Guild Wars 2

Altoid.9104:

That’s the thing though, people use theory dps to talk about a class on the dps tier list. 25k Rev vs 14k necro dps, sure you can say those values aren’t reasonable and it’s just theoretical but then when it comes to in game values are you implying that necro deals 56% of the damage a rev will deal in most in game situations? Thats why I was saying I think the spreadsheets are flawed, most other games with meters use the spreadsheets as a base then calculate real in game numbers to determine where classes actually fall on a list. I haven’t seen that for this game, everything seems to stop at the spreadsheet part and then it gets advertised.

I think you just summed up why the spreadsheet users are advocating in favor of some sort of ingame damagemeter. Having to manually calculate ingame numbers for a sample size that would make it reliable enough to be value is too timeconsuming to be considered realistic.

This also creates the issue that people who do not understand how to interpret spreadsheet information just see it as X >Y in every circumstance and act accordingly to that. But that is not a problem of the spreadsheet information itself.

While I do not think that one profession doing only 56% of the damage of another profession is a realistic scenario I would suggest that even 90% would be barely acceptable and cause for evaluation.

Blaine Tog.8304:

Nemesis.8593:

JoaoFA.8475:

Today I joined a fractal lvl38, it only had one guy in it (the one who posted it in the lfg) and had the only requirements of “zerk” and “experienced”. As soon as I joined, he insta kicked me and then whispered me that he didnt want to be slowed down by horrible necros and “gl in finding another group”.

People can be really stupid. That’s all I have to say.

Impossible…

Bawb and a few others said no one was kick necromancers, Spoj here is saying necromancer is so much better now because we have the “gravedigger” !

The fake math ruined the community’s perception on the class, i am trying to fix that by exposing what the math actually is… as in fake… and some necromancer players hate me for it.

Well… this is disappointing…

To be fair, I think they’re more angry with you because of the rude and confrontational manner in which you deliver your points. You’re trying to stir up controversy, so you really can’t complain when you get what you want.

Mythbusting is at its most effective when it’s either dispassionate or charmingly humorous. If you put people on the defensive, they’re going to dig in their heels and push back regardless of whether your math checks out. You’ve made them want to disagree with you.

Yes… you are correct…

However… what i am saying now i have always said, just never in this format.
The only feedback i got was an insane amount of ridicule from the “elites” and… i don’t really know what % of the average players actually believed me, especially since they saw bosses melting left and right because of the Icebow (with or without the linecasting exploit).

Now… in this format… i changed more minds in 2 weeks then i did in 2 years, my usual elitists trolls from my channel’s comment section are all but gone…. I’ve got Brazil on my side… Goku might be joining soon…

I bet you anything that if i would have just published builds and advertise 8-10K REAL DPS on them i would have been ridiculed by Nike, Sesshi, Goku and Spoj for days on end… maybe some time later i will find the same builds on Dulfy, cause you know…

It’s not pretty i admit… but it is highly effective.

Altoid.9104:

[edit] Furthermore, in other games when people say “X class deals Y DPS” I usually get really close to that value, even if it’s assuming perfect rotations. In this game I see people say values and the real value is all over the place.

This is for two reasons.

First because GW2 has way more variables in its combat system than most other MMO’s.

Second because noone factors in all the variables in spreadsheets. Because its too much work and it isnt the purpose of those spreadsheets to give a real dps value.

Theres a really good example to this. Most theorycrafting is done with the benchmark armour value of enemies being 2600. Because this is pretty standard and is what is used in tooltips. But in reality boss armour varies too much and we dont have extensive data on every single boss and champ. So its easier for comparisons sake to just take a few standard values and calculate with those. But because we arent using the matched armour values to a real boss. You will never see an accurate number because of this and the many other variables not factored in.

That doesnt mean the comparisons and data from the spreadsheets is wrong or useless though. Its the opposite. Without such calculations you would never be able to accurately compare classes and skills in this game. Your feelings certainly arent accurate and we have no dps meters to gather large pools of real data quickly. Plus player by player variance is huge.

spoj.9672:

Altoid.9104:

[edit] Furthermore, in other games when people say “X class deals Y DPS” I usually get really close to that value, even if it’s assuming perfect rotations. In this game I see people say values and the real value is all over the place.

This is for two reasons.

First because GW2 has way more variables in its combat system than most other MMO’s.

Second because noone factors in all the variables in spreadsheets. Because its too much work and it isnt the purpose of those spreadsheets to give a real dps value.

Theres a really good example to this. Most theorycrafting is done with the benchmark armour value of enemies being 2600. Because this is pretty standard and is what is used in tooltips. But in reality boss armour varies too much and we dont have extensive data on every single boss and champ. So its easier for comparisons sake to just take a few standard values and calculate with those. But because we arent using the matched armour values to a real boss. You will never see an accurate number because of this and the many other variables not factored in.

That doesnt mean the comparisons and data from the spreadsheets is wrong or useless though.

I think a lot of people have mistakenly assumed that spreadsheets do give out a real dps value. Which is I think is one of the points Nemesis has been trying to make. I have taken a break for about 18 months (or longer, cant remember) and before that I was always doing fractals with the same group of people so I have not been affected by things such being kicked from groups and such but it seems a lot of others have experienced something like that, which is problematic in itself.

And i dont know how many times ive said to him thats not what they were for. But hes refusing to accept that. :P

@Nemesis, I don’t know whom you consider to be an “elitist” and whom not, but given the amount of posts containing very genuine comments, questions and criticism about your work that you’ve either ignored or given evasive responses to, I’m starting to believe you are not interested at having a healthy discussion at all.

I can understand that being ridiculed and attacked can be frustrating, but if you REALLY want to do something for the community, as you claim, maybe should start taking the genuine criticism that is thrown at you by the bucket seriously.

spoj.9672:

edit: Necro condi damage is weaker than other classes. Or is it outrageous to state the truth as well? Cant win with you people. Also nice of you to twist what i said into something completely different. Weaker than other classes =/ terrible at condi damage.

Aren’t blanket statements like this somewhat the issue here though?

Isn’t this to say that the condition necromancer is weaker than other classes on paper, in spreadsheets, in theory? I know people are saying we’ve never claimed otherwise, but then on the other hand to go and simply call it the truth without any disclaimer or caveat to that could lead to perception issues, twisting of words, no?

I understand people wanting to use spreadsheets to find possible optimal rotations or make gear choices, but when you start to say class x is better than class y because of them, without any other variables or mechanics, those spreadsheets are going to potentially mislead for a percentage of encounters in the game.

