It's been over 5 years. Can we remove Enrage Timers already?

[Krzysztof.5973]

I've got a better question. What's the definition of insanity? 

[Linken.6345]

4 hours ago, ShroomOneUp.6913 said:

you didnt explain anything. you argued for the sake of arguing, supposedly completely missing the point that i was merely saying people need better proof to the debunk the false claim of "no amount of skill can overcome raids"/"raids are impossible".

in fact you have shown to be the person that you have a low understanding of english, that You argued something nobody said.

but it shows how you could amass 4,4k posts in 4 years. i bet 4k of them are just you arguing semantics.

To debunk the no amount of skill would be able to overcome claim

 

All you got to do is show a video of people doing it with gear and traits from the same time period aka 2015 to debunk it mate.

 

Dont need any pug or minimal skilled people to do it at all.

[yann.1946]

19 hours ago, ShroomOneUp.6913 said:

i made bad analogies in my live but this one takes the cake. your example is about morality and not a task/activity being possible for someone at a certain time period. not to mention that is more about a "system" then people just stating something false and other trying to disprove them with thing after the false claims time period

 

Yes it was about morality, but tbh this confirms what I thought. This part was about the structure of an argument. 

 

Edit: A particular reason you did not address the second analogy? 

 

Quote

 

 

 

but it is, as it was in response to the false claim that "only power creep made raids possible and that no amount of skill can over come them"

Exactly it was in response that no amount of skill can overcome them.

(wait do you agree that the claim "only power creep made raids possible, and no amount of skill could overcome them before the power creep" is a false claim?) 

The reverse of nobody can do something is nor everyone can de something, it is someone can do something. 

Quote

the only person looking at it as a "big system" right now is you. i handle it as a situation of people with a false claim, people with inappropriate "proof" and me saying "get better more appropriate proof" to debunk the false claims.

NO, like verifiable no. You specifically mentioned the broader context of this tread, when confront with a specific point. 

Edited July 8, 2021 by yann.1946

[Haru.5493]

On 6/6/2021 at 2:26 AM, SkinnyT.5382 said:

 

Due to the DPS quota created by this feature, raids become an very  restricted and elitist play area in the game. A player cannot come as their best self; with the the builds they have played with and won in every other area of the game. No ; they have to come with a meta build that some number cruncher has calculated to have the highest DPS(or healing). That requires certain weapons and armor and accessories. But not only that, the player must also learn specific skill rotations in order to use that build effectively.

 

 

"let's not bring most effective tactic available for raid dps and skip some mechanics of the fight and let's do slow dps so we need to do more mechanics and more chance to fail it instead"

imagine doing keep construct with variety of these "non number-cruncher builds", very painful.

 

On 6/14/2021 at 2:25 AM, SkinnyT.5382 said:

About an hour in, they all knew the mechanics and we're making to the final phase of the boss consistently. Problem is that the timer kept running out, and the group was overwhelmed by the extra damage.  At first it was running out at about 10%hp, but the group kept making changes  and eventually got it to about 5%. However that's all they could go. So after spending over 3 hours learning this boss and working together to kill it, they all gave up because they couldn't beat the timer. AND the worst part is that they left having nothing to show for it.

 

maybe figured it out what took you so long?
-install arcdps and logging failed encounter reports so you can have some grasp of what's going on.

-not enough condi peeps to kill red/ nobody strips protection from blue during split so ended up wasting more time? 

-your training people doesn't do research on their own rotations to output more dps?

-various boons uptime like might generations, quickness, and the list goes on.

 

if you figure this problem you will never need this suggestion.

 

Edited July 10, 2021 by Harubpunbaru.3260

[Vilin.8056]

9 hours ago, Harubpunbaru.3260 said:

"let's not bring most effective tactic available for raid dps and skip some mechanics of the fight and let's do slow dps so we need to do more mechanics and more chance to fail it instead"

imagine doing keep construct with variety of these "non number-cruncher builds", very painful.

 

 

maybe figured it out what took you so long?
-install arcdps and logging failed encounter reports so you can have some grasp of what's going on.

-not enough condi peeps to kill red/ nobody strips protection from blue during split so ended up wasting more time? 

-your training people doesn't do research on their own rotations to output more dps?

-various boons uptime like might generations, quickness, and the list goes on.

 

if you figure this problem you will never need this suggestion.

 

You don't even need Arcdps for most cases.

 

In most training situations, if you can keep 9 players alive long enough till the end phase, there won't be a enrage timer problem.

