Celtic Heroes

i think mages were support pre update also, just that they werent as good at support so they thought they were a damage class :p

The game definitions of a mage did not agree..

Will Mages be happy? I doubt it.

They may be chipper as baby hamsters now... but give them a week to play with the new formula of lowered casting time + less energy use + quicker Shards + more power from Focus... and they will be back on the forums complaining that they get too much aggro from all the damage they are doing.

Then OTM will have to "fix" the Mage Health Issues.

Well then read your own thread as your arguing something you don't know what your arguing.

I can't comprehend your amazing grammar, oh highly intelligent one.

Do you agree that mage was a support class preupdate 3? Because that is the case you are attempting to argue.

Cloak of fire and lures is support, no? A "support" is something that helps other class by buffing a friend or degrading a boss. I'm not quite sure how you couldn't consider a pre-update mage a support.

Well I wouldn't consider those support by any means..

I was saying this blanket statement is false , and you are wrong .

I made no comment about Mage always being a support class. Though I consider all classes as support classes in one way or another.

It wasn't a blanke statement, it was a reply to the post above me.

And to the grammar nazi, I am on my phone and frankly don't give a **** to text 100% properly to appease you and your OCD, you understood what I said.

I'm not quite sure how you couldn't consider a pre-update mage a support.

As the picture shows, neither did OTM. Just because a mage has a spell that can be support does not mean it is a support class, which is what the person I was replying to was arguing.

Seriously read the whole conversation or don't but in..

It wasn't a blanke statement, it was a reply to the post above me.

And to the grammar nazi, I am on my phone and frankly don't give a **** to text 100% properly to appease you and your OCD, you understood what I said.

I'm not quite sure how you couldn't consider a pre-update mage a support.

As the picture shows, neither did OTM. Just because a mage has a spell that can be support does not mean it is a support class, which is what the person I was replying to was arguing.

Seriously read the whole conversation or don't but in..

I read the whole conversation on my thread thanks. It sounded to me like you didn't realize that lure helps cloak and always has. The fact you still have not acknowledged that over site on your part is very telling to me.

No, that is true, but it does not mean mage was already a support class which is what the post I was replying to was saying. Also it is very situationally a support spell only having helped when a mage casts cloak of fire and then lures it, not anything mear what the support mage is like post update 3. Do you want to catch me on a technicality that lure had an occurance where it was a support spell? Sure, fine, but it doesn't mean mages role was support preupdate 3 as what was being discussed.

Lol, look out Guffy here comes the coyotes.......

No, that is true, but it does not mean mage was already a support class which is what the post I was replying to was saying. Also it is very situationally a support spell only having helped when a mage casts cloak of fire and then lures it, not anything mear what the support mage is like post update 3. Do you want to catch me on a technicality that lure had an occurance where it was a support spell? Sure, fine, but it doesn't mean mages role was support preupdate 3 as what was being discussed.

"by any means"

It wasn't a "technicality" you made a blanket statement I was simply saying it was false, it's ok to be wrong .

As I already said it wasn't a blanket statement, it was in reply to the poster above and to our conversation he replied to me to. Read your last sentence you just posted..