silly albs.. bored?

[majik]

I find it terribly amusing to see all the kiddies throw their toys out of the pram or wave their new found rattlers at the other realms.

Thanks for sharing that with us...
Was that all?

 

[Votan]

Was that all?

Aye, go on.. give me some more food for thought

 

[majik]

Aye, go on.. give me some more food for thought

I haven't been discussing the population disparities myself, at least not as far as I can remember in this post, I've been discussing the degrading rvr situation on excal. If mids were overpopulated and zerging alb/hib I would feel the same way, and the only people who are to blame are Mythic. So there is one reason, or company if you wish that you can pin it down to.

 

[Votan]

Actually i dont really require a reason but yes one can pin it on Mythic for evidently failing to create a balanced RvR environment that does not heavily favour realms with a large population.
I'd say that also the current playability of the server (lag and bug issues) combined with the (imminent) release of other mmorpgs (WoW & EQ2) has drawn a lot of people away from DAoC. I suspect that this will only increase once christmas has passed as people will be out playing their new presents.

 

[Bracken]

..will stop using it now

I do like that screenie

 

[Danya]

NF is what you make of it, if you insist on fg vs fg fights there is plenty of space to do that. What really pisses wannabe rr11 hib and mid noobs of is
not lack of fg action, its the fact they cant farm albs like they used to in a steady stream. Now they have to fight bigger numbers to farm, and often
they lose. All these rr11 noobs newer wanted fair fg fights, they wanted rp
to enlarge their e-penis.

Groups like Llaw, Vengeance, NP, FC, AD .... newer wanted fair fights, and they have newer spared any grey enemy. I dont claim to be better, but atleast i dont come up with some bullshit about me wanting fair fights only.

If that's the case, why is it that people quit, given you can make RP far more quickly and easily in NF than OF?
It was never about the RP - why does a RR11 person care about RP? They already have all their RA points, they gain nothing from it.

 

[Calo]

Most of these threads are like:

- Mid/hib starts a thread with a friendly question for fun
- mid/hibs reply normally
- random alb retard starts to cry about something that happened a year ago and off we go


action - reaction (Hi marc!)

 

[Bracken]

Most of these threads are like:

- Mid/hib starts a thread with a friendly question for fun
- mid/hibs reply normally
- random alb retard starts to cry about something that happened a year ago and off we go

Tolkien himself couldn't have written better fantasy

 

[Bracken]

why does a RR11 person care about RP? They already have all their RA points, they gain nothing from it.

You'd think so wouldn't you - and yet somehow their actions don't fit with those fine sentiments...

 

[pbaz]

And like I have said before, alb was only the 'poor cousin' because you made it so. The groups that were running at the end of 1.69 patch were very strong groups, and I may add that that group setup has been available since the release of Shrouded Isles so if you would like to get a clue before saying alb is the 'poor cousin' it would be helpful.

Truly priceless.

Because absolutely nothing about the game changed from patch 1.57 (SI release) to 1.69. Nope, no changes at all that could possibly explain why caster-groups became FOTM for Albion in 1.69/1.70...

So if you would like to get a clue before saying, well, anything it would be helpful. It would let you avoid mistakes like this:

I have no sympathy for albs who complain about fire/cold damage spells and didn't have the common sense to use a friar in a group

This makes you look like you started paying DAoC in 1.70. Or don't you remember that in Dark Ages of Tankalot (pre-1.69) it was impossible to fit a friar into an optimal Alb group?

 

[majik]

I have seen footage of albion caster groups the fotm tank groups before ToA existed and they ran a friar and it is quite an old video. Who needs to get a clue again?

And btw where is your evidence for it being impossible to fit a friar into a group? Let me guess, just another random retard saying something that he hasn't tried is impossible. There's a place reserved for you on VN boards.

As for being priceless:

Or don't you remember that in Dark Ages of Tankalot

Is that the DAoC where DH were playing, cus if so they must have sucked having no tanks m8r.

 

[Edaemos]

Truly priceless.

Because absolutely nothing about the game changed from patch 1.57 (SI release) to 1.69. Nope, no changes at all that could possibly explain why caster-groups became FOTM for Albion in 1.69/1.70...