[ShroomOneUp.6913]

On 7/8/2021 at 3:34 AM, Linken.6345 said:

To debunk the no amount of skill would be able to overcome claim

 

All you got to do is show a video of people doing it with gear and traits from the same time period aka 2015 to debunk it mate.

 

Dont need any pug or minimal skilled people to do it at all.

doing it with a random pug from 2015 (that includes traits and gear from that time) however underlines it even more so, so that any possible excuse made is already moot.
I made that example before but lemme repeat it again.
someone claims that a pebble is impossible to be lifted by ANY human being. and instead of sending someone to gym and become the strongest person (a seasoned raid group) to have ever existed to lift said pebble, I would just sit a toddler (minimal skill random pug) next to it and let it pick up the pebble with ease.
because the toddler is ALOT weaker and LESS skilled than me and the "strongest person in the world" it out right destroys the claim with a figurative nuclear blast, making any "but this.." or "how about" retorts not possible to be even raised.

Edited July 12, 2021 by ShroomOneUp.6913
elaboration.

[ShroomOneUp.6913]

On 7/8/2021 at 12:39 PM, yann.1946 said:

Yes it was about morality, but tbh this confirms what I thought. This part was about the structure of an argument. 

 

Edit: A particular reason you did not address the second analogy? 

no  its not. its a question of tangible acts, which being is being able to finish the raid or not. there is no moral question to be had. the question is: were raids possible without the alleged power creep that happened between 2015 and 2012 or not. and the answer is YES. 
also the second analogy? kinda the same thing. not really applicable because the question of decommodifying houses is not a question of possibility but rather should it be done. we are not asking if a raid should do X.

 

On 7/8/2021 at 12:39 PM, yann.1946 said:

Exactly it was in response that no amount of skill can overcome them.

(wait do you agree that the claim "only power creep made raids possible, and no amount of skill could overcome them before the power creep" is a false claim?) 

The reverse of nobody can do something is nor everyone can de something, it is someone can do something. 

YES i DO agree that the claim "only power creep made raids possible, and no amount of skill could overcome them before the power creep" is false. never said anything else. I ONLY argued that tto debunk said claim its needs better material to make any attempts of "but this..." and "what about that..." are nipped in the bud before they could be even be made. and what arguments COULD be made by those who do make the FALSE claim, is what i stated as well.

thanks showing how you little you actually read what i wrote.

On 7/8/2021 at 12:39 PM, yann.1946 said:

NO, like verifiable no. You specifically mentioned the broader context of this tread, when confront with a specific point. 

YES, literally the last section showed crystal clear that THAT is the case.

[yann.1946]

28 minutes ago, ShroomOneUp.6913 said:

no  its not. its a question of tangible acts, which being is being able to finish the raid or not. there is no moral question to be had. the question is: were raids possible without the alleged power creep that happened between 2015 and 2012 or not. and the answer is YES. 
also the second analogy? kinda the same thing. not really applicable because the question of decommodifying houses is not a question of possibility but rather should it be done. we are not asking if a raid should do X.

Missing the point that it about the structure of the argument, not what the argument is about.

 

28 minutes ago, ShroomOneUp.6913 said:

YES i DO agree that the claim "only power creep made raids possible, and no amount of skill could overcome them before the power creep" is false. never said anything else. I ONLY argued that tto debunk said claim its needs better material to make any attempts of "but this..." and "what about that..." are nipped in the bud before they could be even be made. and what arguments COULD be made by those who do make the FALSE claim, is what i stated as well.

thanks showing how you little you actually read what i wrote.

I have read what you wrote, this is just the first time it came up in the conversation with me.

Also This makes it even worse, you are trying to correct something by giving an wrong observation.

Because you have beeing actively arguing against yourself. Originally you claimed that it was not proof because it was a high end group. Missing the point that it was a specific counter to a specific claim. And the post before mine you sort of agree that using a high end group would prove the claim.

28 minutes ago, ShroomOneUp.6913 said:

YES, literally the last section showed crystal clear that THAT is the case.

Showed wat?

[Sobx.1758]

7 hours ago, ShroomOneUp.6913 said:

doing it with a random pug from 2015 (that includes traits and gear from that time) however underlines it even more so

It doesn't need to "underline it even more so", the claim is already wrong whether you like it or not 🙃 

[mindcircus.1506]

On 7/12/2021 at 7:25 AM, ShroomOneUp.6913 said:

no  its not. its a question of tangible acts, which being is being able to finish the raid or not. there is no moral question to be had. the question is: were raids possible without the alleged power creep that happened between 2015 and 2012 or not. and the answer is YES. 
also the second analogy? kinda the same thing. not really applicable because the question of decommodifying houses is not a question of possibility but rather should it be done. we are not asking if a raid should do X.

