DISCLAIMER: O2 are awesome people. I am retarded.
For six years, I have had the same phone: my trusty Nokia 7250i. Given that it is now more rusty than trusty, I figured it was time to get a new one.
So, I go to the o2 store. I happened to see the HTC Desire, which was described by one of my friends as, "Like an iPhone, but without the restrictions that come with an apple logo." I had a nice long talk with the trainee who had asked if I needed any help, and he gave me the outline of the pay monthly tariffs (I am currently, and always have been, Pay as You Go, but recently I have found that I am in need of talk-time, owing to being in contact with one of my long-lost school friends, rather than so many hundred free texts per month; calls to other networks being needlessly excessively expensive as they are, I figured I'd go Contract and get some free ones).
I, intelligently, I thought, said that I would go away and think about it for a while before deciding whether I wanted it. Because I really did want it, but I didn't want just to get it on impulse. So I went away, spoke with my mum, outlined what I intended to do (my sister is the complete opposite of this: whenever she gets a new phone or car, mum knows after the event. I figured I could do with a voice of reason, however), and asked her if she thought it was a good idea. She did, so I went back to the store and asked to get it. Here begins my long journey filled with trepidation on the road to entering the 21st century 10 years too late.
Problem 1: Saturday 22nd May: Phone not in stock. This is fine, it's perfectly common. The chap I spoke to was very nice and said that he would take my name and number, and would phone me when they knew that they were getting some more in. This was duly done on Wednesday, and the phonecall detailed that a new delivery of Desires would be in on Thursday and ready by 12 o'clock. Okay, I said, I'll come in after work.
Problem 2: Thursday 27th May, 2.30 p.m.: I don't have my account number to hand. That's fine, I thought, I'll go to my bank and get a statement with it printed on. I'll be back, I said, after a meeting that I had at three o'clock. So, I went to my bank. While I was getting my statement, the cashier asked me if my address was still correct. It had not been correct since I had started going to university, and I thought that now might be a good time to update it. So, I told her my new address, and the system was updated.
Problem 3: Thursday 27th May, 5.10 p.m.: Card declined in O2 store. Wrong address: Because of how banks work, it would take a while for my updated details to be completely fed through the system. As a result, my updated address, for the time-being, would not work for such things as setting up a Direct Debit for a phone contract. I was advised by Fred, the person who has the misfortune of dealing with such an idiot but who is very kind and polite about the whole thing and entirely sees my perspective. He advised that I come back tomorrow and try it again.
Problem 4: Friday 28th May: O2 Exeter's linked computer systems are down. My card is still declining on the non-linked, manual system. I am advised to come back tomorrow.
Someone doesn't want me to get my new phone. I am determined that tomorrow there will be no more hitches and that I will get the arsing thing.
UPDATE 29th May: Still nothing. Apparently it could be a credit issue, which is pretty retarded, so I now have to wait for someone to get back to me on that front.
Friday 28 May 2010
Tuesday 25 May 2010
Saturday 22 May 2010
@Nymarie
Re this:
The cloaks aren't really that good for Shadow. Spirit/Crit is pretty suboptimal -- not quite as bad as the stat combination on that god-awful Tier 9 Spirit/Hit helm, but still not fantastic. I'd hold out for Lich Wrappings (Valithria-10). A stop-gap with +hit is Kurisu's Indecision (ToC5N). Where emblems are concerned, I instead recommend investing in 4T10 Shadow if you have not already. Whenever someone decides that they want to develop their shadow gear set, Tier 10 must be the first port of call. It is so powerful that it dwarfs all other Frost Emblems purchases
So, with regards to some gearing suggestions: Tier 10 Gloves, Helm, Shoulders and Chest (In that order) should be considered. Your Tier 10 Disc legs will be just fine until a SP/Crit/Haste alternative comes along. The Tier 10 Shadow legs have too much hit on them. Your Circle of Ossus will also do nicely in Shadow.
