Post ascension Bishop build

If you're talking about the LHC hypothetical: it's only natural everyone wants HS for any party. Although the same point stands in an example where the support bishop isn't there, and the attacking bishop is sixth strongest instead of fifth (and there's no beneficial party buff that number seven offers that would offset the damage difference). People start parties with what they have available. In my server during 1x many LHC parties don't have hs these days.

So you admit it's an inferior party and that bishops who are forced to attack are a last resort. Okay.

If you're talking about a boss, I said "support you deem necessary" for a reason: sometimes people don't even care about a support bishop. For the longest time they weren't needed or wanted at PB, for example. Support is merely a role bishops can play, not one they inherently must. The hypothetical is about comparing an attacking bishop with other attackers.

Considering a bishops skill tree is greatly influenced by party skills it be pretty stupid to do anything else. Also for the PB method, the detail you forgot to mention was that we needed attackers, and stopped wasting slots on bishops. But wait, can you explain to me why no attacking bishops showed up? Oh no reason besides they suck in that department.

It makes zero sense to include someone weaker whose party skill is worthless. Killing the mobs slower than you otherwise could is slower exp. I don't think you're a good leader if you make the party have slower exp for illogical reasons.

You could barely scoff off a hypothetical situation this would apply to, which would need the following ingrediants:

1) A dead server so that you take what you can get
2) Everyone in the party essentially doesn't need SI which would mean they all have fast 5 weapons. Good luck with that.

That was the point of the LHC hypothetical: SI did nothing for that party. Support bishop is on the rope, BM/hurricane is fast enough with just booster, bam probably uses ele staff, NL is at speed cap, and so forth. Is it so insane to consider the needs and makeup of the party before making a decision?

Barrel is still more useful than attacking bishop for bosses.

I don't understand the mindset of people who make a class that's only useful for making numbers appear on the screen, personally. People make permabeginners - the rest of us certainly don't have to get it.

No you don't get it, I completely understand. See they make a class with big numbers and fun, opinionated gameplay, because they like efficiency with some fun on the side. Perma have no interest in training/bosses, they like the social aspect. Since perma are seen as unicorns, as not a lot of people would play a game solely on the social aspect, they get the attention they want. It's quick access to becoming a maple celebrity besides spamming witty smega's.

Besides, if you play anything besides a BM as of tomorrow, it will be less good than a BM at damage. You should take whatever funding and make a BM, or else you're just spending resources to put yourself on par with BMs.

There are a lot of influencing factors that let you choose a class, a bishop's influences do not include "1v1 DPS". Because most of their skills are party skills sought after, you should consider yourself active with parties, assisting, not attacking. I made a dark knight because I understood how the class functioned, they are a decent attack, which makes my DPS beneficial, and I have party skills that help the players to a degree that it was sought after, not so much anymore. You can't expect to be ridiculed for trying to convince players that a class that needs 8x more resources than a buccaneer should be acceptable as an attacker.

I'm arguing for a pragmatic party and bossing policy that actually utilizes resources instead of arbitrary (and damaging!) class/build discrimination.

It's efficiency princess. You build off your classes strengths, which would be the support role. Not a mule role, but your perogative should be support. If you don't like it, make another class because if you keep up with this royalty attitude, people aren't going to take you to boss runs.

By all means, if the higher damage attacker is available take them instead. Which is the same argument that supports bringing the attacking bishop instead of the bucc.

Barrel could give the entire party invulnerability as it can tank aggro's. A bucc's strengths isn't just dps and SI.

You actually doubt that its possible? Bishop's dps isn't 1/8 of the next weakest class (which may well be bucc right now, I don't know). It's entirely possible to get a damage range 8 times higher than the the weakest fourth jobber. If you insist...

I don't know what your dps list of choice is so I'll just give you a formula to figure out how much extra range the bishop needs to equal the bucc's dps. Link me if you want numbers, but I'll think you're pretty obnoxious if you actually make me do such transparent math for you to acknowledge my point.

assume bishop % damage per second is X (from the chart)
assume bucc % damage per second is Y (from the chart)
assume bishop's damage range (lets go with average) is A
assume bucc's damage range (average) is B

A*X = B*Y

plug and chug

Damage charts even by today's standards are useless. But I'll entertain the idea that a corsair with 0% potential possibly could be outdamaged by a bishop with 200%+, is it realistic? No. Should you invest more funds into a class to just be considered as an attacker, rather than, investing those same amount of funds into a class that would benefit more off of it? Probably not.

Nexon's "design" consists of the equivalent of random chance, there's no point in respecting its intent. I'm going to do what I enjoy and so will everyone else who doesn't play whatever class happens to top the dps list at any given time. All I had to do was show that bishops can attack, not that they're best at it, they just have to be better than the next worst option in any scenario I can imagine. You really want to argue against that?

The party skills that you are selfishly avoiding do not offset the damage increase that the bishop may have, let alone compare to the other attacking classes and their benefits besides damage. Maybe you'll care to explain, by your logic, why bucc's were taken rather than attack bishops? Since it's all about numbers and not other strengths the class may offer.

Back in the day when equips could only vary by a smaller range of stats, it was conceivable that bishop dps couldn't catch up to certain classes with normal funding. But in the age of potential, all bets are definitely off.

Doesn't that weaken your arguement further as most classes use top and bottom not overall?

What's that got to do with it? Anyone who actually committed to making a hsless bishop probably already has a hs mule or access to friends with hs. Address my points, don't harangue a theoretical character: the fate of mr crazy old McHslessbishop is completely irrelevant to this argument. He exists only to illustrate a point, I couldn't care how optimal his training was before hypothetical day any more than I care how optimally a permabeginner trains now.

So your argument is to make a new character to offset the uselessness that a bishop that focus' on attack is? Wonderful.