 

YES i DO agree that the claim "only power creep made raids possible, and no amount of skill could overcome them before the power creep" is false. never said anything else. I ONLY argued that tto debunk said claim its needs better material to make any attempts of "but this..." and "what about that..." are nipped in the bud before they could be even be made. and what arguments COULD be made by those who do make the FALSE claim, is what i stated as well.

thanks showing how you little you actually read what i wrote.

YES, literally the last section showed crystal clear that THAT is the case.

An observation:
Your poor grammar, word choices, punctuation and sentence structure have your posts, at times,  bordering on gibberish. Half of just about every post of yours I have read in this thread degenerates into some barely understandable "word soup".

Not trying to call you out or say I agree or disagree with you, but if you spent a little time polishing your thoughts before hitting Submit it would really help.

 

Edited July 13, 2021 by mindcircus.1506

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

So i get the argument here. The same argument shows up in SPVP. The argument goes like this :

 

Player shows footage of Helseth carrying match's of bronze players until he reaches legendary.

Therefor it's possible for anyone to carry a match, and reach legendary ranking.

 

So someone can ask this same question to raiders of PVE...Do you believe it's fair to say that because Helseth can carry spvp matches, that you, a pve-r should be able to do so as well? 

 

Helseth is for all practical purposes an athlete. E-sports players are generally treated the same as athletes in that their capabilities for action/reaction time, and decision making in the brain is above the average human being. So should the game adhere to these players, or should they be designed around the capability of the average person?

 

I have no personal stance on enrage timers...but I don't think they are useful or serve any practical purpose other than to make the game more frustrating. A person will not learn how to DPS better in a single night...and so enrage timers usually lead to players being kicked for players that know how to DPS better. When players get kicked, people have to wait...the longer people wait...the more likely people are to leave and now people have to wait some more...and this turns into a positive feedback loop until the group fully disbands.

 

Most of my raid experience is from raiding for years in World of Warcraft, where enrage timers are much more of a thing there. It's the same story every time...if you hit a hard enrage timer because your DPS is lacking, then you simply kick the player(s), instate a DPS requirement and you DPS check those players. It's a very toxic process...and so you have to wonder what really is the point of enrage timers if this is the behavior that spawns from it. 

 

There are many good boss fights in World of Warcraft that do not have hard enrage timers, but soft enrage timers instead or none at all, and these fights are usually much more difficult and interesting because the mechanics are allowed to be more intricate. In these kinds of fights it's expected that DPS will drop, so players don't feel alienated when they are on the bottom of the DPS list.

 

So in conclusion, i am impartial to enrage timers...but i also don't really see their purpose in the game at all. They don't add difficulty they just make the group environment more toxic. Why have an enrage timer when you could just make better mechanics. 

[yann.1946]

7 minutes ago, JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

So i get the argument here. The same argument shows up in SPVP. The argument goes like this :

 

Player shows footage of Helseth carrying match's of bronze players until he reaches legendary.

Therefor it's possible for anyone to carry a match, and reach legendary ranking.

 

So someone can ask this same question to raiders of PVE...Do you believe it's fair to say that because Helseth can carry spvp matches, that you, a pve-r should be able to do so as well? 

 

The conversation was not about that argument.

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

2 minutes ago, yann.1946 said:

The conversation was not about that argument.

 

Alright, what was it about exactly, because I read the thread and this is what I took away from it. 

[yann.1946]

1 hour ago, JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

 

Alright, what was it about exactly, because I read the thread and this is what I took away from it. 

In PvP analogy terms,

 

Someone made the claim that Bronze rank players could not be carried by any player, no matter how skilled that player is.

Someone responded by posting a video of Helseth carrying match's of bronze players until he reaches legendary.

And then someone interpreted that video as an argument that everyone could do that.

People responded by saying that that was not of the video.

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

27 minutes ago, yann.1946 said:

In PvP analogy terms,

 

Someone made the claim that Bronze rank players could not be carried by any player, no matter how skilled that player is.

Someone responded by posting a video of Helseth carrying match's of bronze players until he reaches legendary.

And then someone interpreted that video as an argument that everyone could do that.

People responded by saying that that was not of the video.

