gaira wrote:
Dracoth wrote:
gaira wrote:
as an example, quick footnote to the zuchetto argument i noted reading dracoth's post when i posted, is a prime example of what i mean.
for spells that macc is a relevant stat, how could you possibly deny that it is a good piece? i use it for stuns, sleeps, drains, enfeebles, etc. with appropriate +stat and/or stave given circumstances. i'd even go as far to include morrigan's, nashira, and diana's, but that's just me. and that's just one stat on one piece of gear, heh.
for spells that macc is a relevant stat, how could you possibly deny that it is a good piece? i use it for stuns, sleeps, drains, enfeebles, etc. with appropriate +stat and/or stave given circumstances. i'd even go as far to include morrigan's, nashira, and diana's, but that's just me. and that's just one stat on one piece of gear, heh.
Since you're referencing my post, I'll assume you're only talking about the second one. Reread my first post (where I was more concise) and the tone of the second one (where I was replying to why it shouldn't be fulltimed).
Specifically, from my first post:
Dracoth wrote:
The only thing redeeming on the Zucchetto is the M.Acc, but that's macro only. You shouldn't be tp'ing int this head piece.
conceded, but my main point was that we should definitely not exclude situational pieces that are very good at what they do.
gaira wrote:
ok, hopefully last edit for a while til i see a response, went hunting through my spellcast to see sets i defined and what i personally would like to see included in a comprehensive blu guide:
tp set
ws set
cannonball
big 3
macc
cures
mnd nukes
int nukes
chr nukes
breath spells
now i don't know if that's what your guide intended to accomplish, but with the help of the blu forum i think it could certainly become that.
Re. something I didn't quote about you stopping reading -- I can respect that, although I'd like to know exactly what else you disagreed with, and why.
Edited, Jan 8th 2010 5:12am by Lucinus
