Post ascension Bishop build

ok, i'm really tired of this whole bucc vs bishop thing, seriously, that isn't how the game even runs anymore, enough potential will offset the classes with similar DPS

I wish someone would lock this thread.
Look how overexaggerated it's become. It was funny for a few, now it's just annoying.

That isn't even a sensible statement. Having 50% faster DPS in a party offsets the HS exp bonus. I already said it's not more efficient training to build a hsless bishop since there aren't skills that give 50% extra damage in the place of HS's SP, but that's not the argument I'm making so why do you keep wasting my time?

Well see if you had this thing called sentence comprehension you'd see all I'm saying is HS is not offset by your damage period.

I guarantee it, it's my goddamn hypothetical. I object to your use of the term "waste". The only waste here is all the bandwidth you've used failing to make an argument. And whenever you play your not-BM, by your "reasoning."

Because it's only one hypothetical that exists. A bm can't solo everything, it needs other classes skill's, other classes strengths. Guess what the damage output of a bishop is? A credible weakness. You're trying to argue that a bishops damage output is actually worth ignoring your other party skills. That is incorrect and will always be incorrect.

No, it can't. In the hypothetical the HS bishop is weaker than both the bucc and the HSless bishop. It's not redundant to have a better attacker. Where we differ is in what makes someone a better attacker. I say it's because one has higher dps than the other, and the other brings nothing else to that particular situation. You say its the bucc because it's not a bishop, with no relevant reason whatsoever to back it up. Which I say is illogical discrimination that should stop.

Okay I concede, your made up fantasy of one instance, and probably the only instance passes. Much like a permabegginer could potentially be more worthwhile to have then the bishop, depending on your biased, unrealistic circumstances.

It doesn't matter, the circumstances can arise. That's all that's necessary and sufficient for my argument.

By your logic permabegginers then have the edge. And it isn't because that doesn't justify dumb asses going around going "well I'm an attacking bishop, we can just get an hs mule".

They aren't your resources. Stop telling other people how they should spend them, your grace.

Then don't be angry when people like me tell you the reality that the idea of attacking bishop is just irrational. It's going against the grain because your class isn't designed to focus on damage output. As another bishop has pointed out, solo isn't your strong point. We rely on eachother, and I can't rely on a guy who feels his idea of participation is ignoring the party to act like a rebel. Alas it's a maturity thing, kid's at your age just don't understand, but I forgive you.

Very good! It only took how many posts for you to grasp that?

And how many post will it take you to realize that 1 instance does not at all justify that argument. It's like saying someone should go mountain climbing even though he weights 300lb's, has heart problems, and has cancer, but is qualified to do it anyway because he's not carrying an oxygen tank. So because of that one what if instance, he's more qualified than one other person, he should go. Aka Retarded.

What would those hundreds mean? That there are circumstances where you should take a stronger attacker than the attacking bishop? Very good! That is also the case! I'm arguing for party optimization not arbitrary class selection.

See above, obviously the whole scientific theory thing went over your head 1 what if instance does not justify reasoning.


Name one

How about the 7 other classes above it, the party skills that benefit eachother, and the fact not every person in the game has a fast 5 weapon. There, 3 instances off the top of my head.

Who cares? It's unlikely people build bishops for attacking compared to the proportion that build for support, so these "few" situations will find those "few" bishops.

And even less will tolerate them. I guess you refer that to elitism, I call it natural selection. Why would I pick someone, essentially screaming to me, "I'M NOT VERY GOOD WITH COMMON SENSE BECAUSE I CHOSE A CLASS DESIGNED FOR PARTIES BUT DECIDE TO SOLO BECAUSE IM SELFISH"

My hypothetical is LHC, you should really try to stay on topic.

So all attack bishops can do is train. Wonderful, less retards I have to deal with.

Yes, and how to build their characters. Quite presumptuous of you, isn't it?

Once you are able to read the full quote rather than stopping then I'll confront your comment. Other than that, it's hammering common sense.

