I do, however, feel that it is very wrong of Blizzard to push through Forum RealID if they have decided that Blizzard's own staff will not have their names displayed for "Security reasons".
I don't support hypocrisy in any form.
Thursday, 8 July 2010
Wednesday, 7 July 2010
RealID.
This will be a big post. Like, really big. Because it's a big issue, and it's one that the privacy brigade -- the "Hockey moms" and the Daily Mail readers -- have all wrong. But, frankly, when do they stop to apply their walnut brains?
(If you're offended by the outset without even looking at the content I'm about to pour out, you have proven my first point. Congratulations for being a walking foil for my cynicism. It's all right. I won't force you to strain your least-exercised muscle. I do hope you feel small in the process of clicking the X in the corner, though.)
So, RealID: Blizzard's new pet that it is rolling out throughout the new Battle.net system. This post is going to be one huge counter-rant against all the people I mention in the first paragraph. To give it some structure, I will be working through this Wowhead blog post on the subject. I'll pick out the quotes that capture the essence of the arguments against this system, and will comprehensively destroy them in order of importance and distance from the central point (i.e., the points that cause me to go on tangents will be placed later on in the article).
But, first, if you genuinely don't already know what I'm on about, here's the essentials: Blizzard, having created a "RealID" friends list (which, it turns out, does not require you to know more than one friend's e-mail address, since you can then pull the other people off their friends-of-friends list -- so, well done, guys, your security is actually not at all affected there either), is changing the official forum structure. When the new Battle.net system is rolled out, alongside Starcraft II, all official forum posts will use RealID instead of character aliases for the cognomines (that's the correct plural of cognomen, by the way) of those who post there.
People who were up-in-arms about RealID friends lists are, of course, up-in-arms about this, waving around the same old, tired arguments. So, let me set the scene further by pointing out the benefit that no sane person can deny: Real accountability. No level 1 alts clogging up the system with purely retarded posts. Actual names with actual recognition will cause this to be a thing of the past. People will still post stupid shit, and people will still troll, but they will have to consider that it is their real name being displayed when they do it.
This works the other way, too: people who have written guides and who are very proud of their positive contributions to the official forums will now get proper recognition. I do not at all suggest that they're going to be winning Nobel Prizes for literature with their fanfics, or whatever, but, if they have any sense of self, they will enjoy seeing their name there. It helps one's ego, even just a fraction of a fraction, when one encounters someone else who recognises their alias -- so how about someone recognising their name?
This is summed up perfectly by this post by ceto:
Compromised Security
This is the main thrust of the nay-sayers' argument. They claim that, because information based on one's legal name is publicly available, they open themselves up to all kinds of attacks and fraud just by posting on the official forums. That, regardless of their post's content, they will be targeted.
Random targeting
That bit in italics will be my first counter-question: Why would someone target you when the only thing you did was post on the forums? Assuming the mark had nothing to do with the content you posted, it can only have been random. Newsflash: randomised targeting of people to exploit is not a new thing. It has been around for hundreds -- hell, fucking thousands -- of years. Since the dawn of time, one dishonest man has stolen from another whom he targeted semi-, if not completely, randomly. You can be targeted at any time by anyone. If you're seriously worried about this on the WoW forums, you must live in fear, surely? You must be aware of the dangers of, y'know, existing on this planet? How on Earth do you cope with crossing the road ten times a day?
I'll stop the silly rhetorical questions and ask the main one behind this point: How is it that you are going to be targeted, randomly, through the WoW forums, in a way that you could not be targeted by any other person in any other medium? Answer: you're not. Yes, I guess it must suck that, until now, the WoW forums had been a cocoon for you in which you felt that nothing could harm you. If you did feel that the WoW forums were safe before RealID then you are blind or stupid. Nowhere on the internet is safe -- it's the same level of danger as crossing the road (i.e., low-level), but not completely safe.
