Twilight Tempest.7584
-
Posts
584 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Articles
Gallery
Posts posted by Twilight Tempest.7584
-
-
> @"Jabronee.9465" said:
> It IS a bug. Trust me it got nothing to do with LoS or non arced arrows. It happened few years back when LB shots keeps getting obstructed and they fixed it.
> Now it's back again. I'm having the same issue. Especially solo capping camps in WvW.
> Please look into this issue again Anet.
>
Just experienced exactly this. Cleared all NPEs down to just the Supervisor. Unloaded a Rapid Fire burst into him only to see "Obstructed" the whole time while in fairly close range, on level, visually unobstructed ground.
Other times this has happened with allies nearby, and I thought maybe necro minions were somehow obstructing. Guess not?
-
Still broken. My utility skills 7 and 9 always swap places when switching templates.
-
> @"Josiah.2967" said:
> Pro Tip: Use one of the included custom configs if you have a high end system. It will increase your frames significantly more than the standard install. The standard install is meant for mid-lower end.
>
> This made me enjoy events again. This made GW2 a prime part of my rotation again and lead to me spending a lot more money in the gem store. :-)
Could you elaborate? I couldn't find any guidance on this. I tried entering "no" at the "Standard installation?" prompt, but that led to 3 options that didn't seem relevant.
-
As far as lag at World Boss events, the single biggest clue that it is not something specifically on my end is that I have very different lag experiences when I play at reset/post-reset compared to playing the same events at late night slots. Reset/post-reset is the worst lag. Ley Line Anomaly is guaranteed skill lag. Tequatl and Karka have gotten worse in the last several months too. Triple Trouble has animation lag that varies day to day.
All of these exact same events at the late night slots are virtually lag free for me. There is definitely a time-of-day component involved. This could explain why some people experience lag and others don't. It depends on what time they're playing, and in what region. The consistent lag at reset/post-reset (peak player count in my region) suggests it is a congestion issue. Whether the congestion occurs at AWS or something in between us, is hard to say.
Running trace routes can offer clues. This trace from last month shows a nearly doubling in latency beginning with the first Amazon-owned node (Hop # 12) along with significant packet loss. It seems to suggest my lag experience that time originated with Amazon.
-
...
-
PingPlotter trace from a moment ago for the GW2 map IP I'm on. It roughly shows my baseline ping in GW2 (a bit over 100 according to the game's F11 window).
All hops beginning with hop 8 are Amazon except for hop 10 which is RIPE Network Coordination Centre. After that, things get unpleasant. Hop 12 (Amazon) roughly doubles the ping and appears to introduce significant packet loss.
Is this just the norm for AWS?
-
> @"AliamRationem.5172" said:
> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > @"AliamRationem.5172" said:
> > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > > > > WvW: the only mode where you can be branded ‘toxic’ for playing the mode as intended....
> > > >
> > > > Toxic whispers (the only place I used the word toxic), insulting emotes, corpse jumping, dropping siege, and other forms of BM are "playing the mode as intended"? Even pro-sports have penalties for inappropriate behavior deemed "bad sportsmanship."
> > >
> > > And what about players who kill you in a group when you're alone?
> >
> > I don't believe I discussed this scenario. If you want my thoughts on it: It sucks, it isn't "fair", but it happens, and it's part of the game. I've been there plenty of times. I don't feel the least bit proud if I'm the one in the group. Nor do I complain if I was the one alone.
> >
> > > What about players who are more experienced?
> >
> > This, I did touch upon, and I basically said I wish there were more veterans out there like the ones I've seen on YT, as well as some in this very thread, who generally leave low ranks/casuals/PvE-ers/dailies players alone, unless there's a solid reason not to.
> >
> > > This whole thread you've made no distinction between these perfectly legitimate behaviors and... Everything else.
> >
> > Pretty sure I have. In short, I've expressed wishful thinking that people would exercise more discretion and decency, while accepting, as some have posited, that no one can be bound beyond the rules of the game. Meanwhile, I haven't wavered from labeling the BM behaviors above as toxic, in line with the premise of this thread.
> >
> > Sorry, but I completely disagree with your assessment here.
> >
> > > I think it's pretty disingenuous, frankly.
> >
> > I've been as candid about my views as possible. I even responded to the person who took a dig through my post history, and nothing came of it. Not sure how I'm being disingenuous.
> >
> > > Toxic? Yeah.
> >
> > Sorry you think this of me.
>
> I apologize if I've mischaracterized your position, but whether you intended to or not you have conflated these things in this thread.
>
> "As I said, I don't mind fair fights, or even uphill fights. It's more the indecency that turns me off. Again, veterans deliberately bullying newbies, stomping when mercy might be in order, and any sort of bm/toxic whispers."
>
> This is an example of such. What you did here was to lump together overtly toxic behaviors with behaviors where the motivation of the other party is ambiguous. How do I know when mercy might be in order? You're saying that I'm in the same conversation with toxic whispers and bullying new players because I chose thumbs down when you would have chosen thumbs up. Is that fair?
I see what you're saying. I don't mean to place debatable moral choices in the same category as overtly toxic BM. They are indeed two distinct topics, and it wasn't my intent to conflate them. If I did, sorry about that.
> In any event, I don't mean to go digging through your post history to score internet points.
No worries at all. You simply quoted something from an earlier post in this thread, which is totally legitimate. It's not like you went through unrelated post-history to try (and fail) to discredit me in the present conversation, like someone else did.