I suppose my question really is, if the former is what people are actually using the calculations for, why feel the need to then go on to paint a class as weaker or inferior? Particular those with standing or influence in the community. How does this help?

Tzeh Pesh.9508:

spoj.9672:

edit: Necro condi damage is weaker than other classes. Or is it outrageous to state the truth as well? Cant win with you people. Also nice of you to twist what i said into something completely different. Weaker than other classes =/ terrible at condi damage.

Aren’t blanket statements like this somewhat the issue here though?

Isn’t this to say that the condition necromancer is weaker than other classes on paper, in spreadsheets, in theory? I know people are saying we’ve never claimed otherwise, but then on the other hand to go and simply call it the truth without any disclaimer or caveat to that could lead to perception issues, twisting of words, no?

I understand people wanting to use spreadsheets to find possible optimal rotations or make gear choices, but when you start to say class x is better than class y because of them, without any other variables or mechanics, those spreadsheets are going to potentially mislead for a percentage of encounters in the game.

I suppose my question really is, if the former is what people are actually using the calculations for, why feel the need to then go on to paint a class as weaker or inferior? Particular those with standing or influence in the community. How does this help?

Simply, sometimes the truth hurts. You can’t blame the truth for it.

Imo the problem is not spreadsheets or anything like that, it’s that there is so much more emphasis on builds than the skill if the player. That simple change in thought would change so much.

(In reference to Tzeh Pesh) Exactly, blanket statements get thrown around way too much and then when pushed for the variance in damage, spreadsheet numbers are said or nothing at all. How much weaker is Necro condi vs a Engineer / Guardian / Warrior etc in game? IF we are talking 20k vs 10k that’s a giant difference, if it’s more like a 1k difference that’s not a huge deal.

Tzeh Pesh.9508:

Aren’t blanket statements like this somewhat the issue here though?

When its true, no. Condi Necro’s entire max DPS can be outdone by just burning from the better condi builds, its also outdone by basically every power build in group settings. So in the context the blanket is true.

Condi Necro does much better in PvP/solo play because of how its conditions work, but when its just about raw damage, which is all that’s important when you consider condi necro vs other condi builds in a group PvE setting, we lose hard.

Isn’t condi necro good for FoTM 60+ because of Epidemic?

Arantheal.7396:

lots of words

It would be kind of cool if you received a response, as you walked through the entire thought process behind how spreadsheeting works and how it might be applied to various complex scenarios. Unfortunately, I doubt you’re going to get a response.

And if you do, I bet it uses hit phrases such as “fake math”, “DPS uptime”, and “REAL DPS”.

Bhawb.7408:

When its true, no. Condi Necro’s entire max DPS can be outdone by just burning from the better condi builds, its also outdone by basically every power build in group settings. So in the context the blanket is true.

Can be outdone, or is always out done though?

I admit that I’m very much at the casual end of the player pool, but I would have thought there were some high enough armor targets in the game somewhere that a condition necromancer could out damage power builds? Or similar to the example in the video where ground targeted skills gave an advantage against a stealthed enemy, where a necromancer’s play style could be preferred? Say where enemies are immune to burning? Or where epidemic can be used to spread conditions to the maximum number of targets?

I don’t know, happy to be corrected, but just “its the truth” and “its a definite fact” seems to be very hard to say given all the variables and mechanics in the game.

Bhawb.7408:

Condi Necro’s entire max DPS can be outdone by just burning from the better condi builds, its also outdone by basically every power build in group settings.

I do like to be able to switch from power to condition depending on what I feel like playing, but I’ve always felt let-down by our condition builds compared to the power builds.
I feel like everything I do is so slow, both ramp-up but also casting most of the condition skills themselves, e.g. epidemic which is a “take advantage of the moment”-skill, after the 1s cast that “moment” is almost gone (corrupt boon feels better to use, with its 1/2s cast time).
Even when I do get a lot of time to ramp-up my damage, it still doesn’t feel very impressive.
Perhaps we should create a thread with suggestions of how to improve our condition builds? Or maybe there already is one, I might have missed it in that case :P

The problem here is that most people look at the classes theoretical max dps and assume “oh class X can do 25k dps max, and class Y can do 14kdps max”, and dont take into account that class Y has mechanics that allow it to achieve say 12kdps much easier than class X’s mechanics for the same 12kdps.

Yesterday for example I did a fractal with a guardian zerker, my necro is a zerker too with spite/soul reaping/reaper, and while I was eating the damage thrown at me pretty easily and doing a ton of damage, the guy was downed quite a lot of times. You might say he was a noob, but that’s the thing some classes have more forgiving mechanics than others. So while one class might have a theoretical max dps much much higher than that of another one, the translation to the game is completely different due to game mechanics. This is not wow, where you can’t dodge, you have healers and tanks and don’t need to be as reactive.

Until more people start doing what Nemesis is doing, which is creating scenarios in game and getting real data vs theoretical, the theoretical data is worth nothing. I don’t understand the problem of spoj and others regarding this… scientists do it all the time, confront the theory and theoretical numbers with experimental data.

Cogbyrn.7283:

Arantheal.7396:

lots of words

It would be kind of cool if you received a response, as you walked through the entire thought process behind how spreadsheeting works and how it might be applied to various complex scenarios. Unfortunately, I doubt you’re going to get a response.

And if you do, I bet it uses hit phrases such as “fake math”, “DPS uptime”, and “REAL DPS”.

Him dodging my point is answer enough.^^
And for the avid reader it might help to understand how spreadsheets work in detail.

JoaoFA.8475:

Until more people start doing what Nemesis is doing, which is creating scenarios in game and getting real data vs theoretical, the theoretical data is worth nothing. I don’t understand the problem of spoj and others regarding this… scientists do it all the time, confront the theory and theoretical numbers with experimental data.

The problem is that there are no precise instruments for measuring DPS in-game. You have to fudge it by “knowing” how much health something has, using stopwatches, reviewing video, etc. Collecting data is difficult in this game, and when you add human error to the data collection/calculation, you’re back to estimates anyway.

The game needs a damage meter.

Tzeh Pesh.9508:

Can be outdone, or is always out done though

The burning that they stack faster than we stack our damaging conditions out damages our entire build, not including the extra conditions and direct damage they do. Necromancers have literally one of the worst condition damage builds in the game when it comes to raw damage.

