Quote Originally Posted by Supersun View Post
Really? Your great rebuttal essentially boils down to that the parse can't be true because "Sam is a DD"
Where is your argument? all I see here is "YOU'RE WRONG RDM CAN DO IT HERE IS 4 YEAR OLD FAKE DATA" that's not an argument, that's digging a deeper hole for yourself.

I have seen the errors of my way. Not even math itself can challenge the mighty Aurara.
Lol@this statement, you're really upset aren't you? I'm sorry i made you so upset but i have yet to use math, i wasnt the one who used the 80% number to start.

You are just hiding behind terms like gimp and DD without giving any proof of why
Really? because SAM is geared to DD, RDM is not, gimp SAMs are a joke to outparse on any job, so you aren't helping your case in the slightest.


First off if Sam is a DD and because it is a DD it does more damage then a Red Mage the question is how much.
Now we're getting somewhere, and the answer you want to know is, SAM does a lot more DMG than a rdm if geared properly and played correctly.

Multiple parses have backed this ~80% claim and while the example parse posted was...slightly old...I have seen other ones since then that have continued to back the 80% claim.
It does? I'm pretty sure that parse data is faked or has crap DDs with crap gear, where are all of these other parses that support your data, surely you can find these with relative ease and swiftness to back up your alleged claim that RDM can be a viable DD.

The degree which a parse is accuracy can always be questioned, no parse is 100% accurate, but since you refute the 80% number so quickly surely you must have some other piece of evidence to replace it with. If a Rdm can't do 80% of a Sams DD then how much does it do and what evidence do you have to back it up? Surely, you have something to back your claim and it's not just 'a hunch' because Sam is a DD and Rdm is a mage.
I refute it because it's total BS, and it's clear you have 0 understanding of game mechanics, or how DD jobs perform. Truth be told I don't know how a RDM would perform, probably in the 15-20% range if I had to make a logical guess(if that). I can back my claim because I'm not ignorant of how SAM performed at 75 and how RDM DD ability was at 75.


Likewise what do you call gimp? What point does a DD stops being gimp? Because until you can give some form of definition for that you can essentially invalidate any piece of information you receive with the veto of gimp. Hell, the definition might as well be 'if the DD cannot outperform a Rdm by at least 20% then he is gimp'.
Gimp is a crappy DD with crap gear, I'm not saying you need OMG AMAZING SUPREME GEAR, but a decent build, multiple TP/WS set depending on camp etc.

Rearden stated that 99% of the population isn't worth comparing too so is 99% of the population gimp? The term gimp derives from someone being crippled. It infers that a 'gimp' player is one that performs to an inferior standard to the average 'healthy' player. If you consider 1% not worth parsing against then you aren't claiming that that they aren't gimp, but they aren't +2 blue box super saiyan elite. Gimp does not mean anyone that didn't have an Amanomurakumo.
He's saying that since so many players flat out suck, and gear terribly you can't compare yourself to them when you claim to come within 80% of what a SAM does as rdm lol, because fact is you will if they are terribly geared and play like crap.

Believe it or not those ~80% parses were against above average geared players. Sure they weren't perfect in any way or form, but Hagun + Haidates + a respectable store TP set is certainly not gimp.
Let me clear something up for you, Hagun was garbage compared to Tomoe or Levi Course at birdcamp/MJSP/anything not HNM, because penta destroyed everything, any intelligent player would have used polearm in those situations, those who didn't, well i wouldn't consider them all gimp, but if you argued against it you're dumb, and if you choose to play that way that's fine but just know you aren't going to perform as well as a person who used polearm in any of those situations(im not including amano in this at all so dont even bring it up in your argument)

Even if we presented the most concretely solid piece of evidence the world has ever had the pleasure of witnessing you could just as easily 'invalidate' it by just claiming that the player wasn't trying or wasn't skilled.
Prove me wrong then, show me solid evidence and show me the gear you have vs the gear the SAM has.


There is literally nothing we could present that could change your mind. That's fine, we all have our personal beliefs. But could you at least try not to make some of the most ridiculous logical fallacies I've seen on the internet and at least present something that has the semblance of evidence if you are going to claim that other people's points are wrong and yours is right?
Same goes to you.