> I feel this is a productive conversation in that it may help players to at least consider which behaviors they view as "toxic" through a different lens. I think a lot of toxicity is simply a result of misinterpretation that results when players are angry and thus likely to assume the worst of enemy player motivations when the overt behaviors don't necessarily indicate that.
I think so too. For my part, being fairly new, I walked in with certain hopes and expectations based on things I'd seen from veterans on YT and these forums. Am I disappointed that not a single person has spared me a stomp even when it's clear I'm a low rank player who tried to avoid a fight? Yes. Is that disappointment reasonable? Apparently not.
> I 100% agree with you on the overtly toxic behaviors. I don't do the trolling and trash talk. It doesn't make sense to me and does nothing but make the game worse for myself and everyone around me. I expect if we were to go down a list of behaviors that fall into any sort of grey area between overt and ambiguous, we'd find ourselves in agreement more often than not (or perhaps after some discussion). But for the purposes of this discussion, I think it was an important distinction to make.
I really appreciate your calm voice of reason in this sometimes heated debate. Thank you.
-
> @"BolkovonHarnfeldt.1372" said:
> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> >
> > I've been as candid about my views as possible. I even responded to the person who took a dig through my post history, and nothing came of it. Not sure how I'm being disingenuous.
> >
> Yeah, I had to dig really, really hard - and as to whether nothing came of it...Let's just say I saw (and frankly still see) no point **continuing this conversation**.
Yet... you did just that by replying to a post you weren't even tagged in?
I think you're just defending your embarrassing snooping and failed "gotcha!" attempt, and trying to come out of it looking better than you do.
-
> @"AliamRationem.5172" said:
> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > > WvW: the only mode where you can be branded ‘toxic’ for playing the mode as intended....
> >
> > Toxic whispers (the only place I used the word toxic), insulting emotes, corpse jumping, dropping siege, and other forms of BM are "playing the mode as intended"? Even pro-sports have penalties for inappropriate behavior deemed "bad sportsmanship."
>
> And what about players who kill you in a group when you're alone?
I don't believe I discussed this scenario. If you want my thoughts on it: It sucks, it isn't "fair", but it happens, and it's part of the game. I've been there plenty of times. I don't feel the least bit proud if I'm the one in the group. Nor do I complain if I was the one alone.
> What about players who are more experienced?
This, I did touch upon, and I basically said I wish there were more veterans out there like the ones I've seen on YT, as well as some in this very thread, who generally leave low ranks/casuals/PvE-ers/dailies players alone, unless there's a solid reason not to.
> This whole thread you've made no distinction between these perfectly legitimate behaviors and... Everything else.
Pretty sure I have. In short, I've expressed wishful thinking that people would exercise more discretion and decency, while accepting, as some have posited, that no one can be bound beyond the rules of the game. Meanwhile, I haven't wavered from labeling the BM behaviors above as toxic, in line with the premise of this thread.
Sorry, but I completely disagree with your assessment here.
> I think it's pretty disingenuous, frankly.
I've been as candid about my views as possible. I even responded to the person who took a dig through my post history, and nothing came of it. Not sure how I'm being disingenuous.
> Toxic? Yeah.
Sorry you think this of me.
-
> @"SpellOfIniquity.1780" said:
> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > When is someone 100% retreating a threat?
>
> I know you've already had a lot of responses, but I just want to interject with a different perspective.
I appreciate your perspective. It doesn't come across as chest-thumping, "What you talkin' 'bout, crybaby? Get outta mah game mode. Rarrrrrrr!"
> I'm the idiot that assumes peoples best intentions. I often only attack players that are; very obviously roaming, to protect objectives, or the back of zergs to thin the herd. PvE players/people just there for dailies I will usually ignore assuming they don't attack me first. I always let people pass if they tonic/toy at me as well.
I keep saying it, but this is pretty much all I was _hoping_ for from more people. I said "hoping." Not "demanding," as some here seem to interpret it.
> And 9 times out of 10 it bites me in the kitten because these players are afraid of me when they're alone, but when I see them again 2 minutes down the road and they have a bunch of friends, suddenly they're not so scared.
>
> I blame myself for not following the red rule and it's my fault for assuming people will repay me with the same respects I grant them. But this is why you should always assume everyone is hostile.
>
> Strategically, it is best to let someone go when they run out of your comfort zone. Logically, it's best to secure the kill to ensure they get the message and don't return.
>
Yeah I understand this, but I might be an even bigger idiot than you. In all games with optional PvP elements, I _never_ attack first, at least not without a very good reason, such as defending myself or an objective against an obvious attack. In fact, 99% of the time I err towards giving benefit of the doubt, accepting being killed as a consequence of my good faith.
I don't expect everyone to conduct themselves this way. It's just the way I play because I rather die a thousand times than be trigger happy and hurt someone who had no ill-intent. Unfortunately we generally don't have the luxury of being so magnanimous IRL, but since death isn't permanent in games, it's the path I've chosen.
> Bottom line is that everyone is going to play differently and everyone has their own values. You can't appease everyone and you should never expect people to abide by any rules other than the rules of the game; don't hack, don't exploit. That's it. Those are the rules.
Agreed.
-
> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> WvW: the only mode where you can be branded ‘toxic’ for playing the mode as intended....
Toxic whispers (the only place I used the word toxic), insulting emotes, corpse jumping, dropping siege, and other forms of BM are "playing the mode as intended"? Even pro-sports have penalties for inappropriate behavior deemed "bad sportsmanship."
