Adhresa and Pintose probably aren't die-hard battleragers (n/t)

Adhresa and Pintose probably aren't die-hard battleragers (n/t):
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Dioxide's CForum Log Board ]

Posted by Joshu on September 11, 2000 at 12:41:49:

In Reply to: The thing I can't figure out is posted by Nepenthe(IMM) on September 11, 2000 at 12:38:52:

> Why don't the diehard Battle players love this guy?
>
> How many times have you heard someone bitch that there's no way a non-Battle warrior type can stand up to a Rager without having a healer (or whatever) permanently attached? Overpowered, blah blah blah.
>
> Now, as far as I know someone has 50,000 logs of Battle completely wasting this guy straight up. . . but at least a couple times, he's made it work. . .which makes Battle look a whole lot less ridiculous than is often claimed.

Follow Ups:

Text (for Adrhessa and Pintose) Clown Bake 11:42:16 9/12/2000 (2)
- Yep, that's what I meant. (n/t) Joshu 03:09:21 9/13/2000 (0)
- Oh, if you are correct. Then he is right. n/t Adrhesa 20:31:50 9/12/2000 (0)
Dont even say that. he called me a whore so I went to go attack him. I am a god damn defender so dont expect the deadly hits or anything. So shut the hell up! n/t Adrhesa 22:21:59 9/11/2000 (0)
i am the f***ing definition of die hard battle ragers(txt) pintose 18:39:21 9/11/2000 (0)

Post a Followup

Name:
E-mail:
Subject:
Comments:	> > Why don't the diehard Battle players love this guy? > > > > How many times have you heard someone bitch that there's no way a non-Battle warrior type can stand up to a Rager without having a healer (or whatever) permanently attached? Overpowered, blah blah blah. > > > > Now, as far as I know someone has 50,000 logs of Battle completely wasting this guy straight up. . . but at least a couple times, he's made it work. . .which makes Battle look a whole lot less ridiculous than is often claimed.