What team without Grievous should I farm and gear to unlock 7 star Padme in 1-2 months (next return)

"Letareus;c-1895555" wrote:

"Woodroward;c-1894362" wrote:
Removing the qualifying adjective doesn't change the meaning to that of the base word. He is the one who said necessary. I responded to him saying really necessary. This isn't the same as necessary. Yeah being able to do it in a million attempts without him means he isn't necessary. But in a more practical sense, he may as well be. It's the same thing with saying basically required.

So misleading here. I responded to his "basically required" with "unnecessary" with the intention of speaking in the same vein. Maybe I should have said "basically unnecessary," but...seriously?

Necessary is the same as required, it's a difference without a distinction, and he was the one who first started referring to Grievous in that manner, whether hedging with a qualifier or not. While it's technically true that I was the first one to use the word "necessary," that was only in response to Woodroward using the synonymous term "required." His post 6/1/19 1:22PM:

"Woodroward;c-1874064" wrote:
The 3 characters that are basically required to win are GG, Asaji, and B2.

My first use of the word necessary was days later on 6/4/19 at 10:02PM, in the form of "unnecessary." It was intended to be in the same vein as he first mentioned, since I was replying to his argument even though I should probably have put a different quote above my response. My point was that Grievous is neither required nor basically required to 7 star Padme. He's wrong on both counts. Or he was trying to weasel his way out with semantics.

Let me make it clear now: Grievous is not required to 7 star Padme, nor does not having him make it unlikely you'll succeed in doing so.

It may be true that I didn't address this directly enough; we may have been distracted with too many other things. It didn't take a million attempts to 7* Padme without Grievous even the last time around. That's a gross exaggeration. And an exaggeration is a form of lying. There's no such thing as truthful hyperbole. It might depend on how good your mods are, though. Next time around, it'll be even less true that Grievous is "basically required" with all the reworks. But Woodroward is busy fighting the last war.

It may take many attempts to 7* Padme without Grievous; it may take several hours. But it doesn't take perfect RNG that takes a million attempts. It's not unlikely. In the following thread alone, seven unique players clearly succeeded in 7 starring Padme without Grievous (several more may have but did not make it clear so I didn't count them): https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/203264/7-padme-without-grievous-use-geonosians-asajj-and-b2

Their usernames are: Arobot19900, usArmyJedi, Neo2551, Worst_Idea_Ever, IgorconQueso, nivbp7, and HermitProfOak. In addition to that, InRevanWeTrust on this thread (page 1) also did it without Grievous. That's at least 8 separate individuals who managed to 7* Padme last time around in just 2 threads, and we should all know that the overwhelming majority of players neither read nor post on forums. 8 separate people on only 2 threads did it without Grievous last time, and next time will be even easier with reworks. Yes, it's soooooo unlikely (sarcasm).

"Woodroward;c-1894362" wrote:
TLDR: Doesn't matter what my words mean to you, matters only what is meant by my words and everything I stated was true and correct in this thread as long as people don't egotistically force their own understandings onto what I have stated.

First, some of the things he has stated as facts on this thread can be neither true nor false because they are either opinions and/or depend on subjective value judgements (e.g., his argument that one should farm everything in the fleet store to 7* before getting a single zeta mat from there). Those aside, many of the things he has stated are objectively false and have been proven as such yet he continues to insist they are true by smoothly brushing aside details and specifics with broad generalizations (and ignoring refutations).

The main one is his insistence that getting 7* Padme without Grievous is unlikely as stated above. Another one was his statement that there is no value disconnect between him and I, which could not be more obviously false - if he disputes this I can write several paragraphs of examples of obvious value disconnects but this post is long enough already.

You may be the one who originated this thread, but you are the troll here. I didn't respond to you. That post was not directed toward you and I'll thank you to erase this post I quoted and not look at what I post again because i have made it abundantly clear that whatever I am discussing has nothing to do with you.

These are my words you're quoting. Having a different idea of what they mean doesn't mean "you have a differing opinion", it means you're wrong because they're my words and I told you what they mean. Accept the truth or get off my back because you're just plain wrong simply by responding to me at this point.

I have never been proven wrong in this thread because the meaning of my words and my viewpoint have the same origin. To insist upon meanings from other points of views is pointless misdirection, or to put it another way, not just wrong, but INTENTIONALLY wrong.

So go ahead and argue some more thereby cementing your status as an egotist or a troll, but leave me out of it.

Get over yourself.

"Woodroward;c-1895748" wrote:
You may be the one who originated this thread, but you are the troll here. I didn't respond to you. That post was not directed toward you and I'll thank you to erase this post I quoted and not look at what I post again because i have made it abundantly clear that whatever I am discussing has nothing to do with you.

