Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Sewer Syrup deafeted!Follow

#27 Apr 20 2008 at 9:02 PM Rating: Default
The problem really is if you get aggro/link with a Mousse you're basically dead. Mousses take forever to kill, let alone SS, and SS already rapes your wyvern with his 300-350dmg Fluid Spreads.

One side of the hallway has a DC Ghost that will make things complicated, and the other hallway has 2 Mousses and a Ghost further down I believe.

Although the Mousses don't hit you particularly hard, they definitly make killing SS impossible because they'll interrupt your HB triggers, and SS hits **** hard already.

The only things you need to concern yourself with in this fight is not getting an add, and keeping your wyvern alive. This is also why /RDM beats /BLU for this fight, for Shell II+Barwater+Empathy. Without this, you have a moderately high chance of your wyvern dying twice eventually because its such a long fight. He's got about 12,000 HP and you're hitting him for 25-40 with 120ish WS.

Edited, Apr 20th 2008 10:02pm by TheHolyDragoonSeraphus
____________________________
DRG75/RDM75/PLD75


One to be born
from a dragon
hoisting the light
and the dark
arises high
up in the sky
to the still land.
Veiling the moon with the light of eternity
it brings another promise to mother Earth
with a bounty and mercy.
#28 Apr 21 2008 at 8:30 AM Rating: Excellent
Sage
Avatar
*****
10,815 posts
The ChaosRook of Doom wrote:
Master ketrel wrote:
Quote:
You can't rebut an argument by criticising or denigrating its presenter instead of dealing with the argument itself.


Yes you can, if you have a history of providing information you pulled from your *** then people should be informed and right off the top not believe you and or not take your numbers as realistic or reliable.


It's called Ad hominem. It is a logical fallacy in debates of this type. If we're talking a matter of opinion, then discrediting the person with the opinion is perfectly reasonable. However, when we are talking cold verifiable facts, discrediting the person rather than the argument is irrational and unhelpful. No doubt that HDS tends to pull numbers out of his nether regions, but in this case, his numbers aren't that far from reality and can't be dismissed just because he's the one providing them.


not quite... unless you already know the answer to the question, you have no way of differentiating between when seraphus is flat out lying (like he used to do daily on the killingifrit MNK forums; i'm not sure if he was an alla troll as well at that time) or saying something valid.

since he does simply make things up on occasion, his posts are rendered worthless. the only ways they could be "useful" would be if you verified everything he said for yourself (90% of the cases of which could be done without ever asking the question in the first place), or if others post confirming his response (in which case it's their answers not his that were helpful).

there's principles of charity and trust that allow for communication, especially here where we make claims about observable things that "no one would ever bother lying about" (like how we assume most to all parses haven't been edited after the fact by the poster). when someone openly violates those principles, it's borderline impossible to seriously communicate with them.

---

listen, i'm all for the principle of anonymous communication and having arguments stand up more than people (i quite prefer that to ego/reputation-based forums like alla), and i know ad hominem is a fallacy. but you need to understand that social interaction is not so simple as taking everything everyone says "at face value" all the time. the internet has trolls, for one. two, if people like seraphus are allowed to spread misinformation as freely as valid information, it erodes all reason for people to take seriously anything you or i might say (stuff where certain game mechanics are taken as assumed). some people prefer to take the attitude, "no! regardless of liars, you should hang on EVERY SINGLE WORD that comes out of my mouth, make no judgments about my demeanor and character, and hash out every logical argument i make no matter how trifling!" that's a very entitled and foolish attitude.

you can't deal with known liars the same way you deal with people who have never lied to you. this isn't about morality or ethics, it's about the dispassionate mechanics of communication itself. the machinery can't run if liars are treated the same as truthtellers; the conveying of information is premised off certain common assumptions without which we can't talk about final fantasy xi.

/sermon
____________________________
pahn
retired monk

i wish to be the red comet.
#29 Apr 21 2008 at 8:35 AM Rating: Good
******
49,744 posts
Please don't defend the guy that said the PS2 didn't have a CPU.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#30 Apr 21 2008 at 8:55 AM Rating: Excellent


I'm not defending him. He's an idiot, and 9.9/10 times posts garbage. However, my point stands, his numbers were actually correct, and making a post calling him a liar and not to believe him is pretty worthless. If you can't debunk his argument based on the facts, then you may as well leave it be. Believe me there are people here who can (if it in fact needs to be debunked).

