Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst
1
2
  1. #21

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    Quote Originally Posted by Khalahn
    Retard checks: "I will not move when Flame Wreath is cast or else the raid blows up"

    Every time I ever did aran i always braced for an insta gib during flame wreath

  2. #22

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    Quote Originally Posted by Posid
    [...] The boss that's taken the longest so far since the first encounter is 4 horsemen in naxx40, it took roughly 7 weeks [...]
    Nefarian took 10 weeks to be killed.
    I'm in the "I don't have an obnoxiously large signature" club.

  3. #23

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    Quote Originally Posted by dotSeed
    Nefarian took 10 weeks to be killed.
    From BWL's release date, or from the first time someone engaged Nefarian? I'm talking about the period from when the boss is first engaged, till it's killed. If that's the case then I'll concede my point

    Edit: BWL was released 12th of july and he got killed the 26th september, I couldn't find a world first kill date for chromaggus but if he died as fast as other bosses, it did indeed take 10 weeks.

  4. #24

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    Ragnaros took about 3 months to kill from first engagement.

    First Majordomo Kill - 10th February 2005
    First Ragnaros Kill - 25th April 2005

    Battle of the Badasses - Warcraft Edition

    Congrats to Medivh

    Bracket Results Here

  5. #25

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuke1096
    Ragnaros took about 3 months to kill from first engagement.

    First Majordomo Kill - 10th February 2005
    First Ragnaros Kill - 25th April 2005
    You just proved this thread's point, it took long because it was still a gearcheck... the tactics to kill Ragnaros arent terribly overwhelming, you just needed the gear to survive and dps fast enough.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bahumut5
    I don't want to call Boubouille and wake her up for something like this.

  6. #26

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    Quote Originally Posted by Posid
    From BWL's release date, or from the first time someone engaged Nefarian? I'm talking about the period from when the boss is first engaged, till it's killed. If that's the case then I'll concede my point
    From engagement, everything else died patch day or within a few days.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuke1096
    Ragnaros took about 3 months to kill from first engagement.
    About the same time actually at ~10 weeks. (Mid Feb -> Late April)

    Quote Originally Posted by Chaoslux
    You just proved this thread's point, it took long because it was still a gearcheck... the tactics to kill Ragnaros arent terribly overwhelming, you just needed the gear to survive and dps fast enough.
    In Ragnaros' case is was getting fire resistance gear. In Nefarian's case it was Onyxia cloaks. For C'thun it was just unbeatable until hotfixed. Only Kel'thuzad didn't have a dickish wall and he only lasted a mere 5 days.
    I'm in the "I don't have an obnoxiously large signature" club.

  7. #27

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    Quote Originally Posted by ChunkyM
    I agree Posid. Tuning is one of the ways of making this game harder and to those that say oh they need more gear to down arthas need to think about this question. Would naxx (WotlK version) be considered harder if you needed full epics to kill the bosses rather than blues?
    If you were to require full epics then you can assume a shorter enrage timer / harder hitting / more aoe damage / etc.

    So in a way, yes. If you required full epics over blues then you should assume that dps need more stats and better weapons to beat the enrage timers. The healers need better gear to heal for more and have better mana regen. The tanks need better gear for more stamina and avoidance / mitigation. The raid overall will probably require more stamina for survival in fights with aoe damage.

    Furthermore, it means you need to make full use of every CD available in the raid, and coordinate all the CD's in a much better fashion. I could take a raid full of greens to Marrowgar with everyone knowing full well the tactics yet still wipe since we wouldn't have the gear.

    At the end of the day, we have no idea if guilds know the 25 LK HC fight fully, or what percentage they have got him to. But increasing the gear requirement for a boss would technically increase the difficulty in a way, at least at that point in time when you are progressing in said instance (naxx in your question), before you overgear the encounters.

  8. #28

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    You realize arthas heroic is mostly designed to be fought with the zone wide raid buff right?

  9. #29

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    Quote Originally Posted by Chaoslux
    You just proved this thread's point, it took long because it was still a gearcheck... the tactics to kill Ragnaros arent terribly overwhelming, you just needed the gear to survive and dps fast enough.
    I wouldn't really put Ragnaros and nefarian in the "gearcheck" category along with Festergut and Patchwerk and the likes. It took a fair bit more than just tanking and spanking to succede.

    Quote Originally Posted by Destram
    You realize arthas heroic is mostly designed to be fought with the zone wide raid buff right?
    Gief source for this, or it doesn't really say much.

  10. #30

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    i didn't say it is impossible, i just said it is mostly designed to be foguht with the buff. i am sure the top world guilds will either kill him or get close to when they have most heroic bis gear.

  11. #31

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    Quote Originally Posted by Destram
    You realize arthas heroic is mostly designed to be fought with the zone wide raid buff right?
    You realize the zone wide buff is meant to be implemented after it's been cleared for the worse guilds, right?
    By Blood and Honor We Serve!

  12. #32

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    Itemization screwed vanilla up!
    Resto shamans with agility, and so on, bosses are not getting easier, it's the ppl who are getting better.
    C'Thun is NOT harder than Yogg +0 25 man!

  13. #33

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    Thank you flashur for explaining the many ways. I asked that question and expected them to realise all the points you put down and there are even more than that but its pointless to explain more to people who dont accept it.

  14. #34

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    Do you really believe that lich king hc would have been still alive if it wasnt for the limited attempts?

    Dont even try comparing him to prewotlk cockblocks.

  15. #35

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    Athcat considering Paragon got to Lich king with 10+ attempts now they must be getting to him with near enough all 20 attempts. Now add those attempts to the alts they also use they most likely have enough attempts at the fight.

  16. #36
    Miss Doctor Lady Bear Sunshine's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    15,651

    Re: Icecrown Citadel Not so weak after all...

    There are plenty of threads to respond to on this topic already.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •