so pretty much everyone who's asking for nerfs is wrong, including yourself?
Alright, you're a grown person (I think?) you can put 2 and 2 together or you can continue trying the sneaky sideline approach to loop this endlessly. Points have been explained sufficiently by myself and many others.
With all due respect, to me, this is just outrageously misguided and misinformed, and, or, unaware of games, mechanics, development etc.
You cannot blame the developers if something slips out of whack. That will happen naturally. This is the nature of the beast, we cannot escape that. And so what? Nothing remains the same in games like these. You wouldn't want that either.
There are other options than straight up nerfing characters. These other options also seem to be the prefered choice. So apparantly the devs mostly agree with everyone that is against nerfs. I'm not sure why, i'm no expert. You make it seem you're guided, informed, aware of games, mechanics and development, so maybe you're the right person to explain why it's better to not nerf characters and look for other options to let the game evolve. Seeying as the devs released and reworked quite alot of characters that instantly became meta and almost never directly nerfed a character.
Or you could just keep repeating that nerfs are mandatory and anyone who disagrees is misinformed, misguided etc etc.
The reason is simple: $$$
With power creep instead of nerfs, the devs can keep cashing in the sweet money they get from people who either pay for the character or pay for his gear/level/abilities.
If they nerf a character, you don't need to pay for a shiny new toy that can counter the current meta.
Somehow everyone agrees with that. The official reason is that it "would be unfair to those who paid for the character". So everyone assumes they would lose a very good character with no compensation.
The thing is, when EA introduce a power creep new hero that counters the current meta, the previously OP characters become worthless too, just like if they were nerfed.
The only difference is that if you had nerfed them, more teams could have appeared and became viable. There would be more diversity.
With the current power creep/Counter to what's OP method, the new meta becomes the new character. There's no diversity.
See R2: You slap him on a Rex lead and it counters ZMaul. Nothing new. Still Rex and ZMaul (for a time) in the Arena.
If ZMaul has been nerfed, we could have seen more teams: FO, Resistance, even Phoenix. More Jedi too.
See Shoretrooper: They could have nerfed Wiggs, and many teams would have been more viable. But instead, they created Shoretrooper to stop Wiggs. What happened? Shore was put in Rex or Wiggs team, and there was no increase in diversity.
With all due respect, to me, this is just outrageously misguided and misinformed, and, or, unaware of games, mechanics, development etc.
You cannot blame the developers if something slips out of whack. That will happen naturally. This is the nature of the beast, we cannot escape that. And so what? Nothing remains the same in games like these. You wouldn't want that either.
There are other options than straight up nerfing characters. These other options also seem to be the prefered choice. So apparantly the devs mostly agree with everyone that is against nerfs. I'm not sure why, i'm no expert. You make it seem you're guided, informed, aware of games, mechanics and development, so maybe you're the right person to explain why it's better to not nerf characters and look for other options to let the game evolve. Seeying as the devs released and reworked quite alot of characters that instantly became meta and almost never directly nerfed a character.
Or you could just keep repeating that nerfs are mandatory and anyone who disagrees is misinformed, misguided etc etc.
The reason is simple: $$$
With power creep instead of nerfs, the devs can keep cashing in the sweet money they get from people who either pay for the character or pay for his gear/level/abilities.
If they nerf a character, you don't need to pay for a shiny new toy that can counter the current meta.
Somehow everyone agrees with that. The official reason is that it "would be unfair to those who paid for the character". So everyone assumes they would lose a very good character with no compensation.
The thing is, when EA introduce a power creep new hero that counters the current meta, the previously OP characters become worthless too, just like if they were nerfed.
The only difference is that if you had nerfed them, more teams could have appeared and became viable. There would be more diversity.
With the current power creep/Counter to what's OP method, the new meta becomes the new character. There's no diversity.
See R2: You slap him on a Rex lead and it counters ZMaul. Nothing new. Still Rex and ZMaul (for a time) in the Arena.
If ZMaul has been nerfed, we could have seen more teams: FO, Resistance, even Phoenix. More Jedi too.
See Shoretrooper: They could have nerfed Wiggs, and many teams would have been more viable. But instead, they created Shoretrooper to stop Wiggs. What happened? Shore was put in Rex or Wiggs team, and there was no increase in diversity.
meh, i don't believe nerfing wiggs, zmaul or any of the characters that some players thought deserved a nerf would have done wonders for the diversity in arena. That's just wishfull thinking.
One thing to note with the current power creep system is that it's completely unsustainable.
With each power creep generation, non-meta characters become weaker and weaker.
This narrows down the possibilities. Reworks solve that, but let's be honest, we would need 50 of those to simply bring diversity to the current roster. It won't happen soon, and by the time it does, new power creep characters will have raised the bar higher.
With all due respect, to me, this is just outrageously misguided and misinformed, and, or, unaware of games, mechanics, development etc.
You cannot blame the developers if something slips out of whack. That will happen naturally. This is the nature of the beast, we cannot escape that. And so what? Nothing remains the same in games like these. You wouldn't want that either.
There are other options than straight up nerfing characters. These other options also seem to be the prefered choice. So apparantly the devs mostly agree with everyone that is against nerfs. I'm not sure why, i'm no expert. You make it seem you're guided, informed, aware of games, mechanics and development, so maybe you're the right person to explain why it's better to not nerf characters and look for other options to let the game evolve. Seeying as the devs released and reworked quite alot of characters that instantly became meta and almost never directly nerfed a character.
Or you could just keep repeating that nerfs are mandatory and anyone who disagrees is misinformed, misguided etc etc.
The reason is simple: $$$
With power creep instead of nerfs, the devs can keep cashing in the sweet money they get from people who either pay for the character or pay for his gear/level/abilities.
If they nerf a character, you don't need to pay for a shiny new toy that can counter the current meta.
Somehow everyone agrees with that. The official reason is that it "would be unfair to those who paid for the character". So everyone assumes they would lose a very good character with no compensation.
The thing is, when EA introduce a power creep new hero that counters the current meta, the previously OP characters become worthless too, just like if they were nerfed.
The only difference is that if you had nerfed them, more teams could have appeared and became viable. There would be more diversity.
With the current power creep/Counter to what's OP method, the new meta becomes the new character. There's no diversity.
See R2: You slap him on a Rex lead and it counters ZMaul. Nothing new. Still Rex and ZMaul (for a time) in the Arena.
If ZMaul has been nerfed, we could have seen more teams: FO, Resistance, even Phoenix. More Jedi too.
See Shoretrooper: They could have nerfed Wiggs, and many teams would have been more viable. But instead, they created Shoretrooper to stop Wiggs. What happened? Shore was put in Rex or Wiggs team, and there was no increase in diversity.
meh, i don't believe nerfing wiggs, zmaul or any of the characters that some players thought deserved a nerf would have done wonders for the diversity in arena. That's just wishfull thinking.
How about something to back up your claims rather than "well I believe" ?
One thing to note with the current power creep system is that it's completely unsustainable.
With each power creep generation, non-meta characters become weaker and weaker.
This narrows down the possibilities. Reworks solve that, but let's be honest, we would need 50 of those to simply bring diversity to the current roster. It won't happen soon, and by the time it does, new power creep characters will have raised the bar higher.
With all due respect, to me, this is just outrageously misguided and misinformed, and, or, unaware of games, mechanics, development etc.
You cannot blame the developers if something slips out of whack. That will happen naturally. This is the nature of the beast, we cannot escape that. And so what? Nothing remains the same in games like these. You wouldn't want that either.
There are other options than straight up nerfing characters. These other options also seem to be the prefered choice. So apparantly the devs mostly agree with everyone that is against nerfs. I'm not sure why, i'm no expert. You make it seem you're guided, informed, aware of games, mechanics and development, so maybe you're the right person to explain why it's better to not nerf characters and look for other options to let the game evolve. Seeying as the devs released and reworked quite alot of characters that instantly became meta and almost never directly nerfed a character.
Or you could just keep repeating that nerfs are mandatory and anyone who disagrees is misinformed, misguided etc etc.
The reason is simple: $$$
With power creep instead of nerfs, the devs can keep cashing in the sweet money they get from people who either pay for the character or pay for his gear/level/abilities.
If they nerf a character, you don't need to pay for a shiny new toy that can counter the current meta.
Somehow everyone agrees with that. The official reason is that it "would be unfair to those who paid for the character". So everyone assumes they would lose a very good character with no compensation.
The thing is, when EA introduce a power creep new hero that counters the current meta, the previously OP characters become worthless too, just like if they were nerfed.
The only difference is that if you had nerfed them, more teams could have appeared and became viable. There would be more diversity.
With the current power creep/Counter to what's OP method, the new meta becomes the new character. There's no diversity.
See R2: You slap him on a Rex lead and it counters ZMaul. Nothing new. Still Rex and ZMaul (for a time) in the Arena.