These are my words you're quoting. Having a different idea of what they mean doesn't mean "you have a differing opinion", it means you're wrong because they're my words and I told you what they mean. Accept the truth or get off my back because you're just plain wrong simply by responding to me at this point.

I have never been proven wrong in this thread because the meaning of my words and my viewpoint have the same origin. To insist upon meanings from other points of views is pointless misdirection, or to put it another way, not just wrong, but INTENTIONALLY wrong.

So go ahead and argue some more thereby cementing your status as an egotist or a troll, but leave me out of it.

Get over yourself.

Once again, I refute his arguments, and he deflects with generalities, possibly because he is unable to respond to the substance of my contentions.

His main points were totally proven wrong, and it's not for lack of understanding his meaning. His main claim is that not having Grievous makes it unlikely that you can succesfully complete the Padme event (7 stars). He claimed that you need perfect (or near-perfect) RNG to do so successfully (million attempts, etc.). I showed that that was patently false in my previous post - a cursory search found at least 8 separate individuals who were able to 7* Padme the last time around without Grievous in relatively short order, which would be ludicrously improbable if the RNG situation were as dire as he claimed.

It doesn't matter who he's addressing it to (though he addressed that point directly to me many times). It doesn't matter if he tries to cloud the issue with semantics about who said first or not understanding his meaning. That was his main point. It is wrong, it was shown to be wrong, yet he continues to insist that everything he said was completely correct.

He made many other points that were shown to be false as well, but I won't make this post overly long by revisiting them; maybe I will if he continues to defend himself.

It's unclear what he means by having a differing opinion about what he wrote. I agree that one cannot have an opinion on a poster's intended meaning and never disputed that. There were one or two things that I misinterpreted him on and I admitted fault. But I didn't misinterpret everything he said, and he acts like those couple of misunderstandings mean that I misterpreted everything he ever wrote. Also, he did the same thing he accused me of and misinterpreted many of the things I wrote - but unlike me, he never owned those errors. If he's referring to my comment about some of his arguments being opinions - he completely misunderstood that. What I was saying that many of the things he said, no matter the position and no matter the interpretation are opinions and not facts, not that I had an opinion on what he said.

It doesn't matter if a post is directed toward someone or not. Posts don't exist in a vacuum. They reflect the poster's meaning, intent, values, etc. no matter who he directs it to and anyone is free to respond to those or use them to support an argument. One doesn't magically morph into a different person everytime one talks to someone else.

This is a thread meant to help me with my specific case. Woodroward is the one who gave some fair advice at first, but after a certain point, gave bad advice and his comments gradually started morphing into trolling in defense of said bad advice. It has been made clear a while ago that some of his advice is bad and undesired yet he continues to post here. If that's not trolling, I don't know what is. Projecting much? He needs to take his own advice.

@MasterSeedy
I think Sun Fac should be a couple of tiers higher:
He was a critical part of the “budget team” some people used 1st time round to unlock 7*
Poggle(l), Spy, SunFac, Ventress and B2. All need to be G12 of course.

I have just pushed Sun Fac to G12 and with trash mods he’s sitting at 71k Protection —> so 90k+ will be easy. He’s got a dispel on basic and can Taunt....

"Letareus;c-1896838" wrote:

"Woodroward;c-1895748" wrote:
You may be the one who originated this thread, but you are the troll here. I didn't respond to you. That post was not directed toward you and I'll thank you to erase this post I quoted and not look at what I post again because i have made it abundantly clear that whatever I am discussing has nothing to do with you.

These are my words you're quoting. Having a different idea of what they mean doesn't mean "you have a differing opinion", it means you're wrong because they're my words and I told you what they mean. Accept the truth or get off my back because you're just plain wrong simply by responding to me at this point.

I have never been proven wrong in this thread because the meaning of my words and my viewpoint have the same origin. To insist upon meanings from other points of views is pointless misdirection, or to put it another way, not just wrong, but INTENTIONALLY wrong.

So go ahead and argue some more thereby cementing your status as an egotist or a troll, but leave me out of it.

Get over yourself.

Once again, I refute his arguments, and he deflects with generalities, possibly because he is unable to respond to the substance of my contentions.

His main points were totally proven wrong, and it's not for lack of understanding his meaning. His main claim is that not having Grievous makes it unlikely that you can succesfully complete the Padme event (7 stars). He claimed that you need perfect (or near-perfect) RNG to do so successfully (million attempts, etc.). I showed that that was patently false in my previous post - a cursory search found at least 8 separate individuals who were able to 7* Padme the last time around without Grievous in relatively short order, which would be ludicrously improbable if the RNG situation were as dire as he claimed.

It doesn't matter who he's addressing it to (though he addressed that point directly to me many times). It doesn't matter if he tries to cloud the issue with semantics about who said first or not understanding his meaning. That was his main point. It is wrong, it was shown to be wrong, yet he continues to insist that everything he said was completely correct.

