I say to you as I said to Tom ... if Bind resistance build-up is something that exists on all mobs in the game, it would be just as easily demonstrated on a level 1 bunny as on a god, and it would in fact be a *better* test to do it on the bunny, since that excludes a lot of other variables that might interfere (such as, as you mentioned, level difference or INT difference).
A mob does not have to be higher level than you or have higher stats than you, to build up resistance. If it's gonna build up resistance, it's gonna build up resistance. If it's not, it's not. Level and relative stats have nothing to do with it.
If you haven't done the Tuning Out quest, the bees for that build up sleep resistance, but they're quite wimpy compared to a level 75. Ditto for the tigers for the A Chocobo's Tale quest.
And then you can go trot off to, I dunno, Ru'Avitau. Pull a Decorative Weapon to the zone so you can cheerfully sit there sleeping it without magic aggroing Aura Butlers. Sleep it for a half hour or so. It will not build sleep resistance, despite being quite a bit stronger level- and stat-wise than those wimpy quest mobs.
It would therefore be a logical fallacy to do as Tom did, and go "I fought these tigers for a quest once, and they built sleep resistance, so I think everything in the game builds sleep resistance." And then compound the already incorrect conclusion by using it as the basis for another conclusion, as in "Since everything in the game builds sleep resistance, and I didn't see any sign of it here, the person must be hacking."
Finally, go on to not only be wrong, but to piss other people off with your stubborn illogical behavior, with "Any of you who try to argue that my conclusion is wrong - arguing that I'm wrong about the whole sleep resistance thing in the first place, and therefore my logic, following from it, falls to bits - well, you're just blind little fanboys and I'm still right. You little peons aren't worth my time to actually prove my baseless claims that you seem to think are incorrect."
Substitute "mammets in a mission" for "tigers for a quest" and "bind" for "sleep" and you basically have Tom's argument, and the blatant logical problems with it.
Yes, it's possible Avesta hacks. I don't personally think he does, but it's possible, and I said that way back in the single-digit page numbers of this thread. All my arguing here *since* then, is not to the tune of "Avesta doesn't hack" so much as "Tomasello can't make a logical argument that can stand up to scrutiny, and here's the following holes in it." The fact that the subject of the argument is Avesta, or hacking, is quite irrelevant to me.
And that's my final word on the subject. Tom can feel free to reply to this with yet another caustic comment that doesn't actually respond to the points I've been making about the holes in his logic (as he has done in the majority of his previous replies to me), but unless he actually goes and makes a *logical* argument (and actually backs up his claims), I'm not particularly interested in replying further.
I'm certainly not holding out for a "Ya know, I was wrong about the game mechanics in the first place and didn't know what I was talking about - thanks for the corrections and clarifications, guys. I do still think he hacks although I have no evidence to convince anyone of it, but I apologize for making such a big stink about what was only my opinion." While that would certainly be gratifying to see, and would in fact probably be the most mature way for him to bow out of this and salvage some of his reputation after making a fool of himself, I ain't holding my breath.
artytime: I think this is the second time you posted something, it goes pretty much avoided, and then I quote on agreement.
