This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Is it fair to use PvE gear in PvP?
Return to board index
Post by
Monjaru
Learn to read, I never mentioned SM when I said oneshot. Infact, I never mentioned any item at all. It was just an example.
Oh? Well, then I apologize for the misunderstanding. It was just a grossly overexaggerated example that is competely unrelated to everything else you said. My mistake.
Monjaru, I dont think you have successfully broken down a single one of my arguments yet so saying that you have done so doesnt get you anywhere.
Secondly,
it actually does make quite a difference
, as warriors in particular do a lot more damage wielding Shadowmourne. We're both agreed then that this is an advantage, yes?
Also, you've said all along that you know it doesn't automatically ensure victory for the wielder, but the fact you've debated this long that it is an unfair item that should be banned from PvP (i.e. A Big Deal) betrays otherwise. The way you've talked about it all through this thread gives the impression that you consider it to be some game-changing item that needs to be removed so people don't have to deal with the agonizing torment of facing someone with it.
You're turning a petty complaint which garners no real sway over the outcome of arena matches into a horrible wrong-doing of unfathomable proportions that needs to be fixed ASAP
.
@Monjaru, you did reply but the thing you're still 'dodging' is the fact that it doesnt matter how small the advantage is, it still shouldnt be allowed. I know its a small advantage.
I know it isnt gamebreaking.
But the fact is that technically it should not be allowed in arena.
Argument broken down. Bolded and underlined important points for emphasis since I know quotes scare you.
Also: the only reason the rest of your argument hasn't fallen apart yet (well, it actually has, you just don't want to see it) is because you're holding onto a point which is entirely irrelevant to the actual point of the thread.
What you're saying is that it isn't fair because not everyone can have SM. And you're right, it's not fair to the
playerbase
that they can't all have the big, shiny, legendary weapon.
In PvP specifically, however, it's not unfair because the weapon itself holds no real sway over the outcome of matches.
I believe it's called a Sweeping Generalization. It's a logical fallacy. You're taking a general rule (it's not fair that only certain players can acquire SM) and trying to apply it to a specific case (PvP) where it simply doesn't apply (because it holds no measurable sway over matches in PvP).
Like I just explained, it IS an unfair advantage. So why is is OK to use it? You cant just say 'its not a very big advantage' because it still helps, and therefore shouldnt be allowed. You still have not answered this point except by saying 'its only a tiny advantage'. Does that mean you can't answer it?
See above.
It's an advantage; not an unfair one. And I very much
can
"just say" it's not a very big advantage, because that's all that needs be said to disprove what you're saying. It helps, but not to an extent that it will actually influence the outcome of any given match; I don't see what's so hard to understand about that.
It's been answered. Many, many times. Your lack of understanding of what we're saying is the only thing keeping this conversation alive.
Post by
Synectics
You gotta be a really big retard or have never played arena to say that Shadowmourne was OK. According to your logic: I should be able to oneshot people just because I've worked for a certain item.
No. According to my logic, someone who has worked their ass off and farmed something just maybe -- MAYBE -- have something to show for it.
You farm Arena gear, right? (inb4 it's easy to farm, since apparently Shadowmourne is easy to farm as well). What if all it did was offer pretty new colors instead of better gear? No one would bother.
People go through the trouble because Shadowmourne offers a slight advantage. And that being the case, if you really are butthurt about it, roll a Warrior, Retadin, or DK and get it if it's so easy and makes THAT much of a difference. I'm sure you'll go from bottom 100 to top 100 in ratings in no-time flat.
Synectics, you're about 5 pages behind. I've explained exactly why Shadowmourne is unfair, it isnt the same as using epic gems or professions because the advantage they give is available to everyone, unlike with Shadowmourne (see previous posts to read why).
If that's the case, you're about eight pages behind. I've posted as to why Shadowmourne is nothing but a QQ magnet for lesser skilled players (see previous posts to read why).
Post by
688014
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
551048
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Monjaru
@Monjaru: if thats what you meant when you said you broke down my argument then I'm totally relieved. You didnt break anything at all. What I said was that it makes a noticeable difference (to me, anyway - I'm not saying I'm right, this is something which you cant measure fairly) but this difference isnt gamebreaking. You assumed I was creating hyperboles and speaking at both ends of the scale.