If ZMaul has been nerfed, we could have seen more teams: FO, Resistance, even Phoenix. More Jedi too.
See Shoretrooper: They could have nerfed Wiggs, and many teams would have been more viable. But instead, they created Shoretrooper to stop Wiggs. What happened? Shore was put in Rex or Wiggs team, and there was no increase in diversity.
meh, i don't believe nerfing wiggs, zmaul or any of the characters that some players thought deserved a nerf would have done wonders for the diversity in arena. That's just wishfull thinking.
To each his opinion, but as far as I'm concerned, I believe in nerfs. The Barris and Poe nerfs, for instance, did their job.
It's all about Nerfing the right thing in the character to create clear weaknesses and strengths.
If you're looking for more insight on this, I suggest you look up all the interviews, blogs and videos that Riot Games posts about balance. They really do a lot of thinking for LoL, and it's interesting to understand their approach.
so pretty much everyone who's asking for nerfs is wrong, including yourself?
Alright, you're a grown person (I think?) you can put 2 and 2 together or you can continue trying the sneaky sideline approach to loop this endlessly. Points have been explained sufficiently by myself and many others.
I'm not sneaky about anything. I straight up asked you a question that you didn't awnser. twice now
a dictionary link to the word "read" is pretty funny though.
so pretty much everyone who's asking for nerfs is wrong, including yourself?
Alright, you're a grown person (I think?) you can put 2 and 2 together or you can continue trying the sneaky sideline approach to loop this endlessly. Points have been explained sufficiently by myself and many others.
With all due respect, to me, this is just outrageously misguided and misinformed, and, or, unaware of games, mechanics, development etc.
You cannot blame the developers if something slips out of whack. That will happen naturally. This is the nature of the beast, we cannot escape that. And so what? Nothing remains the same in games like these. You wouldn't want that either.
There are other options than straight up nerfing characters. These other options also seem to be the prefered choice. So apparantly the devs mostly agree with everyone that is against nerfs. I'm not sure why, i'm no expert. You make it seem you're guided, informed, aware of games, mechanics and development, so maybe you're the right person to explain why it's better to not nerf characters and look for other options to let the game evolve. Seeying as the devs released and reworked quite alot of characters that instantly became meta and almost never directly nerfed a character.
Or you could just keep repeating that nerfs are mandatory and anyone who disagrees is misinformed, misguided etc etc.
The reason is simple: $$$
With power creep instead of nerfs, the devs can keep cashing in the sweet money they get from people who either pay for the character or pay for his gear/level/abilities.
If they nerf a character, you don't need to pay for a shiny new toy that can counter the current meta.
Somehow everyone agrees with that. The official reason is that it "would be unfair to those who paid for the character". So everyone assumes they would lose a very good character with no compensation.
The thing is, when EA introduce a power creep new hero that counters the current meta, the previously OP characters become worthless too, just like if they were nerfed.
The only difference is that if you had nerfed them, more teams could have appeared and became viable. There would be more diversity.
With the current power creep/Counter to what's OP method, the new meta becomes the new character. There's no diversity.
See R2: You slap him on a Rex lead and it counters ZMaul. Nothing new. Still Rex and ZMaul (for a time) in the Arena.
If ZMaul has been nerfed, we could have seen more teams: FO, Resistance, even Phoenix. More Jedi too.
See Shoretrooper: They could have nerfed Wiggs, and many teams would have been more viable. But instead, they created Shoretrooper to stop Wiggs. What happened? Shore was put in Rex or Wiggs team, and there was no increase in diversity.
meh, i don't believe nerfing wiggs, zmaul or any of the characters that some players thought deserved a nerf would have done wonders for the diversity in arena. That's just wishfull thinking.
To each his opinion, but as far as I'm concerned, I believe in nerfs. The Barris and Poe nerfs, for instance, did their job.
It's all about Nerfing the right thing in the character to create clear weaknesses and strengths.
If you're looking for more insight on this, I suggest you look up all the interviews, blogs and videos that Riot Games posts about balance. They really do a lot of thinking for LoL, and it's interesting to understand their approach.
I'm not against all nerfs, i don't think anyone is. I wasn't playing when barriss got nerfed, so i don't know what happened there. Poe i believe made every match a sure loss for non-poe users and a 50/50 if both were using poe. so yea...
so pretty much everyone who's asking for nerfs is wrong, including yourself?
Alright, you're a grown person (I think?) you can put 2 and 2 together or you can continue trying the sneaky sideline approach to loop this endlessly. Points have been explained sufficiently by myself and many others.
