Need more clarity around 60% success rate in DE meta

[TrollingDemigod.3041]

20 minutes ago, Silent.6137 said:

That just made me scratch my head and go "huh? That made absolutely no sense at all .

I assume you're ascribing the 6/10 from the purportedly 60% success rate. And asking why a "case group" is failing 4 out of 10 times is totally flawed.

A good group will not fail 4 out of 6 times. A bad group will not succeed 4 out of 10 times either. It is the average of all the groups put together, not just 1 group. You simply cannot assume every single group will have 60% success rate. And use that number to represent the average group.

You're wrong though, "good group" can fail 4 out of 6 and "bad group" can succeed 4 out of 10, but that's solely dependant on RNG rolls and nothing beyond that.
It's still just coin toss with 60% rate.

[Silent.6137]

39 minutes ago, TrollingDemigod.3041 said:

You're wrong though, "good group" can fail 4 out of 6 and "bad group" can succeed 4 out of 10, but that's solely dependant on RNG rolls and nothing beyond that.
It's still just coin toss with 60% rate.

Not at all. If that's the case, then they're not good or bad groups, just simply average groups.

Good groups' winning percentage are in the high 90s. Bad groups' winning percentage are probaly in the low single digit. A good group will know how to overcome bad RNG. And consistently win with approximately 5 minutes to spare.

To the question of why good group still fail? Compositions. You can't always control who are at the meta. If enough players fail to listen and do not know the mechanics, then there's a chance it might fail.

A bad group succeeding? Again compositions. If it's lucky enough to get enough who understand what to do, then there's a chance of success.

Now for the average group who might win some and lose some. The commander probably have enough knowledge to lead the squad and does a few things right. However, there are many things the commander is bad at or neglected to do. Again, it comes down to the composition of the group. If enough of those in the group knows the mechanics, then the chances will be quite high. Otherwise, look for lots of frustrated players.

Average commanders ignore thornhearts, fail to make the right decisions whether to stay at the head or move to the tail, often do not assign splits to the groups and do not stress the importance of killing sub-bosses at the same time, etc., etc. People focus on commander's tag and follow it. Make wrong moves repeatedly, it's magnified because others will follow you. And ultimately, expect a fail meta.

 

Edited April 17, 2022 by Silent.6137

[Raizel.8175]

1 hour ago, Labjax.2465 said:

True, this game's combat mechanics are pretty obvious: it's obvious that someone on the team really likes particle effects and another person really likes telegraphs that would be feasible to see without all the particle effects, and they don't appear to have ever communicated with each other on anything. Or worse, they do and they consider the combination of those two things to be "challenging."

Sorry, but the relevant AoEs are distinctly visible. The only AoE that isn't all that visible is her gooey spit, but that doesn't really instakill you.

[Necrosian.1359]

Yeah this meta is 💩. Meta is unreliable. Rewards are 💩. It does nothing, but create toxic environment for both the hardcore and casual players. Ether side blaming the other for Anets incompetence.

 

kitten it i have my useless turtle, you can keep your kittenous meta Anet.

 

[Malus.2184]

1 hour ago, Silent.6137 said:

That just made me scratch my head and go "huh? That made absolutely no sense at all .

I assume you're ascribing the 6/10 from the purportedly 60% success rate. And asking why a "case group" is failing 4 out of 10 times is totally flawed.

A good group will not fail 4 out of 6 times. A bad group will not succeed 4 out of 10 times either. It is the average of all the groups put together, not just 1 group. You simply cannot assume every single group will have 60% success rate. And use that number to represent the average group.

The case group is one with average performance instead of one with good performance (I define good performance as so good that the group can succeed despite the mechanics). You had to create a straw version of it that you then responded to. That might work with someone who pays less attention to rhetoric than I do.

Someone else might have taken this post as you asking the question. In reality, you asked yourself a different question that looked alike that you then answered.

[Malus.2184]

14 hours ago, Cuks.8241 said:

Nah I got it. Well to an extent because I dont really read this back and forth anymore. It's been weeks now and there is really nothing more to say on the matter.

Just dont want to perpetuate the hyperbole that you need to show up anything close to raid ready to do this. 

So, what you're stating is, "they already did something and is never gonna do anything further"? I also never even expressed an argument that you needed raid prep, I checked my post history in order to see of I had done so by accident. So you saying that I said it is making a straw version of me that you can put any ridiculous opinion on that you then look better arguing against.