... Although, having said all that, hit rating on 25-man Icecrown gear seems to be focused in the neck, one ring (Valanar's. Don't get the Crit/Hit one unless it is a stop-gap for the Haste/hit) and ... that's pretty much it for optimal slots, annoyingly. You don't want the Chest, Gloves or Shoulders because they're all tier slots. That's incredibly short-sighted, I think.
But let's have a play, shall we? We've identified this, this, this and this. 194 Hit. 95 short. Let's get these. 31 to go. These. Done.
Alternative: Tier 10 Shadow legs instead of Tier 10 Shadow chest (+80) and a Rigid gem in the cloak (+24).
(I know that you have the +hit offhand, but you'll want to get rid of that as soon as you win Dying Light. Dying Light is wonderful for Shadow.)
Obviously these are all optimal selections rather than necessarily what you'll be able to get your hands on at first. I tend to do that.
And now I must go out, so I'll have to cut short my advice for the time-being.
The cloaks aren't really that good for Shadow. Spirit/Crit is pretty suboptimal -- not quite as bad as the stat combination on that god-awful Tier 9 Spirit/Hit helm, but still not fantastic. I'd hold out for Lich Wrappings (Valithria-10). A stop-gap with +hit is Kurisu's Indecision (ToC5N). Where emblems are concerned, I instead recommend investing in 4T10 Shadow if you have not already. Whenever someone decides that they want to develop their shadow gear set, Tier 10 must be the first port of call. It is so powerful that it dwarfs all other Frost Emblems purchases
So, with regards to some gearing suggestions: Tier 10 Gloves, Helm, Shoulders and Chest (In that order) should be considered. Your Tier 10 Disc legs will be just fine until a SP/Crit/Haste alternative comes along. The Tier 10 Shadow legs have too much hit on them. Your Circle of Ossus will also do nicely in Shadow.
... Although, having said all that, hit rating on 25-man Icecrown gear seems to be focused in the neck, one ring (Valanar's. Don't get the Crit/Hit one unless it is a stop-gap for the Haste/hit) and ... that's pretty much it for optimal slots, annoyingly. You don't want the Chest, Gloves or Shoulders because they're all tier slots. That's incredibly short-sighted, I think.
But let's have a play, shall we? We've identified this, this, this and this. 194 Hit. 95 short. Let's get these. 31 to go. These. Done.
Alternative: Tier 10 Shadow legs instead of Tier 10 Shadow chest (+80) and a Rigid gem in the cloak (+24).
(I know that you have the +hit offhand, but you'll want to get rid of that as soon as you win Dying Light. Dying Light is wonderful for Shadow.)
Obviously these are all optimal selections rather than necessarily what you'll be able to get your hands on at first. I tend to do that.
And now I must go out, so I'll have to cut short my advice for the time-being.
Friday 21 May 2010
Bad Priest #243
That's a random number, of course.
Sinespe versus Blendia.
Just look at those delicious Haste/Spirit gems socketed everywhere in that Priest's bloody gear. Funnily enough, despite his over-zealous hasty behaviour, he almost has less haste than I do.
But look at that spellpower. 3150 without Inner Fire. Not even my Draenei has that much. Full 251 and 264 epics. A challenge, surely, in spite of the terrible gemming choices.
The boss? Toravon the Ice Watcher.
The result? An obliteration.
5.8k? Seriously? Full bloody buffs, right down to an unholy death knight for the extra disease damage, and you pull 5.8k? You're about 3k below what you should be capable of doing with that gear. Full bloody Tier 10, and all.
Want to know the kicker? Tier 10 legs dropped. Now, I already have these, and I will only be using them for a very short period of time while I accumulate enough emblems to have four pieces of tier 10 without relying on something with a severe problem in the hit department.
This guy, on the other hand, already has four pieces of tier 10, and Leggings of Woven Death. That's pretty much Best in Slot without access to anything above ICC25-N content.
He rolled on the legs.
I died a little inside.
Sinespe versus Blendia.
Just look at those delicious Haste/Spirit gems socketed everywhere in that Priest's bloody gear. Funnily enough, despite his over-zealous hasty behaviour, he almost has less haste than I do.
But look at that spellpower. 3150 without Inner Fire. Not even my Draenei has that much. Full 251 and 264 epics. A challenge, surely, in spite of the terrible gemming choices.
The boss? Toravon the Ice Watcher.
The result? An obliteration.
5.8k? Seriously? Full bloody buffs, right down to an unholy death knight for the extra disease damage, and you pull 5.8k? You're about 3k below what you should be capable of doing with that gear. Full bloody Tier 10, and all.
Want to know the kicker? Tier 10 legs dropped. Now, I already have these, and I will only be using them for a very short period of time while I accumulate enough emblems to have four pieces of tier 10 without relying on something with a severe problem in the hit department.
This guy, on the other hand, already has four pieces of tier 10, and Leggings of Woven Death. That's pretty much Best in Slot without access to anything above ICC25-N content.
He rolled on the legs.
I died a little inside.
Why I love being British
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/7746090/Cream-teas-battle-rages-between-Devon-and-Cornwall.html
That is all.
That is all.
Monday 10 May 2010
Americanisms.
The ones that make no sense and which make me cringe whenever I read them.
Language is important. Thinking about language is even more important. If you use a word without knowing what it means, you have a high probability of being ousted for attempting to embellish the expanse of your vocabulary by the use of oddities of verbosity.
Text-speak, it has been claimed, uses an altogether different part of the brain from the one devoted to language and communication: it cuts out that part of our brain which is designed to think, carefully, about whether we are using words appropriately, aptly and correctly. Instead of thinking how to express an idea in 140 characters using full words and sentences, text-speak is a convenient circumnavigation past the necessity of considering and weighing up each word. The counter-argument is that considering and weighing each word could take longer than just writing in a sentence composed of half-words, and that text-speak is used for its expediency, which makes it appropriate to the medium of communication in which it is deployed -- text messages themselves designed to be a quick way of telling something to someone.
This argument falls apart, however, when one considers the simple adage, "Practice makes perfect." The same argument is applied to using text-speak on-line: it is claimed that the fractions of seconds saved by missing out characters can make all the difference on, to take a WoW example, a message typed in the middle of a boss-fight, where time is at a premium for communication owing to being completely disabled while typing. But consider this: what if one actually practises typing full words from the start? They'll type quicker as they learn the positions of the keys. Text-speak is a whole other language with its own alphabet -- pseudo-Oriental in its use of certain characters to represent whole words (compare Japanese or Chinese Kanji with "4" as a substitute for the combination of phonics producing the sound "for").
To become fluent in any language, you have to think in that language. That's what fluency means: you spend no time at all consciously thinking about what you want to say -- the words enter your speech centres directly from your subconscious and go straight out; and, conversely, words of others in the same language flow into your brain and are immediately understood. A scholar of Latin could stare at a complex sentence for many minutes to work out its full meaning; show it to a Roman and he'll react to it instantly.
Where typing is concerned, the same logic applies, but rather than your brain being the key motivator, it is a combination of your brain and muscles. Muscle memory is used to remember the position of the keys. Assuming one has one's hands anchored at the same location on the keyboard, one's muscles learn exactly how far to move in order to press down on a particular key. Combine that with fluency in the language, and you have the phenomenon touch-typing.
So, learning fluency in English, rather than in text-speak, means that the two are apples and oranges. Those who claim that the amount of time saved by cutting out characters make such a claim from the position of typing proper English really slowly. I would type text-speak as slowly as they would type English.
