Talk:Caustacyst/@comment-108.35.8.17-20161116060726/@comment-27279105-20161117080714

objectivity and facts, i love it! now we can talk :)

from the context and your use of words it was clear to me that you're one of those that rage about PUG players and their use of certain weapons, if that's not the case then i take that back.

but i have some issues with your comparison: in the first part you compare it to weapons that have to use some mechanic like a charge attack, yet when calculating the times to kill, you compare it to straight up damaging weapons. i'm sure, compared to Glaives, the time to kill is much better on this one. from your times to kill we can clearly see that its regular attacks are not really viable compared to other weapon classes, no surprise here. but shouldn't you use the weapon in the way it deals the most damage for it to be able to compare? when you would compare Glaives time to kill with Staffs time to kill, I'm sure you would also test the throwing damage, not just stance attacks.

in the video i mentioned a Bombard lvl140 can be killed in 2 seconds, why should that not be considered? sure, you can say you don't like the charge attack because it's sluggish and gimmicky, and i'd agree with that, but it is still part of the weapon and has to be considered when rating the weapon's potential objectively. Now for "Bring an Inaros, Ivara, Loki, Equinox or heck use naramon": That's not really an argument imo, not being locked in your frame or focus choice is a huge plus from my view. i don't want having to choose my frame to fit my weapons, if you do that, it's fine, but it doesn't deduct from the weapon's performance. "You can also get the stealth multiplier by knocking down an enemy and setting them on fire before they get up" - are you sure? have you any proof for that? sorry, but i've never heard that before ^^ now if you say you don't like the weapon and it's mechanics, i'm on your side, i don't really like it either :D but it has great potential to deal insane damage und thus should not be called trash by someone that is able to objectively and scientifically analyse something like you :)