So, since you only seem to want to add dishonesty to the discussion let me treat you never posting again with an "oh no...Anyway."

Edited April 18, 2022 by Malus.2184

[Silent.6137]

13 minutes ago, Malus.2184 said:

The case group is one with average performance instead of one with good performance (I define good performance as so good that the group can succeed despite the mechanics). You had to create a straw version of it that you then responded to. That might work with someone who pays less attention to rhetoric than I do.

Someone else might have taken this post as you asking the question. In reality, you asked yourself a different question that looked alike that you then answered.

I did misread your post . So ignoring that, let's look at this:

Quote

What gives them four failures when they were showing the exact same performance that gave them six successes?

That's a false premise. You are assuming the compositions are the exact same, thus giving the same performance. It is not, hence the difference in successes. Same commander do not necessarily equate same performances, unless it's a closed instance and all members of the squad are exactly the same.  If they were showing the same performances, they'll achieve the same results more likely than not.

Edited April 17, 2022 by Silent.6137

[Malus.2184]

Just now, Silent.6137 said:

 

That's a false premise. You are assuming the compositions are the exact same, thus giving the same performance. It is not, hence the difference in successes. If they were showing the same performances, they'll achieve the same results more likely than not.

It's case group a case study means that everything is the exact same from each instance, composition, performance, etc.

[Silent.6137]

38 minutes ago, Malus.2184 said:

It's case group a case study means that everything is the exact same from each instance, composition, performance, etc.

So, it's nothing more than a rhetorical question. Since we both know this openworld meta cannot lead to such a test group. If it is, then it won't be openworld.

EDIT: Just wanted to add that such a case group will necessitate stacking a group so the chances of successes are reflected by the results. This is no longer a fair or random test group since you'll be manipulating the data to ensure such an outcome. And the question of why is already answered: data manipulations.

Edited April 17, 2022 by Silent.6137

[Cuks.8241]

27 minutes ago, Malus.2184 said:

So, since you only seem to want to add dishonesty to the discussion let me treat you never posting again with an "oh no...Anyway."

Oh... no, never tried to be dishonest, I just never wanted a discussion with you in the first place anyway.

[Sunshine.4802]

Had 0 successes with more or less organized pugs, decided to try once more since i needed mastery for charging crystals anyway. Comm planned, organized and shotcalled literally everything that's possible, but we still failed at 1%. Never doing this meta again unless it gets nerfed. And i hope everyone else who hates it just stops doing it so that anet can finally boast with their 90% success rate with no people playing

[AliamRationem.5172]

1 hour ago, Sunshine.4802 said:

Had 0 successes with more or less organized pugs, decided to try once more since i needed mastery for charging crystals anyway. Comm planned, organized and shotcalled literally everything that's possible, but we still failed at 1%. Never doing this meta again unless it gets nerfed. And i hope everyone else who hates it just stops doing it so that anet can finally boast with their 90% success rate with no people playing

Bruh.  I do this meta 10 times before breakfast and never fail.  You just need to show up 3 hours ahead of time, tag up, get at least 20 support classes and divide them between your subgroups, put on a blindfold and a ballgag, then pray to Cthulhu while doing the truffle shuffle, and for God's sake don't forget to take the haggis out of the oven!  Easy win.  I don't see what the problem is.

[Walle.6045]

Really good question by the OP.
I know I have not returned to DE meta since I cleared it twice in week 1 and 2. 

I just do not have the time to form a raid group in an open world environment to such a high degree of cookie cutter builds. Open world content is suppose to be fun challenging, not frustrating and community destructive. 

I have already accepted that DE meta will turn into a vabbi meta of sorts and be run by a dedicated group once a week or so in the future. Designers have a vision but that vision is not what the majority consider fun in open world, its fine I have come to peace with that. 

Its just a shame really as the fight is quite good and interesting. 

Edited April 18, 2022 by Walle.6045

[Dante.1508]

Do people not realize that 60% win is also a 40% fail, that is a huge percentage for a failure rate in an online game thats suppose to be fun and requires others to actually make it work..

No wonder people are mad and not interested..

[Wielder Of Magic.3950]

Then perhaps people should wonder  why the failure rate is that high in the first place. 

And instead of demanding nerfs, wonder if perhaps they could do something better.