Tzeh Pesh.9508:

I admit that I’m very much at the casual end of the player pool, but I would have thought there were some high enough armor targets in the game somewhere that a condition necromancer could out damage power builds? Or similar to the example in the video where ground targeted skills gave an advantage against a stealthed enemy, where a necromancer’s play style could be preferred? Say where enemies are immune to burning? Or where epidemic can be used to spread conditions to the maximum number of targets?

TL;DR no, there isn’t a group situation in the game where condi Necro is good. There are niche spots (solo) where it is better than power necro, but you could also just play one of the other condition builds not on Necro that deal double our damage.

Cogbyrn.7283:

The game needs a damage meter.

this.
If any dev has made its way trough all the salt spilled by me (sorry, but that’s how I am) and others, please notify that the implementation of a dmg meter would improve the community A LOT.

In the beginning it was stated that dmg meters would lead to more elitism, but now that we have 1 group of min-maxers who use spreadsheets in order to come up with effective builds, and a vast majority of people not being able to understand the purpose of spreadsheets and actually go after other players and harrass them for the class they’re playing, this can only be solved by allowing us to effectively gather data of classes ingame performance.

This would
a) allow us to pinpoint balancing issues between classes within the PvE side of things.
b) allow the meta to work with way more accurate numbers, and while that wouldn’t necessarily change our builds, it would help us showcasing that there are many viable options next to the meta as well
c) over time end the harassment of non-meta players since the community can acknowledge that the dps difference between classes is way smaller than current numbers suggest.

Side-effects would be that
a) Individual players get a way more direct feedback about their performance, helping them to improve it.
b) In case the results can be shared ingame, it would allow people to not only brag with their skins, but their actual skill by out-dps’ing each other over and over again.
c) Again, in case the results can be shared ingame, people could prove that they perform exceptionally well on the class they’re playing, resulting in better organized elitis guilds, and less class-specific harassment.

Keep in mind that top-gear can be obtained rather easily in Gw2, so unlike other MMO’s players would not be forced into a endless grind to keep up with the dps standards dictated by the last raid-tier "cough*WoW*cough*, but still could follow up within weeks, even as entirely new player.

Yes, there would also negative tradeoffs, like lfg’s suddenly asking for certain dps instead of AP…
But then again, farming AP can be a month-long grind, while the needed dps can be achieved by anyone determined enough to learn his class within days or weeks…

any peeps play for fun ? or is stats that matters ? kitten reaper is fun.

I try to avoid blanket statements as much as possible these days. But regarding condi necro. I felt that was so obvious it was ok. :P

You can see it on spreadsheets but you can also see it in game really easily. Ive barely touched engi but on my first time playing condi engi i was already doing more condi damage than ive ever seen condi necro do. And that was with disastrous rotations and pathetic general play. Its true that playing condi engi to its maximum is very difficult. But even playing it really suboptimally yields very high output.

Cogbyrn.7283:

JoaoFA.8475:

Until more people start doing what Nemesis is doing, which is creating scenarios in game and getting real data vs theoretical, the theoretical data is worth nothing. I don’t understand the problem of spoj and others regarding this… scientists do it all the time, confront the theory and theoretical numbers with experimental data.

The problem is that there are no precise instruments for measuring DPS in-game. You have to fudge it by “knowing” how much health something has, using stopwatches, reviewing video, etc. Collecting data is difficult in this game, and when you add human error to the data collection/calculation, you’re back to estimates anyway.

The game needs a damage meter.

Not at all. All this does is completely verify the theorized maximum DPS when those values are determined.

Even if this kind of thing would debunk current evaluation, someone will just compose a build that realistically performs better and prove it with this metric. Now you have the same problem, AND it’s verified through actual gameplay.

What people fail to recognize is that there will under all circumstances ALWAYS be a meta. A game can be figured out. Checkers, an arguably simple game, has a meta. Chess, a complex game, also has a meta. In fact, checkers has been objectively figured out with an objectively best-possible moveset.

The reality of the matter – and part of an important aspect of game theory – is that optimization will always occur. There is no way to do this unless either the path to the solution is deterministic and absolute – I.E., you watch the game play itself through a series of pre-determined actions which have no means of changing (the game is no longer by definition a game), or all actions affecting the path from start to terminating states of the game are completely random (I.E., your auto attack does anything from 0 to the maximum value allowable by the programming schemes used to create the game itself.

There is no such thing as truly abolishing optimization efforts or even the ability to optimize. This can only be done if the state space for what’s allowable is infinite, which is a literally impossible thing to do when confined by the limits of physics and the fundamentals of computer architecture and computer science.

So the stance of abolishing a meta is fundamentally flawed. The only way to disperse the use of a common strategy is to make it not usable in all states by explicitly preventing a strategy from being used. That said, this merely creates a sub-optimization scheme on the problem space for that particular problem, solving genuinely nothing and in turn creating the same exact problems. This is why the “trinity” ideology (fixed scheme) is flawed as a solution to solving any kind of “meta” existing within a game. Period. This is completely irrefutable when arguing against the use of optimization.

The only true “class balance” is to just create a constant flux of imbalance to make everything take the spotlight at one point, and rotate this infinitely until everyone is satisfied with a given state of “balance” at one point in time.

Only having really played Guild Wars, how are damage meters handled in other MMOs?

Can imagine it would open up a whole new can of worms in this discussions depending on if or how damage gained from shared modifiers like boons or debuffs applied by other group members are calculated and who they’re credited to.

Bhawb.7408:

The burning that they stack faster than we stack our damaging conditions out damages our entire build, not including the extra conditions and direct damage they do. Necromancers have literally one of the worst condition damage builds in the game when it comes to raw damage.

Can you link a video that shows an engineer consistently getting burns that high? I have looked around since I’ve heard people make that statement but haven’t found it, maybe I suck at searching but even in guides for condition engi I don’t see that many stacks.

Bhawb.7408:

Tzeh Pesh.9508:

Aren’t blanket statements like this somewhat the issue here though?

When its true, no. Condi Necro’s entire max DPS can be outdone by just burning from the better condi builds, its also outdone by basically every power build in group settings. So in the context the blanket is true.

Condi Necro does much better in PvP/solo play because of how its conditions work, but when its just about raw damage, which is all that’s important when you consider condi necro vs other condi builds in a group PvE setting, we lose hard.

This is exactly what i mean when i say people who have absolutely no idea about the class, keep teaching others about what is what.

I shouldn’t even mention how many times i have been ridiculed by this particular individual for my statements.

Say Bhawb… you just said “Condi necro’s entire max DPS can be outdone by justburning from the better condi build”… kind of vague…

How about you tell me what’s the condition damage stat and condition duration of the build in question, as well as the rotation and the max DPS said rotation can achieve… then tell me the same for “the better condi builds”.
Oh… let’s also take into consideration small things like ramp-up time and if it’s sustained or burst stacking.

