I'm being as clear as i can. You just can't understand me, and that is not my problem.
The only use cygnus had was easy characters to level that can be made for the sake of blessing, which is what i made mine for.
Though i really doubt they'll have to revamp cygnus again unless they raise the level cap to 300 or something. Suggesting UAs might become useless only means you're suggesting that nexon might actually go that far where they would have to revamp everything again, and i doubt this game will come to that.
Only because you still don't understand what i said.
I never said that they would be reborn into regular adventurers that can hit 200. You did. I never said that being reborn into regular adventurers would make non-cygnus reborned adventurers useless. I never acknowledged that system to be possible to begin with, and even if it were possible, normal adventurers wouldn't be useless, they would just be easier to make.
By the way, soul driver is currently stronger than my dragon strike on enough targets and is also stronger than my demolition in multiple target situations (zak arms, possibly HT). So no, that skill is not useless when it comes to 4th job. The rest are imo, though. I would probably make a UA NW if they gave poison bomb though. Vampire is just way too slow and too weak.
Ditching and deleting are completely different things. Ditching would mean abandoning your main for a new one, but you can still play the old character...
Creating an adventurer would only be skipping a step for a small sacrifice if under your "cygnus rebirth into normal adv with 200 lv cap", not my "rebirth into UA" system.
1) I don't (more specifically CAN'T) play this game anymore.
2) I already knew this point was directed at a larger audience and not specifically myself. I reference myself because it's an easy example that i can relate to, so it's easier to compose arguments.
3) Considering that's what the system that I proposed earlier is MEANT TO DO IN THE FIRST PLACE (not to mention that's what the cygnus system was meant to do), no.