 

I am going to repeat myself once again: 

 

1. Listen to your commander.

2. Play a build capable of doing more than 7k DPS when buffed ( Considering we have multiple 40k+ benchmarks in this game you are asked to play at a level that is less than 20% of what is possible. There are builds that can do 20k DPS with a single button press. 7k is not unreasonable people, you do not need a raid build for that, far from it!). 

3. When you see the big fat blue bar appear, use CC.

 

If people did those three very simple things we would see the clear-rate rise exponentially. 

But instead, people ignore the commander and do utterly incomprehensible things, do less than 3k DPS, and often don't even know what CC is. And yet, people think that while playing like that they deserve a win. 

And they drag the people down that do at least try the 3 things listed above. 

If you feel frustrated that your meta event failed while you did listen to your commander, did CC and did 7k DPS or more, you know it was not you. Unfortunately, there were not enough of you in the squad. 

 

This is why people organise outside  through discords. 

Not because the meta is hard. 

Not because we need everyone in ascended raid builds vomiting 40k DPS on the boss. 

But because if we don't, the squad gets flooded with people unwilling to invest a single thing. 

Get enough of these people and they reach critical mass, meaning the people that did invest can no longer carry the uninvested ones toward a win.

 

If you do invest the bare minimum you are welcome to join the organised groups without any issue!

But if you feel that being asked to do the bare minimum is toxic or infringes on your right to play how you want...best of luck in your own group and no hard feelings. But you will see that attitude reflected in your chances for a succesful clear. The choice is yours completely.

 

Edited April 18, 2022 by Wielder Of Magic.3950

[AliamRationem.5172]

21 minutes ago, Wielder Of Magic.3950 said:

Then perhaps people should wonder  why the failure rate is that high in the first place. 

And instead of demanding nerfs, wonder if perhaps they could do something better.

 

I am going to repeat myself once again: 

 

1. Listen to your commander.

2. Play a build capable of doing more than 7k DPS when buffed ( Considering we have multiple 40k+ benchmarks in this game you are asked to play at a level that is less than 20% of what is possible. There are builds that can do 20k DPS with a single button press. 7k is not unreasonable people, you do not need a raid build for that, far from it!). 

3. When you see the big fat blue bar appear, use CC.

 

If people did those three very simple things we would see the clear-rate rise exponentially. 

But instead, people ignore the commander and do utterly incomprehensible things, do less than 3k DPS, and often don't even know what CC is. And yet, people think that while playing like that they deserve a win. 

And they drag the people down that do at least try the 3 things listed above. 

If you feel frustrated that your meta event failed while you did listen to your commander, did CC and did 7k DPS or more, you know it was not you. Unfortunately, there were not enough of you in the squad. 

 

This is why people organise outside  through discords. 

Not because the meta is hard. 

Not because we need everyone in ascended raid builds vomiting 40k DPS on the boss. 

But because if we don't, the squad gets flooded with people unwilling to invest a single thing. 

Get enough of these people and they reach critical mass, meaning the people that did invest can no longer carry the uninvested ones toward a win.

 

If you do invest the bare minimum you are welcome to join the organised groups without any issue!

But if you feel that being asked to do the bare minimum is toxic or infringes on your right to play how you want...best of luck in your own group and no hard feelings. But you will see that attitude reflected in your chances for a succesful clear. The choice is yours completely.

 

Imagine feeling like you have to join tryhard discord to do an open world meta...

 

[daninumbers.4036]

When I read it and Anet being so proud I was left the same tbh: failed 11 times, got the egg off the vendor, failed again after "fixes" that didn't feel any different, failed another time after more fixes. Basically all of the attempts were organized squads, pugs as it's expected in open world, it's not an instance, but with our subgroups for boons, varied classes, full squad and at least me with my 10 stacks. If Anet is REALLY interested into making it challenging content that you must prepare for hours, get alacrity spammers in each subgroup, healers, dps... pull that off open world and make it what actual challenging content belongs to: strikes and raids. Creating a subcommunity around it that wants to beat it just alienates the rest of the people that does as with every other meta: someone tags up, maybe brings some friends or guildies and randoms join, with a fairly high chance of success if you don't lack numbers or really mess up. It's literally an either you join us or have fun failing for the 40th time.

If I've tried again after getting the egg (again, off the vendor) it was just to get the mastery points and the collection items but I would never be back to it afterwards and they surely can see how many players are returning to it.

Once everyone else stops doing it and just dedicated players farm it, a super high success rate will mean nothing, like it does now.