This is a large diversion from the point I want to make, which is the following: once you are fluent in a language, you can devote more time to analysing it instead of spending time making sure that what you are saying it grammatically accurate. You can analyse the differences in meaning between "drenched" and "damp"; both mean "wet" but have differing levels of wetness associated with them. This varying scale can be applied to other, more subtle examples: Greed vs. Gluttony, Tautology vs. Redundancy. By such analysis, one starts to use more precise language; one becomes more efficient, in a way that text-speak, by its very nature as an invention of convenience thought up in but a moment compared to the millennial evolution of English, cannot hope to achieve. In that previous sentence, I could have said "the evolution of English over thousands of years"; but "millennial" is more succint and conveys the exact same meaning.
So. Americanisms. Why am I annoyed at their use of language today? Well, it isn't the spelling, for once. At least, not really. Instead, my problem is that some of our English idioms have been corrupted by our Free cousins, in ways that do not make sense; ways that show, clearly, a disregard for actual thought: text-speak evolutions, done in haste, mistranslation or for convenience.
Some examples for you:
Correct idiom: "I couldn't care less." Meaning of idiom: "I don't care." Americanised idiom: "I could care less."
Why the Americanism is wrong: Just think about it for a moment. If you use a conditional sentence indicating that you could care less about something, you are saying that the current reality is that you do care to an extent -- that it would be possible for you in another circumstance to care to a lesser extent than you currently do. But the meaning is supposed to be "I do not care one little bit. It is impossible for my care level to be lower: My level of care is 0 on the scale from 0 to infinity. I could not care less."
Correct idiom "There is still a way to go." Meaning of idiom: "Progress is still to be made before we can consider this deed accomplished." Americanism: "There is still a ways to go."
Why the Americanism is wrong: a way. A: singular, impersonal pronoun. Singular. It is a singular, non-collective noun. Change it for any similar word: "We have been travelling on this path for a mile, but we are only half way along it. There is still a mile to go." Not "A miles", "a mile".
Now, by the sounds of things, I am late to the party on this one, because Webster has prepared a defence: it insists that idioms are not defined by their grammatical structure, and that, by their nature, require foundational knowledge of the culture in which they are used if they are to be understood. I do not consider this argument remotely adequate: There is no cultural difference between "A way to go" and "A ways to go". They convey the exact same thing. The only difference is that one of them is wrong. Furthermore, "I could/couldn't care less" is not the same as the difference between, for instance, "He kicked the bucket," in English and ,"He broke his pipe," in French -- in the latter idiomatic construct, and others of its kind, the thought being conveyed is completely based in imagery and metaphor. "I couldn't care less", however, is entirely linguistic. Calling these literal expressions "Idioms" is therefore something of a misnomer: They are commonly used expressions specific to a particular language, and they are expressed as self-contained units in the same way that individual words are, but their grammar should nevertheless be correct. There is no reason why someone from another culture should not be able to understand the meaning expressed by "I couldn't care less" simply by reading the sentence.
I will come up with more examples and lengthen this treatise, but I should really do the heroic daily and stuff.
Language is important. Thinking about language is even more important. If you use a word without knowing what it means, you have a high probability of being ousted for attempting to embellish the expanse of your vocabulary by the use of oddities of verbosity.
Text-speak, it has been claimed, uses an altogether different part of the brain from the one devoted to language and communication: it cuts out that part of our brain which is designed to think, carefully, about whether we are using words appropriately, aptly and correctly. Instead of thinking how to express an idea in 140 characters using full words and sentences, text-speak is a convenient circumnavigation past the necessity of considering and weighing up each word. The counter-argument is that considering and weighing each word could take longer than just writing in a sentence composed of half-words, and that text-speak is used for its expediency, which makes it appropriate to the medium of communication in which it is deployed -- text messages themselves designed to be a quick way of telling something to someone.
