|
Quote:
|
|
Unfortunately your analysis of my post is inaccurate. As I've mentioned the given scenario is based on the parameter of having hp/sp stone usage restricted, in this case a mage whose cast distance is far greater than a fighter's would easily remove the fighter's potential of casting any spells via a mana burn. From the point on the fighter is left with only regular attacks and plain chasing. With the low level of MDef a fighter posses a mage firing their skills will kill a fighter in 2 rounds, this can be done easily as the fighter won't even reach the mage after the first round of firing (even without slow). Once the mage finishes with the cool down while kiting death is certain for a fighter. I'm not saying that as a class mage> fighter, but within the given scenario the mage will win far easier against a fighter than the other two (archer can fire off shots in roughly the same distance, and given their critical rate and possibly the chance of landing a poison itll be over for the mage, and as for a cleric they simply have better MDef than a fighter with or without sp).
|
Lolz, if a fighter would accept to fight a mage without stones than THAT FIGHTER is a total moron, yes of course the mage will win but A FIGHTER WILL USE stones and WILL NOT accept a ridicolous fight such as that. IT"S like giving the mage all his adv while taking away all the adv from the fighter. Your example is something like this. Hey let's put a mage right next to a fighter and let's see who wins and have them both fight without skills (that would mean no spells for the mage, that is how ridicolous your example of a fight without stones between a mage and a fighter is not using stones)
A fight without pots is perfectly normal, a fight without STONES is totally ridicolous sorry for the expression but really, is hilariously ridicolous in a mage vs any other class.
BTW against an archer the mage has no chance whatsoever, Archers are known for beign Mage killers