That's the problem. In many cases, a "noticable difference" is equal to "gamebreaking". Not always, mind you, they aren't interchangabe terms, but oftentimes a noticable difference will
be
the difference between winning and losing a game (read: gamebreaking). Now you're just contradicting yourself.
Despite the fact that it isnt gamebreaking however, it should still be banned from arena because it isnt fair to those players who cant get that kind of edge in arena.
The very fact that it isn't gamebreaking is all the support I need to tell you it isn't unfair. Many engineering items were banned from arena because they were giving gamebreaking advantages to people who had them, meaning people would be forced to roll engineering in order to compete. This is an example of an unfair advantage and how Blizzard dealt with it.
What you're missing (and have been missing from the start) is that unfairness has to be taken in relation to the topic at hand. In other words: in relation to PvP. If you have an advantage in arena that NO ONE else can get, if it makes no direct impact on the outcome of the match, it
still
won't be considered unfair in PvP, because the unfairness of the matter has no direct correlation to PvP itself.
Now, I dont quite understand your argument about playerbase and PvP.
You don't understand it at all. It's what I've been saying since page 5 or 6.
The argument is: what is unfair to the playerbase as a whole (not being able to obtain an item that certain players can) is not automatically unfair in PvP. See above paragraphs for explanation on what IS unfair in PvP and why SM is NOT unfair in PvP.
I really dont see how this is at all relevant.
I get that you don't understand it; you didn't understand it when I first said it on page 5 or 6, and you don't understand it now. And what I said then still applies now: until you understand the difference to being unfair to the playerbase and being unfair in PvP, you won't understand the argument (ironically, I mean both my argument and your own; as it stands, you don't even understand what
you're
arguing).
I have said so, so many times that it doesnt win matches on its own. But what does the playerbase have to do with anything? I'm not saying its unfair because everyone in the world cant get it, I'm saying its unfair because not everyone who does PvP in the world can get it. So I dont see how a 'general playerbase' comes into it at all.
You keep saying you know that it doesn't win matches on its own, but your argument can only make sense if it
does
win matches on its own. Your entire argument is dependent on that, and because it isn't true, your argument is baseless.
Also, adding "in PvP" to the end of your statement doesn't magically make your statement apply in PvP. Sorry. You've never mentioned PvPers specifically not being able to get it before now, and saying so now doesn't change the meaning of your argument any.
The general playerbase comes into play because that is as far as your argument pertains; hence why I say you don't understand what
you're
arguing, let alone what
I'm
arguing. What you're arguing as "unfair" in PvP doesn't apply beyond a general unfairness to the playerbase as a whole.
Why
it doesn't apply in PvP, I've also been saying all along. Having it or not doesn't affect the outcome of arena matches. You say you understand this fact, but your responses in this argument pretty obviously contradict such a claim.
You still need to answer one key question: If something gives an advantage, but that advantage isnt available to everyone, is it fair to use this advantage? . Bearing in mind that arena is supposed to be balanced. (I know that it isnt, and never has been, but its supposed to be)
I've answered that question just as many times as I've explained my argument to you. You just haven't been satisfied with the answer because it proves your argument false. The real question is this: If something gives an advantage that makes no difference in an arena match, but that advantage isn't available to everyone, is it fair to use this advantage? And the answer is clearly (to everyone but you) yes.
Bearing in mind arena is supposed to be balanced, a piece of gear which doesn't change the outcome of a match is perfectly fair. The key word is balance. SM isn't gamebreaking (as we've established many, many times), and thus does nothing to throw off balance. As such, whether it's available to everyone or no one is irrelevant to the discussion.
Just let him be, he obviously thinks SM is fair bsns. Any decent arena player agrees that legendaries got no place in arena. Shadowmourne is overpowered and always will be, stop defending your lovely little weapon.
No base, no argument, no reason to be in this thread. Goodbye.
Post by
688014
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Monjaru
OK Monjaru basically we are now just arguing over one point, and thats the question of whether it does or doesnt give a 'gamebreaking' advantage.
No... we're not? That was one of the few things we've established; it's not gamebreaking.
Here you go again with the inconsistency. Note that difference in our arguments: mine is consistent, yours is not.