Malicious targeting
So, we can discredit randomised targeting as a valid reason for disliking RealID -- or, at least, a valid reason for disliking RealID more than, say, signing up for a mobile phone contract and ticking the "Do not share my information with third parties" box. We now turn to malicious targeting. In other words, targeting which has been caused by the direct or indirect result of the actual content that a user has posted.
So I'll get the short one out of the way: if you're posting stupid shit at the present time on the WoW Forums, I would recommend that you stop posting, since, yes, by some degree of logic people could maliciously target you for posting stupid shit. I will go on to explain how even the fear of that is unfounded (using a degree of logic much more advanced than the one mentioned in the previous sentence), but, if you want to play it safe, you can do us all a favour and take your ball home with you. As shown in the quote earlier, the prospective improvement of post quality in the WoW Forums, as a result of RealID, is a good thing.
Now, some slightly longer, more advanced arguments:
The likelihood of being targeted effectively is incredibly small.
I entered that Wowhead thread at this point.
1) Three links (Gone Blogal, Twitter and Facebook) that I knew were in the public domain. Look -- I've even linked them here, too!
2) One link (192.com) which garnered no information that he could use. It wasn't even that 192.com did have the correct information and that it would yield it for a fee. The information it had was completely wrong, and the only places where it even came close to the mark was three years out of date.
3) That he is a retarded 11-year-old.
I cannot be located in any meaningful way using a Google search. I do not deny that, if someone had a lot of time and a lot of contacts, that person could find out whatever they liked about me ... But that returns to my random targeting point: That could happen at any point and for any/no reason. Why is RealID, specifically, going to be the catalyst that causes me to become the subject of fraud or stalking? Answer: It's not. The information I have made publicly available has been done so by my own hand, with my own knowledge. I have control over it. Oh, speaking of which:
Stalking
If someone knows where I live, they can stalk me. There you go: I said it. 1-0 to the Daily Mail? Not so fast! There are a number of reasons why I don't care; and, moreover, why no one is going to stalk me.
1) I can, and will, call the police. They can, and will, deal with it. Ironically, the reason why they are likely to deal with it is exactly because of Daily Mail scare stories. That is, I will admit, the advantage of the tabloid press: they do make people aware of the dangers of the modern world. The problem with the them is that they exaggerate everything. (In the Daily Mail's case, everything gives you cancer. No, seriously, I mean it.)
2) I am a nobody, frankly. And, further frankly, so are all of you; paranoia is one of the highest forms of arrogance. And, damn, am I ever arrogant. I do not run my own company, I have very little money to my name, I am not famous in any way. I'm reasonably good-looking, I'm informed, but someone is more likely to stalk me for that reason outside of WoW than as a consequence of posting on the WoW forums. Even if you are notorious in a WoW context, you aren't going to be stalked. So get over yourself.
But enough about me. What about other people's concerns that they will be stalked or e-stalked? Well, let's see the arguments:
2) I have already covered.
b) All of my friends know that I play WoW. Know why they're friends? Because they accept it as part of who I am. Get new friends, frankly. Don't bother with people who don't want to bother with you. This logic extends to c). I don't understand why you would want to be with someone who dislikes something that you do on a regular basis, if you personally like that regular thing and have no desire, now or in the future, to stop it. It is just going to cause more hassle than it could ever be worth. I can understand compromise, but that is not what is being implied in c). What is being implied in c) is someone who, upon hearing that you play WoW, either tries to make you stop altogether or just doesn't want to see you any more as a result. Again, why bother with someone like that who cannot accept you for who you are?
I think I've covered the main points of the whole "I'm going to get stalked/have my identity stolen" brigade now, so I will just finish with my Xaratherus-based tangent.
Authenticators
I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure that Xaratherus has locked horns with me before. If it was not him, then I apologise, but I'm going to forge ahead anyway and claim it was him because I am 90% sure it was.
I am an authenticator-denier. By that, I mean I do not subscribe at all to the theory that, if you have an authenticator, you're not going to get hacked. We know that's not true, and I've had it demonstrated to me how it can be done. Yes, it is more elaborate than a simple keylogger, but it's enough to make you realise that you don't want to lax on security.