You’ve always made statements and told others what is what… i wonder if you have any idea what you are actually talking about, really… tell me the values…

People say i am not looking for a constructive debate and i ignore criticism or questions.

It took me an insane amount of time to make those videos, and now… what… i’m suppose to personally contradict every single person who decides to make claims out of their imagination on things they have 0 knowledge on.

This is ridiculous… and i know that as soon as i leave this thread it’s going to get a lot worse.

Altoid.9104:

Can you link a video that shows an engineer consistently getting burns that high? I have looked around since I’ve heard people make that statement but haven’t found it, maybe I suck at searching but even in guides for condition engi I don’t see that many stacks.

Burning deals about 3x the damage of bleeding or poison. Meaning an engineer who can keep up say 10 burning is dealing the same damage as a Necromancer who could theoretically keep up 30 bleeding/poison. Now, will they maintain that high of burning? Obviously not, nor will a Necromancer maintain very high bleeding/poison.

Its likely exaggerating to say that it actually outdamages everything from a PvE context, though its worth mentioning that it is actually true in PvP where the ability to burst 25 burning (very doable) definitely beats out Necromancers ~12 bleed “burst”, but they still way out damage us in a condi context. A large part of that is Curses being really bad though, and the fact that Necromancer having the same condition damage in PvE would be insanely toxic in PvP.

Nemesis.8593:

People say i am not looking for a constructive debate and i ignore criticism or questions.

It took me an insane amount of time to make those videos, and now… what… i’m suppose to personally contradict every single person who decides to make claims out of their imagination on things they have 0 knowledge on.

Of course i ignore those things… this really is getting tiresome… it’s like there’s quite a few people here who just say what ever goes through their mind at that moment…

Nemesis, common please, I’m not looking for you to contradict me for better or worse.

Please re-read this and this comment and give me a proper response. I really think there are some misconceptions about what the numbers you come up with actually are representative of and serious issues with your attitude towards the people you label “elitists”.

Arantheal.7396:

Cogbyrn.7283:

The game needs a damage meter.

this.

I used to be a stalwart DPS meter hater but now I can see and agree it’s necessary, but not likely for the reasons that people typically say.

I believe we need damage meters so ideas of what is ‘good and bad’ professions can be debunked. I think if you’re going to be discriminated against because of your build/profession/whatever … as least let it be based on truth instead of what some irrelevant calculation from some overzealous Excel wizard tells us it is.

The upside is this … a tool demonstrating DPS by Anet’s own hand is very powerful for players to have when discussing the relevant range of damage they get from various builds; it does serve as a platform for a discussion about DPS balancing, etc… If we all work from the same information, then the arguments about what the relevant information actually is ceases.

Bhawb.7408:

Altoid.9104:

Can you link a video that shows an engineer consistently getting burns that high? I have looked around since I’ve heard people make that statement but haven’t found it, maybe I suck at searching but even in guides for condition engi I don’t see that many stacks.

Burning deals about 3x the damage of bleeding or poison. Meaning an engineer who can keep up say 10 burning is dealing the same damage as a Necromancer who could theoretically keep up 30 bleeding/poison. Now, will they maintain that high of burning? Obviously not, nor will a Necromancer maintain very high bleeding/poison.

From my experience I maintain 20-30 bleeding, anywhere from 5-9 poison (with bursts of 30+), 7-9 torment and chill (also damages). This is sustain, not burst excluding the 30+ poison stacks. So I call BS on your statement, can you provide a video showing a engineer sustaining high uptime on burns? Enough to actually deal more than necro condition.

Tzeh Pesh.9508:

Only having really played Guild Wars, how are damage meters handled in other MMOs?

Can imagine it would open up a whole new can of worms in this discussions depending on if or how damage gained from shared modifiers like boons or debuffs applied by other group members are calculated and who they’re credited to.

I haven’t played the most popular MMO’s with DPS meters but in those games, the thinking tends to be different around DPS because most of those games have trinity (Healer, Tank, DPS) so the expectations to deliver damage are different for classes specific to each role.

Since we don’t have that here, I believe it’s the common expectation that everyone can reach (reasonably) similar levels of DPS. Problem I believe is that though the DPS calculations are not relevant to actual game situation, they are correct by coincidence that SOME professions fall short on DPS, at best only in specific situations, at worst, consistently all the time.

While there is a case for arguing that classes that fall behind in raw DPS bring other things (buffs, debuffs, etc..) and some even buff themselves so their damage increases. Unfortunately, even these ‘non-DPS’ tools aren’t regarded equally; some are self, some are teamwide.

Ultimately, the lack of trinity and intrinsic defenses only lends to exaggerate this because now you get 1) a system where players expect all classes to not only have relatively equal damage, and 2) where more ambitious players are concerned, a situation where players have no reason to not play optimally, i.e., no reason to NOT play the meta, other than exercising their own personal preference.

spoj.9672:

And i dont know how many times ive said to him thats not what they were for. But hes refusing to accept that. :P

I don’t understand… I think what you are trying to say is that you are using spreadsheet math as a basis of comparison with the caveat that none of this is real but lets use something as baseline so we have an idea. Ok fair enough, this gives you something to contrast other skills/stats/classes, and lets u say this is better than that, because look hypothetically this does x dps and that does y.

The counter argument presented is that the basis of comparison that you are using is inadequate because it doesn’t account for most of what you see in the game, it’s a stationary target that just sits there, doesn’t fight back and allows you to do everything you want it to do to it. It also doesn’t account for different armors and buffs the boss has, doesn’t account for the boss actually fighting back requiring you to do something defensive (block, dodge, stability, whatever).

So the problem clearly is… the counter argument presents a very glaring hole in your comparisons because you said x is better than y. But in this boss fight x cannot go through the damage rotation you theory crafted to equate the same DPS you calculated because of his armor, his buffs, the fact that he goes invuln or stealth or whatever. In comparison, the other build y would have actual higher dps because he uses for example condi damage, armor doesnt mean anything for him and the boss still takes damage in stealth. So your theory crafting just took a poop all over class y and said your class x is better in this situation, when this is just not true…

Enter nemesis’ argument, every fight is different there are different builds that are better at different fights, don’t make overarching comments like “this is better because this does blaaaah damage” when in reality this just isnt true… I dont see what’s there to even argue here… what am I missing? I’m honestly trying to understand the debate

Tiggers.3890:

Enter nemesis’ argument, every fight is different there are different builds that are better at different fights, don’t make overarching comments like “this is better because this does blaaaah damage” when in reality this just isnt true… I dont see what’s there to even argue here… what am I missing? I’m honestly trying to understand the debate

The only thing you’re missing is that some people have an agenda; a group of people want you to play the meta, so they advertise it’s the best way to play, PERIOD. Even if they know it’s not ideal for EVERY situation, they don’t want you to stray from using it, fearing you’re going to learn something they haven’t told you. Sounds Conspiracy theory right? Ask yourself WHY someone who doesn’t know you or shouldn’t care about how you play the game WANTS you to play meta … doesn’t make sense until you realize there is an agenda here.