Now, you seem to think I'm saying that it can win arena matches on its own - in other words, its 'gamebreaking'. I have not said this, nor does my argument depend on this point, which is what you seem to think.
I'm not saying that's what you said; I'm saying that's what needs to be true in order for your argument to hold water in this discussion. As this is -not- true, your argument
cannot
and
does not
make sense.
What I'm actually saying is that it gives an advantage which is noticable but isnt 'gamebreaking'. There is a big difference.
No, there really isn't. If it gave any noticable advantage, in a fight between two teams of equal or near equal skill and gear, the team with a SM-user would win
noticably
more often than the team without. As that is not the case, SM grants neither a gamebreaking advantage nor even a noticable one. (re-read my last post for the reason I make a distinction between the two)
The only way in which you could possibly say that its fair to use it in pvp is if Shadowmourne gave NO advantage at all in PvP - and I think we have both agreed that it does.
That too is a logical fallacy. You're discounting the option that it is fair in PvP because it gives such a small advantage (in persective of arena matches) that it holds no more sway over the outcome of the match than a lucky string of crits via RNG does. And you wouldn't tell Blizzard to remove RNG from arena play on the grounds that it's "unfair", would you?
Therefore I fail to see how your argument stands up against mine. You cannot just say 'because it isnt gamebreaking, you have no argument at all'.
I'm only stating the facts, good sir.
And unless you can be more specific, your argument about a difference between a playerbase as a whole and PvP is irrelevant. You didnt really elaborate, you just repeated your words with slight variations before proceeding with your usual 'you dont understand at all', 'you are an idiot' comments. Lets have less of those please and a bit more elaboration on your point.
That's just it. I'm not saying "you're an idiot", you simply don't understand. That's a fact.
There's no need to elaborate because what I've said is all the proof necessary to support my argument and disprove yours. I can't just elaborate on a subject when you still fail to understand the core of it. It won't help anything. It'll just stretch the main point into an unreadable mess that you can pick apart with problems you find in formatting and semantics. I understand why you would want that, but it wouldn't further the argument any.
I fail to see how you can say that even if it gives an advantage over other players in PvP (as you have admitted) which not everyone in the PvP community has access to then it should be allowed in pvp - I just dont see how this type of advantage can be allowed.
I've answered that question just as many times as I've explained my argument to you. You just haven't been satisfied with the answer because it proves your argument false.
The real question is this: If something gives an advantage
that makes no difference in an arena match
, but that advantage isn't available to everyone, is it fair to use this advantage?
And the answer is clearly (to everyone but you) yes.
Dodged points count: A LOT
Post by
Synectics
Gotyouall, read both of these very carefully, and tell me which one is apparently the "right" response.
"_____, you're about 5 pages behind. I've explained exactly why Shadowmourne is unfair, it isnt the same as using epic gems or professions because the advantage they give is available to everyone, unlike with Shadowmourne (see previous posts to read why)."
"you're about eight pages behind. I've posted as to why Shadowmourne is nothing (see previous posts to read why)."
I want to know how your response is valid, while mine isn't. Please, explain it. In the meantime, I'll continue to refer you to my previous posts. If you'd like, I'll start goshad quote-flooding you.
Post by
sfagias
Seriously, I mean seriously, I am getting tired of you not answering my posts Gotyouall.
What I'm actually saying is that it gives an advantage which is noticable but isnt 'gamebreaking'. There is a big difference. The only way in which you could possibly say that its fair to use it in pvp is if Shadowmourne gave NO advantage at all in PvP - and I think we have both agreed that it does. Therefore I fail to see how your argument stands up against mine. You cannot just say 'because it isnt gamebreaking, you have no argument at all'.
As I, and others have stated over and over again, SM gives an advantage. It is true, but this advantage is really miniscule. Yes, it is still an advantage, we got that from 1 trillion repetitions that were not needed since we agreed that it is still an advantage, but you then went ahead and said that because not everyone can get it it is not a fair advantage. We excluded from that argument all axe-wielders since SM is obtainable with effort and therefore those who have it have a right to use it however they want.