Xaratherus's argument is that Man in the Middle attacks are too elaborate to be considered a viable threat. Yet, this is the same Xaratherus who claims that just by giving him my name he can find out everything about me. Do you see the double-standard? It's pretty subtle, so I'll use an analogue.
Man in the Middle attacks : Deep Privacy Searches :: Keyloggers : Google searches.
See what I mean? The person who claims that an authenticator will provide nigh-on immunity from being attacked is the same person allowing himself to react in a knee-jerk fashion to the idea that people's real names can be googled. Just as Man in the Middle attacks require more set-up than a simple keylogger, so too do deep privacy searches than Googling. There are already so many other reasons why someone would want to perform an MitM attack (a deep privacy search): a WoW account (a real name on a WoW forum) is not going to be high up the list.
Business sense
People seem to think that this is a bad idea because it will lose Blizzard money due to its unpopularity. People also seem to think that this decision was made because the only thing that Blizzard cares about is money. Sorry, what? How does that work, exactly? Either it will gain them money or lose them money. You can't claim that it is unpopular but that it will make them money.
I can assure you all that Blizzard is going to profit off of this; or, if not profit, it is not going to lose money. Know why? Because Blizzard is a business, and it has been a business for over ten years. It knows about market research, and that you don't take any action without first carrying out market research. They are big boys now. They can look after themselves. Whatever changes you might perceive as being crackpot ideas have actually been considered from a business and practicality perspective. In short: Blizzard> You.
Community
This post sickened me.
No, what you meant to say was that forum communities give you an alias. You are still known by a name -- it's just not your real name. Your alias can still be brought into disrepute. Your alias will still carry with it the mark of whatever you choose to post. Your alias will be branded in people's minds as "Helpful" or "Unhelpful". If "Unhelpful", at some point, you're still going to have to leave that community owing to everyone eventually ignoring you, after your constant asstardery.
Opt-in & "The majority of people do not want this"
It just is an opt-in. The forums are not the game. I'm pretty sure that the majority of people do not even know that the forums exist, let alone post on them. At the end of the day, WoW is a game, and there are other avenues to give your feedback. Hell, you can post on the Wowhead forums to give your feedback: Blizzard does read those. Nothing has actually been lost in this respect, because your views will still get across if you publicise them in equally notable venues.
_________
And, with that, I think I'm done. There's a whole slew of other stuff about this issue that I think I wanted to say, but which I simply can't remember at the moment. Oh well. I think 3.3k words is long enough for one night.
(If you're offended by the outset without even looking at the content I'm about to pour out, you have proven my first point. Congratulations for being a walking foil for my cynicism. It's all right. I won't force you to strain your least-exercised muscle. I do hope you feel small in the process of clicking the X in the corner, though.)
So, RealID: Blizzard's new pet that it is rolling out throughout the new Battle.net system. This post is going to be one huge counter-rant against all the people I mention in the first paragraph. To give it some structure, I will be working through this Wowhead blog post on the subject. I'll pick out the quotes that capture the essence of the arguments against this system, and will comprehensively destroy them in order of importance and distance from the central point (i.e., the points that cause me to go on tangents will be placed later on in the article).
But, first, if you genuinely don't already know what I'm on about, here's the essentials: Blizzard, having created a "RealID" friends list (which, it turns out, does not require you to know more than one friend's e-mail address, since you can then pull the other people off their friends-of-friends list -- so, well done, guys, your security is actually not at all affected there either), is changing the official forum structure. When the new Battle.net system is rolled out, alongside Starcraft II, all official forum posts will use RealID instead of character aliases for the cognomines (that's the correct plural of cognomen, by the way) of those who post there.
People who were up-in-arms about RealID friends lists are, of course, up-in-arms about this, waving around the same old, tired arguments. So, let me set the scene further by pointing out the benefit that no sane person can deny: Real accountability. No level 1 alts clogging up the system with purely retarded posts. Actual names with actual recognition will cause this to be a thing of the past. People will still post stupid shit, and people will still troll, but they will have to consider that it is their real name being displayed when they do it.