@Obtena, just take a look at a random build video by Nike (since he seems to be one of the people Nemesis has an issue with in particular). As far as I can tell he always makes it very clear that the builds he is advertising were design with optimized groups for speedy dungeon/fractal clears in mind. He never claims that his builds are ideal in every situation and I’m pretty sure none of the other DnT members that release build guides claim that either.

I’m not attacking the builds people are proposing; I’m attacking the idea that those builds are advertised by most people pushing meta as the optimal builds for everything when they aren’t. Nike’s fault or the fault of theorycrafters before him? I don’t care to pick fights with people; we know people will just run with whatever they want to believe though. My beef with these calcs are that they are so far from what actually happens ingame they have almost no value in talking about them.

Am I to believe that even in the most ideal speed run, optimized situation, Engi does 17K DPS (or whatever it is now) as I’ve been told in Nike’s vid? OK, show me. I hear Revenant can do 25K DPS? Shouldn’t be that hard to demonstrate that even 80% of that can be achieved or say where it’s relevant .. or are the numbers actually HIGHLY dependent on the situation … so much so that they are rendered absurd or irrelevant for most gameplay? Almost no mechanics of any fight are considered. How can any comparisons of builds or absolute DPS values from any of the calculations where these mechanics aren’t considered be taken seriously?

How much sense does it make for ANYONE choose (or discriminate against) a class for an encounter based on these ridiculous calculations when they are not reflective to what happens in the game? THIS is what happens and it’s just stupid. Stop pushing these general meta builds when they don’t consider the mechanics of the game.

So what is their agenda, exactly? This “agenda” keeps getting mentioned. Are the people who do spreadsheets and caveat their data when they provide builds getting kickbacks from ANet for number of "followers? Do they have ticker tape in their respective rooms, giving updates on their build stock, seeing how their META Exchange is performing? Maybe as they read the tape, they are laughing together with cigars in their mouths while holding glasses of bourbon.

Or, I guess they are going through all of the effort to analyze and break down the rotations and potential of a class so they can show the meta that their class that they enjoy most isn’t worth bringing to their speed runs?

Or do people actually believe the spreadsheets are falsified just to give certain classes a bad rep?

Why does everyone think Necros are bad? A government conspiracy, apparently.

Thanks, Obama.

If you guys would get together and work to do the math together in a standardized way you could remove the animosity going around.

this drama as it were shouldn’t even exist from either point of view.The big issues here are community disrespect and mistreatment of other players.

so go on keep flinging mud at each other and get nothing done or work together and find the real way to allow everyone to play the game for fun.

NovaanVerdiano.6174:

The one to Rule.2593:

NovaanVerdiano.6174:

The one to Rule.2593:

NovaanVerdiano.6174:

The one to Rule.2593:

spoj.9672:

Spreadsheets are not why people think necro is bad. The reality of the classes previous lack of utility was the reason. Had nothing to do with dps and it had nothing to do with spreadsheets. You dont calculate utility on spreadsheets.

Maybe those players should rely less on teammates preventing them from dying and rely more on their own skill then there wouldn’t be this stupid persecution of classes. Honestly, I’ve played every class in the game quite a bit. I don’t find necromancers lacking at all.

“Prevent them from dying” what the kitten lmao
It’s not about people relying on others not to die, it’s about bringing useful tools to the party like fields, blasts, reflects/projectile destruction, unique buffs etc. so that the party can achieve higher efficiency and a smoother run.
That being said, yes, Necromancers got better over time but back then we didn’t have as much to bring.

So what? rely on yourself and not everyone else. Rely on what YOU can bring to a team not what everyone else can. Necro does bring things to the table so I’m not really sure where all this is coming from. We have projectile destruction, party wide life siphon Great dps and guess what? we don’t have to rely on ele’s or ps warriors for our own might generation. Aoe blinds for team support in bosses where people are dying all the time. Transfusion etc. Not to even mention boonstripping and team condi cleanses.

Our support is different, but it does not make it bad by any means.

Sorry come again?
Why in hell would I >not< expect my party to bring things? If I want to rely on myself I solo.
Besides, I especially mentioned that Necros didn’t have much BACK THEN, because we surely didn’t have CPC, leech and other things in their current form months or years ago, which is the time that stigma is coming from in the first place. DPS is also okay, not great. Other classes outperform us.
Yes, even back then Necro was capable of some nifty tricks, the issue however was that it wasn’t as easily accessible or was plagued by other issues when another class was able to do this in a much easier fashion. One of the reasons Necro isn’t optimal and, back then, much less viable. Now we’re finally closing this gap, though I doubt we’ll ever see a spot in optimal party compositions except things are going to change in one way or another.

If you’re dying all the time in a party, chances are it’s probably you being bad and not your party, people really need to stop blaming everyone else when they fail at things. And quite honestly, if you aren’t going for world record runs, 2-3 minutes extra on a dungeon path is no big deal.

Now that dungeons are dying, the only real place we’ll see the " meta" bs that forces us to play classes we don’t even like are going to be in raids. Completely discriminating against classes is not good for the health of this game. I agree there are inherent flaws with necromancers, but there are flaws to any class.

Why are you so fixated on people dying? No one ever said they’re dying left and right.

Also, it is your fault for letting yourself get discriminated in a godkitten videogame, when the solution the your “issue” would’ve been “open own lfg” or “join a guild”. As a Necro main over three years, I never had any issues. Don’t join groups which are looking for specific things when you can’t fulfill the requirements and you won’t have issues, really.

It’s my fault for "letting myself get discriminated " ? do you even read the things you type before you actually type them? That statement was probably the single most idiotic thing i’ve read on these forums.

That said, your posts about groups and guilds is rather irrelevant. Half the time I played necro when I got into dungeons saying things like “Lfg p1” and nothing else mind you, I’d get insta kicked for playing necro before i even joined the instance. Playing in a guild with friends is all well and good, but it doesn’t solve the problem it only serves to ignore it and pretend that it’s not really happening to people.