So if you would like to get a clue before saying, well, anything it would be helpful. It would let you avoid mistakes like this:



This makes you look like you started paying DAoC in 1.70. Or don't you remember that in Dark Ages of Tankalot (pre-1.69) it was impossible to fit a friar into an optimal Alb group?

Please don't make sensible posts to the whiney hibs/mids, they are unable to understand.

 

[evial bloodstone]

If the server preNF could take the alb zerge, do you guys think thay whod have still ownd 0 relics. I think not, so imo this was an accident waiting to happent.

 

[Belomar]

Majik, you need to learn a new vocabulary, using the word "retard" in each and every one of your posts does nothing to showcase your intelligence in the view of others, nor makes for a very sensible discussion.

 

[majik]

Majik, you need to learn a new vocabulary, using the word "retard" in each and every one of your posts does nothing to showcase your intelligence in the view of others, nor makes for a very sensible discussion.

True, but I'm addicted to saying the word, not because I don't know any others

I need retard detox.

 

[Danya]

Friars weren't good because the didn't have det. Hibs had GP and BAoD to offset this so they could run caster heavy groups more successfully.

 

[pbaz]

I have seen footage of albion caster groups the fotm tank groups before ToA existed and they ran a friar and it is quite an old video. Who needs to get a clue again?

Please post link of video from an Excal gank group that ran with a friar. Would love to see it. Actually - please post link of any gank group that ran with a friar. Would love to see it. Problem with your bullsh*t posturing is that eventually someone will call you out. Put your money where your mouth is - show us the footage of a friar running in a pre-ToA caster and tank gank group.

And btw where is your evidence for it being impossible to fit a friar into a group?

Three years of playing in Albion? Two(ish) years of watching poor friars be passed over for RvR groups because they were useless? Endless discussion over three years discussing optimal Alb groups? Every friar rerolling a more RvR-friendly alt? Game design and bias that made it impossible for Albion to fit the same utility into an 8-man group that Hibgard could?

Is that the DAoC where DH were playing, cus if so they must have sucked having no tanks m8r.

Oops, my bad. I thought you were able to hold a complete sentence inside your tiny little mind. Cleraly not, so let me re-quote my sentence. Pay attention, now. Try to read each word:

Or don't you remember that in Dark Ages of Tankalot (pre-1.69) it was impossible to fit a friar into an optimal Alb group?

I've added some bolding to highlight the part of the sentence you seemed unable to read last time. Remind me again... When was it that DH rolled on Alb and ran a caster group with a friar in it?

 

[Flimgoblin]

True, but I'm addicted to saying the word, not because I don't know any others

I need retard detox.

I can give you a two week detox programme if you want...

that or stop calling everyone who disagrees with you a retard.

In some cases it's rather disrespectful to the emotionally or mentally challenged.

Oh and consider this a friendly "ffs stop calling everyone a retard or I'll ban your ass next time I'm low on caffeine"

 

[majik]

I can give you a two week detox programme if you want...

that or stop calling everyone who disagrees with you a retard.

In some cases it's rather disrespectful to the emotionally or mentally challenged.

Oh and consider this a friendly "ffs stop calling everyone a retard or I'll ban your ass next time I'm low on caffeine"

Well the first stage of solving the problem is to admit you have the problem, so I'm on track to sorting it out, thanks for the help offer. Keep your caffeine stocked up though, it's not me talking, it's the addiction

 

[Flimgoblin]

Well the first stage of solving the problem is to admit you have the problem, so I'm on track to sorting it out, thanks for the help offer. Keep your caffeine stocked up though, it's not me talking, it's the addiction

it won't be me banning it's the addiction

Some incentive to break the habit is always good.

 

[pbaz]

In some cases it's rather disrespectful to the emotionally or mentally challenged.

Thanks for thinking of me Fingo!

 

[majik]

Pbaz I don't actually have the link to it as I recieved the file over msn, but I know the guild that ran a friar pre-toa and it was Sol Invictus who did so. But I know you like to play the sceptic so dismiss that footage as you will.

And as for two(ish) years of being at ATK have you seen many gank groups that have EVEN TRIED (there is some bold text for you) running with a friar in the group? I really hope you aren't saying that because random groups at atk didn't take friars in their groups it meant that the friar was a non group worthy class because that really shock me.

