Post ascension Bishop build

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?