This works the other way, too: people who have written guides and who are very proud of their positive contributions to the official forums will now get proper recognition. I do not at all suggest that they're going to be winning Nobel Prizes for literature with their fanfics, or whatever, but, if they have any sense of self, they will enjoy seeing their name there. It helps one's ego, even just a fraction of a fraction, when one encounters someone else who recognises their alias -- so how about someone recognising their name?
This is summed up perfectly by this post by ceto:
I think this is bound to increase the quality of discussion on the forums. Posts actually mean something when you sign your name at the bottom. Likewise when you're replying to someone with a name. You might feel no qualms telling Omgbeefeater, Level 3 Tauren Druid, that he's full of fail and should kill himself. Now you're, telling the same thing to David Anderson. Maybe the conversation just got a little more civil. Or maybe you just stopped posting to the forums. Either way, quality won.
This is the best thing that could happen to the crowded, noisy World of Warcraft forums.So, let's delve into the realms of pucks and racism.
Compromised Security
This is the main thrust of the nay-sayers' argument. They claim that, because information based on one's legal name is publicly available, they open themselves up to all kinds of attacks and fraud just by posting on the official forums. That, regardless of their post's content, they will be targeted.
Random targeting
That bit in italics will be my first counter-question: Why would someone target you when the only thing you did was post on the forums? Assuming the mark had nothing to do with the content you posted, it can only have been random. Newsflash: randomised targeting of people to exploit is not a new thing. It has been around for hundreds -- hell, fucking thousands -- of years. Since the dawn of time, one dishonest man has stolen from another whom he targeted semi-, if not completely, randomly. You can be targeted at any time by anyone. If you're seriously worried about this on the WoW forums, you must live in fear, surely? You must be aware of the dangers of, y'know, existing on this planet? How on Earth do you cope with crossing the road ten times a day?
I'll stop the silly rhetorical questions and ask the main one behind this point: How is it that you are going to be targeted, randomly, through the WoW forums, in a way that you could not be targeted by any other person in any other medium? Answer: you're not. Yes, I guess it must suck that, until now, the WoW forums had been a cocoon for you in which you felt that nothing could harm you. If you did feel that the WoW forums were safe before RealID then you are blind or stupid. Nowhere on the internet is safe -- it's the same level of danger as crossing the road (i.e., low-level), but not completely safe.
Malicious targeting
So, we can discredit randomised targeting as a valid reason for disliking RealID -- or, at least, a valid reason for disliking RealID more than, say, signing up for a mobile phone contract and ticking the "Do not share my information with third parties" box. We now turn to malicious targeting. In other words, targeting which has been caused by the direct or indirect result of the actual content that a user has posted.
So I'll get the short one out of the way: if you're posting stupid shit at the present time on the WoW Forums, I would recommend that you stop posting, since, yes, by some degree of logic people could maliciously target you for posting stupid shit. I will go on to explain how even the fear of that is unfounded (using a degree of logic much more advanced than the one mentioned in the previous sentence), but, if you want to play it safe, you can do us all a favour and take your ball home with you. As shown in the quote earlier, the prospective improvement of post quality in the WoW Forums, as a result of RealID, is a good thing.
Now, some slightly longer, more advanced arguments:
The likelihood of being targeted effectively is incredibly small.
I entered that Wowhead thread at this point.
Xaratherus: Give me your name and two hours. I'll give you a call.Over the course of the next two pages, Xaratherus showed me the following.
Sinespe: Chris de Lacy. Go for it.
1) Three links (Gone Blogal, Twitter and Facebook) that I knew were in the public domain. Look -- I've even linked them here, too!
2) One link (192.com) which garnered no information that he could use. It wasn't even that 192.com did have the correct information and that it would yield it for a fee. The information it had was completely wrong, and the only places where it even came close to the mark was three years out of date.
3) That he is a retarded 11-year-old.