In spite of having all kinds of great party skills, a bishop can be funded to the point where their dps exceeds other classes. Therefore, there are circumstances where they are better attackers than strictly attacking classes (which you conceded). I don't find it helpful to say that bishops are strictly a support class with that in mind. And my argument says treating them as such is illogical, given these bishops-make-preferable-attackers scenarios.

So can perma beginners, doesn't make them any less successful. I don't think you understand the volume of funds to actually accomplish that, oh well not that I have to worry, pretty sure no one would be dumb enough to attempt to accomplish it.

You're the one having a fit because you think someone else wants to do something in a game with their own character you disagree with.

What selfishly lure in parties for a solo bishop that is worthless to me? Yeah I have a problem with that. I have a huge pet peeve against this disease against "dumb". You say I have a problem with bishop's doing unique builds, I have a problem with them expecting us to piggy back them during boss fights. You don't take the best part of your class and take it away to pretend something you're not. Believe me, you aren't.

But on the subject of his chart, which you want to bring up, after saying that charts aren't reliable and you don't want to talk about them....

it's 19xx% for bishops/sec, what's the bucc number? I'll even take the handicap of no bahamut, no infinity, and no teleport, which are Joe's numbers.

Joe gave up an analysis not a chart, none the less I don't know, I expect since numbers are so easy to plug in you'd figure it out.

Err, do you know what logic is? My hypothetical is as I described, and it's designed so that it can be a straightforward dps comparison.

But no one is going to pick an overfunded bishop based of dps when other factors still remain, period. You might as well argue permabegginers while you're here. Completely possible, but just as silly.

The extra HP is generally held to be inferior to having undispellable 40% at real bosses. And BMs still do more damage. But hey I don't want you losing sleep over your ongoing descent into uselessness. Let's stay on the topic of your lack of an argument.

Real bosses call for that extra 20% as well, it's a double edge sword really. Which is why real players like me have HB pants and 60% hb skill, oh and know how to play my class. See I know my class, I educated myself on it, it's a mid tier attacker with support, best of both worlds. A bishop is a support class that's DPS hinders it, it's his flaw, you guys suck solo. I take my strengths and recognize my weakness', you try to throw outrageous amounts of money at your weakness hoping to offset it.

Math's already provided. It's a four variable equation, I'm sure you can handle it. Oh wait, you already conceded a bishop can be stronger, stop wasting my time.

Why do you think your time is so important? you sit here arguing a circumstance I'd challenge you to find, and once again, permabegginers are clearly better than bishops, as they can be stronger than bishops, it only makes sense, especially since you gave up your party skills.

How is that? And how do you not fall into the exact trap I described about having to be the top dps class or else you're inefficient? Is your DK deleted yet? I might have to stop listening if not, because you're making a very obvious contradiction here.

I don't think you understand what I'm saying, but that's okay, your frustration of your inferiority is clearly shining. Anyway, bishop's strongest point is parties, support. Their weakest is damage. If you take away their best asset to enhance their weakest, you're making a worthless class. It loses all its advantages to try to offset it's weakness. It's like a car, you don't take away its speed to enhance it's durability, you aren't going to win anything driving a brick down the race track. In fact the corsair is the polar opposite of a bishop, it's entire success rests on damage, period. It has no party skills at all, so what, we should take away corsair's skill books enhancing his attack to increase to mw30, and accept him as a party corsair? Give me a break. The only contradiction here is your actual intelligence vs your holier than though attitude.

I'm arguing that players assess an attacking bishop as such. If they can do the job, let them. I am arguing against people solely allowing for bishops for support. As you conceded, a funded bishop can attack better than characters of other classes.

...So far the only character you've presented is a buccaneer, which by the way aren't as popular since the downfall of bigfoot. In fact I find it more likely that the buccaneer maybe a mule, so in reality you wouldn't be fighting a spot against a bucc, it probably would be one of the warrior classes. Good luck outdamaging that lmfao.

Just like you shouldn't be brought unless you already have a funding advantage over a BM. Because you're soooo inefficient.