He made many other points that were shown to be false as well, but I won't make this post overly long by revisiting them; maybe I will if he continues to defend himself.

It's unclear what he means by having a differing opinion about what he wrote. I agree that one cannot have an opinion on a poster's intended meaning and never disputed that. There were one or two things that I misinterpreted him on and I admitted fault. But I didn't misinterpret everything he said, and he acts like those couple of misunderstandings mean that I misterpreted everything he ever wrote. Also, he did the same thing he accused me of and misinterpreted many of the things I wrote - but unlike me, he never owned those errors. If he's referring to my comment about some of his arguments being opinions - he completely misunderstood that. What I was saying that many of the things he said, no matter the position and no matter the interpretation are opinions and not facts, not that I had an opinion on what he said.

It doesn't matter if a post is directed toward someone or not. Posts don't exist in a vacuum. They reflect the poster's meaning, intent, values, etc. no matter who he directs it to and anyone is free to respond to those or use them to support an argument. One doesn't magically morph into a different person everytime one talks to someone else.

This is a thread meant to help me with my specific case. Woodroward is the one who gave some fair advice at first, but after a certain point, gave bad advice and his comments gradually started morphing into trolling in defense of said bad advice. It has been made clear a while ago that some of his advice is bad and undesired yet he continues to post here. If that's not trolling, I don't know what is. Projecting much? He needs to take his own advice.

No, you had no valid points because you were responding to comments not directed towards you with your values.

Finding evidence that people have done it without gg doesn't equate to it not being unlikely.

Nothing you have said to me is valid. It's pointless troll bait. That's why I never addressed what you said.

Now please get my words out of your mouth.

"Woodroward;c-1897530" wrote:
No, you had no valid points because you were responding to comments not directed towards you with your values.

The validity of a point is independent of who it's directed at. Oversimplified hypothetical analogy:

Woodroward to Person B: 1+1=3
Me: That's not true.
Woodroward: Sorry, I wasn't talking to you, so your objection is invalid. Everything I said is true.
(crappy analogy I know, but it's for the sake of brevity; better, lengthier analogy will be furnished if this one proves inadequate)

Not only that, but many or most of my points were actually responding directly to your comments directed at me. Once again, you take the few times I responded to a comment you made to someone else to characterize all my responses. And even those times I was quoting a comment you made towards someone else, the greater point I was making was in response to something you directed at me or directed generally.

"Woodroward;c-1897530" wrote:
Finding evidence that people have done it without gg doesn't equate to it not being unlikely.

It is when so many people did it without Grievous in such short order. Arobot19900 posted his thread and in only a few days, one person after another after another managed to duplicate it. 5 people managed to follow in his footsteps, and he himself was following a Reddit user. If it's as unlikely as you claim, it would be unlikely for even one person to post that they duplicated the feat since the majority of players don't read or post on forums.

To be clear, you characterized it as extremely unlikely with terms like "miillion attempts" and "perfect RNG." 5 people managed to replicate perfect RNG in a few days? If you had said that it was a bit difficult/slightly unlikely, requiring good mods and a few hours on average, that's arguably true. The extreme to which you characterized it as, however, does not reflect reality. Perhaps it is true for people with poor/mediocre mods, I'm not sure.

"Woodroward;c-1897530" wrote:
Now please get my words out of your mouth.

What about all the times you misunderstood or misinterpreted things I've said? Again, I admitted fault for the couple of instances where I misinterpreted you and corrected myself. You have never done the same. And most of my other readings of your statements were correct, but you use the few errors I made to characterize all of them.

"Woodroward;c-1897530" wrote:
Nothing you have said to me is valid. It's pointless troll bait. That's why I never addressed what you said.

If you misread or don't read the things I said carefully, it's easy to dismiss them as invalid. Admittedly, it's not an easy thing to do because my posts have been long-winded. Even so, you may not be able to read anything I write with a clear head ever since you took offense at something that was not intended to offend. In retrospect, it probably wasn't the best way to do what I was trying to do.

Just quit it already.

@Shadowscream

I think Sun Fac should be a couple of tiers higher:
He was a critical part of the “budget team” some people used 1st time round to unlock 7*

Maybe I'm wrong about Sun Fac. I think I've made a good assessment, but obviously I am a fallible human and I can't try all the different combos out first. Thanks for your input. I genuinely hope that everyone here gets her next go 'round, whatever team they use.

"Letareus;c-1898002" wrote:

"Woodroward;c-1897530" wrote:
No, you had no valid points because you were responding to comments not directed towards you with your values.