-
> @"ASP.8093" said:
> > @"msalakka.4653" said:
> > Chasing down pvers doing dailies isn't roaming, it's just being trash.
>
> Technically, jumping someone who's out there trying to flip a camp is closer to the design intent for "roaming" than this kind of run-around-looking-for-duels/have-a-picnic-in-the-ruins culture that's developed among a lot of self-identified roamers is.
>
I pretty much agree with this. I have zero complaints if I'm trying to take a camp and an enemy player tries to stop me.
But the situation I described earlier was a low rank who upon arriving at the outskirts of a camp hoping just to pick off some NPCs, spotted a highly-ranked enemy roamer, and immediately said "never mind." They tried to turn back, but they weren't allowed. "Red = dead" folks may think that's fine, but I'd like to think others exercise more discretion. That's not me trying to impose my beliefs. Just some possibly misplaced hopes.
-
> @"BolkovonHarnfeldt.1372" said:
> > @"msalakka.4653" said:
> > In Breaking Bad terms this thread is filled with Heisenbergs, Twilight Tempest is Skylar, and instead of having their last conversation it's just Walt going on about doing it for his family.
> > She already called y'all out. Just have that last conversation.
>
> Seeing that the poor helpless WvW pleb getting chased down by the big bad diamond veteran has a long posting history in the PvP forum, I wonder who the real Walter White is in this thread :)
If you're referring to me, yeah I played PvP mainly for dailies, but decided to take a break from it and try WvW. I play a completely different class in WvW, and it's the first time I've played it outside PvE. WvW also lacks PvP's normalized gear, limited amulets, and absence of food and utilities, so there are more ways for people to have an edge in WvW. Sorry to disappoint, but I'm still a WvW noob for all intents and purposes.
Edited for clarity.
-
> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > @"BolkovonHarnfeldt.1372" said
> > That is a lot of words for saying "I want my dailies done quickly."
> >
> >
>
> I tried to believe it was more.
You guys are bullies in game and on the forum. :sigh:
-
Back on topic. These are just a sampling of map chat at the Tequatl and Ley Line Anomaly events that happened just minutes ago. Not a day goes by where people aren't complaining or joking about the lag at these events. I know it's not a scientific sample, so take it for what it's worth. Anecdotally, it does seem a lot of people have lag issues, whatever the cause.
Again, if you never experience lag, that is wonderful, and you are perhaps one of the lucky few.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
**Edit to add today's samples (May 7, 2020):**
Tequatl at reset (8+ full maps in LFG):
Ley Line Anomaly (probably at least 3 full maps):
If anyone truly does not experience any lag at these events, at these slots, really, I want to know your secret.
-
> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Individual setups mostly affect things like framerate. Of course, you can have high ping if you're located far from the nearest servers or your ISP isn't up to par.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > But this game has been plagued by server-side animation and skill lag for over a year. Think Tequatl, Ley Line Anomaly, and Triple Trouble at reset/post-reset. The waves at Tequatl are never in sync. It's why you have to jump before it looks like they'll hit you. It's why all you can use at LLA is your auto-attack. It's why anyone who's done roles at TT can tell you how tough lag makes their job. These are universal issues that affect everyone across all setups, even those playing on super computers with full fiber connections and no issues in other games.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > AWS has proven marginal at best. The current increase in players and internet use in general due to the pandemic is probably only exacerbating things.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > If I can test both systems at the same time, doing the same thing, and one of them experiences skill lag while the other doesn't, certainly individuals setups can be a possible cause.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Have you done this?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I had said I did so yes.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The way you worded it sounded like the test was a possibility, not something already done. Namely, "_If I can_." I can see how it can be read the way you meant it, but it's ambiguous. Hence the request for clarification. Also, I'm not sure how you can be in two places at once, unless you mean someone else is testing one of the PCs.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [The way it was phrased wasn’t a question.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_conditional_sentences)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Fully aware of that. Doesn't change that, as worded, it can be interpreted two different ways, and is thus ambiguous. Take this example:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "If I can pass the test, so can you."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Can you ascertain with certainty whether I have already taken the test or I'm referring to the future? You cannot.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For clarity it probably would have been better to just phrase it as an affirmative statement. I.e., "I tested both systems [and this is what I observed]."
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Sure, if English isn’t your first language I guess that I can understand the confusion since many don’t follow the same structure.
> > > >
> > > > English need not be one's first language for one to fully grasp its rules and many, many idiosyncrasies. But that's neither here nor there. The fact remains that, what you stated, and the example I gave, while both grammatically correct, are ambiguous statements. You have not been able to refute that. You cannot state (accurately) that both statements, on their face, communicate unambiguously whether something has occurred in the past, or has yet to occur.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I’m not going to argue further on this. If you don’t understand that type of statement then it’s whatever.
> > >
> > > > > Unfortunately I’m not going to change the way that I phrase things as the way it was stated is correct.
> > > >
> > > > Lol. You have every right to prioritize pride over effective communication. I never asked you to change anything. Just offered a suggestion on how ambiguity could be avoided. If that was too much, you're free to reject it.
> > > >
> > >
> > > It’s not about pride. It’s about having to dumb down what is stated.
> > >
> > > > > > > I have my older PC and the newer one. You don’t need to be at two places at once. I can simply test one PC and then run to the other within like 15 seconds.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I mean you did say, "If I can test both systems _at the same time_."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Anyway, if you have a completely lag-free experience even at peak times on capped maps, that's great, and I would say you're very fortunate.