As I've said before: I'm not joining a discord VC with randoms for an open world event even if that's the only way to do this very specific one. The strike-like obsession Anet is having lately makes me really doubt any further content they pull will be interesting to me, just to the challenge lovers, so make it alternative an not a main thing, everyone happy. And I don't go to raid threads to say "hey guys you should make this easier, it's too hard for pugs squads!", so same don't go to the casual gamemode to say "we need harder content (that the average player can't do so we can feel superior or something?), don't nerf it please!" as you could see some threads about leaving it as it is.

 

[AliamRationem.5172]

1 minute ago, Alcatraznc.3869 said:

 

I mean you dont have to. But joining people in discord - and it doesnt have to be tryhard- drastically increases your chance of winning. PUG are just that bad.

 

But the vast majority of people here would rather waste their time crying than actually trying out these advices. Hell I still see people making LFG to boycott DE meta and these people stay 2 hours on a map doing nothing. 

 

We have reached a point where all the player here are saying "event sucks, rewards sucks no need to play the meta" but at the same time they keep doing the meta and failing. I dont know what it is. Schizophrenia ? Masochism ? Or maybe people are just jealous other can win the meta while they keep loosing ?

 

Whatever the reason it has became a joke. This is literally the image of someone who keep saying who goes to a restaurant, ask for a dishes, says to everyone "I hate this dish it is trash" but keep asking for it each time he enters the same restaurant and keep eating. 

I can only speak for myself, but I'm not banging my head against the wall.  I don't do open world metas for challenge (it's not like I can carry 50 players on my back, right?).  If something like Octovine or Chak Gerent failed half the time, I doubt I would bother with them either.  Yeah, I can join a discord and show up ahead of time if I want to win, but I just can't be bothered.  There are better ways to spend my time.

As far as I'm concerned, the only event worth a kitten in the whole expansion was DE meta, but they totally kittened it with that boring waste-of-time pre event cycle and the tuning of the final boss.  I'm spending no time in these maps currently.  I got my 455 mastery level, completed my story, and picked up all the skins.  There's no replay value there.

[Alcatraznc.3869]

9 minutes ago, daninumbers.4036 said:

When I read it and Anet being so proud I was left the same tbh: failed 11 times, got the egg off the vendor, failed again after "fixes" that didn't feel any different, failed another time after more fixes. Basically all of the attempts were organized squads, pugs as it's expected in open world, it's not an instance, but with our subgroups for boons, varied classes, full squad and at least me with my 10 stacks. If Anet is REALLY interested into making it challenging content that you must prepare for hours, get alacrity spammers in each subgroup, healers, dps... pull that off open world and make it what actual challenging content belongs to: strikes and raids.

What if Anet want a challenging OW content ? You know something that isnt like 99.9% of the game where people can mindlessly spam 1.

9 minutes ago, daninumbers.4036 said:

Creating a subcommunity around it that wants to beat it just alienates the rest of the people that does as with every other meta

Not really ? Anyone is free to join discord such as Hardstruck and participate un their DE run. That is one example among many. 

9 minutes ago, daninumbers.4036 said:

 someone tags up, maybe brings some friends or guildies and randoms join, with a fairly high chance of success if you don't lack numbers or really mess up. It's literally an either you join us or have fun failing for the 40th time.

Then have a better organisation

9 minutes ago, daninumbers.4036 said:

If I've tried again after getting the egg (again, off the vendor) it was just to get the mastery points and the collection items but I would never be back to it afterwards and they surely can see how many players are returning to it.

Once everyone else stops doing it and just dedicated players farm it, a super high success rate will mean nothing, like it does now.

Wrong. People will keep doing that event because it gives stuff to craft the new legendary weapons. 

9 minutes ago, daninumbers.4036 said:

As I've said before: I'm not joining a discord VC with randoms for an open world event even if that's the only way to do this very specific one. The strike-like obsession Anet is having lately makes me really doubt any further content they pull will be interesting to me, just to the challenge lovers, so make it alternative an not a main thing, everyone happy. And I don't go to raid threads to say "hey guys you should make this easier, it's too hard for pugs squads!", so same don't go to the casual gamemode to say "we need harder content (that the average player can't do so we can feel superior or something?), don't nerf it please!" as you could see some threads about leaving it as it is.

 

 

You are shooting yourself in the foot but whatever I'm not the one crying that I fail an event. 