The funny part is that I do in fact own a BM. Although the advantages of my dark knight, such as stance, sacrifice, HB, and soon to be dark impale, kind of suit my playstyle more than a Bm. Damage presented is not damage gurranteed. Most bosses have you on ledges, aren't affected by scare crow, and spam mobs that certainly get in the way. Each class has it's own advantages, you're stripping away the bishops to try to excel in damage that you weren't even needed for.

That wasn't me. And I already described one set of circumstances where the bishop is better than at least one alternate attacker. And you already conceded bishops can be stronger. Tick tock.

One as likely as me being abducted by aliens, a pure attack bishop would be sought after as much as a non-se BM. Oh did you know BM's need that party skill? Kind of helps them and their party. We could bring an SE mule, pair it up with the hs/advanced bless mule, and I don't really like HB'ing so I might as well bring that. All and all you option of simply putting up mules with the party skill's quickly falls flat on your face considering party limits at bosses. So no, I'd rather take a normal bishop who can attack(possibly) and use his party skills rather than waste a slot.

I never said godly to describe 100% int, why are you putting it in quotes?

"100% int come in and outdamage all the attackers"

lolno you'd need probably double that.

I'll flame your class some other time, let's focus on how you don't have an argument, and I'm right.

I would love for you to try, I'm sure everyone including me has gotten bored of your wanking over your bishop not being the all purpose character you led yourself to believe it was.

Obviously having a reasoned debate with you is a waste of time.

Here's all I want from you, and the only part of your post that's remotely relevant:
One reason why my providing one hypothetical to prove my point is illogical, of which you said there were hundreds.

Because it's as unlikely as a permabegginer funding himself so hard he outdamages you. The 100's of examples would be contradictions to your one single, rather only scenario possible. Which really isn't anymore considering how dead the bucc population is now, so you'll be challenging much more efficient classes for that last spot. derp.

I think this is an important issue to argue. Wholesale discrimination against particular skill builds is a bad thing for the whole community.

People said I was crazy for maxing doom back in the day, but it was fantastic in the early days of alien pq. Classes can often do more than what the dominant build would permit, most simply deem the tradeoff not worth it. But that's a far cry from worthless, redundant, and the other words certain individuals are using to describe them in this thread. And it takes community recognition to let irregular skill builds or high funded, low damage classes party and succeed in the game.

Congratz doom was useful for one temporary PQ.

This argument is going nowhere. You are either unable or unwilling to address my points. I proved a scenario where having a bishop attacking, not hsing, not supporting, not doing anything besides attacking, is preferable to available alternatives. Imagining scenarios where that is not the case does not disprove the existence of scenarios where it is.

You're trying to argue that a bishops damage output is actually worth ignoring your other party skills. That is incorrect and will always be incorrect.

Even though I said several times to the contrary, sure, why not: how much a bishop values damage compared with support is entirely up to the bishop. Just like its up to you how much you value being able to have 20% more hp versus the extra damage you'd have as a BM. If you claim to decide for everyone the value of all their decisions, your attitude is orders of magnitude worse than a princess's and you need a stiff reality check.

As far as permabeginners go, even the "paltry" (and lowball) 1800% damage/sec would be versus what, 120%/sec for a permabeginner? You aren't getting 15x the range of a bishop on a permabeginner. But feel free to undertake that quest in order to disprove me, it seems like that will be a par use of your time.

How about the 7 other classes above it, the party skills that benefit eachother, and the fact not every person in the game has a fast 5 weapon. There, 3 instances off the top of my head.

A party is six people, so of the seven, the attacking bishop and the bucc had no relevant party skills. In the hypothetical, everyone's speed is at the cap already. You're describing conditions that aren't the hypothetical. Nothing about the hypothetical is illogical.

If: the hypothetical is logical
Then: Circumstances can exist where an attacking bishop, with no party skills whatsoever, is preferable to available alternatives for a party
Therefore: Bishops can be desirable as legitimate attackers, playing no support role whatsoever
In Conclusion: People shouldn't act as if bishops must be support only

And it doesn't take much permutation to imagine similar scenarios for a boss or anything else you think bishops aren't fit attackers for.