This argument falls apart, however, when one considers the simple adage, "Practice makes perfect." The same argument is applied to using text-speak on-line: it is claimed that the fractions of seconds saved by missing out characters can make all the difference on, to take a WoW example, a message typed in the middle of a boss-fight, where time is at a premium for communication owing to being completely disabled while typing. But consider this: what if one actually practises typing full words from the start? They'll type quicker as they learn the positions of the keys. Text-speak is a whole other language with its own alphabet -- pseudo-Oriental in its use of certain characters to represent whole words (compare Japanese or Chinese Kanji with "4" as a substitute for the combination of phonics producing the sound "for").
To become fluent in any language, you have to think in that language. That's what fluency means: you spend no time at all consciously thinking about what you want to say -- the words enter your speech centres directly from your subconscious and go straight out; and, conversely, words of others in the same language flow into your brain and are immediately understood. A scholar of Latin could stare at a complex sentence for many minutes to work out its full meaning; show it to a Roman and he'll react to it instantly.
Where typing is concerned, the same logic applies, but rather than your brain being the key motivator, it is a combination of your brain and muscles. Muscle memory is used to remember the position of the keys. Assuming one has one's hands anchored at the same location on the keyboard, one's muscles learn exactly how far to move in order to press down on a particular key. Combine that with fluency in the language, and you have the phenomenon touch-typing.
So, learning fluency in English, rather than in text-speak, means that the two are apples and oranges. Those who claim that the amount of time saved by cutting out characters make such a claim from the position of typing proper English really slowly. I would type text-speak as slowly as they would type English.
This is a large diversion from the point I want to make, which is the following: once you are fluent in a language, you can devote more time to analysing it instead of spending time making sure that what you are saying it grammatically accurate. You can analyse the differences in meaning between "drenched" and "damp"; both mean "wet" but have differing levels of wetness associated with them. This varying scale can be applied to other, more subtle examples: Greed vs. Gluttony, Tautology vs. Redundancy. By such analysis, one starts to use more precise language; one becomes more efficient, in a way that text-speak, by its very nature as an invention of convenience thought up in but a moment compared to the millennial evolution of English, cannot hope to achieve. In that previous sentence, I could have said "the evolution of English over thousands of years"; but "millennial" is more succint and conveys the exact same meaning.
So. Americanisms. Why am I annoyed at their use of language today? Well, it isn't the spelling, for once. At least, not really. Instead, my problem is that some of our English idioms have been corrupted by our Free cousins, in ways that do not make sense; ways that show, clearly, a disregard for actual thought: text-speak evolutions, done in haste, mistranslation or for convenience.
Some examples for you:
Correct idiom: "I couldn't care less." Meaning of idiom: "I don't care." Americanised idiom: "I could care less."
Why the Americanism is wrong: Just think about it for a moment. If you use a conditional sentence indicating that you could care less about something, you are saying that the current reality is that you do care to an extent -- that it would be possible for you in another circumstance to care to a lesser extent than you currently do. But the meaning is supposed to be "I do not care one little bit. It is impossible for my care level to be lower: My level of care is 0 on the scale from 0 to infinity. I could not care less."
Correct idiom "There is still a way to go." Meaning of idiom: "Progress is still to be made before we can consider this deed accomplished." Americanism: "There is still a ways to go."
Why the Americanism is wrong: a way. A: singular, impersonal pronoun. Singular. It is a singular, non-collective noun. Change it for any similar word: "We have been travelling on this path for a mile, but we are only half way along it. There is still a mile to go." Not "A miles", "a mile".
Now, by the sounds of things, I am late to the party on this one, because Webster has prepared a defence: it insists that idioms are not defined by their grammatical structure, and that, by their nature, require foundational knowledge of the culture in which they are used if they are to be understood. I do not consider this argument remotely adequate: There is no cultural difference between "A way to go" and "A ways to go". They convey the exact same thing. The only difference is that one of them is wrong. Furthermore, "I could/couldn't care less" is not the same as the difference between, for instance, "He kicked the bucket," in English and ,"He broke his pipe," in French -- in the latter idiomatic construct, and others of its kind, the thought being conveyed is completely based in imagery and metaphor. "I couldn't care less", however, is entirely linguistic. Calling these literal expressions "Idioms" is therefore something of a misnomer: They are commonly used expressions specific to a particular language, and they are expressed as self-contained units in the same way that individual words are, but their grammar should nevertheless be correct. There is no reason why someone from another culture should not be able to understand the meaning expressed by "I couldn't care less" simply by reading the sentence.