Xaratherus: If I had the desire, and financial resources, to dig a bit deeper, I could find more.I will return to Xaratherus later, because he is an incredibly amusing hypocrite on another issue of security which is a mirror-image of this one. That is something of a tangent, though, so I will stick to my point here.
Sinespe: Except, you couldn't, because that second link sees only one Chris de Lacy in Exeter, and it has the age range completely wrong -- yet, my age, I'm pretty sure, is publicly accessible somewhere too. "I could if I wanted to" is not valid argument ... It's 11-year-old logic, at most. So, please, come back with something more substantial. I'm waiting for my phone-call.
[...]
Xaratherus: When exactly did I say that I would restrict my search to the public domain?
Sinespe: Quite a few times. Because you "don't have/want to use the resources to search deeper". You're just making wild assumptions now about whether I can or cannot be located. All you have done is claimed you can find me and then backed away from it, falling back on "Well, I could if I wanted to!". It invalidates your argument utterly. In short, I've called your bluff. So, please, stop talking. And, in future, maybe you'll learn not to make grandiose claims before checking whether you can actually live up to the bluff. It'll make you look less stupid. You do feel stupid, I hope? Doesn't matter if you're behind an alias -- anonymity doesn't protect you from that.
(I'm done, by the way. I've proven my point; you haven't proven yours, nor do you intend to.)
I cannot be located in any meaningful way using a Google search. I do not deny that, if someone had a lot of time and a lot of contacts, that person could find out whatever they liked about me ... But that returns to my random targeting point: That could happen at any point and for any/no reason. Why is RealID, specifically, going to be the catalyst that causes me to become the subject of fraud or stalking? Answer: It's not. The information I have made publicly available has been done so by my own hand, with my own knowledge. I have control over it. Oh, speaking of which:
Stalking
If someone knows where I live, they can stalk me. There you go: I said it. 1-0 to the Daily Mail? Not so fast! There are a number of reasons why I don't care; and, moreover, why no one is going to stalk me.
1) I can, and will, call the police. They can, and will, deal with it. Ironically, the reason why they are likely to deal with it is exactly because of Daily Mail scare stories. That is, I will admit, the advantage of the tabloid press: they do make people aware of the dangers of the modern world. The problem with the them is that they exaggerate everything. (In the Daily Mail's case, everything gives you cancer. No, seriously, I mean it.)
2) I am a nobody, frankly. And, further frankly, so are all of you; paranoia is one of the highest forms of arrogance. And, damn, am I ever arrogant. I do not run my own company, I have very little money to my name, I am not famous in any way. I'm reasonably good-looking, I'm informed, but someone is more likely to stalk me for that reason outside of WoW than as a consequence of posting on the WoW forums. Even if you are notorious in a WoW context, you aren't going to be stalked. So get over yourself.
But enough about me. What about other people's concerns that they will be stalked or e-stalked? Well, let's see the arguments:
1) Female gamers (such as myself) who do not wish to be "targeted", either in game or offline.So, apparently there is a third potential target criterion: being female in a male-dominated environment (which WoW is: 84% of its population is male). Fair enough; you could be targeted just because you're female. But, again, I'd have to ask the question: who on earth is going to do that? It'd have to be a really dedicated kind of crazy to go to all the trouble of stalking someone from a WoW forum, when (and I'm almost sorry to be crude, but this is criminal logic) there are far more accessible, immediate targets in the real world. The "female gamer" angle can only be spun from a purely sexual perspective, so, by its very nature, it falls flat on its face.
2) I have already covered.
3) Users getting fired or disciplined at work for posting on Blizzard forums.Apparently it is Blizzard's fault that you're slacking off at work. Nice scapegoating tactic, there. You might as well also blame YouTube. Hell, why not go the whole hog and blame Google? WoW has been used as a scapegoat throughout that Wowhead thread for bad parenting and bad self-discipline. Sorry, but those arguments are incredibly old and incredibly tired. They have no weight behind them; they never did. Oh no, children are going to be forbidden from posting on the WoW forums. What a huge loss to the community. (I'll be coming onto community later, too.)