Then you went ahead saying that it is not fair because it is not available to every class. While, I agree that it is a shame not everyone can have an orange shiny for each class this legendary benefits PvE much more than PvP. The stats SM gives are the same as any 284 ilvl in the game. Meaning that classes that cannot get SM can get
equal
level of stats (including weapon damage, speed). SM is different is because of it's awesome procc, which in PvE is amazingly good, giving a very good and
steady
boost on your dps. In PvP however, this procc is not steady, and does not give the boost it gives in PvE. What it does, is give a slight advantage, if you manage to stay on the target for some time. Now, while SM gives a small boost to someone's damage output(as any other ilvl284), many people
prefer
to grab the wrathfull weapons, for the boost in their survivability, so anyway, a legendary stat stick would not be as desirable as all that resil/stam. Taking all these facts I would like to finally conclude, that shadowmourne is one of the many items of the game that is obtainable if the player is dedicated enough, and anyone that can use it has a right to do so, since it is not overpowerred, it is not an exploit and it is not in any case gamebreaking. Therefore, the use of it is not unfair and should not be banned in arenas. The only thing it does is look cool, has a very nice effect and is of orange value, making it seem to several people overpowered. It is a powerful tool, yes, but not OP.
Post by
551048
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
688014
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
sfagias
Hmm if SM didn't give an advantage why are people using it over T2 PvP wep? And why would AJ folks QQ so much. Hmm, it gotta be something.... Because, it does give an advantage as said on so many posts before and plate wearers can afford the loss of resil/stam.
No retard on earth would take T2 wep instead of SM, that has to be the most retarded arguement I've ever heard, who's running full PvP gear anyway? No one.
Yep, noone runs with full PvP gear, I did not say such thing, and indeed between SM and T2 obviously most ppl will choose SM. However, I did say hypothetically if there was a stat stick of orange colour for casters, some might want to grab PvP weapons as most of these classes cannot afford the loss of survivability because they are constantly targeted.
When a legendary is only available to 3 classes, and the rest can't get their hands on one of course it will be unfair. It is 284 (T2 wep is 277) and on top of that it has a proc and 3 red sockets (rofl). Name anything close to that please. It's the proc that makes it OP not the weapon itself.
I adressed that already. Any 284 weapon has 3 sockets and equal stats. I agree, the procc is powerful, but in a high rated match it is not the easiest thing to stick on the enemy to get that procc to its full potential, and CCs might break the stacking. Obviously, it gives an advantage but it is not at all gamebreaking, and since the player worked so hard to get it, it is well withing his rights to use it anywhere he freakin wants. Are arena maches REALLY so dependant on one weapon? If it is not gamebreaking, and different kind of comps can counter it, and win matches why is it "unfair"? because other pplz can't haz orange? That is not an argument. That is QQ.
It would be unfair if only relying on a weapon, you could win matches. But you don't.
Post by
Monjaru
@Monjaru: You need to stop with the belittling and the insults.
The only belittling I've done is tell you that you're not understanding my points, which is obvious to anyone actually reading the argument for content.
And if you want to call a dodge its common practice to quote the points which I apparently 'dodged'The fact I've had to repeat information in the last (at least) half a dozen posts outta be your first clue. And considering how often you actually read quotes (see last three pages of discussion), I don't see how actually giving you quotes would change anything. You'd just complain that they're cluttering up the post with "unnecessary" or "irrelevant" information. My proof for this is your past action in this thread.
otherwise you're just making it up.
This, I will admit, made me laugh a little bit on the inside. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. What you just said goes completely against the very basis of human knowledge and how it's progressed over the years.
Do you actually have proof of this? Do you have proof that in a game of equal skill and gear the Shadowmourne team would not win noticably more than the other team? If you do I'd love to hear it, if you dont then this doesnt help you.
You're arguing in a circle, dude. We went over all this 6 or 7 pages ago. By checking the top 100 arena teams of last season, we find that just as many (if not, more) teams without SM (or even the ability to use SM) are present than those who are able to use it and do use it.
I dont really see how an advantage offered by having better gear is anything like RNG. You cant call RNG an 'advantage' because it is technically the same for both sides.
You're missing (or dodging, as it were) the point. The fact is, having SM on your team or not has about as much influence on the outcome of the match as a lucky string of crits via RNG. If you complained that it was RNGs fault you lost a match, you'd be told to L2P. Likewise, when you complain that the opposing team had SM on their side, you're going to be told to L2P. In other words: if you lost to a team that had a player with SM, it's not the fact that player had SM that caused you to lose. You wouldn't go to your team and say, "Oh well, the other team had a guy with SM; nothing we can do about that." You would say, "Oh well, we should've applied harder pressure at X time, chained our CC better at Y, and been more prepared for the heavy burst that came at Z."