That's all I asked for, you had nothing, go chill out or cry more about your class

This argument is going nowhere. You are either unable or unwilling to address my points. I proved a scenario where having a bishop attacking, not hsing, not supporting, not doing anything besides attacking, is preferable to available alternatives. Imagining scenarios where that is not the case does not disprove the existence of scenarios where it is.

Scenario* there is one scenario and it's a rare occurance, in fact one I have never dealt with in last 5 years I was playing. The only scenario you can provide is one that, really makes no difference. Bucc's are taken for SI, barrel and mob control, not necessarily damage. As is a bishop with HS/bless/res. I'll eat my own pants when I see "R>attacking bishop" in a legitimate fashion.

Even though I said several times to the contrary, sure, why not: how much a bishop values damage compared with support is entirely up to the bishop. Just like its up to you how much you value being able to have 20% more hp versus the extra damage you'd have as a BM. If you claim to decide for everyone the value of all their decisions, your attitude is orders of magnitude worse than a princess's and you need a stiff reality check.

A reality check, from someone who believes that a bishop qualifies as an attacker because it's second to last? Assuming that's true anyway, you aren't worth the time to do a pomegranate ton of research on both classes. And just fyi, as a player who evidently know's how to play maplestory, knows party skills are priority over damage, because your party needs you as much as you need them. Making a non-party bishop is essentially saying you have the social skills and intelligence of a honeybadger. If you play a supportive class and try to squeeze damage out of it, sacrificing majority of your attention from the party, then why the fu`ck wont you just go solo.

Oh right, you can't.

As far as permabeginners go, even the "paltry" (and lowball) 1800% damage/sec would be versus what, 120%/sec for a permabeginner? You aren't getting 15x the range of a bishop on a permabeginner. But feel free to undertake that quest in order to disprove me, it seems like that will be a par use of your time.

Why not? The bishop could be unfunded, completely worthless in fact! It's no different than your bucc vs bishop, the reality is there, therefore can be applied. I mean for all you know your bishp could be using a 7x staff, while the beginner is using the 220 mop which can be scrolled to, 300+ attack easy, legit. Possibility is there, you have to take that into consideration! That you can be lower....than a permabegginer lmfao.

A party is six people, so of the seven, the attacking bishop and the bucc had no relevant party skills. In the hypothetical, everyone's speed is at the cap already. You're describing conditions that aren't the hypothetical. Nothing about the hypothetical is illogical.

Except the fact it would never happen, feel free to prove me wrong, it's not like you have anything better to do, useless class and all, assuming you have no party skills.

If: the hypothetical is logical
Then: Circumstances can exist where an attacking bishop, with no party skills whatsoever, is preferable to available alternatives for a party
Therefore: Bishops can be desirable as legitimate attackers, playing no support role whatsoever
In Conclusion: People shouldn't act as if bishops must be support only

And it doesn't take much permutation to imagine similar scenarios for a boss or anything else you think bishops aren't fit attackers for.

That's all I asked for, you had nothing, go chill out or cry more about your class

You provided one example, that is so goddam specific that using that as argument's sake is retarded. Are you so desperate to become an attacker? Are you so blown away by the fact that the class you chose is not attack oriented? Then start over.

I don't know how to make it anymore clear to you that,

A) Your example is so specific, even under the assumption you outfunded the bucc, as equal funding would make it unfair in your arguments favor, that's it's not even worth using as legitimate data. I can't even find the vocabulary to tell you that generally the bishop will be weaker, and that general consensus, like any other general statement, may have exemptions, but does not justify that a bishop (by your own logic) be accepted generally as an attacker. And frankly I doubt anyone would party with someone who made a bishop without party skills because they are clearly downright retarded.

B) Bishops are not mules who sit on ropes, but their priority should be party, just like any other class with party skills. If you can't understand that, a new class of corsair awaits you.