[Alcatraznc.3869]

3 minutes ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

I can only speak for myself, but I'm not banging my head against the wall.  I don't do open world metas for challenge (it's not like I can carry 50 players on my back, right?).  If something like Octovine or Chak Gerent failed half the time, I doubt I would bother with them either.  Yeah, I can join a discord and show up ahead of time if I want to win, but I just can't be bothered.  There are better ways to spend my time.

That is a fair argument. 

 

7 minutes ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

As far as I'm concerned, the only event worth a kitten in the whole expansion was DE meta, but they totally kittened it with that boring waste-of-time pre event cycle and the tuning of the final boss.  I'm spending no time in these maps currently.  I got my 455 mastery level, completed my story, and picked up all the skins.  There's no replay value there.

 

I actually agree with that. Beside DE, the rest of EoD map feel empty if you're not doing collection, gathering material, doing meta event or doing story mission. On that aspect they messed up

[Labjax.2465]

6 hours ago, Raizel.8175 said:

Sorry, but the relevant AoEs are distinctly visible. The only AoE that isn't all that visible is her gooey spit, but that doesn't really instakill you.

You were making a generalization about where people should be at based on them playing the game up til that point and I made a generalization about what that experience is like. Pointing to one encounter doesn't really relate to that. Is the overall picture one of combat mechanics not being as obvious as you make them out to be, or are you correct in saying they are obvious, that is the question and my position is that generally (with some exceptions) telegraphs get covered by visual effects. This is in part based on my replaying all of the story (seeing some of it for the first time) within the last couple of months. And seeing a lot of open world content, too, such as bounties, zone metas, etc. Some encounters are undeniably messier to look at than others, but from where I'm standing, the overall picture is that it's hard to learn telegraphs in this game because of the visual effect spam. And if that's true, then encounters that are exceptions to the rule don't help much because if you aren't getting many chances to train those instincts, especially if the instincts you are training is instead to just give up and let yourself get hit because you can't see stuff anyway, then you are going to tend to get hit more than you would otherwise even when telegraphs are clear.

[Silent.6137]

4 hours ago, daninumbers.4036 said:

As I've said before: I'm not joining a discord VC with randoms for an open world event even if that's the only way to do this very specific one. The strike-like obsession Anet is having lately makes me really doubt any further content they pull will be interesting to me, just to the challenge lovers, so make it alternative an not a main thing, everyone happy. And I don't go to raid threads to say "hey guys you should make this easier, it's too hard for pugs squads!", so same don't go to the casual gamemode to say "we need harder content (that the average player can't do so we can feel superior or something?), don't nerf it please!" as you could see some threads about leaving it as it is.

 

Discord are not essential to successful runs but it helps. Also, no one are required to talk, just listen. In fact, you don't even have to listen if you don't want to. I'm not interested in listening to most of the chats anyways. Not interested in other's life history. Really. Just basic instructions by commanders when needed on the few occasions. If any commanders are doing a running commentary, he/she will be muted fast enouigh.

As for the meta itself, I sure hope Anet does not listen to the vocal minority and totally nerf it. It's one of the few interesting and enjoyable meta, for me anyways, where you don't have people just showing up to get a guarantee win. Or worse yet, afk until the final moment just to loot the chests.

It's a meta that requires participations and cooperations, not just showing up and mindlessly hitting. There's enough of those world bosses around where you just need to stand in one spot and press 1. Those are just farming mobs, only a little bigger.

Edited April 18, 2022 by Silent.6137

[Wielder Of Magic.3950]

6 hours ago, daninumbers.4036 said:

As I've said before: I'm not joining a discord VC with randoms for an open world event even if that's the only way to do this very specific one.

 

Listen to your commander.  Hit blue bars with CC. Do 7k DPS or more. If you can do that you can clear DE meta.

6 hours ago, daninumbers.4036 said:

The strike-like obsession Anet is having lately makes me really doubt any further content they pull will be interesting to me, just to the challenge lovers, so make it alternative an not a main thing, everyone happy. And I don't go to raid threads to say "hey guys you should make this easier, it's too hard for pugs squads!", so same don't go to the casual gamemode to say "we need harder content (that the average player can't do so we can feel superior or something?), don't nerf it please!" as you could see some threads about leaving it as it is.

 

Except droves of people have complained about wanting an easy-mode for raids....(here it comes) but without nerfed rewards. 

People want the reward, without the effort.

DE is nothing like raids or strikes, only people who never did any of those things think this. 

 

It is not the meta, it is you. 