And for your information I knew you were refering towards an optimal Alb Group but as you like to generalise things I thought I would take a leaf out of your book.

Just for the record, why are we discussing only caster groups when pre ToA you say it was Dark Age of Tank-a-lot , are you going to tell us now that alb tanks were no good aswell?

 

[Belomar]

And as for three years of being at ATK have you seen many gank groups that have EVEN TRIED (there is some bold text for you) running with a friar in the group? I really hope you aren't saying that because random groups at atk didn't take friars in their groups it meant that the friar was a non group worthy class because that really shock me.

Seriously, stop trolling, yours is a lost cause. Arguably one of the better Albion gank groups, Public Enemies on Alb/Prydwen, did not include a Friar in their optimal setup (instead they had a Friar BB at ATK they went and rebuffed resists at ). Simply put, pre-ToA, an Albion group who included a Friar was not optimal. That does not prevent there being exceptions where skilled Friars (or skilled support) managed to make an Albion group with a Friar in it work, but generally speaking, a second or a third Merc (depending on what you want to drop from the "optimal" pre-ToA Alb group) would have worked better.

You can harp on about it however much you want, but the fact is that for pre-ToA Albion tank groups, Friars were simply not an option.

 

[majik]

Seriously, stop trolling, yours is a lost cause. Arguably one of the better Albion gank groups, Public Enemies on Alb/Prydwen, did not include a Friar in their optimal setup (instead they had a Friar BB at ATK they went and rebuffed resists at ). Simply put, pre-ToA, an Albion group who included a Friar was not optimal. That does not prevent there being exceptions where skilled Friars (or skilled support) managed to make an Albion group with a Friar in it work, but generally speaking, a second or a third Merc (depending on what you want to drop from the "optimal" pre-ToA Alb group) would have worked better.

You can harp on about it however much you want, but the fact is that for pre-ToA Albion tank groups, Friars were simply not an option.

Relating back to my original post, I was saying how Albs were considered what someone called the 'Poor Relative' and I only mentioned one aspect of this as I can recall certain people from albion complaining about chanter nukes with debuff as they had no friar. My point was that the majority of albs on excal didn't even try to include a friar to test a new setup. This thread and my post in this thread was not meant to create a friar disucssion.

 

[pbaz]

And as for three years of being at ATK have you seen many gank groups that have EVEN TRIED (there is some bold text for you) running with a friar in the group?

There are plenty of people on Alb/Excal that started out in DAoC with a friar main. As the game evolved and the hardcore gamers began to test and figure out the "optimal" setup it became clear that a friar just didn't offer enough utility to justify their inclusion in a gank group. This conclusion was arrived at because people did the tests! In the early days there was no such thing as a tried, tested and proven setup - we had to figure out what it was. In short, what did a friar have to offer a group? He could melee, sure - but then he had no det, so a merc was preferrable. He could heal, sure - but he didn't get BoF, so a cleric was preferrable. He could stat buff, sure - but buffshearing wasn't in the game yet, so a buffbot was preferrable. So what was a friar's unique and only contribution? Those extra resists that you mentioned in a previos post! But, really, ask yourself if you would take one spot in an 8-man team just for that? Remember that to compete pre-1.69 an Alb tank group (usually) took out: Cleric, Cleric, Merc, Merc, Merc, Sorc, Mincer, Pally (possibly swap one Merc or Mincer for a "random" - often a theurg). To give adequate healing, damage output, speed, end regen and crowd-control this is what we needed. There just isn't room in there to put a friar - even if we knew we should have those resists. Albion had her abilities diluted out over a larger number of classes than Hibgard did (another consequence of Mythic paying too much attention to the design of Albion prior to the release of the game - this time one that hurt Albion).

There are very good reasons why, historically, groups ran without a friar. To look at the state of the game now and say we were "retards" for not running with a friar just make you look a little fresh to the game.

I really hope you aren't saying that because random groups at atk didn't take friars in their groups it meant that the friar was a non group worthy class because that really shock me.

I think it's actually the other way round. Because the gank groups worked out that a friar didn't contribute much to the group, the random pick-up groups started copying them and suddenly the friar was an unloved, worthless class.

