, how the whole thing looks (ive known that before your first post) you dont need to type down the obvious part over and over again. i admit its a possibility, its probably the most possible one but accept it or not, people got other opinions and there more possibilities. have a nice day my friend, im done here.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ResoWho said:

i never said, that i believe that the tank instigated the whole thing

Your whole argument on this forum is the idea that people are jumping to conclusions because we don't know what the tank has said prior. Which means you are insinuating that the tank must have done something wrong to begin with. How else am I suppose to put it? Your direct words are that the tank could have insulted the mage "off screen". Hence the instigation.

 

1 hour ago, ResoWho said:

 im also not debatting with you since you seem not to get my quintessence.

So the moment someone doesn't agree with you, you choose to not have a discussion? Interesting. People can debate all day, no one has to change their minds because it's ultimately up to them. I simply debate because it's a good exercise in itself.

 

1 hour ago, ResoWho said:

you can pray down again what i can see and read in the screenshot myself if you want but i understand whats written there, how the whole thing looks (ive known that before your first post) you dont need to type down the obvious part over and over again. i admit its a possibility, its probably the most possible one but accept it or not, people got other opinions and there more possibilities. have a nice day my friend, im done here

So you choose ignorance. I guess it is bliss after all. You shouldn't shy away from factual evidence. If it is as ambiguous as you make it out to be, why don't you implore upon it further? Do research? Figure out the answers. Maybe then your arguments will have some weight to them. But for now your plane Jane response of "there could be more there could be more" just doesn't work in this scenario. I'll see you around.

Edited by Rhondis
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Rhondis said:

Which means you are insinuating that the tank must have done something wrong to begin with.

nope. i never insinuated anything, i talked about possibilities. i was talking about hypothetical cases, which mustn be true.

51 minutes ago, Rhondis said:

How else am I suppose to put it?

i tried to clarify that more then once now. since the lack of context there are more posible options then just one.

 

51 minutes ago, Rhondis said:

Your direct words are that the tank could have insulted the mage "off screen". Hence the instigation.

exactly, "could" is an important word here. its one thesis of many. so that doesnt mean it must be true, it was just an example.

51 minutes ago, Rhondis said:

So the moment someone doesn't agree with you, you choose to not have a discussion?

nope, the moment i repeatedly try to explain what i mean and the not understanding of it made me realize that its not going anywhere and its not worth the time we both spend here. we are talking past each other.

51 minutes ago, Rhondis said:

People can debate all day, no one has to change their minds because it's ultimately up to them.

i can totally agree with that

51 minutes ago, Rhondis said:

So you choose ignorance.

as i said before with other words, we are spinning in a cirlce

51 minutes ago, Rhondis said:

If it is as ambiguous as you make it out to be, why don't you implore upon it further? Do research? Figure out the answers

cause its not worth the time to create a reddit account, look for the mage, look for the tank, starting a conversation with both about an incident from days ago where one word is against the other and even if i figure out the truth at the end, it would had been a waste of time for such an unimportant case. if you have the time to investigate such mundane things, thats great for you.

51 minutes ago, Rhondis said:

Maybe then your arguments will have some weight to them.

ok but what weight does yours have? as long as you cant bring the whole whisper chat from start till end (and even then the grp chat also could include some aspects) or the mages side of the story, nothing changed. you like to investigate, ask the tank for the mages name and then contact the mage and ask him about his point of view. i would be curious. (to prevent that you get this one wrong, im curious doesnt mean "if you hear his story you see that you are wrong" but it would rule out a couple, if not all, possibilities if he agrees with the tanks story for example)

51 minutes ago, Rhondis said:

But for now your plane Jane response of "there could be more there could be more" just doesn't work in this scenario.

philosophically theres always more

Edited by ResoWho
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, ResoWho said:

philosophically theres always more

Given the circumstances yes. But in this exact scenario, where everything is black and white. No. Again, this is getting old now. You can keep denying all you want, but I'm just gonna refer you to the reddit messages and my essay, because those two alone pretty debunks anything you have to say about "something more", until you can provide a weighted argument that the tank, indeed, is at fault here. Peace.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Starym
      We're taking another look at a few of the bosses in the Sanctum this week, in addition to our usual overview where Balance seems to be doing really well across all the difficulties and brackets! Let's get right into it.
      Mythic DPS Rankings
      Affliction is still hanging in there after its recent surge, as it loses the second slot to Balance, but remains in the top 3. Arcane is on another one of its frequent upswings, rising 3 into 5th, while Marksmanship has the biggest drop this week, losing 4 and going down to 14th, as Assassination gains those same 4 spots and ends up in 11th.