I don’t think there is an agenda, I have a hard time imaging Spoj or Nike saying that necros are subpar at <x> for some evil reason to bring the class down while putting in work testing builds for a game I assume they love to play. I just think that the spreadsheet stuff needs to be reigned in while letting in game numbers take center stage.

Obtena.7952:

Am I to believe that even in the most ideal speed run, optimized situation, Engi does 17K DPS (or whatever it is now) as I’ve been told in Nike’s vid? OK, show me. I hear Revenant can do 25K DPS? Shouldn’t be that hard to demonstrate that even 80% of that can be achieved or say where it’s relevant .. or are the numbers actually HIGHLY dependent on the situation … so much so that they are rendered absurd or irrelevant for most gameplay? Almost no mechanics of any fight are considered. How can any comparisons of builds or absolute DPS values from any of the calculations where these mechanics aren’t considered be taken seriously?

What else is possible? Ofc these calculated dps are very “theoretical”. But you get an impression of the potential of a build.

A realistic test would require huge amounts of work:
-you would have to form a team which keeps all buffs up. Missing buffs will give wrong results.
-you need to repeat the test several times to get an average value
-you need to do this for every boss ingame for every build

Your results would be a huge list of bosses and builds.

Lupi:
- guardian condi build A: X dps
- guardian condi build B: Y dps
-guardian power build
-warrior power build
- …..
Mossman:
- guardian condi build A: X dps
- guardian condi build B: Y dps
-guardian power build
-warrior power build
- …..

Its way easier to give out a “raw dps” value. For both sides: players and testers.
But players have to use their brains. An enemy immune against condi-damage (or with condi remove) will cause lower dps for condi builds. Enemies moving around a lot or forcing players to dodge often will favour condi-builds or ranged builds. Etc.
Players have to figure that out themselves. Those dps values can give you a rough impression, nothing more.

Cogbyrn.7283:

The game needs a damage meter.

Absolutely not. We have enough discussions without it, we don’t need more discrimination. Because that’s what damage meters brings. I played many MMOs enough with that kind of attitude of trying to reach max damage and nothing more. Guild Wars 2 is about fun, or at least it is trying, and so far I’m ok with it.

Bhawb.7408:

Burning deals about 3x the damage of bleeding or poison. Meaning an engineer who can keep up say 10 burning is dealing the same damage as a Necromancer who could theoretically keep up 30 bleeding/poison. Now, will they maintain that high of burning? Obviously not, nor will a Necromancer maintain very high bleeding/poison.

A Necromancer can stacks and keep 30 stacks of bleed, even more. However with the latest condition duration changes (and sceptre) it’s not possible (or useful) any more since we dropped a bit of bleed for more torment.

I always played Malice builds and what I’ve seen is that the Necromancer is maybe the slowest (maybe not any more since latest Sceptre changes) condition applier but the best when keeping them. So, as I’ve seen, an Engineer can spike 10x or maybe more burning but then they decay fast, while a Necromancer can maintain Bleed and Poison (and now Torment) stacks more easily.

Nemesis.8593:

..the differences in DPS of the same build, played by the same person… with the same team comp… based on encounter, are so great… that it literally renders all math spreadsheets meaningless even for comparison purposes. …

Math itself is exact and cannot be wrong, however you have to neglect certain aspects and make assumptions in order to simply the math. The conclusion people draw based on this math can be wrong, because these people are not within the boundaries of the assumptions (Human error) .

I assume you would agree that most of the current spreadsheets are complete enough to give the exact damage per second of direct damage dealt by auto attacking Target Golem (Indestructible). But next you say that when everything remains the same except the encounter, that this math is wrong. However if you insert the new armor value and assume no downtime due to stuns or blocks, then this spreadsheet should be exact for direct damage until the time you die. Ofcourse the spreadsheet now only works for the case where you do not avoid damage, but that does not make the spreadsheet wrong (except for scholar runes and some traits).

If you want to start a discussion based on spreadsheet damage calculations, then you should give a very specific spreadsheet and a very specific goal you try to achieve with that spreadsheet. Based on that it should be possible to expand the spreadsheet to make it complete.

An example goal could consist of:
Input:
Character stats (may be variable)
Target health assumed infinite for direct damage (power damage)
Target armor
Necromancer Dhuumfire build (Easy to implement rotation)
Dagger as weapon.
Rotation: Use skill 1 AND go in reaper shroud when life force is full.
Damage uptime (variable) (simplification for dodging, healing, blocks, CC)
The damage the player recieves (as function of time and for given amount of armor)
The healing the player recieves from outside.
Buffs and debuffs provided by party (if any).

Output:
Damage per second averaged
Ramp up time for conditions averaged
Optional:
Scholar uptime estimation

Arcades Saboth.5139:

Cogbyrn.7283:

The game needs a damage meter.

Absolutely not. We have enough discussions without it, we don’t need more discrimination. Because that’s what damage meters brings. I played many MMOs enough with that kind of attitude of trying to reach max damage and nothing more. Guild Wars 2 is about fun, or at least it is trying, and so far I’m ok with it.

If discrimination happens because of damage meters, then at the very least it is empirical. You’d rather the current situation, where random players discriminate based on someone else’s theory? Where you have no tools to demonstrate your ability, so anything anyone says in-game cannot be disproven with cold, hard gameplay?

I’ve played MMOs enough to initially think that damage meters caused harm, and now I’m full circle and think they are a necessity for any sort of developed PvE. Nothing helps you solidify a rotation and better understand how to improve than all of the data a damage meter can provide. Breakdowns on what abilities did the most damage, what the ratios of damage are between each ability, and how other people’s damage breaks down as well. If someone does more damage than you on the same class/spec, you can analyze what they’ve done to see where, if anywhere, the disparity lies. Maybe they just happened to crit more over the course of a fight, but maybe something in their rotation sneaks out some additional damage.

I’ve also had really good, healthy conversations come directly from a damage meter. In WoW after a LFR run, a player whispered me asking how I did as much damage as I did with a Demo Warlock. We started chatting about the talents, “rotation”, gearing. All in all it felt good to help someone, and a meter helped them realize that they weren’t reaching the potential they wanted to reach.

I don’t subscribe to eliminating the possibility of damage meters out of fear of elitists. I prefer the idea of putting them in their place with the truth in-game.

Obtena.7952:

<snip>

First, I’m not saying YOU attack those people, but Nemesis clearly does which becomes very evident if you watch his three latest videos.