 

I think the confusion here is that people are treating this as a single claim. There are two claims made here. The first of which is wrong, but the 2nd one is correct.

 

The first claim : "Bronze rank players can not be carried by any player, no matter how skilled that player is." is obviously wrong...because Helseth did it once.

 

But the 2nd claim : "not everyone could do that." is correct...because not everybody can do what Helseth does....he's an athlete with above average human capability.

 

For example, you can find video's online of people 5 man-ing raids with green gear. So we all know it's possible to do. But most people do not 5 man raids in green gear for a simple reason...because they are not at that skill level, which most would consider to be above average player capability.

Edited July 13, 2021 by JusticeRetroHunter.7684

[yann.1946]

6 minutes ago, JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

 

I think the confusion here is that people are treating this as a single claim. There are two claims made here. The first of which is wrong, but the 2nd one is correct.

 

The first claim : "Bronze rank players can not be carried by any player, no matter how skilled that player is." is obviously wrong...because Helseth did it once.

 

But the 2nd claim : "not everyone could do that." is correct...because not everybody can do what Helseth does....he's an athlete with above average human capability.

 

For example, you can find video's online of people 5 man-ing raids with green gear. So we all know it's possible to do. But most people do not 5 man raids in green gear for a simple reason...because they are not at that skill level, which most would consider to be above average player capability.

Sure, but nobody was making the argument that everyone could do it.

Edit: To be more precise, the 2nd claim only became relevant because people where arguing as if people said that the second claim was false. But nobody was arguing that.

Edited July 13, 2021 by yann.1946

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

7 minutes ago, yann.1946 said:

Sure, but nobody was making the argument that everyone could do it.

Edit: To be more precise, the 2nd claim only became relevant because people where arguing as if people said that the second claim was false. But nobody was arguing that.

 

Logically, the initial claim, and the counter claim to that initial claim are both voided, because the 2nd claim is true.

 

The only argument someone could make at that point, is that : Are all human's as capable as any other human being no matter who they are? which we can't really prove. Can just anybody play professional basketball with Shaq and Iverson? No probably not. Just like how not just anybody can compete in professional E-sports, and the same should apply to how not just anybody can do world record speed runs completely naked.

 

 

[yann.1946]

2 minutes ago, JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

 

Logically, the initial claim, and the counter claim to that initial claim are both voided, because the 2nd claim is true.

No not at all, because the second claim was not made. and is not relevant to the claims made.

 

2 minutes ago, JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

The only argument someone could make at that point, is that : Are all human's as capable as any other human being no matter who they are? which we can't really prove. Can just anybody play professional basketball with Shaq and Iverson? No probably not. Just like how not just anybody can compete in professional E-sports, and the same should apply to how not just anybody can do world record speed runs completely naked.

 

 

NOBODY is making that argument

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

32 minutes ago, yann.1946 said:

No not at all, because the second claim was not made. and is not relevant to the claims made.

 

NOBODY is making that argument

 

If both the initial claim, and it's counter argument are voided by the second claim, than what is the argument? You have to counter the 2nd claim.

 

It's like this :

1. I say that all swans are white (1st claim).
2. You then say no, not all swans are white, and you pull up a picture of a black swan (1st claim's counter argument).
3. Then the 2nd claim, is that not all swans are black.

 

So now what is the counter argument to the second claim.

Edited July 13, 2021 by JusticeRetroHunter.7684

[yann.1946]

1 hour ago, JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

 

If both the initial claim, and it's counter argument are voided by the second claim, than what is the argument? You have to counter the 2nd claim.

 

But they are not voided, because they are about something else. Their is no logical connection between the 2nd and the first claim.

1 hour ago, JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

It's like this :

1. I say that all swans are white (1st claim).
2. You then say no, not all swans are white, and you pull up a picture of a black swan (1st claim's counter argument).
3. Then the 2nd claim, is that not all swans are black.

 

So now what is the counter argument to the second claim.

Nobody needs to counter the second claim, because it is logically detached from the first. The second claim also does not void the first claim or its counter.

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

3 minutes ago, yann.1946 said:

Nobody needs to counter the second claim, because it is logically detached from the first. The second claim also does not void the first claim or its counter.

 

Yes they are separate claims, I said this before, but the two claims aren't detached. They are both about the same subject...the color of swans...one claim is true, and the other is false. 

[yann.1946]

7 minutes ago, JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

 

Yes they are separate claims, I said this before, but the two claims aren't detached. They are both about the same subject...the color of swans...one claim is true, and the other is false. 