> > > > >
> > > > > They are being tested at the same time.
> > > >
> > > > They literally are not, unless you have the ability to be at two places "at the same time, doing the same thing," but okay. lol
> > > >
> > > > Not going to derail this discussion any further. You're welcome to have the last word.
> > >
> > > I’m testing both computers at the same time. The individual actions being 15 seconds apart doesn’t really matter. If the one on WiFi is the only one that experiences skill lag then a system’s setup, and not the servers, could be an issue. Wait. Wait. I used an “if”! Let me rephrase this to prevent confusion since that’s apparently an ambiguous statement.
> > >
> > > I test old computer. Skill lag. I test new computer. No skill lag. Conclusion: old computer setup is causing skill lag.
> >
> > You've been low key condescending since your first reply, and your last one really knocks it out of the park. So against better judgment, I'm replying.
> >
> > You are also proving repeatedly that _you_ don't understand some basic language arts. The way you meant something is clearly the only way it can logically be interpreted. No ifs, ands, or buts. You, oh master of the English language, could not possibly improve, let alone have erred. Heavens, no. (/s)
> >
> > There is a reason you sidestepped my simple question above. It's because you know it perfectly demonstrates the ambiguity in your statement. Doesn't matter if you refuse to admit it.
> >
> > Here it is again. I challenge you to refute it.
> >
> > > Take this example:
> > >
> > > "If I can pass the test, so can you."
> > >
> > > Can you ascertain with certainty whether I have already taken the test or I'm referring to the future? You cannot.
> >
> > That is exactly the form of the statement you made, and why I simply asked whether you had already done it or not. Of course you had to respond with "Duh! I said I did, so I did." (paraphrasing and exaggerating for effect.) Your horse only got higher from there.
>
> I'm sorry if it's coming across as that as that was not my intention.
Okay. Glad to hear it.
> It's just frustrating that instead of talking about the subject matter, we're going over the confusion between the difference of a conditional statement and a question statement.
>
> As for your question, I can. If it was intended as a question you'd have a question mark at the end. Similarly how you can put a question mark behind almost any statement to make it a question. The exact words that I used were "I had said I did so yes.". I'm sorry that it was taken the wrong way.
I never said it was a "question statement." Rather, it was an attempt at making an affirmative statement that, due to its first three words, is open to multiple logical interpretation and is therefore ambiguous. Those interpretations being whether you had already tested or had yet to. It cannot be discerned for certain. "If I can do X, then Y" can be interpreted either as X being something you can and have done (your meaning), or as something speculative about the future (an equally possible meaning).
So I simply asked for clarification and explained why it was ambiguous. Personally, I think the English language is filled with pitfalls that even native speakers overlook. It's why I cut a healthy dose of slack (and respect) to anyone learning it as a subsequent language.
-
> @"AliamRationem.5172" said:
> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > > > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said:
> > > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > When is someone 100% retreating a threat?
> > > > > > What do you plan on doing after you retreat?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Stop playing WvW?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If the answer is no, then you're still 100% a threat.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If the answer is yes well then sure, I'll give you that. Outside WvW you're not a threat to any objectives.
> > > > >
> > > > > This^.
> > > > >
> > > > > The OP stated he was going to go to another camp. Therefore a ‘threat’.
> > > >
> > > > I believe what you're thinking of is: "I would go elsewhere in search of something unguarded."
> > > >
> > > > In case you two didn't know, there are three worlds in WvW. Not everyone is specifically after your world's precious territories. If your thing is to murder everything that breathes, that's your prerogative. Just don't kid yourselves trying to justify it.
> > >
> > > I don’t justify. It’s not worth my energy.
> >
> > And justification isn't needed. But Dawdler, above, and you in full agreement, tried to do just that: justify chasing down and killing a retreating player who signaled they didn't want any trouble, on the theory they are 100% a threat unless they leave WvW. Extreme much?
> >
> > So on the one hand you say you don't justify killing because it's not worth your energy, but you did just that above. Just say you like to fight and kill at your whim and own it. No need to pretend there's a reason, but then say you don't need reasons.
> >
> > > There is a really neat thing in this game.... I can respawn after I die....
> > >
> > > I don’t even lose equipment to someone when I die. It’s really sweet.
> >
> > That's fine and all. But there's also this limited resource called "time." It tends to get wasted by pointless killing of casuals just trying to do a couple low-impact dailies. Is being killed and sent back to respawn the risk for chasing these dailies? Absolutely. Doesn't mean it has to be the norm. So yeah, you do you and get your jollies off wasting casuals' time. And I'll do me, and not.
> >
> > > So... take advantage of any engagement to get better and learn. If you are running a build that you would use in PvE, maybe try something different designed for running alone, tweak it and work on improving.
> > >
> > > Or don’t. Just don’t expect people to play the way you think they should.
> >
> > ^ Sound advice.
>
> I imagine the point this person is trying to convey (forgive me for making the assumption) is that they shouldn't require a justification for doing what the game mode allows. I don't think it's particularly relevant what their motivations are. Would you ever know about them if they never told you? You're obviously welcome to feel how you want to feel about those motivations, whatever they may be. But why does it matter so much to you whether you're killed by a friendly player who just likes to fight or a not-so-friendly player who couldn't care less about your feelings on the matter...and also likes to fight?
