Bounty Hunter Archive
Thread: Why not force jedis to follow the rules instead?
Leatherneck_of_Alderaan wrote:
TheMadCoder wrote:
Leatherneck_of_Alderaan wrote:
TheMadCoder wrote:
Again, there are people who suck on both sides, but I have heard no FACTS that a full template combatant will beat a full template defender 50% of the time, all things being equal.
Highly, highly doubtful. (this excludes "/offerride," "force run, "force cloak," house grinding," "house running, " "LOS exploits," and "Kashyyk /afk grinding," of course - These, of course, are reserved for the Jedi that don't stand to fight, so the numbers are surely HIGHLY screwed by this.)
BIG problem right there.
Not every full template is a defender. There are quite a few templates that have little to NO defender.
Yes, the Devs keep logs. Good ones at that. And THEY are the ones Tanks is reporting that feel that Jedi are close. That's my authority for citing. Where's yours?
Ummmm...
But that was the ENTIRE POINT of my post when I entered this horrendous thread:
***This wouldn't effect us against any other profession in the game, but would give most bounty hunters a chance again full template defenders...***
Again, there are lousy players and lousy templates, but don't tell me that full template defenders aren't the FOTM, full on, alpha, uber, 1.5x profession, because they sure as hell are.
They're not.
Cada_Kai wrote:
aekeem wrote:
Cada_Kai wrote:
aekeem wrote:
SPY-DER wrote:
+5 force defences per block ? your wanting more force defence then a master defender ? lol
you do speak english, right spy-der? dictionary.com is your friend for big words like irrelevant
TheMadCoder wrote:
(this numbers are irrelevent, but you get the general idea.)
Since you have to look for something to flame in every single post I thought I might point out that you are flaming the wrong person for not spelling correctly.
TheMadCoder made the spelling mistake not Spy-der.
If you are going to try and be the official forum spell checker then atleast get your target right before being an ass.
if you could comprehend what you read you'd notice the meaning of my post was not to point out the misspelling of irrelevant. i was pointing out that the numbers DIDN'T MATTER. hence the dictionary.com comment, suggesting maybe spy-der didn't understand the meaning of the word irrelevant. if someone misspells something i would recommend using the spell check included with the forums.
ok, Spy-der posted first.
Mad posted the reply.
Spyder never laid claim that the Numbers Didn't Matter.
You cannot find a decent argument so you pick apart every last detail. This has become you MO.
no actually mad posted first stating bhs should get bonuses that are applicable only against jedi and then threw out some random numbers but clearly stated the numbers were irrelevant, spy-der replies with "you would havemore defense than a mdefender" to which i replied "themadcoder stated the numbers didn't matter"
Leatherneck_of_Alderaan wrote:
They're not.
It's funny how all the Jedi trolls coming here don't really have a decent argument, do they? Anyway, there's far too much picking apart at grammer and spelling. Let's just go with the meaning of posts. Please? Pretty please with aDBed master defender on top?
Cada_Kai wrote:
aekeem wrote:
if you could comprehend what you read you'd notice the meaning of my post was not to point out the misspelling of irrelevant. i was pointing out that the numbers DIDN'T MATTER. hence the dictionary.com comment, suggesting maybe spy-der didn't understand the meaning of the word irrelevant. if someone misspells something i would recommend using the spell check included with the forums.
ok, Spy-der posted first.
Mad posted the reply.
Spyder never laid claim that the Numbers Didn't Matter.
You cannot find a decent argument so you pick apart every last detail. This has become you MO.
TheMadCoder wrote:
It's funny how all the Jedi trolls coming here don't really have a decent argument, do they? Anyway, there's far too much picking apart at grammer and spelling. Let's just go with the meaning of posts. Please? Pretty please with aDBed master defender on top?
Cada_Kai wrote:
aekeem wrote:
if you could comprehend what you read you'd notice the meaning of my post was not to point out the misspelling of irrelevant. i was pointing out that the numbers DIDN'T MATTER. hence the dictionary.com comment, suggesting maybe spy-der didn't understand the meaning of the word irrelevant. if someone misspells something i would recommend using the spell check included with the forums.
ok, Spy-der posted first.
Mad posted the reply.
Spyder never laid claim that the Numbers Didn't Matter.
You cannot find a decent argument so you pick apart every last detail. This has become you MO.
hey if cada_kai wants to ride my jock let him, he never has anything that's actually well thought out to say he just likes to get mad at everything i post. i find it humorous, plus i've never had a forum stalker before, i feel kind of honored.
aekeem wrote:
i find it funny that guy somehow thinks there's a typo involved and the other guy obviously just wants to start up an "aekeem fanc club"
TheMadCoder wrote:
aekeem wrote:
i find it funny that guy somehow thinks there's a typo involved and the other guy obviously just wants to start up an "aekeem fanc club"
If you're referring to me, can I join? Do I get a badge or hat or something for it?
Go Aekeem!!!
well i'm pretty sure you'll have to talk to cada_kai(i was referring to him in the post you quoted), but i know you have to keep a separate window of your web browser open with the aekeem post tracker up on it and you must troll every thread i post in, also your posts must make little to no sense if any at all.
It is quite funny how the people who show no evidence claim to disprove others claims.
Some show numbers, links to posts, etc..etc.. and yet you dismiss them.
Yawn
Cada_Kai wrote:
It is quite funny how the people who show no evidence claim to disprove others claims.
Some show numbers, links to posts, etc..etc.. and yet you dismiss them.
Yawn
so did you finally get around to reading posts #12 and #34 in this thread? or are you going to continue stalking me, making posts about stuff when you haven't even read the thread?
aekeem wrote:
posts 12(themadcoder) and 34(spy-der)
aekeem wrote:
Cada_Kai wrote:
It is quite funny how the people who show no evidence claim to disprove others claims.
Some show numbers, links to posts, etc..etc.. and yet you dismiss them.
Yawn
so did you finally get around to reading posts #12 and #34 in this thread? or are you going to continue stalking me, making posts about stuff when you haven't even read the thread?
oh aakeem you Pwnt me.
It is perfectly fine for you to come when I am posting and post your own drivel, butwhen I decide to return the drivel i am suddenly stalking you.
You are not worth my time.
/addignore aekeem