The numbers being difficult to verify doesn't make attacking him personally a legitimate tactic. Hate him, love him, whatever him, I don't care. If he posts garbage, call him on it. If he posts something legitimate don't attempt to discredit him just because you don't like him.

P.S. Asking for proof or some sort of evidence of claims is not the same as attacking the source. If you doubt the source, and can't verify his assertions; have him back up his claim with some sort of proof.

Edited, Apr 21st 2008 11:58am by ChaosRook
____________________________
That is the saving grace of humor, if you fail no one is laughing at you
~A. Whitney Brown

But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
~Carl Sagan
---
[ffxisig]135670[/ffxisig]
#31 Apr 21 2008 at 9:05 AM Rating: Good
Sage
Avatar
*****
10,815 posts
Quote:
The numbers being difficult to verify doesn't make attacking him personally a legitimate tactic. Hate him, love him, whatever him, I don't care. If he posts garbage, call him on it. If he posts something legitimate don't attempt to discredit him just because you don't like him.


i discredit him because i don't trust him, not because i don't like him. i reiterate, if you know that he literally makes up data and posts it, you can't know that the numbers he wrote in this thread are accurate unless you already knew what kind of numbers to expect in the first place!

if you can't believe someone without firsthand knowledge of the things they talk about, or trustworthy people verifying their story, you can't helpfully receive new information from that person. all readers should exercise such skepticism when reading seraphus' posts, and receive no benefit whatever from the things he writes. you may as well believe every willful troll if you take seraphus seriously.

validity of information is rendered irrelevant by wholly unreliable speakers giving out the information. if i say, "i don't know anything at all about PUP or what automaton attachments do, but i suggest you use the heat seeker attachment," i'm not suddenly rendered reliable if it turns out that you SHOULD use the heat seeker attachment. make sense?

edit:

Quote:
P.S. Asking for proof or some sort of evidence of claims is not the same as attacking the source. If you doubt the source, and can't verify his assertions; have him back up his claim with some sort of proof.


in the thread linked by ketrel, seraphus is shown to be falsifying such proof. you're treating this like law instead of conversation, which is where you're going wrong. think of it as "is it possible to have successful communication" with this person, not "could i convict this person to jail" or "could i Consider Myself As Having Won The Argument with this person." it's not about logical fallacies and whether or not bad source entails bad info and therefore grants all opponents of the bad source the title of Argument Winner; it's about "can an advice forum tolerate the input of a lying source." it can't.

Edited, Apr 21st 2008 1:08pm by milich
____________________________
pahn
retired monk

i wish to be the red comet.
#32 Apr 21 2008 at 9:14 AM Rating: Good
milich wrote:
Quote:
The numbers being difficult to verify doesn't make attacking him personally a legitimate tactic. Hate him, love him, whatever him, I don't care. If he posts garbage, call him on it. If he posts something legitimate don't attempt to discredit him just because you don't like him.


i discredit him because i don't trust him, not because i don't like him. i reiterate, if you know that he literally makes up data and posts it, you can't know that the numbers he wrote in this thread are accurate unless you already knew what kind of numbers to expect in the first place!

if you can't believe someone without firsthand knowledge of the things they talk about, or trustworthy people verifying their story, you can't helpfully receive new information from that person. all readers should exercise such skepticism when reading seraphus' posts, and receive no benefit whatever from the things he writes. you may as well believe every willful troll if you take seraphus seriously.

validity of information is rendered irrelevant by wholly unreliable speakers giving out the information. if i say, "i don't know anything at all about PUP or what automaton attachments do, but i suggest you use the heat seeker attachment," i'm not suddenly rendered reliable if it turns out that you SHOULD use the heat seeker attachment. make sense?


You aren't the one who posted that HDS is a liar and you can't trust anything he says. That was posted by someone who did so because he doesn't like him. I've also never seen you completely discredit somebodies information based on it's source. In fact, I've seen you take great pains to show why the information is wrong (including a previous post by HDS in regards to SA Jump damage). Is this necessarily a practical thing to do in real life? Of course not, and I do see your point. However on a discussion board (where obviously people have some spare time), it makes sense to make the extra effort.

The problem I have is not that somebody doubted HDS's info based on past reputation... that's completely reasonable. The issue is that said somebody didn't even make an attempt to respond to the numbers. Anybody who's fought Sewer Syrup can tell you that the numbers HDS posted are reasonable. It's not something that's hard to verify, so his reputation as a liar is pretty irrelevant here.