      95th percentile Mythic data by Warcraft Logs.
      Windwalkers are at the top of their raid game as they hold on to the No.1 spot in both high and generalist brackets, and the first change this week comes in at No.4 where Assassination suddenly burst onto the top rank scene, jumping 3 spots as it seems to be a really good week for them! This pushed Affliction down quite a bit, as the spec loses 4 spots but holds on to the top 10, with Balance coming in hot at No.5 (up 3). The middle of the pack is solidly jumbled up from last week, with Fury rising the most and Survival doing it's now customary downwards trajectory after a very good previous week.

      All percentiles Mythic data by Warcraft Logs.
       
      Individual Bosses
      We're also taking a look at a few key bosses this week, as the wall of pain seems to have a pretty set raid composition, keeping the same top 7 spots over the past 2 weeks.
      Painsmith:

      All percentiles Painsmith Mythic data by Warcraft Logs.
      Kel'Thuzad:
      Ol' phylactery-man also has very few changes, with Elemental getting to the top spot as Affliction loses out all over the place, while Demonology and Havoc move on up a little.

      All percentiles Kel'Thuzad Mythic data by Warcraft Logs.
      Sylvanas:
      Sylvanas has some significant changes as the Druids take over, with Fury dropping down an insane amount from it's No.1 spot 2 weeks ago, settling in the middle of the pack. Survival shows up at No.3, but that doesn't seem to be a reliable stat as it never is with the (few) melee Hunters, but the following 3 specs are solid and kept their slots over the past 2 weeks. Meanwhile, Retribution rises a little and closes out the top 10.

      All percentiles Sylvanas Mythic data by Warcraft Logs.
       
      Heroic DPS Rankings
      There's actually a pretty big change in Heroic for once, as Balance finally breaks up the Rogue party we've had for over a month and takes the No.2 spot! Shadow and Arms swap position as well, with Fire rising into 8th.

      All percentiles Heroic data by Warcraft Logs.
       
      As always, if you want even more info on a spec, you can check out our class guides here, for a DPS tier list you can go here, or for even more data, head on over to Warcraft Logs.
    • By Stan
      Dovah the Explorer created a video titled "The Exploration Museum". It's a collection of peculiar and extremely rare maps from WoW's early Alpha (0.5.3) to Battle for Azeroth (8.0.1). Some of the zones were scrapped and never released.
      Source: Reddit
    • By Stan
      We are looking at the Druid Mage Tower set coming in Patch 9.1.5.
      Druid Mage Tower Set in Patch 9.1.5
      The Druid Mage Tower armor set is comprised of the following items:
      Stormheart Drape Stormheart Gloves Stormheart Cinch Stormheart Legguards Stormheart Headdress Stormheart Jerkin Stormheart Tunic Stormheart Moccasins Stormheart Mantle Stormheart Wristguards Druids can choose between two chest pieces; a full "dress" (Stormheart Tunic) or a chest armor piece with visible leg armor (Stormheart Jerkin).
      Druid Mage Tower Set Appearance (Tunic)

      Druid Mage Tower Set Appearance (Jerkin)

    • By Starym
      Hirumaredx is back with another great video focusing on WoW's history, this time covering the life and death of 10-man competitive/maximum difficulty raiding and the lower player-count raid version in general. With the most difficult raiding being 20-man for quite a while now and Blizzard being pretty receptive to feedback, the topic of 10-man maximum difficulty raiding is a very interesting one to bring up, so let's take a look.
      The main point coming across from the video is the fact that 10-man raiding for the hardest difficulty was much more popular than 25-man, as the video goes into the timeline of the addition of 10-man raids, the switch over to Mythic and addition of flex. Hirumaredx also talks about the reasons it was removed, from the balancing difficulty, to the weird raid compositions, the basically hand-me-down raid design, the top guilds not considering it where the real competition was at, how the mode could be brought back and much more.
      It's very much worth a watch if you're even a little interested in WoW history or raiding!
    • By Stan
      Timebound Ruminations is a new item that you can purchase in Oribos to immediately grant your Companion 5,000 experience.
      Patch 9.1.5 introduces a very useful way to catch up on Companion XP if you want to give Covenant Adventures a try or plan on switching to a different Covenant.
      Timebound Ruminations can be purchased from Au'Dara a new Heirloom Vendor near the Flight Master in Oribos and costs 10,000 Reservoir Anima.

      The item can be used on any Companion to grant them 5,000 XP. We tried upgrading Sika (Level 1) and the Companion went up straight to Level 14.

      The item's also Bind-to-Account, meaning you can purchase it on one character and send it to another.
×
×
  • Create New...