>
> It's an honest question to ponder. Why does it matter so much? What if it didn't? What would that be like?
Yeah, I'm not really concerned with motivations so much as the "indecencies" I mentioned earlier. Namely: veterans deliberately bullying newbies, stomping when mercy might be in order, and any sort of bm/toxic whispers. I don't really care _why_ they're doing it, so much as _that_ they're doing it, if that makes sense.
I happen to prefer a more noble/honorable/moral/ethical/just/fair/sporting WvW. Opinions may vary on what that means, but the basics are pretty universal.
No, I do not expect the game mode to change for little old me. Adapt or move on, right?
-
> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > > > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said:
> > > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > When is someone 100% retreating a threat?
> > > > > > What do you plan on doing after you retreat?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Stop playing WvW?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If the answer is no, then you're still 100% a threat.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If the answer is yes well then sure, I'll give you that. Outside WvW you're not a threat to any objectives.
> > > > >
> > > > > This^.
> > > > >
> > > > > The OP stated he was going to go to another camp. Therefore a ‘threat’.
> > > >
> > > > I believe what you're thinking of is: "I would go elsewhere in search of something unguarded."
> > > >
> > > > In case you two didn't know, there are three worlds in WvW. Not everyone is specifically after your world's precious territories. If your thing is to murder everything that breathes, that's your prerogative. Just don't kid yourselves trying to justify it.
> > >
> > > I don’t justify. It’s not worth my energy.
> >
> > And justification isn't needed. But Dawdler, above, and you in full agreement, tried to do just that: justify chasing down and killing a retreating player who signaled they didn't want any trouble, on the theory they are 100% a threat unless they leave WvW. Extreme much?
>
> So, you want to add a mechanism that ‘unflaggs you’ for any PvP engagement? There is no signal that is universally accepted.. (well, tonics and kites are pretty well accepted but..)
No, that would be rather silly. Although I am aware of some games with open-world PvP where players are allowed to turn on a "passive" non-combative state where they can neither harm nor be harmed.
I believed (apparently falsely) that turning tail and (trying) to flee the moment a scary Diamond player charged was a pretty universal: "I'll just be on my way; don't want any trouble." But I suppose that could be interpreted as "100% a threat", because I _exist_ in WvW. lol
> >
> > So on the one hand you say you don't justify killing because it's not worth your energy, but you did just that above. Just say you like to fight and kill at your whim and own it. No need to pretend there's a reason, but then say you don't need reasons.
>
> I think you misunderstood (or I explained it poorly), I don’t feel a need to ‘justify’ it. I enjoy engaging **anyone**, including those who destroy me. And maybe that is a ‘justification’, but I don’t think either of us benefit from arguing the semantics of that word.
You explained fine. You don't need justification--got it. It's just that you did point to justification when you endorsed Dawdler's claim that I am 100% a threat unless I stop playing WvW; therefore: "I assure you, I would hunt you down until you die or is so far away the effort of attemping to do so is more than disengaging."
Maybe you don't need justification, but you propped up someone else's--justification--so I saw a contradiction.
> > > There is a really neat thing in this game.... I can respawn after I die....
> > >
> > > I don’t even lose equipment to someone when I die. It’s really sweet.
> >
> > That's fine and all. But there's also this limited resource called "time." It tends to get wasted by pointless killing of casuals just trying to do a couple low-impact dailies. Is being killed and sent back to respawn the risk for chasing these dailies? Absolutely. Doesn't mean it has to be the norm. So yeah, you do you and get your jollies off wasting casuals' time. And I'll do me, and not.
>
> See, there is a big reason why we disagree. I don’t view it as wasting anyone’s time. I am simply engaging and making Red = Dead. (It also gains me 10 minutes of time on my skirmish track lol)
>
> If you find those engagements are a waste of time, then maybe WvW isn’t for you. I hate that as I want people to enjoy it, but we both know that there are areas of the game we enjoy more than others
I mean, I know it isn't always easy to see things from another's perspective. But imagine a casual dailies player just trying to get to the nearest enemy camp for the Camp Capturer daily. She's on a low-tier server that's trailing the other worlds in her match. Many friendly WPs are contested. She's new, alone, and has no friends or guild to back her up.
She sets off for a camp that's just about to come off cooldown, but before she gets there, a veteran roamer who's been lurking outside her spawn to pick off zerglings and the influx of dailies players at reset intercepts her. She tries to escape, but her non-upgraded mount is no match for the veteran's fully upgraded, dual-endurance bar, javelin-wielding mount. Not only does he kick her to the curb, he finishes and BMs her, let alone does her the courtesy of letting her recover and continue on.
She respawns. But not only is she reluctant to head for the same camp, she sees that it is already being attacked, and even if it's friendlies, she'll never make it before it's captured. Not only that, other camps she might have attempted have already flipped and are now immune to capture. (The competition for camp dailies among all the little casuals is fierce.) She opens the world map and looks for another option. She sees one on another borderlands, and clicks the WP, only to be presented with: "The world you are trying to enter is currently full. Would you like to queue?"
Does that help you see how someone's time gets wasted?