Well, you can't be now. After all, anyone reading the thread would notice you aren't reading properly or refusing to acknowledge the points.
But eventually you did though.
You did in the previous post where you just admitted you prefer no nerfs, which pretty much means you do not want a balanced game. Thumbs up though.
a dictionary link to the word "read" is pretty funny though.
Because it's what you need to do. Properly this time though.
haha, what are you even talking about? now i'm not sneaky anymore?
I personally think that anyone reading this thread realizes you're just talking out of your behind. You keep throwing cheezy insults and you have trouble actually awnsering direct questions. Luckely for you someone else helps you out and you can quote them and type +1
I also hope that someone else thinks giving a dictionary link for the word "read" is funny for the same reason i think it's funny.
so pretty much everyone who's asking for nerfs is wrong, including yourself?
Alright, you're a grown person (I think?) you can put 2 and 2 together or you can continue trying the sneaky sideline approach to loop this endlessly. Points have been explained sufficiently by myself and many others.
Well, you can't be now. After all, anyone reading the thread would notice you aren't reading properly or refusing to acknowledge the points.
But eventually you did though.
You did in the previous post where you just admitted you prefer no nerfs, which pretty much means you do not want a balanced game. Thumbs up though.
a dictionary link to the word "read" is pretty funny though.
Because it's what you need to do. Properly this time though.
haha, what are you even talking about? now i'm not sneaky anymore?
I personally think that anyone reading this thread realizes you're just talking out of your behind. You keep throwing cheezy insults and you have trouble actually awnsering direct questions. Luckely for you someone else helps you out and you can quote them and type +1
I also hope that someone else thinks giving a dictionary link for the word "read" is funny for the same reason i think it's funny.
That is an extremely insecure post. All points have been explained already, you just keep trying to loop. You can also just research my background and experience. https://www.psiraise.com/
so pretty much everyone who's asking for nerfs is wrong, including yourself?
Alright, you're a grown person (I think?) you can put 2 and 2 together or you can continue trying the sneaky sideline approach to loop this endlessly. Points have been explained sufficiently by myself and many others.
Well, you can't be now. After all, anyone reading the thread would notice you aren't reading properly or refusing to acknowledge the points.
But eventually you did though.
You did in the previous post where you just admitted you prefer no nerfs, which pretty much means you do not want a balanced game. Thumbs up though.
a dictionary link to the word "read" is pretty funny though.
Because it's what you need to do. Properly this time though.
haha, what are you even talking about? now i'm not sneaky anymore?
I personally think that anyone reading this thread realizes you're just talking out of your behind. You keep throwing cheezy insults and you have trouble actually awnsering direct questions. Luckely for you someone else helps you out and you can quote them and type +1
I also hope that someone else thinks giving a dictionary link for the word "read" is funny for the same reason i think it's funny.
That is an extremely insecure post. All points have been explained already, you just keep trying to loop. You can also just research my background and experience. https://www.psiraise.com/
here you go again, calling my comment insecure, extremely insecure even. Why do that? It's so unnecessary.
so pretty much everyone who's asking for nerfs is wrong, including yourself?
Alright, you're a grown person (I think?) you can put 2 and 2 together or you can continue trying the sneaky sideline approach to loop this endlessly. Points have been explained sufficiently by myself and many others.
Well, you can't be now. After all, anyone reading the thread would notice you aren't reading properly or refusing to acknowledge the points.
But eventually you did though.
You did in the previous post where you just admitted you prefer no nerfs, which pretty much means you do not want a balanced game. Thumbs up though.
a dictionary link to the word "read" is pretty funny though.
Because it's what you need to do. Properly this time though.
haha, what are you even talking about? now i'm not sneaky anymore?
I personally think that anyone reading this thread realizes you're just talking out of your behind. You keep throwing cheezy insults and you have trouble actually awnsering direct questions. Luckely for you someone else helps you out and you can quote them and type +1
I also hope that someone else thinks giving a dictionary link for the word "read" is funny for the same reason i think it's funny.
That is an extremely insecure post. All points have been explained already, you just keep trying to loop. You can also just research my background and experience. https://www.psiraise.com/
here you go again, calling my comment insecure, extremely insecure even. Why do that? It's so unnecessary.
so pretty much everyone who's asking for nerfs is wrong, including yourself?
Alright, you're a grown person (I think?) you can put 2 and 2 together or you can continue trying the sneaky sideline approach to loop this endlessly. Points have been explained sufficiently by myself and many others.