The validity of a point is independent of who it's directed at. Oversimplified hypothetical analogy:

Woodroward to Person B: 1+1=3
Me: That's not true.
Woodroward: Sorry, I wasn't talking to you, so your objection is invalid. Everything I said is true.
(crappy analogy I know, but it's for the sake of brevity; better, lengthier analogy will be furnished if this one proves inadequate)

Not only that, but many or most of my points were actually responding directly to your comments directed at me. Once again, you take the few times I responded to a comment you made to someone else to characterize all my responses. And even those times I was quoting a comment you made towards someone else, the greater point I was making was in response to something you directed at me or directed generally.

"Woodroward;c-1897530" wrote:
Finding evidence that people have done it without gg doesn't equate to it not being unlikely.

It is when so many people did it without Grievous in such short order. Arobot19900 posted his thread and in only a few days, one person after another after another managed to duplicate it. 5 people managed to follow in his footsteps, and he himself was following a Reddit user. If it's as unlikely as you claim, it would be unlikely for even one person to post that they duplicated the feat since the majority of players don't read or post on forums.

To be clear, you characterized it as extremely unlikely with terms like "miillion attempts" and "perfect RNG." 5 people managed to replicate perfect RNG in a few days? If you had said that it was a bit difficult/slightly unlikely, requiring good mods and a few hours on average, that's arguably true. The extreme to which you characterized it as, however, does not reflect reality. Perhaps it is true for people with poor/mediocre mods, I'm not sure.

"Woodroward;c-1897530" wrote:
Now please get my words out of your mouth.

What about all the times you misunderstood or misinterpreted things I've said? Again, I admitted fault for the couple of instances where I misinterpreted you and corrected myself. You have never done the same. And most of my other readings of your statements were correct, but you use the few errors I made to characterize all of them.

"Woodroward;c-1897530" wrote:
Nothing you have said to me is valid. It's pointless troll bait. That's why I never addressed what you said.

If you misread or don't read the things I said carefully, it's easy to dismiss them as invalid. Admittedly, it's not an easy thing to do because my posts have been long-winded. Even so, you may not be able to read anything I write with a clear head ever since you took offense at something that was not intended to offend. In retrospect, it probably wasn't the best way to do what I was trying to do.

Regardless of your meager protestations you are arguing about something that doesn't concern you and mistaken in 90% of your counterarguments anyway.

For the last and final time, please get my words out of your mouth (that means don't quote me, don't argue with me, and for the love of pete don't let your ego tell you to explain how you're "right" yet again)

Your arguments had no merit to begin with. I told you exactly why I didn't bother putting more in it in my last short post. Accept that truth because it will set you free from your egotistical posturings. You really have only discord to sow by responding to me again.

"MasterSeedy;c-1900091" wrote:
@Shadowscream

I think Sun Fac should be a couple of tiers higher:
He was a critical part of the “budget team” some people used 1st time round to unlock 7*

Maybe I'm wrong about Sun Fac. I think I've made a good assessment, but obviously I am a fallible human and I can't try all the different combos out first. Thanks for your input. I genuinely hope that everyone here gets her next go 'round, whatever team they use.

I personally disagree vehemently on Sun Fac. I switched my g9 Sun Fac out for g7 asaji early on because all of Sun Fac's counter attacks made his contributions more negative than positive.

Anyone who got Padme with Sun Fac would have been better throwing in a g1 level 1 toon instead.

"Woodroward;c-1900179" wrote:
Regardless of your meager protestations you are arguing about something that doesn't concern you and mistaken in 90% of your counterarguments anyway.

For the last and final time, please get my words out of your mouth (that means don't quote me, don't argue with me, and for the love of pete don't let your ego tell you to explain how you're "right" yet again)

Your arguments had no merit to begin with. I told you exactly why I didn't bother putting more in it in my last short post. Accept that truth because it will set you free from your egotistical posturings. You really have only discord to sow by responding to me again.

Your own words are far more appropriately applied to yourself.

My primary arguments all ultimately respond directly to or relate to things you said directly to me. For example, the viability of a team without Grievous is a topic that you addressed me on directly me many, many times and which is of primary importance to my ultimate goal here. Now, according to you, it is something that doesn't concern me.

I support all my arguments with evidence, detail, and/or specifics. You do not. You mostly ignore evidence and respond with unsupported general claims to the effect of "you're wrong lulz." It is easy to say anything you want when you don't back it up. Your arguments are the ones without merit.

And you are doing the exact same thing you accused me of when you responded to MasterSeedy in your last post. Exactly the same thing. MasterSeedy was clearly addressing @Shadowscream, not you. By your logic, "you are arguing about something that doesn't concern you." Pure hypocrisy.

GG is not necessary. Id say go fo ass7aj, dooku, nute, b2 and magna guard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lh2VzT222E
like most other events, it is easy with the right mods and chars