To be clear, I'm not saying this experience isn't "part of the game." Rather, I'm asking, does it need to be? Does it need to be the norm? Again, seven times out of ten, an enemy passerby opts to chase. And to this day, no one has spared me the stomp when they defeat me. I would probably jump up and down like a school girl and bow if someone actually spared me and let me be on my way. lol
> (To me, PvE is like an I.V. of habanero pepper juice concentrated by 50 times)
:lol:
-
> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > > Individual setups mostly affect things like framerate. Of course, you can have high ping if you're located far from the nearest servers or your ISP isn't up to par.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But this game has been plagued by server-side animation and skill lag for over a year. Think Tequatl, Ley Line Anomaly, and Triple Trouble at reset/post-reset. The waves at Tequatl are never in sync. It's why you have to jump before it looks like they'll hit you. It's why all you can use at LLA is your auto-attack. It's why anyone who's done roles at TT can tell you how tough lag makes their job. These are universal issues that affect everyone across all setups, even those playing on super computers with full fiber connections and no issues in other games.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > AWS has proven marginal at best. The current increase in players and internet use in general due to the pandemic is probably only exacerbating things.
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > If I can test both systems at the same time, doing the same thing, and one of them experiences skill lag while the other doesn't, certainly individuals setups can be a possible cause.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Have you done this?
> > > > >
> > > > > I had said I did so yes.
> > > >
> > > > The way you worded it sounded like the test was a possibility, not something already done. Namely, "_If I can_." I can see how it can be read the way you meant it, but it's ambiguous. Hence the request for clarification. Also, I'm not sure how you can be in two places at once, unless you mean someone else is testing one of the PCs.
> > >
> > > [The way it was phrased wasn’t a question.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_conditional_sentences)
> >
> > Fully aware of that. Doesn't change that, as worded, it can be interpreted two different ways, and is thus ambiguous. Take this example:
> >
> > "If I can pass the test, so can you."
> >
> > Can you ascertain with certainty whether I have already taken the test or I'm referring to the future? You cannot.
> >
> > For clarity it probably would have been better to just phrase it as an affirmative statement. I.e., "I tested both systems [and this is what I observed]."
> >
>
> Sure, if English isn’t your first language I guess that I can understand the confusion since many don’t follow the same structure.
English need not be one's first language for one to fully grasp its rules and many, many idiosyncrasies. But that's neither here nor there. The fact remains that, what you stated, and the example I gave, while both grammatically correct, are ambiguous statements. You have not been able to refute that. You cannot state (accurately) that both statements, on their face, communicate unambiguously whether something has occurred in the past, or has yet to occur.
> Unfortunately I’m not going to change the way that I phrase things as the way it was stated is correct.
Lol. You have every right to prioritize pride over effective communication. I never asked you to change anything. Just offered a suggestion on how ambiguity could be avoided. If that was too much, you're free to reject it.
> > > I have my older PC and the newer one. You don’t need to be at two places at once. I can simply test one PC and then run to the other within like 15 seconds.
> >
> > I mean you did say, "If I can test both systems _at the same time_."
> >
> > Anyway, if you have a completely lag-free experience even at peak times on capped maps, that's great, and I would say you're very fortunate.
>
> They are being tested at the same time.
They literally are not, unless you have the ability to be at two places "at the same time, doing the same thing," but okay. lol
Not going to derail this discussion any further. You're welcome to have the last word.
-
> @"Dawdler.8521" said:
> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > > > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said:
> > > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > When is someone 100% retreating a threat?
> > > > > > What do you plan on doing after you retreat?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Stop playing WvW?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If the answer is no, then you're still 100% a threat.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If the answer is yes well then sure, I'll give you that. Outside WvW you're not a threat to any objectives.
> > > > >
> > > > > This^.
> > > > >
> > > > > The OP stated he was going to go to another camp. Therefore a ‘threat’.
> > > >
> > > > I believe what you're thinking of is: "I would go elsewhere in search of something unguarded."
> > > >
> > > > In case you two didn't know, there are three worlds in WvW. Not everyone is specifically after your world's precious territories. If your thing is to murder everything that breathes, that's your prerogative. Just don't kid yourselves trying to justify it.
> > >
> > > I don’t justify. It’s not worth my energy.
> >
> > And justification isn't needed. But Dawdler, above, and you in full agreement, tried to do just that: justify chasing down and killing a retreating player who signaled they didn't want any trouble, on the theory they are 100% a threat unless they leave WvW. Extreme much?
> >
> > So on the one hand you say you don't justify killing because it's not worth your energy, but you did just that above. Just say you like to fight and kill at your whim and own it. No need to pretend there's a reason, but then say you don't need reasons.
> >
> > > There is a really neat thing in this game.... I can respawn after I die....
> > >
> > > I don’t even lose equipment to someone when I die. It’s really sweet.
> >
> > That's fine and all. But there's also this limited resource called "time." It tends to get wasted by pointless killing of casuals just trying to do a couple low-impact dailies. Is being killed and sent back to respawn the risk for chasing these dailies? Absolutely. Doesn't mean it has to be the norm. So yeah, you do you and get your jollies off wasting casuals' time. And I'll do me, and not.
> >
> > > So... take advantage of any engagement to get better and learn. If you are running a build that you would use in PvE, maybe try something different designed for running alone, tweak it and work on improving.
> > >
> > > Or don’t. Just don’t expect people to play the way you think they should.
> >
> > ^ Sound advice.
> It's not extreme.
>
> You say there is a limited resource called "time". WvW is 24/7, 365 days a year, with the exception of the 5m between reset. Points is literally based on the time you hold objectives. You call it "wasting casuals time". **You're wasting *my* time trying to cap a camp my server holds, because if that's lost *I* have to spend time getting it back.** That's why I will hunt you down and send you packing to spawn. Because every second you're not doing something useful is a win for the server.