You specificly said the 2nd claim voided the first, but it does not;

 

EDIT: and when i meant logically detached, i meant that the falsity or truth of the 2nd claim has no bearing to the first statement. 

Edited July 13, 2021 by yann.1946

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

47 minutes ago, yann.1946 said:

You specificly said the 2nd claim voided the first, but it does not;

 

EDIT: and when i meant logically detached, i meant that the falsity or truth of the 2nd claim has no bearing to the first statement. 

 

Looking back at the discussion, i think the argument was merely distorted. Take a look here at this.

 

 

Hannelore.8153 said:

Raids wouldn't even be possible without all the powercreep to begin with. If ten players from 2014 Core game stepped foot in a raid, they'd die in a heartbeat, and no amount of skill would be able to overcome the lack of tools neccessary to complete the job. Even now, the same content isn't nothing like it was during HoT release.

 

CasualElitist.8795 said:

"May I interest you with that video of 78 level core specs doing whole W1 without hitting enrage timers or gorse updrafts? It's not about the classes and power creep."

 

ShroomOneUp.6913 said:

oh nice non argument, taking 10 people who have been raiding for years, are coordinated and trained in the raids, KNOW the raids because of those years managed this WOW. whats next? gonna use a 30 years master in black smithing showing how possible it is for the most inefficient way to smith a blade and expect everyone else to do it?

 

Hannelore, which makes the first initial claim, can't be interpreted as "all swans are white." The reason is because of this line : If ten players from 2014 Core game stepped foot in a raid, they'd die in a heartbeat.

 

The statement by Hannelore is not saying "All players..." it's saying "If some players..." and she gives a specific number for some (10)

 

The counter argument was made by Casual Elitist showing a video as if Hannelore said "All players" or to think of it in the context of swans : "You said All swans are white, so I present video evidence that not all swans are white, there are black swans."

 

Shroom responds by pointing out the manipulation of the initial claim, by responding to the counter argument with the proper counter claim that "not all swans are black." 

 

It seems more or less that the initial claim was distorted (as per usual on forums) where the counter argument is a distortion of the claim to fit a specific counter argument (This is called a Straw man).

 

So ya there you have it. 

 

Edited July 13, 2021 by JusticeRetroHunter.7684

[LittleYoshi.2548]

The only reason why the first statement is true would be, cause there literally werent any raids to begin with in 2014, so why should they even talk about a time when they didnt exist.
If we only talk about this "Raids wouldn't even be possible without all the powercreep to begin with"  , then we can definitely say that its nonsense. 
The lowlevel videos from Teapot use even worse gear, than what was used back then and they still managed to get the raids done. 
You could say that a group of people from 2015 or whenever probably would not be able to kill a raidboss on their 1st attempt, but with more practice and experience on the boss they would eventually get to a point where they would kill it and if that takes them a whole month, who cares. The only claim made was, that it is impossible, but that would mean that people never get better by trying different builds/gear/strategies, which we can 100% say is not the case, cause humanity has shown, that if faced with a problem and with enough time, they will manage to overcome the problem (the raidboss in this case).

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

 

6 hours ago, LittleYoshi.2548 said:

If we only talk about this "Raids wouldn't even be possible without all the powercreep to begin with"  , then we can definitely say that its nonsense. 
The lowlevel videos from Teapot use even worse gear, than what was used back then and they still managed to get the raids done. 

 

What you are doing here is taking part of the statement, selecting what you want as basis to make a counter argument with only that part of the statement. This is again what a strawman is. Just to remind everyone the definitions for what a strawman argument is...:

 

1. Oversimplifying an opponent's argument, then attacking this oversimplified version.
2. Presenting someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, then denying that person's arguments—thus giving the appearance that every upholder of that position (and thus the position itself) has been defeated.^[2]
3. Exaggerating (sometimes grossly exaggerating) an opponent's argument, then attacking this exaggerated version.
4. Quoting an opponent's words out of context—i.e., choosing quotations that misrepresent the opponent's intentions

 

Hannelore may have said that "Raids aren't possible without power-creep." But the example she gave after that "If ten players from 2014 Core game stepped foot in a raid, they'd die in a heartbeat" makes her argument one that is not equivalent to an "All swans are white." claim. 

 

Because just as you can easily show a video of 10 players defeating the content in green gear, she can easily rebuttal your counter argument, with a video of 10 players wiping instantly in said green gear.

 

This is why Shrooms response to the counter argument is valid, and also true.