I can't stress enough that there is a large difference between an unreliable source posting opinion and that same source posting verifiable facts. HDS's post in this thread falls firmly in the latter.
____________________________
That is the saving grace of humor, if you fail no one is laughing at you
~A. Whitney Brown

But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
~Carl Sagan
---
[ffxisig]135670[/ffxisig]
#33 Apr 21 2008 at 9:34 AM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts


He's right you know...

Playstations are powered by babies!

Screenshot
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#34 Apr 21 2008 at 9:35 AM Rating: Default
****
4,902 posts
Milich put it perfectly.

I should have been much more clear, Seraphus has done nothing to me directly and like I sated above I don't trust his numbers. They may be right, I have no way of testing them but from his posting history we can see people should right off the bat know they are probably reading some thing that happened to him in last nights dream.

____________________________
DRG FAQ
#35 Apr 21 2008 at 9:39 AM Rating: Decent
****
4,902 posts
I mean some of the stuff he has posted has been unverifiable at the time he posts them.

Remember when he posted that the ore needed for mezraq drops from the HQ form of Cerberus?

____________________________
DRG FAQ
#36 Apr 21 2008 at 9:44 AM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Master ketrel wrote:
I have no way of testing them but from his posting history we can see people should right off the bat know they are probably reading some thing that happened to him in last nights dream.


You know that would make more sense. Considering we're actually on the same server, I never recall seeing him in-game anywhere. Maybe my mind is doing me a favor, I don't know.

Edited, Apr 21st 2008 12:45pm by bsphil
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#37 Apr 21 2008 at 9:59 AM Rating: Good
Master ketrel wrote:
I mean some of the stuff he has posted has been unverifiable at the time he posts them.

Remember when he posted that the ore needed for mezraq drops from the HQ form of Cerberus?



If you can't verify it, and he can't show proof, then it's perfectly reasonable (and right) to disregard his information. This is true regardless of his reputation. If I posted that Blau Dolch is an ultra rare drop from the Ash Dragon and couldn't follow that up with some sort of proof, I'd hope that I'd be called on it.

When I say "if you can't verify it", I don't mean you need to spend hours doing painstaking experiments. I mean finding some source that backs up the claim, either personal experience or a second independent source (e.g. Wiki, BG, etc). I understand why you would look at anything HDS posts with a healthy dose of skepticism, I really do. However being skeptical and being dismissive are two different things.
____________________________
That is the saving grace of humor, if you fail no one is laughing at you
~A. Whitney Brown

But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
~Carl Sagan
---
[ffxisig]135670[/ffxisig]
#38 Apr 21 2008 at 10:19 AM Rating: Default
****
4,902 posts
Quote:
When I say "if you can't verify it", I don't mean you need to spend hours doing painstaking experiments. I mean finding some source that backs up the claim, either personal experience or a second independent source (e.g. Wiki, BG, etc). I understand why you would look at anything HDS posts with a healthy dose of skepticism, I really do. However being skeptical and being dismissive are two different things.


well it just may be me but after a certain amount of lies I just become dismissive I label him a lier and thats the end of that. Maybe its a character flaw idk but after a certain amount of ******** I just stop reading lol
____________________________
DRG FAQ
#39 Apr 21 2008 at 11:27 PM Rating: Decent
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyK1LTfLXiM

not a rickroll.

actually found this from a different website about a different subject all together.

the ChaosRook of Doom's "It's called Ad hominem." reminded me of this thread so I posted the link.

:3
____________________________
Saesumi wrote:
I have like four people left to talk to on this server... 2 of them are you.

lolgaxe wrote:
Or do you think Christmas always involved trees and decorated boxes, and Easter always involved an egg laying Zombie Jesus Bunny?

My Journal
#40 Apr 22 2008 at 1:18 PM Rating: Default
*
73 posts
Quote:

well "Cads" it seems you are the illiterate one.. reread the bold plz


Don't misunderstand me sparky... I enjoy cursing out Seraphus as much as the next guy. Doesn't really have anything to do with the fact that /rdm is probably a better sub to use on SS for the reasons he detailed.

Edit: though I think he's talking out of his *** about shell being useful against syrup, seeing as how fluid toss and spread are physical TP moves.

Edited, Apr 22nd 2008 5:20pm by SelfDestButton
#41 Apr 22 2008 at 10:20 PM Rating: Default
Quote:
seeing as how fluid toss and spread are physical TP moves.