Secondly, I understand that you, as many others, might have a problem with theoretical numbers being advertised as something you’ll most definitely see in game. But as far as I can tell, none of the people making these spreadsheets claim that.

Let’s take the numbers from obal’s revenant guide since you already brought them up.

If you pay attention to the DPS graph he shows in his video guide, you’ll notice that those ominous “25k DPS” only account for the opening burst (first ~9-10s) with the rotation he suggests for his build (Glint + Shiro – Activate all facets except elite -> Elemental Blast -> Assassin Stance -> Enchanted Daggers -> Impossible Odds -> Sword Auto) and only under most optimal conditions presumably. After this initial burst DPS drops down and normalizes at ~18-20k depending on which version of the build we are looking at. He also states that auto-attacking with sword will net you ~15k DPS, again, under most optimal conditions presumably. This doesn’t sound all that unreasonable considering that Brazil determined ~12.5k DPS using his method of calculation for sword auto-attack (in the PvP lobby I should mention, so the stats are lower than in PvE).

People really should understand that those numbers are just theoretical and should only use them for theoretical purposes (refining your own damage rotation e.g.) and should NOT expect to actually see numbers that high in the game.

I agree with Brazil that e.g. obal doesn’t do the best job at communicating these things, but all you really have to do is just use a bit of common sense, no? Why is it so hard for some people to acknowledge that these numbers just are what they are and leave it be (unless, ofc, you really think people deliberately promote “fake math”)? And why should it be e.g. obal’s fault if people do NOT understand this and then kick others from their groups because they think “hurrdurr Revs do 25k DPS consistently and your class does not!!”?

I really don’t understand what the problem with “spreadsheet DPS” is, as long as you are aware of the fact that it is just that.

Edit: fixed typos/grammar and checked back on Brazil’s numbers. Here is the link to his video on this matter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xR8WPHovXTs
If you haven’t already, you should really watch it, it’s a very good video.

Cogbyrn.7283:

If discrimination happens because of damage meters, then at the very least it is empirical. You’d rather the current situation, where random players discriminate based on someone else’s theory? Where you have no tools to demonstrate your ability, so anything anyone says in-game cannot be disproven with cold, hard gameplay?

I would like to have personal DPS meters. The only one who could see it would be me and I shouldn’t be able to see others DPS meter. That way you could still gauge yourself and do accurate tests but you wouldn’t be able to discriminate in groups.

Because even if the DPS meter is accurate, it still doesn’t show the whole story in a dungeon. What I mean by that is, if I get attacked in a dungeon while my necro buddy isn’t, chances are he will have a higher DPS uptime. Some builds/classes have different DPS depending on how long the combat takes, if I am allowed to use 2 Lich Forms my DPS will be inflated. If we are spread out and the mesmer doesn’t hit me with time warp, my DPS will be lower than theirs. So just because I would have low DPS in dungeon group X, I may have the highest DPS in dungeon group Y. That’s why I don’t want to see “leaderboard DPS” in groups. Because people WILL discriminate with it.

But personal DPS meter, yes please.

@Cogbyrn
I agree with what you say: a DPS meter would help a sane person to improve himself however my experiences was only abuses. You are a little behind? You are kicked out. WoW comunity was a bit toxic with this, Guild Wars 2 ones is following but still not there.
To be honest I was rarely kicked from parties due to being a Necromancer and so far only a couple of times in three years due to my mistakes (well, it happens). Most of the time I proved myself worthy so other people never complained, maybe sometimes I even changed idea of someone. Is not that kittenomeone describe.
I found a lot of people that are asking a zerk build so I had to switch to it but kicking because being a Necro it’s more a thing of the past.

Arantheal.7396:

Nemesis.8593:

I knew that if i am ever going to continue making guides to builds that actually work without icebow, and advertise real DPS numbers in them… without people going “pffff… so small… sinister engineer does 20K”… i must first break the false “berserker meta”.

I have done that…

Except you didn’t.
The meta started experimenting sinister builds & condi-dmg in general as soon as a-net lifted the stack cap & introduced sinister stats.
That was way before you even released your first clip in your trilogy.
And now that they’ve revamped condi-duration into a numeric value, while introducing Viper stats, builds are in a revamp process once again.

You did not cause any of this, if anything you’re being part of that motion, once you actually release builds that are not meant for PvP. Until then you just repeat what we already have known before you came along.
Welp, apart from using a dps calculation model that shows nothing but what you – you alone – will do with a given build.

So, I want you to consider the following points, and tell me if you agree with them, and if you not, tell me why you disagree with them:
-disclaimer, none of these questions care about critical damage at this point. This comes later, to the end.
1.) The game’s engine uses [on the wiki] documented formulas to calculate power & condition damage ingame for each skill / ticking conditions. True or not?
2.) If the toughness values of any given creature are inserted into the power-dmg-formula, it will give out the accurate dmg-range (since weapon-strength is partly RNG) of any given skill, BEFORE applying buffs. True or not?
3.) If that dmg-range is altered by -33%, it accurately reflects the influence of protection on a mob. True or not?
4.) If that dmg-range is altered by +25% it accurately reflects the influence of vulnerability on a mob. True or not?
5.) If the dmg-range of a skill is divided by its full animation duration (pre-cast & aftercast included), added with the full condition-damage (duration x stack.amount), you can determine its Burst dps. True or not?
6.) If its determined burst dps is higher than the dps of your AA, you will prefer to use the burst over the AA. True or not?
7.) If you add the cd of a skill to its pre & aftercast duration, you can determine its full cycle-duration. True or not?
8.) If you know the burst-dps, the full cycle duration & the full animation duration of each skill a class offers, you can engineer a chained segment of burst-skills, while filling the gaps with your hardest hitting, available AA. True or not?

If you do not disagree up until this point, we agree that rotations can be engineered entirely theoretically within a spreadsheet.

9.) It is possible to estimate a boss’ toughness value by hitting him 100 times (or more), calculating the average hit-dmg, and then resolving the – in the wiki documented – dmg formula to give out toughness, while inserting the previously calculated average hit-dmg, the power value of the build used, and the weapon-strength of the used item. Further present toughness can be compensated by increasing the claculated average hit dmg by 33% before inserting it in the resolved dmg-formula. True or not?
10.) If the calculated toughness value gets applicate to the dmg-calculation of any given skill, it will accurately return the true hit-dmg-range of that skill on the same boss ingame (in case of irremovable perma protection, after reducing it by 33%). True or not?