I will come up with more examples and lengthen this treatise, but I should really do the heroic daily and stuff.
Monday 3 May 2010
SHeroics.
Meet the Fungineers:
Sinespe, Hand of A'dal: Undead Shadow Priest
Isolde the Patient: Undead Discipline Priest
Fermy of the Nightfall: Blood Elf Holy Paladin (And Kartok the Patient: Blood Elf Beast Mastery Hunter)
Twilight Vanquisher Zorzil: Troll Protection Warrior
Starcaller Drenera: Undead Arcane Mage (And Cherana: Blood Elf Protection Paladin)
Together, we are Touched by a Troll. We intend to be a 10-man raiding guild in Cataclysm. We are transferring to Stormrage, where there are actually good people. (Cyclone-EU is a fantastic battlegroup. Frenzy, on the other hand, has Magtheridon in it. Oh dear.)
To tide us over until Cataclysm actually gets launched, we intend to get a decent raiding base together and clear some ICC content. And, while we wait for that, to get us noticed, we are doing SHeroics.
"SHeroics" is a term we coined from calling what we were doing in Heroics "Shenanigans". "Heroic Shenanigans" became "SHeroics". SHeroics are Heroic Hard Modes. "But, Chris, 'Heroic' means 'Hard mode' already!" Well, yes, but have you seen Wrath 5-man Heroics? They're a joke. You can't really call them "Hard".
So, what are Heroic Hard Modes? Simple, really: engaging multiple bosses at the same time, and killing them one-by-one.
This post is a trial-run of the formula I will be using on our guild site, which will hopefully have a blogging section. There will be Youtube videos of the kills when my lovely companions have worked out how video editing works. We have already done one SHeroic -- Nexus -- and we have been experimenting with Utgarde Pinnacle. So, without further ado:
SHeroic Nexus
Bosses engaged: Ormorok --> Anomalous --> Telestra.
Kill order decided: Anomalous --> Telestra --> Ormorok
Toons used: Sinespe, Isolde, Cherana, Zorzil, Fermy.
After some experimentation, we found that the only way this was going to work was to clear all trash and pull backwards through the instance from Ormorok. We had accidentally killed the Alliance captain during trash clearing, so killing all four bosses will have to wait for another time.
So, we pulled Ormorok, then worked our way back through a sea of respawned mini-lashers (The Aura of Regeneration mobs) to get to Anomalous. Cherana and Fermy went with Ormorok towards Telestra. Zorzil, Issy and I ran up to Anomalous to pull him. While on the move towards Telestra, I was killing the Chaotic Rifts to limit the adds we had. Upon reaching Telestra, our priority was to kill Anomalous first, since the number of adds was ludicrous. The combination of Telestra's AoE "freeze" stuns and Ormorok's Crystal Spikes was brutal, as was all the damage from Chaotic Rifts, adds, and Telestra's Blizzards, fire bombs and Gravity Wells. I died at around 30% of Anomalous' health, but that was the majority of the challenge: identifying which of his Chaotic Rifts was generating his immunity shield. Once that was overcome, the rest was relatively straightforward.
Attempts required: 2. (1 wipe, 1 kill).
Achievement name: "There's Plenty of Them to Go Around. [10]" Sequential achievement. Next achievements in sequence: "There's Even More of Them to Go Around. [25]" (O->A->AC->T Kill A Kill T Kill AC Kill O); "Chaos: It's Not Just a Theory. [40]" (Overview: " Pull O Pull A Pull AC Pull T Kill A Kill T Kite to K Kill O Pull K Kill K Kill AC".)