I would love to quote the Dark Souls community with "git gud" here, but this is so far removed from 'git gud' it is laughable. 

It is more like 'please....git sum basics down that you had 10 years worth of content to learn plz'.

[AgentMoore.9453]

55 minutes ago, Wielder Of Magic.3950 said:

droves of people have complained about wanting an easy-mode for raids without nerfed rewards. 

Could you provide some examples of this?

The discussions I've seen regarding different levels of raid difficulty have seemed fairly consistent about having the rewards scale with those difficulties, ie: the harder the content, the more you get for your time. I think multiple difficulties for raids with scaling loot would be fantastic, not only for casuals who want to experience raids but also for those who enjoy them in their current state as more people playing means more incentive for development of the content - or any development getting done, given that raids died due to the tiny minority playing them. The tier system seems to work great in fractals, and I think it could work for raids as well.

And really, this kind of thing is the same reason people want DE adjusted in some way. We should all want it to appeal to more players, because we should want it to have high replayability so that the expansion remains attractive in the long-term. There should be an instanced version of the battle with Soo-Won tuned for challenge and an open world fight that is comparable to other open world metas. This way, the organized groups get full control of their group comp without having to carry and the challenge they desire, and the casual players get an event that is not only more on their level, but engaging and repeatable years after EoD's release. Bonus points if you want to add extra rewards or increased loot to the challenging version of the encounter; it will be fairly balanced by the open world alternative being accessible.

The intense back and forth in this thread over something like ArenaNet's nebulous 60% win rate claim only proves what an empty statistic the 60% is because no one seems able to agree about what it means. It doesn't tell us if a tiny minority is attempting the meta or if it's a high percentage of people who own EoD. People are guessing at what percentage of players are engaging with Soo-Won and which sort are in the win category and whether it's skill or RNG determining the outcome of the meta. Because we don't have the full picture, we're just screaming into the dragonvoid based on anecdotal experiences with DE, which gets us nowhere and has spawned some truly nasty remarks and sentiments.

How will EoD rank 6 months from now? A year? 5 years? When people ask 'which expansions should I buy?' will their friends be telling them to skip Cantha? This is what I'm thinking about.

[Malus.2184]

17 hours ago, Silent.6137 said:

So, it's nothing more than a rhetorical question. Since we both know this openworld meta cannot lead to such a test group. If it is, then it won't be openworld.

That's the reason it's a  case study with a model group to exemplify the case.  You make an impossible ideal to 'solve' the case.

Statistically speaking, DE has a binary outcome of either success or failure, or 50/50 if you want. Where a group lies in that binary depends on their performance. This means that once enough players have 'cracked the code' the success rate will trend towards 100%. People who've yet to 'crack the code' will fall into the failure binary. Either results occur due to the mixing of those two groups. You see this exemplified in other metas that once people know how to do it the success rate increase dramatically. The other EoD metas are good examples of this. When people had no idea what to do they would often fail. Once people familiarised themselves with them the success rate rose exponentially. The same effect should be seen in DE, yet it sits at 60% currently. This is the statistical oddity that needs to be examined.

In the above case, everyone in the group has 'cracked the code' so their success rate should be 100%. ANet has only said that the success rate is 60% instead of the overall success rate being 60%. This makes extrapolating the group's success rate into a simple 6/4 split relevant. The internal factors are all there to allow for a 100% success rate, so the only factors that can give this number in the other direction are external ones. Aka. the RNG.

I'll give an anecdotal example, I led an utter pug group with around average performance, we go both Break Bars at respectively 61% and 41%. The effect of this is that while the Break Bars are up the damage done to Soo-Won is reduced by 100%. In this situation we could either deal with the Break Bars and enjoy 5-sec of increased DPS before she phased and the remaining 25-sec was lost. Or we could let it time out and it would take 8-sec before she phased.

Due to the internal CD of that ability the two you get on average was gone. This resulted in 50-sec lost increased DPS. The encounter timed out when she was at 5% health. That 5% health would had been gone if the Break Bars had appeared at 59% and 39% health instead. This is the reason that no one can really get a consistent performance on her, unless their performance is so big that they can succeed despite the mechanics.

Sure, this might only have a 1% chance of happening and due to the Large Numbers effect once you have, for example, a 1000 instances it will have happened ten times. And you're out of luck if you have an averagely performing group and you're in one of those ten instances as nothing you can do can affect the outcome.

Edited April 18, 2022 by Malus.2184