Well, you can't be now. After all, anyone reading the thread would notice you aren't reading properly or refusing to acknowledge the points.
But eventually you did though.
You did in the previous post where you just admitted you prefer no nerfs, which pretty much means you do not want a balanced game. Thumbs up though.
a dictionary link to the word "read" is pretty funny though.
Because it's what you need to do. Properly this time though.
haha, what are you even talking about? now i'm not sneaky anymore?
I personally think that anyone reading this thread realizes you're just talking out of your behind. You keep throwing cheezy insults and you have trouble actually awnsering direct questions. Luckely for you someone else helps you out and you can quote them and type +1
I also hope that someone else thinks giving a dictionary link for the word "read" is funny for the same reason i think it's funny.
That is an extremely insecure post. All points have been explained already, you just keep trying to loop. You can also just research my background and experience. https://www.psiraise.com/
here you go again, calling my comment insecure, extremely insecure even. Why do that? It's so unnecessary.
Observations, nothing personal.
haha, you realize you just dodged another direct question right?
so pretty much everyone who's asking for nerfs is wrong, including yourself?
Alright, you're a grown person (I think?) you can put 2 and 2 together or you can continue trying the sneaky sideline approach to loop this endlessly. Points have been explained sufficiently by myself and many others.
Well, you can't be now. After all, anyone reading the thread would notice you aren't reading properly or refusing to acknowledge the points.
But eventually you did though.
You did in the previous post where you just admitted you prefer no nerfs, which pretty much means you do not want a balanced game. Thumbs up though.
a dictionary link to the word "read" is pretty funny though.
Because it's what you need to do. Properly this time though.
haha, what are you even talking about? now i'm not sneaky anymore?
I personally think that anyone reading this thread realizes you're just talking out of your behind. You keep throwing cheezy insults and you have trouble actually awnsering direct questions. Luckely for you someone else helps you out and you can quote them and type +1
I also hope that someone else thinks giving a dictionary link for the word "read" is funny for the same reason i think it's funny.
That is an extremely insecure post. All points have been explained already, you just keep trying to loop. You can also just research my background and experience. https://www.psiraise.com/
here you go again, calling my comment insecure, extremely insecure even. Why do that? It's so unnecessary.
Observations, nothing personal.
haha, you realize you just dodged another direct question right?
You realize I gave you the answer and you either lack reading comprehension or trolling?
so pretty much everyone who's asking for nerfs is wrong, including yourself?
Alright, you're a grown person (I think?) you can put 2 and 2 together or you can continue trying the sneaky sideline approach to loop this endlessly. Points have been explained sufficiently by myself and many others.
Well, you can't be now. After all, anyone reading the thread would notice you aren't reading properly or refusing to acknowledge the points.
But eventually you did though.
You did in the previous post where you just admitted you prefer no nerfs, which pretty much means you do not want a balanced game. Thumbs up though.
a dictionary link to the word "read" is pretty funny though.
Because it's what you need to do. Properly this time though.
haha, what are you even talking about? now i'm not sneaky anymore?
I personally think that anyone reading this thread realizes you're just talking out of your behind. You keep throwing cheezy insults and you have trouble actually awnsering direct questions. Luckely for you someone else helps you out and you can quote them and type +1
I also hope that someone else thinks giving a dictionary link for the word "read" is funny for the same reason i think it's funny.
That is an extremely insecure post. All points have been explained already, you just keep trying to loop. You can also just research my background and experience. https://www.psiraise.com/
here you go again, calling my comment insecure, extremely insecure even. Why do that? It's so unnecessary.
Observations, nothing personal.
haha, you realize you just dodged another direct question right?
You realize I gave you the answer and you either lack reading comprehension or trolling?
I don't think you understood the question if you think that's an awnser. but yea, must be my reading comprehension
so pretty much everyone who's asking for nerfs is wrong, including yourself?
Alright, you're a grown person (I think?) you can put 2 and 2 together or you can continue trying the sneaky sideline approach to loop this endlessly. Points have been explained sufficiently by myself and many others.
Well, you can't be now. After all, anyone reading the thread would notice you aren't reading properly or refusing to acknowledge the points.
But eventually you did though.
You did in the previous post where you just admitted you prefer no nerfs, which pretty much means you do not want a balanced game. Thumbs up though.
a dictionary link to the word "read" is pretty funny though.
Because it's what you need to do. Properly this time though.
haha, what are you even talking about? now i'm not sneaky anymore?