5) Exploitation of children who must now either post under their real name, or not be allowed to post at all.
4) Users being discriminated against by potential employers, friends, romantic partners based on easily searched gaming habits.a) Employers. Illegal. You can sue. Well, if you can prove that i) that was the reason you weren't chosen for the post, ii) that reason was not sufficient grounds for refusal, and iii) that you were otherwise the most qualified and capable person for the post. And, frankly, any employer who does that much of a background check on you before you even get hired is very likely to fire you six months down the line for whatever s/he can. Lack of trust does not make for good business arrangements in 90% of circumstances.
b) All of my friends know that I play WoW. Know why they're friends? Because they accept it as part of who I am. Get new friends, frankly. Don't bother with people who don't want to bother with you. This logic extends to c). I don't understand why you would want to be with someone who dislikes something that you do on a regular basis, if you personally like that regular thing and have no desire, now or in the future, to stop it. It is just going to cause more hassle than it could ever be worth. I can understand compromise, but that is not what is being implied in c). What is being implied in c) is someone who, upon hearing that you play WoW, either tries to make you stop altogether or just doesn't want to see you any more as a result. Again, why bother with someone like that who cannot accept you for who you are?
I think I've covered the main points of the whole "I'm going to get stalked/have my identity stolen" brigade now, so I will just finish with my Xaratherus-based tangent.
Authenticators
I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure that Xaratherus has locked horns with me before. If it was not him, then I apologise, but I'm going to forge ahead anyway and claim it was him because I am 90% sure it was.
I am an authenticator-denier. By that, I mean I do not subscribe at all to the theory that, if you have an authenticator, you're not going to get hacked. We know that's not true, and I've had it demonstrated to me how it can be done. Yes, it is more elaborate than a simple keylogger, but it's enough to make you realise that you don't want to lax on security.
Xaratherus's argument is that Man in the Middle attacks are too elaborate to be considered a viable threat. Yet, this is the same Xaratherus who claims that just by giving him my name he can find out everything about me. Do you see the double-standard? It's pretty subtle, so I'll use an analogue.
Man in the Middle attacks : Deep Privacy Searches :: Keyloggers : Google searches.
See what I mean? The person who claims that an authenticator will provide nigh-on immunity from being attacked is the same person allowing himself to react in a knee-jerk fashion to the idea that people's real names can be googled. Just as Man in the Middle attacks require more set-up than a simple keylogger, so too do deep privacy searches than Googling. There are already so many other reasons why someone would want to perform an MitM attack (a deep privacy search): a WoW account (a real name on a WoW forum) is not going to be high up the list.
Business sense
People seem to think that this is a bad idea because it will lose Blizzard money due to its unpopularity. People also seem to think that this decision was made because the only thing that Blizzard cares about is money. Sorry, what? How does that work, exactly? Either it will gain them money or lose them money. You can't claim that it is unpopular but that it will make them money.
I can assure you all that Blizzard is going to profit off of this; or, if not profit, it is not going to lose money. Know why? Because Blizzard is a business, and it has been a business for over ten years. It knows about market research, and that you don't take any action without first carrying out market research. They are big boys now. They can look after themselves. Whatever changes you might perceive as being crackpot ideas have actually been considered from a business and practicality perspective. In short: Blizzard> You.
Community
This post sickened me.
Krypter: That's going to kill their forums quite a bit. People are going to be too scared to post things since the great thing about forum communities is the sense of anonymity. Now you have to worry about your idea or post being taken the wrong way, and someone finding you on Facebook and making your life miserable. No thanks."The great thing about forum communities is the sense of anonymity"? What? No... Sorry, I think you must have misspoke. You aren't anonymous in a forum community unless that forum "community" is /b/. Remind me: Why is that community "great", again? Do you really want to put forward /b/ as an argument in favour of anonymity?