>
> This is the simple fact of the WvW gamemode, because it's literally how it's played. We're all here to waste each others time until one side wins.
No, no you don't. Careful not to strain your back reaching for a reason, any reason, to be an indiscriminate killer. Just be a killer.
I know you know that minor objectives like camps, especially when they're a daily, flip constantly, and are seldom held by any one server for long. Don't worry. The filthy casual dailies players on your server will take back the camp the other server's filthy casual dailies players took, as soon as that 5 minute capture immunity timer runs, and vice versa. No need to waste your precious veteran time on such trifles.
But if lurking around camps to farm casuals is your vibe, that's fine. Just don't pretend it's anything more.
-
> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > Individual setups mostly affect things like framerate. Of course, you can have high ping if you're located far from the nearest servers or your ISP isn't up to par.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But this game has been plagued by server-side animation and skill lag for over a year. Think Tequatl, Ley Line Anomaly, and Triple Trouble at reset/post-reset. The waves at Tequatl are never in sync. It's why you have to jump before it looks like they'll hit you. It's why all you can use at LLA is your auto-attack. It's why anyone who's done roles at TT can tell you how tough lag makes their job. These are universal issues that affect everyone across all setups, even those playing on super computers with full fiber connections and no issues in other games.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > AWS has proven marginal at best. The current increase in players and internet use in general due to the pandemic is probably only exacerbating things.
> > > > >
> >
> > > > > If I can test both systems at the same time, doing the same thing, and one of them experiences skill lag while the other doesn't, certainly individuals setups can be a possible cause.
> > > >
> > > > Have you done this?
> > >
> > > I had said I did so yes.
> >
> > The way you worded it sounded like the test was a possibility, not something already done. Namely, "_If I can_." I can see how it can be read the way you meant it, but it's ambiguous. Hence the request for clarification. Also, I'm not sure how you can be in two places at once, unless you mean someone else is testing one of the PCs.
>
> [The way it was phrased wasn’t a question.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_conditional_sentences)
Fully aware of that. Doesn't change that, as worded, it can be interpreted two different ways, and is thus ambiguous. Take this example:
"If I can pass the test, so can you."
Can you ascertain with certainty whether I have already taken the test or I'm referring to the future? You cannot.
For clarity it probably would have been better to just phrase it as an affirmative statement. I.e., "I tested both systems [and this is what I observed]."
> I have my older PC and the newer one. You don’t need to be at two places at once. I can simply test one PC and then run to the other within like 15 seconds.
I mean you did say, "If I can test both systems _at the same time_."
Anyway, if you have a completely lag-free experience even at peak times on capped maps, that's great, and I would say you're very fortunate.
-
> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said:
> > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > When is someone 100% retreating a threat?
> > > > What do you plan on doing after you retreat?
> > > >
> > > > Stop playing WvW?
> > > >
> > > > If the answer is no, then you're still 100% a threat.
> > > >
> > > > If the answer is yes well then sure, I'll give you that. Outside WvW you're not a threat to any objectives.
> > >
> > > This^.
> > >
> > > The OP stated he was going to go to another camp. Therefore a ‘threat’.
> >
> > I believe what you're thinking of is: "I would go elsewhere in search of something unguarded."
> >
> > In case you two didn't know, there are three worlds in WvW. Not everyone is specifically after your world's precious territories. If your thing is to murder everything that breathes, that's your prerogative. Just don't kid yourselves trying to justify it.
>
> I don’t justify. It’s not worth my energy.
And justification isn't needed. But Dawdler, above, and you in full agreement, tried to do just that: justify chasing down and killing a retreating player who signaled they didn't want any trouble, on the theory they are 100% a threat unless they leave WvW. Extreme much?
So on the one hand you say you don't justify killing because it's not worth your energy, but you did just that above. Just say you like to fight and kill at your whim and own it. No need to pretend there's a reason, but then say you don't need reasons.
> There is a really neat thing in this game.... I can respawn after I die....
>
> I don’t even lose equipment to someone when I die. It’s really sweet.
That's fine and all. But there's also this limited resource called "time." It tends to get wasted by pointless killing of casuals just trying to do a couple low-impact dailies. Is being killed and sent back to respawn the risk for chasing these dailies? Absolutely. Doesn't mean it has to be the norm. So yeah, you do you and get your jollies off wasting casuals' time. And I'll do me, and not.
> So... take advantage of any engagement to get better and learn. If you are running a build that you would use in PvE, maybe try something different designed for running alone, tweak it and work on improving.
>
> Or don’t. Just don’t expect people to play the way you think they should.
^ Sound advice.
-
> @"AliamRationem.5172" said:
> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > @"AliamRationem.5172" said:
> > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > @"Celsith.2753" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > > > @"ArlAlt.1630" said:
> > > > > > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > @"schloumou.3982" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > Yep. Those displayed ranks are kind of insulting too. It only leads to low rank players beeing harassed and focused by the self proclaimed roamers. Needs to be done something.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Totally feel like low rank puts a target on one's back sometimes. So many "roamers" go out of their way to chase you down and dismount you even when you're trying to run. All so they can win an unfair fight.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Also, is "shivering" emote over your body a new form of bm? And how do people even whisper enemies in WvW? Sorry, I'm pretty new to the mode.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > **As a general rule I won't touch anything less than Bronze**, unless they're preventing me from capturing or defending an objective, or they decided to +X in an already outnumbered fight. In that case, yea I'll find you and yea I might not give you a fair fight either, you gave up that right the moment you +Xed.