If you agree with me up until here, we agree on raw dps being determinable for each boss specifically, just by a spreadsheet.

11.) All bosses have skills with specific cd’s. True or not?
12.) A dodge takes 0.75 seconds. True or not?
13.) If you identify the skill of a boss that apply greater dmg than you can outheal them, then their overall cd (actual cd + precast + aftercast), determines the time-interval in which you loose 0.75s dps. True or not?
14.) You can calculate the percentile dps loss if you know how often you have to doge within your own rotation. True or not?
15.) Invulnerability-phases of bosses follow a determinable pattern, be it by a given skill-rotation, a HP-trigger, or simply by the cd of the invulnerability-spending skill. True or not?
16.) Group-stuns, like given from the colossus fractal’s final boss can be treated as “invulnerability-phase”. True or not?
17.) The existence of said pattern allows for developing boss-specific formulas that give out the rough percentile vulnerability-time to dmg, which can be used as further, dmg-reducing percentile factor (F.E. determined dmg-uptime is ~50%, so power-dps gets reduced by ~50%). True or not?
18.) The kind of invulnerability is important to note, because some just become completely invulnerable/evade, and others still take hits with zero dmg, allowing for condi-application. True or not?
19.) Because of this behavior, condition dmg & power dmg uptime always must be calculated separately per skill. True or not?
20.) The combined dps loss from dodging & boss invulnerability phases can be utilized to determine your boss-specific dps-uptime. True or not?
21.) Calculating the final dps up until this point with crit-chance, crit-dmg, dmg-modifiers, and crit-related procs allows for accurate, boss-specific results. True or not?

If you agree with me up until this point, we both agree on builds being able to be compared in theoretical, boss-specific scenarios within boss-specific spreadsheets, coming up with dps conclusions that are very close, but still slightly above reality.

The rest-discrepancy to reality is caused by individual player-skill & therefore require mechanical perfection from a player wanting to achieve these numbers. Still the above described methods allow for coming up with builds that not only reflect very realistic numbers, but can be used to analyze a wide range of boss-encounters, without ever recording your dmg ingame (beyond probing the values for this build-process).

So if you (and others) think that this would be a valuable tool for theory-crafting, how about we stop dps-recording builds (and smash our head against each other about who has the best muscle-memory), but start recording boss-behavior to feed this more accurate (and more complex) kind of spreadsheets.

Keep in mind that the presence of healers (or passive healing within a build) influence which boss-attacks might need dodges or not anymore, while cc-caused breakbar stuns increase the dmg uptime directly, due to less dodges per rotation being required.
So when looking away from the individual build, but into the group comp, cc & healing become a lot more valuable as well.

So if you want to be constructive, start working on these spreadsheets, especially since raids will highly profit from a more in-depth analysis (once we know their boss-mechanics ofc).

Well combining the time you needed to write this post+creating a spreadsheet with all that info probably will take longer to do than actually killing bloomy/other bosses 100 times and adding up the combat log xD

How is his method flawed? What is better than taking in game dps values to check the theory dps that everyone tends to throw around and discriminate against classes? We just had someone in this thread make a crazy statement that Engineer burn alone outdamages a condi necro with absolutely nothing to back him up except some spreadsheet (specifically that and burn damage coefficients) he saw. That kind of thing is extremely normal and it doesn’t at all reflect what happens in game.

You can dislike nemesis for all the drama if you want, I have no problem with that (even though it caused lots of people to watch the video, myself included). However if you are going to call his method flawed I think that is pretty unfair considering results matter more than theory in a MMO, especially when theory is so far off what is actually happening in game.

Altoid.9104:

How is his method flawed? What is better than taking in game dps values to check the theory dps that everyone tends to throw around and discriminate against classes? We just had someone in this thread make a crazy statement that Engineer burn alone outdamages a condi necro with absolutely nothing to back him up except some spreadsheet (specifically that and burn damage coefficients) he saw. That kind of thing is extremely normal and it doesn’t at all reflect what happens in game.

You can dislike nemesis for all the drama if you want, I have no problem with that (even though it caused lots of people to watch the video, myself included). However if you are going to call his method flawed I think that is pretty unfair considering results matter more than theory in a MMO, especially when theory is so far off what is actually happening in game.

I am calling his means of expressing his findings flawed. If you can’t express yourself properly regardless of your message people will not listen nor should they.

Harper.4173:

Cogbyrn.7283:

Harper.4173:

Do not forget friend that your way of being has given you a reputation – and me and many others are actively discouraging people from listening to you or anything you have to say based on that reputation.

So while in some ways you might be effective – don’t forget that there will be people discrediting you now regardless of the validity of what you have to say.

You would try to discredit a valid argument, even if it is presented with appropriate humility and without all the “…” and silly claims, just because the argument has “Nemesis” next to it? Is that going to make you happy inside?

Seems like you are potentially setting yourself up to look pretty silly. It also seems like you want to be just like Nemesis, discounting what others say because of who they are, not because of what they say. Which is a bit ironic.

Personally I consider his way of approaching things immature and it would be a valid lesson for him to understand that what you say is just as important as how you say it.
He might be wrong or he might be right – but as long as he’s unpleasant then yes – I can discredit him regardless of what he’s actually saying.

In terms of Rhetoric his logos might be fine or not but his pathos and ethos are really really poor – why should he succeed then?

I would not have cared to discredit or convince people to not listen to him had he actually presented his findings in a decent and “with the appropriate humility” or whatever you want to call it.

His ways of presenting his arguments are the reason I’ve decided to do my best to work against him.

In a sense your last paragraph is true – if he can do it and it’s fine for him then it should also be fine when it happens to him, no?

I just think it’s odd that you are going to go out of your way to act just like him, specifically because you don’t like how he is acting. It’s like walking up to someone else’s crying baby and crying louder in its face.

I don’t think his behavior is fine, but I’m not going to change him. Neither are you. I just hope this is a publicity stunt of his to get youtube views, because it bugs me when people think themselves infallible. Especially when they don’t even feign understanding of the other side of the argument.

The best I can do is just casually point out where I think he’s being extremist (I would do the same if spreadsheet posts made declarations that I didn’t feel were appropriately supported), and let whoever reads all of these ridiculous posts decide for themselves.

Nemesis.8593:

Making false quotes is one of the worst forms of trolling, besides the insults.
Reported.

Look up, I fix’d it xD
Also, someone who accuses a wide range of people of intentional, mischievous lying, while calling the majority of other dumb and deluded should be very careful with what he points out as insult.
Still waiting on your “productive” participation in this thread.^^