Wait, really how are you sure? And the wiki discussion for Jelly mobs says

Quote:
Digest: Single target HP Drain.
Fluid Spread: 10' AoE water(?) damage, absorbed by Utsusemi.
Fluid Toss: Single target water damage.
HP Drain: HP Drain
Epoxy Spread: AoE Bind
Mucus Spread: AoE Slow.



Also Mysterytour, a Japanese FFXI database says they're water based too.
____________________________
DRG75/RDM75/PLD75


One to be born
from a dragon
hoisting the light
and the dark
arises high
up in the sky
to the still land.
Veiling the moon with the light of eternity
it brings another promise to mother Earth
with a bounty and mercy.
#42 Apr 22 2008 at 11:25 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
If it's AoE magic damage, why can you block it with utsusemi?
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#43 Apr 23 2008 at 12:31 AM Rating: Good
Sage
Avatar
*****
10,815 posts
no
____________________________
pahn
retired monk

i wish to be the red comet.
#44 Apr 23 2008 at 9:25 AM Rating: Default
*
73 posts
Sounds like lies and chicanery. Rule of thumb is if you can evade it or blink it, it's physical.
#45 Apr 23 2008 at 10:39 AM Rating: Decent
Prettier Than You
*****
12,975 posts
NoodlesCCCLV wrote:
Well I'm a mushroom cloud laying motherfucker, motherfucker.
I'm the guns of the Navarone.
____________________________
Did you lose faith?
Yes, I lost faith in the powers that be.
But in doing so I came across the will to disagree.
And I gave up. Yes, I gave up, and then I gave in.
But I take responsibility for every single sin. ♪ ♫


Thank god I stopped playing MMOs.
#46 Apr 23 2008 at 11:32 AM Rating: Default
Quote:
Rule of thumb is if you can evade it or blink it, it's physical.

Like Fire Spit
____________________________
DRG75/RDM75/PLD75


One to be born
from a dragon
hoisting the light
and the dark
arises high
up in the sky
to the still land.
Veiling the moon with the light of eternity
it brings another promise to mother Earth
with a bounty and mercy.
#47 Apr 23 2008 at 11:39 AM Rating: Good
TheHolyDragoonSeraphus wrote:
Quote:
Rule of thumb is if you can evade it or blink it, it's physical.

Like Fire Spit


Firespit isn't an AOE.
____________________________
That is the saving grace of humor, if you fail no one is laughing at you
~A. Whitney Brown

But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
~Carl Sagan
---
[ffxisig]135670[/ffxisig]
#48 Apr 24 2008 at 4:48 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,890 posts
TheHolyDragoonSeraphus wrote:
Quote:
Rule of thumb is if you can evade it or blink it, it's physical.

Like Fire Spit


This might be hard to comprehend, but there are actually two "Fire Spits". The mage mamools have one, which is a ST magic based fire attack (which happens to ignore shadows). The melee mamools have another one, which is a 3 hit attack (which is absorbed by shadows and can be evaded / dodged). This is apparent when BLUs try to learn the spell, they can only learn the one from the mages.
____________________________
RoTZ: Complete DM: O
CoP: Complete AN: O
99 SAM, RDM, BLU, WAR, PLD, DRK

lolgaxe wrote:
Nothing in this game is impossible if you set yourself to the task of actually doing it. Even dumb people can only hold you back for so long.


Lucinus wrote:
when you're hefting something that deadly, you don't miss - mobs get the **** out of the way instead...
#49 Apr 24 2008 at 8:18 AM Rating: Default
Sorry, I never got the memo
____________________________
DRG75/RDM75/PLD75


One to be born
from a dragon
hoisting the light
and the dark
arises high
up in the sky
to the still land.
Veiling the moon with the light of eternity
it brings another promise to mother Earth
with a bounty and mercy.
#50 Apr 24 2008 at 10:06 AM Rating: Good
Sage
***
1,567 posts
TheHolyDragoonSeraphus wrote:
Sorry, I never got the memo

Here ya go.
Also,
GaugeChambers the Malevolent wrote:

<Dracula
____________________________
Chatokun 90DRG | 75RDM | 82BRD | 90THF | 90NIN | 75SAM | 90BLU
Valefor Server
Linkshell: Heresy
#51 Sep 13 2014 at 11:11 PM Rating: Default
Delete


Edited, Sep 14th 2014 1:16am by DonCorneo
Necro Warning: This post occurred more than thirty days after the prior, and may be a necropost.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 1 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (1)