The beauty of SHeroics is in inventing these achievements. You can come up with various ways to pull, deal with and kill bosses, and the combinations you come up with will have varying levels of difficulty.
So watch this space for more Heroic Shenanigans.
Sinespe, Hand of A'dal: Undead Shadow Priest
Isolde the Patient: Undead Discipline Priest
Fermy of the Nightfall: Blood Elf Holy Paladin (And Kartok the Patient: Blood Elf Beast Mastery Hunter)
Twilight Vanquisher Zorzil: Troll Protection Warrior
Starcaller Drenera: Undead Arcane Mage (And Cherana: Blood Elf Protection Paladin)
Together, we are Touched by a Troll. We intend to be a 10-man raiding guild in Cataclysm. We are transferring to Stormrage, where there are actually good people. (Cyclone-EU is a fantastic battlegroup. Frenzy, on the other hand, has Magtheridon in it. Oh dear.)
To tide us over until Cataclysm actually gets launched, we intend to get a decent raiding base together and clear some ICC content. And, while we wait for that, to get us noticed, we are doing SHeroics.
"SHeroics" is a term we coined from calling what we were doing in Heroics "Shenanigans". "Heroic Shenanigans" became "SHeroics". SHeroics are Heroic Hard Modes. "But, Chris, 'Heroic' means 'Hard mode' already!" Well, yes, but have you seen Wrath 5-man Heroics? They're a joke. You can't really call them "Hard".
So, what are Heroic Hard Modes? Simple, really: engaging multiple bosses at the same time, and killing them one-by-one.
This post is a trial-run of the formula I will be using on our guild site, which will hopefully have a blogging section. There will be Youtube videos of the kills when my lovely companions have worked out how video editing works. We have already done one SHeroic -- Nexus -- and we have been experimenting with Utgarde Pinnacle. So, without further ado:
SHeroic Nexus
Bosses engaged: Ormorok --> Anomalous --> Telestra.
Kill order decided: Anomalous --> Telestra --> Ormorok
Toons used: Sinespe, Isolde, Cherana, Zorzil, Fermy.
After some experimentation, we found that the only way this was going to work was to clear all trash and pull backwards through the instance from Ormorok. We had accidentally killed the Alliance captain during trash clearing, so killing all four bosses will have to wait for another time.
So, we pulled Ormorok, then worked our way back through a sea of respawned mini-lashers (The Aura of Regeneration mobs) to get to Anomalous. Cherana and Fermy went with Ormorok towards Telestra. Zorzil, Issy and I ran up to Anomalous to pull him. While on the move towards Telestra, I was killing the Chaotic Rifts to limit the adds we had. Upon reaching Telestra, our priority was to kill Anomalous first, since the number of adds was ludicrous. The combination of Telestra's AoE "freeze" stuns and Ormorok's Crystal Spikes was brutal, as was all the damage from Chaotic Rifts, adds, and Telestra's Blizzards, fire bombs and Gravity Wells. I died at around 30% of Anomalous' health, but that was the majority of the challenge: identifying which of his Chaotic Rifts was generating his immunity shield. Once that was overcome, the rest was relatively straightforward.
Attempts required: 2. (1 wipe, 1 kill).
Achievement name: "There's Plenty of Them to Go Around. [10]" Sequential achievement. Next achievements in sequence: "There's Even More of Them to Go Around. [25]" (O->A->AC->T Kill A Kill T Kill AC Kill O); "Chaos: It's Not Just a Theory. [40]" (Overview: " Pull O Pull A Pull AC Pull T Kill A Kill T Kite to K Kill O Pull K Kill K Kill AC".)
The beauty of SHeroics is in inventing these achievements. You can come up with various ways to pull, deal with and kill bosses, and the combinations you come up with will have varying levels of difficulty.
So watch this space for more Heroic Shenanigans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)