No, what you meant to say was that forum communities give you an alias. You are still known by a name -- it's just not your real name. Your alias can still be brought into disrepute. Your alias will still carry with it the mark of whatever you choose to post. Your alias will be branded in people's minds as "Helpful" or "Unhelpful". If "Unhelpful", at some point, you're still going to have to leave that community owing to everyone eventually ignoring you, after your constant asstardery.
Opt-in & "The majority of people do not want this"
It just is an opt-in. The forums are not the game. I'm pretty sure that the majority of people do not even know that the forums exist, let alone post on them. At the end of the day, WoW is a game, and there are other avenues to give your feedback. Hell, you can post on the Wowhead forums to give your feedback: Blizzard does read those. Nothing has actually been lost in this respect, because your views will still get across if you publicise them in equally notable venues.
_________
And, with that, I think I'm done. There's a whole slew of other stuff about this issue that I think I wanted to say, but which I simply can't remember at the moment. Oh well. I think 3.3k words is long enough for one night.
Sunday, 27 June 2010
Sunday, 13 June 2010
Dear America (and the World, by Extension),
Now, I don't follow football. Especially where the World Cup is concerned, I think it is a blight, especially for the English, who seem to like to take it as an opportunity to show the hosting nation just how full of pathetic hooligans England is.
However, it is in my best interests that England stay in for as long as possible, since it means that, whenever England are playing a match, I get to socialise with certain people and do certain things with an increased frequency -- plus, everywhere in town is nice and quiet because everyone is in pubs or at home watching the matches.
So if you guys could let us get to the semi-finals, at least, that would be nice. Go on. Do it for your old pal Sinespe. He likes getting tail.
However, it is in my best interests that England stay in for as long as possible, since it means that, whenever England are playing a match, I get to socialise with certain people and do certain things with an increased frequency -- plus, everywhere in town is nice and quiet because everyone is in pubs or at home watching the matches.
So if you guys could let us get to the semi-finals, at least, that would be nice. Go on. Do it for your old pal Sinespe. He likes getting tail.
Saturday, 12 June 2010
Friday, 11 June 2010
Touched by a Troll on YouTube!
http://www.youtube.com/trolltouched
I'm not telling you which voice is mine.
I'm not telling you which voice is mine.
Wednesday, 9 June 2010
Raid SHeroics
We tried Earth, Wind and Fire tonight.
Dear God it is hard.
We'll get it later in the week.
Dear God it is hard.
We'll get it later in the week.
Friday, 28 May 2010
HTC Bastard.
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.
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.
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.
Monday, 26 April 2010
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Link.
The first of the refinements being made is that we're combining all raid sizes and difficulties into a single lockout. Unlike today, 10- and 25-player modes of a single raid will share the same lockout.SUCK IT. SUCK IT HARD.
Friday, 23 April 2010
About fucking time.
This is the appropriate form of greeting when someone takes an extra five minutes to log in, owing to the Cyclone battlegroup's login servers playing up,which they had been doing for days. Such was the level of playing-up of the login servers that it had been well documented on the official board for Cyclone over the past three days from when the problem started and, thus, should be at least partially expected and wholly sympathised with.
That is, of course, if you are more concerned about doing SRSBSNSS 5v5 than concerned about the actual "friends" (I use the term incredibly loosely, because I don't think it's appropriate at all -- it's more an aspiration) with whom you're doing said 5v5. Speaking of which, by the way, our 5s started out as just a way to get points and was never, and will never, be srsbsnss. 1950 does not make us awesome. Nor is it worth being so fucking acerbic, obsessed, and haranguing about.
It very quickly becomes suffocating to know that whenever I log into my toon I'm going to get people interrogating me on why I've not been online (Note, not "asking"; "interrogating". Asking is nice -- especially if it shows a regard for how I am. Interrogating doesn't care about how I am, it cares about the use of my toon for the sake of 5v5). I wonder what the chances are that that suffocation explains why, even when I do have free time lately, I'm more likely to log on to my Horde priest with other friends who don't have these scheduling expectations of me. Pretty high, I'd say.