And for your information I knew you were refering towards an optimal Alb Group but as you like to generalise things I thought I would take a leaf out of your book.

I don't like to generalise. I like to deal in specifics. That's why I was talking about a particular group setup in a particular realm at a particular stage of the game. I now agree, for example, that it is viable for an alb group to run with a friar! But this is a new change that patch 1.70 made possible. It hasn't always been true.

Just for the record, why are we discussing only caster groups when pre ToA you say it was Dark Age of Tank-a-lot , are you going to tell us now that alb tanks were no good aswell?

Not at all. Mercs were the backbone of Alb tank groups. Not quite savages, but still strong tanks. We are discussing only caster-groups because you made this post:

And like I have said before, alb was only the 'poor cousin' because you made it so. The groups that were running at the end of 1.69 patch were very strong groups, and I may add that that group setup has been available since the release of Shrouded Isles so if you would like to get a clue before saying alb is the 'poor cousin' it would be helpful.

Here you are implying that since SI it was possible for Albion to run groups like they ran at the end of 1.69 and now (I assume you meant caster-groups by this, since these were the FOTM Alb groups 1.69/1.70. If you were talking about a different group setup, please let us know what you meant). My participation in this discussion was in the hope that I could show you why we didn't run the same groups post SI release as we do now. The answer, I believe, is that it wasn't possible for us to run the kind of groups we see now until 1.69 came along.

 

[Marc]

random alb retard

See, its this that gets on my tits. Im not particualry that arsed what some IRC prick thinks of me. Heard it all before by much more important people than the irc community, but the generalisation is bullshit. Because someone doesnt take the game as seriously as others this automatically qualifies them as a retard??

You know Calo, you dont have to be a fanboy you know. you could rise above it and think and say things for yourself, not copy what all your dreambois say.

 

[majik]

Here you are implying that since SI it was possible for Albion to run groups like they ran at the end of 1.69 and now (I assume you meant caster-groups by this, since these were the FOTM Alb groups 1.69/1.70. If you were talking about a different group setup, please let us know what you meant). My participation in this discussion was in the hope that I could show you why we didn't run the same groups post SI release as we do now. The answer, I believe, is that it wasn't possible for us to run the kind of groups we see now until 1.69 came along.

Well I haven't had any experience in playing Albion so I am not the correct person to say, I base my opinions on what I hear on forums and what I hear on IRC which everyone knows isn't precise at the best of times. It has actually been nice to hear some formal input into what Pre-Toa alb/excal rvr was like as I didn't exist on my healer in those times but I thought I knew a bit about RvR at that time. I knew albs weren't as strong as mids/hibs then but without playing alb you can't really tell.

And as for the "retards" thing, together with my determination and Flimgoblin's support I'm getting over it.

 

[majik]

See, its this that gets on my tits. Im not particualry that arsed what some IRC prick thinks of me. Heard it all before by much more important people than the irc community, but the generalisation is bullshit. Because someone doesnt take the game as seriously as others this automatically qualifies them as a retard??

You know Calo, you dont have to be a fanboy you know. you could rise above it and think and say things for yourself, not copy what all your dreambois say.

The person who thinks people on IRC have different amounts of importance is a r.... re....... really silly person.

 

[Marc]

The person who thinks people on IRC have different amounts of importance is a r.... re....... really silly person.

wow, i never saw that comming, Tweedle dumb adding!

Read what i said. People on IRC are of ZERO importance! Failing that get Tweedle dee to spell it out to you

 

[Calo]

See, its this that gets on my tits. Im not particualry that arsed what some IRC prick thinks of me. Heard it all before by much more important people than the irc community, but the generalisation is bullshit. Because someone doesnt take the game as seriously as others this automatically qualifies them as a retard??

You know Calo, you dont have to be a fanboy you know. you could rise above it and think and say things for yourself, not copy what all your dreambois say.

I use Generalisation because ur mates do it to:
all mids cry
all mids suck
all mids do ac raids (cool didnt know that total population of midgard was 200)
In EVERY thread there is 1 alb who has to cry again about the ac and add to it that we are planning ac raids...
I know that not all albs think this way.
But...
action - reaction