Greedy Goblin

Monday, July 18, 2011

Running is shameful but effective

Lord Rhyolith was fixed on July 14. I They "nerfed" him on July 8, by giving the volcanos separate stacks. This way different volcanos couldn't roll stacks, when one volcano is destroyed, its stacks cannot be refreshed by the next. What they missed is +120% is smaller than  2*+60% as 1.6*1.6 = 2.56 > 2.2. So they actually buffed him. Now they fixed it, making Rhyolith the same difficulty as Shannox..

During the unfixed period, we wasted 3 raids trying to kill him. We figured out several ways how could we be better, none worked. Rhyolith was just broken. Now, if we ask why did we lost the time, "Rhyolith was broken" is not a useful answer. We couldn't know back then that he is broken. We had every reason to believe that he is nerfed since we firstkilled him and we just suck.

The good answer is "we lost the time because we kept banging our head to the wall". Accepting that we can't kill him, no matter why would be accepting defeat. The problem is that we were no less defeated by not accepting it. We only wasted time we could spend on Alysrazor and Baelroc.

Being effective needs to look for the easiest road that leads to where we want to go. We did not looking. We kept trying the "proven" road. After all we killed him before, we must be able to kill him again. Too bad.

It's not the mistake of Blizzard that wasted our time. It just blocked us from killing Rhyolith. Our own stubbornness wasted our time.  Don't make the same mistake! The little Devil will keep telling you that "you can't leave defeated!". Yes you can. You should pick your battles smartly. Rather win the objective at the cost of giving up a battle than the other way. The little Devil telling you to keep on banging your head is a set of social subroutines that want to prevent you look bad front of peers. "We ran from Rhyolith" sounds worse than "we kept trying on him, never gave up". But killing Baleroc is better than wiping on Rhyolith.

Looking good and doing well are mutually exclusive. Pick yours. I picked mine.


Yaggle said...

A lesson learned again and again throughout history. Example: Stalingrad World War II. The Germans were sure they should be able to take the city. But it was buffed more than they expected. They kept trying, never gave up. They never recovered from it.

Anonymous said...

Surely looking good and doing well are not mutually exclusive if you are, say, an entertainer.

Anyway you're right in this case and as Yaggle points out, this has cost many lives in the past.

Anonymous said...

Your assertion is true only you define your goal as "kill as many bosses as possible during a set amount of time".
For someone who rather enjoys a finding new strategies to beat an old encounter, "banging the head on the wall" could be more cost-effective.
Unless he's a M/S, he will still improve himself from failed attempts - and that's all that matters for some players.

Anonymous said...

Your calculation is wrong...
Remember that with 1 Stack, it was quite impossible to drop the stacks. With the splitted debuff, the stack can drop.

This mechanik deals more dmg to the raids, that cant manage the vulcano's, while its less dmg, when you play it correctly.

Even with the changed mechanic, you could easily kill him. So instead of calling him broken (and he has several mechanics that arnt working perfectly!!), you should ve focus more on how to adept.

pippen1001 said...

this has not always been the case, in raiding before you only had one way off boss killing order so you had to kill it before moving to next.

chewy said...

We couldn't know back then that he is broken.

I was tempted to reference back to your post where you wouldn't accept any excuse for disconnecting during a raid, not even the axe through the cable from an errant street maintainer but that's not the point I want to make.

I agree with your post that it would have been better to move to another boss, there is no shame in better utilising your time. But since we pay for a service where was the service in this example ? Why didn't Blizzard test the patch properly in the first instance and tell us in game that this is broken rather than expecting the player to search out the answer ?

Perhaps because there isn't a fair face to capitalism. "How many players are we going to lose if this patch doesn't work ? Probably not many, ah well, we'll test it live then"

Weapon X said...

He was still killable though, plenty of people were killing.

This is probably why you stayed and wiped.

Anonymous said...

No idea how you can call the boss broken when one mechanic of many of the fight is changed, and even though the formula might not give the exact same result as before it is still very doable. We killed it on hc, and the damage taken with proper volcano stomping is actually lower due to the stacks resetting, something that wasn't ensured before. Oh and by the way the spark's hp was stealth nerfed from 3M to 2.5 on hc, not sure about normal.

That aside, I can't agree more with your conclusion, some fights in Firelands, especially on hc just require certain setup/class stacking to be doable with only 2 weeks of farm, so ye more research before the fight actually meant more bosses down faster :)

maxim said...

You actually could know if he was broken or unkillable.
If someone took a log after 1st wipenight, sat down with it and compared Rhyolitgh's actual damage output vs healer throughput and sustainability, he would have figured it out.
Thing is, it is a thankless job that takes hours. Something a goblin would never do. So nobody in the guild did it. So you kept not knowing that the boss is unkillable. So you wiped.

That someone with the log could have found a way to kill him regardless. That would be awesome, but since it is boring and thankless job and feels more like work than play, again nobody did it.

Finally "this boss is broken and unkillable" is a favourite M&S excuse. Even if you are perfectly justified in using it here (which in itself is doubtful), the line between using it here and using it everywhere else is way too thin for my liking.