My apologies to Elanie and Sane, who did nothing to piss me off and who, I hope, care more that I'm using my energy to immerse myself in the working world, and thus increase my employability, and that this is leaving me very tired at the end of the day, and in very little mood to deal with any other crap (that I already had done on Tuesday and had had quite enough of) such that I am in no mood to have sarcastic snipes thrown at me by the other two thanks to their complete selfishness and single-mindedness. "Just an excuse for taking so long".
That is, of course, if you are more concerned about doing SRSBSNSS 5v5 than concerned about the actual "friends" (I use the term incredibly loosely, because I don't think it's appropriate at all -- it's more an aspiration) with whom you're doing said 5v5. Speaking of which, by the way, our 5s started out as just a way to get points and was never, and will never, be srsbsnss. 1950 does not make us awesome. Nor is it worth being so fucking acerbic, obsessed, and haranguing about.
It very quickly becomes suffocating to know that whenever I log into my toon I'm going to get people interrogating me on why I've not been online (Note, not "asking"; "interrogating". Asking is nice -- especially if it shows a regard for how I am. Interrogating doesn't care about how I am, it cares about the use of my toon for the sake of 5v5). I wonder what the chances are that that suffocation explains why, even when I do have free time lately, I'm more likely to log on to my Horde priest with other friends who don't have these scheduling expectations of me. Pretty high, I'd say.
My apologies to Elanie and Sane, who did nothing to piss me off and who, I hope, care more that I'm using my energy to immerse myself in the working world, and thus increase my employability, and that this is leaving me very tired at the end of the day, and in very little mood to deal with any other crap (that I already had done on Tuesday and had had quite enough of) such that I am in no mood to have sarcastic snipes thrown at me by the other two thanks to their complete selfishness and single-mindedness. "Just an excuse for taking so long".
Thursday, 8 April 2010
Tuesday, 6 April 2010
More 25-man exclusive crap
Grats Shadowmourners.
I will spare you all a 1.5k-word rant this time. You all know how much bullshit that is.
I will spare you all a 1.5k-word rant this time. You all know how much bullshit that is.
Monday, 22 March 2010
Tier 10 Healing.
Get it changed; and tell them to talk to us.
Because, right now, they're not discussing it with us at all.
Hell, if you're on the US forums, copy it over to them.
Because, right now, they're not discussing it with us at all.
Hell, if you're on the US forums, copy it over to them.
Monday, 15 March 2010
Want me in your guild?
Then don't advertise yourselves like this:
______
Someone commented about me being in Inglourious Gankers. I am, as a pink pony-tailed gnome rogue. Levelling is very slow -- but I'll get my scalps in due course.
______
Account is due to expire in one month. Just before you start thinking I'm back. Oh, and I am deliberately being more of a jerk and caring less about being such. Retarded blog posts, which have their justification sounding very much like "Balance", are not softening my edges. "These people are clearly morons of the highest order [...] 'Everyone's opinion is equally valid', my arse!"
______
I am on Twitter now, for some reason.
______
"Lay" still takes a direct object.
[14:25:04] [W From] [Bien]: Hey mate, you need a new guild ? :) we are a newly formed guild, gonna be a good raiding guild, and we would like to have you in :)Because it translates as "You have awesome gear and I want you to carry people I already have in the guild who think they're a lot better than they are, and think that if they get four pieces of tier 10 like you they will, magically, know their class inside-out and pull the DPS you can."
[14:25:09] [80:Bien]: Level 80 Human Paladin [Shadow Raiders]- The Forge of Souls
______
Someone commented about me being in Inglourious Gankers. I am, as a pink pony-tailed gnome rogue. Levelling is very slow -- but I'll get my scalps in due course.
______
Account is due to expire in one month. Just before you start thinking I'm back. Oh, and I am deliberately being more of a jerk and caring less about being such. Retarded blog posts, which have their justification sounding very much like "Balance", are not softening my edges. "These people are clearly morons of the highest order [...] 'Everyone's opinion is equally valid', my arse!"
______
I am on Twitter now, for some reason.
______
"Lay" still takes a direct object.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)