C) I could care less what you say my position as a dark knight is, because frankly why is your opinion even credible when you're so confused on the position on something as obvious as a bishop?

This argument is going nowhere. You are either unable or unwilling to address my points. I proved a scenario where having a bishop attacking, not hsing, not supporting, not doing anything besides attacking, is preferable to available alternatives. Imagining scenarios where that is not the case does not disprove the existence of scenarios where it is.

Scenario* there is one scenario and it's a rare occurance, in fact one I have never dealt with in last 5 years I was playing. The only scenario you can provide is one that, really makes no difference. Bucc's are taken for SI, barrel and mob control, not necessarily damage. As is a bishop with HS/bless/res. I'll eat my own pants when I see "R>attacking bishop" in a legitimate fashion.

Even though I said several times to the contrary, sure, why not: how much a bishop values damage compared with support is entirely up to the bishop. Just like its up to you how much you value being able to have 20% more hp versus the extra damage you'd have as a BM. If you claim to decide for everyone the value of all their decisions, your attitude is orders of magnitude worse than a princess's and you need a stiff reality check.

A reality check, from someone who believes that a bishop qualifies as an attacker because it's second to last? Assuming that's true anyway, you aren't worth the time to do a pomegranate ton of research on both classes. And just fyi, as a player who evidently know's how to play maplestory, knows party skills are priority over damage, because your party needs you as much as you need them. Making a non-party bishop is essentially saying you have the social skills and intelligence of a honeybadger. If you play a supportive class and try to squeeze damage out of it, sacrificing majority of your attention from the party, then why the fu`ck wont you just go solo.

Oh right, you can't.

As far as permabeginners go, even the "paltry" (and lowball) 1800% damage/sec would be versus what, 120%/sec for a permabeginner? You aren't getting 15x the range of a bishop on a permabeginner. But feel free to undertake that quest in order to disprove me, it seems like that will be a par use of your time.

Why not? The bishop could be unfunded, completely worthless in fact! It's no different than your bucc vs bishop, the reality is there, therefore can be applied. I mean for all you know your bishp could be using a 7x staff, while the beginner is using the 220 mop which can be scrolled to, 300+ attack easy, legit. Possibility is there, you have to take that into consideration! That you can be lower....than a permabegginer lmfao.

A party is six people, so of the seven, the attacking bishop and the bucc had no relevant party skills. In the hypothetical, everyone's speed is at the cap already. You're describing conditions that aren't the hypothetical. Nothing about the hypothetical is illogical.

Except the fact it would never happen, feel free to prove me wrong, it's not like you have anything better to do, useless class and all, assuming you have no party skills.

If: the hypothetical is logical
Then: Circumstances can exist where an attacking bishop, with no party skills whatsoever, is preferable to available alternatives for a party
Therefore: Bishops can be desirable as legitimate attackers, playing no support role whatsoever
In Conclusion: People shouldn't act as if bishops must be support only

And it doesn't take much permutation to imagine similar scenarios for a boss or anything else you think bishops aren't fit attackers for.

That's all I asked for, you had nothing, go chill out or cry more about your class

You provided one example, that is so goddam specific that using that as argument's sake is retarded. Are you so desperate to become an attacker? Are you so blown away by the fact that the class you chose is not attack oriented? Then start over.

I don't know how to make it anymore clear to you that,

A) Your example is so specific, even under the assumption you outfunded the bucc, as equal funding would make it unfair in your arguments favor, that's it's not even worth using as legitimate data. I can't even find the vocabulary to tell you that generally the bishop will be weaker, and that general consensus, like any other general statement, may have exemptions, but does not justify that a bishop (by your own logic) be accepted generally as an attacker. And frankly I doubt anyone would party with someone who made a bishop without party skills because they are clearly downright retarded.

B) Bishops are not mules who sit on ropes, but their priority should be party, just like any other class with party skills. If you can't understand that, a new class of corsair awaits you.

C) I could care less what you say my position as a dark knight is, because frankly why is your opinion even credible when you're so confused on the position on something as obvious as a bishop?