I personally think that anyone reading this thread realizes you're just talking out of your behind. You keep throwing cheezy insults and you have trouble actually awnsering direct questions. Luckely for you someone else helps you out and you can quote them and type +1
I also hope that someone else thinks giving a dictionary link for the word "read" is funny for the same reason i think it's funny.
That is an extremely insecure post. All points have been explained already, you just keep trying to loop. You can also just research my background and experience. https://www.psiraise.com/
here you go again, calling my comment insecure, extremely insecure even. Why do that? It's so unnecessary.
Observations, nothing personal.
haha, you realize you just dodged another direct question right?
You realize I gave you the answer and you either lack reading comprehension or trolling?
I don't think you understood the question if you think that's an awnser. but yea, must be my reading comprehension
Are you being serious? Scripture or not, wiki or yahoo, forum or live speak - sense is sense and logic is logic, no matter where it is written. That is the definition for the gaming terms. Would you like me to use dictionary next time?
Yes, I'm dead serious, because I can go on wiki right now and modify the information to my understanding of it, complete with references, and then would you still agree? There's a really good reason why respected higher learning institutions will not allow wiki references.
Are you being serious? Scripture or not, wiki or yahoo, forum or live speak - sense is sense and logic is logic, no matter where it is written. That is the definition for the gaming terms. Would you like me to use dictionary next time?
Yes, I'm dead serious, because I can go on wiki right now and modify the information to my understanding of it, complete with references, and then would you still agree?
Stop. Face the exact point - those are the definitions of the words. That's it. You know it, I know it. Simple.
Seriously guys stop bothering with him. He ignores facts he can't twist to fit his narrative and pretends others don't exist, dodges questions he has no answer for and pretends they're irrelevant, and throws about his "experience" as though playing a subscription based game has any relevance to developing a Freemium game. He has nothing of merit to say and will inevitably resort to insults and faux psychoanalysis and reductive nonsense as he has already begun to do... Don't waste your time.
Seriously guys stop bothering with him. He ignores facts he can't twist to fit his narrative and pretends others don't exist, dodges questions he has no answer for and pretends they're irrelevant, and throws about his "experience" as though playing a subscription based game has any relevance to developing a Freemium game. He has nothing of merit to say and will inevitably resort to insults and faux psychoanalysis and reductive nonsense as he has already begun to do... Don't waste your time.
Replies
Read
Wow. Someone with a brain around here!
meh, i don't believe nerfing wiggs, zmaul or any of the characters that some players thought deserved a nerf would have done wonders for the diversity in arena. That's just wishfull thinking.
With each power creep generation, non-meta characters become weaker and weaker.
This narrows down the possibilities. Reworks solve that, but let's be honest, we would need 50 of those to simply bring diversity to the current roster. It won't happen soon, and by the time it does, new power creep characters will have raised the bar higher.
How about something to back up your claims rather than "well I believe" ?
To each his opinion, but as far as I'm concerned, I believe in nerfs. The Barris and Poe nerfs, for instance, did their job.
It's all about Nerfing the right thing in the character to create clear weaknesses and strengths.
If you're looking for more insight on this, I suggest you look up all the interviews, blogs and videos that Riot Games posts about balance. They really do a lot of thinking for LoL, and it's interesting to understand their approach.
I'm not sneaky about anything. I straight up asked you a question that you didn't awnser. twice now
a dictionary link to the word "read" is pretty funny though.
But eventually you did though.
You did in the previous post where you just admitted you prefer no nerfs, which pretty much means you do not want a balanced game. Thumbs up though.
Because it's what you need to do. Properly this time though.
I'm not against all nerfs, i don't think anyone is. I wasn't playing when barriss got nerfed, so i don't know what happened there. Poe i believe made every match a sure loss for non-poe users and a 50/50 if both were using poe. so yea...
haha, what are you even talking about? now i'm not sneaky anymore?
I personally think that anyone reading this thread realizes you're just talking out of your behind. You keep throwing cheezy insults and you have trouble actually awnsering direct questions. Luckely for you someone else helps you out and you can quote them and type +1
I also hope that someone else thinks giving a dictionary link for the word "read" is funny for the same reason i think it's funny.
here you go again, calling my comment insecure, extremely insecure even. Why do that? It's so unnecessary.
haha, you realize you just dodged another direct question right?
I don't think you understood the question if you think that's an awnser. but yea, must be my reading comprehension
Yes, I'm dead serious, because I can go on wiki right now and modify the information to my understanding of it, complete with references, and then would you still agree? There's a really good reason why respected higher learning institutions will not allow wiki references.