And actually I'm not being inconsistent,
Despite the
fact
that it isnt gamebreaking however
, it should still be banned from arena because it isnt fair to those players who cant get that kind of edge in arena.
OK Monjaru basically
we are now just arguing over one point
, and thats the question of
whether it does or doesnt give a 'gamebreaking' advantage
.
This, good sir, is an example of inconsistency. There are a couple other obvious ones I could fish around for, but it does require quite a bit of work to do and I don't see why I should put so much effort into this argument when you yourself put in none. Actually try responding to all of my posts for once instead of just lumping things together; you'll miss a lot less that way.
As for citing specific examples of points you dodged: you could try addressing the two separate occasions I pointed out logical fallacies in your argument which you conveniently skipped over in your incomplete "recap" messages. Just as a start.
if anything you are. In your last post you said SM both was and wasnt an advantage - well, which is it?
Me? Whaaaaaaat? I'd like to call shenanigans, if I may.
Here's a nice assignment to start you on actually putting some effort into the conversation. Please, by all means, find in my last post where I claimed that SM doesn't give an advantage; I claimed it was an advantage (albeit a trivial one), but I don't recall this contradiction you seem to have found.
We agreed ages ago that Shadowmourne did give some sort of advantage, didnt we?
Do I need to start a count on how many times you say this again? I'd really rather not.
Yes, we've established that. It's the part that you always follow this with that doesn't make sense and discredits your argument.
(I'm not interested for the moment on exactly how big this advantage may or may not be). We agreed that it did give an advantage.
-.-
...
"It's an advantage." count for this post: 2
"It's an advantage." count that I've personally tallied: 4
"Its an advantage." count for this thread: Hoooolllllyyy $%^&thatsahighnumber
Now, pay close attention. I am not being inconsistent by saying what I'm saying. I'm saying that Shadowmourne gives an advantage, which I think is noticable.
What I'm actually saying is that it gives an advantage which is noticable but isnt 'gamebreaking'.
You knew it a few posts back, but now you're not so sure? Boy, that's awfully convenient for you... hey, wait a minute...
This, good sir, is an example of inconsistency.
BUT even if I'm wrong, it doesnt matter - the fact that it gives
any kind of advantage at all
(which we agreed) means that it shouldnt be allowed in arena.
More inconsistency. First your argument stated that the only reason it was unfair was because everyone couldn't get it, now all of a sudden you're back on the whole "It's an advantage, so it's unfair." thing again. Didn't you spend a whole page trying to convince us this
wasn't
what you were saying?
It is no good saying "it gives a tiny advantage, why shouldnt they use it? Its not noticable" because its still there. Its like saying that mages having an extra 5% crit for no reason at all should be allowed in pvp - I mean, it isnt
noticable
, but you cant deny that it helps.
I'm not denying it helps. What I'm denying it that it's unfair. Reason being: it makes no noticable effect on the outcome of arena matches, a fact you still have yet to make a reasonable counter-point against.
Post by
Synectics
@Synectics: The reason why mine was valid and yours is not is because you are just calling Shadowmourne a 'QQ magnet for lesser skilled players' (those were your original words, you didnt quote them here.) - I gave an actual argument in
response
to your argument
No. You said "go read my previous posts for an explanation." So did I. I'm not going to keep repeating myself for the sake of adding to my post count. If you want to know my valid points, head about 8 pages back -- especially if you expect me to do the same with your argument.
Post by
105944
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Synectics
but not everyone has the time to farm the gold for epic gems!
This, pretty much. Getting the gold or materials for epic gems involves PvE content. So does getting Shadowmourne.
They literally offer about as much of an advantage -- if you consider a player with 10 gems, using Rare quality instead of Epic, is just as much of a difference as Shadowmourne.
So why should some PvE content and rewards allowed in arena, and others shouldn't?
Post by
335609
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
551048
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
105944
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Synectics
SM is more than that. how?
Post Reply
This topic is locked. You cannot post a reply.