> > > > > > > > > No clue about the shivering emote, but there was never a strict guide on how to BM in emotes.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Well-under-Bronze pleb here. Still get deliberately chased and murdered by roamers all the time. Just yesterday, I approached a camp hoping to pick off a few NPCs for the daily. A Diamond roamer was idling there. I stopped dead in my tracks, paused a second, and turned tail. But before I could gain enough distance, they dismounted me and my fate was sealed. How more obvious could it be that I didn't want to fight? This sort of thing happens far too often. It's like the decline of roaming makes remaining roamers hungry for anything that happens by. I've yet to experience any dignified roamers who leave low ranks alone (unless there's a reason not to), or at least forgo stomps so the lowbie can continue on their way without having to WP and travel again. Wish more people exercised some decency. :(
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sounds like they were defending a camp. You wanted to take the camp. He should let you because you are low rank?
> > > > > > > For all he knows you might be a pvp god who is making a rare entrance into wvw. And he might be an EotM farmer with less experience than you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I stopped far outside the camp. I didn't even try to do anything besides turn and run when I saw the Diamond player approaching.
> > > > >
> > > > > Not far enough outside of it if he was able to catch you on your mount.
> > > >
> > > > My mount only has one endurance bar versus his or her two plus a javelin throw.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > @"AliamRationem.5172" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > > > @"ArlAlt.1630" said:
> > > > > > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > @"schloumou.3982" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > Yep. Those displayed ranks are kind of insulting too. It only leads to low rank players beeing harassed and focused by the self proclaimed roamers. Needs to be done something.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Totally feel like low rank puts a target on one's back sometimes. So many "roamers" go out of their way to chase you down and dismount you even when you're trying to run. All so they can win an unfair fight.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Also, is "shivering" emote over your body a new form of bm? And how do people even whisper enemies in WvW? Sorry, I'm pretty new to the mode.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > **As a general rule I won't touch anything less than Bronze**, unless they're preventing me from capturing or defending an objective, or they decided to +X in an already outnumbered fight. In that case, yea I'll find you and yea I might not give you a fair fight either, you gave up that right the moment you +Xed.
> > > > > > > > > No clue about the shivering emote, but there was never a strict guide on how to BM in emotes.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Well-under-Bronze pleb here. Still get deliberately chased and murdered by roamers all the time. Just yesterday, I approached a camp hoping to pick off a few NPCs for the daily. A Diamond roamer was idling there. I stopped dead in my tracks, paused a second, and turned tail. But before I could gain enough distance, they dismounted me and my fate was sealed. How more obvious could it be that I didn't want to fight? This sort of thing happens far too often. It's like the decline of roaming makes remaining roamers hungry for anything that happens by. I've yet to experience any dignified roamers who leave low ranks alone (unless there's a reason not to), or at least forgo stomps so the lowbie can continue on their way without having to WP and travel again. Wish more people exercised some decency. :(
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As a general rule, I leave players below bronze rank alone and **usually if I down someone who didn't fight back or only wanted to run away, I'll just go on my way and allow them to recover.**
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > @"ArchonWing.9480" said:
> > > > > > > See, everyone is different. Personally, I think players should respect the fact that player vs player combat will happen here. **I'm less likely to stomp someone that stays and fights, and I usually don't go out my way to chase players unless they've been annoying. But players that surrender without a fight? I'll always kill those.**
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Seems some people have mercy on someone who surrenders, while others only if they fought back. I get that there are no rules, and everyone can play as they like.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > > > @"ArlAlt.1630" said:
> > > > > > > > > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > @"schloumou.3982" said:
> > > > > > > > > > > Yep. Those displayed ranks are kind of insulting too. It only leads to low rank players beeing harassed and focused by the self proclaimed roamers. Needs to be done something.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Totally feel like low rank puts a target on one's back sometimes. So many "roamers" go out of their way to chase you down and dismount you even when you're trying to run. All so they can win an unfair fight.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Also, is "shivering" emote over your body a new form of bm? And how do people even whisper enemies in WvW? Sorry, I'm pretty new to the mode.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > **As a general rule I won't touch anything less than Bronze**, unless they're preventing me from capturing or defending an objective, or they decided to +X in an already outnumbered fight. In that case, yea I'll find you and yea I might not give you a fair fight either, you gave up that right the moment you +Xed.
> > > > > > > > > No clue about the shivering emote, but there was never a strict guide on how to BM in emotes.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Well-under-Bronze pleb here. Still get deliberately chased and murdered by roamers all the time. Just yesterday, I approached a camp hoping to pick off a few NPCs for the daily. A Diamond roamer was idling there. I stopped dead in my tracks, paused a second, and turned tail. But before I could gain enough distance, they dismounted me and my fate was sealed. How more obvious could it be that I didn't want to fight? This sort of thing happens far too often. It's like the decline of roaming makes remaining roamers hungry for anything that happens by. I've yet to experience any dignified roamers who leave low ranks alone (unless there's a reason not to), or at least forgo stomps so the lowbie can continue on their way without having to WP and travel again. Wish more people exercised some decency. :(
> > > > > > > Then dont go to the the camp. Dont get your daily.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I assure you, I would hunt you down until you die or is so far away the effort of attemping to do so is more than disengaging. I dont care about ranks. I dont care how "weak" newbies are supposed to be or how "honorable" veterans are supposed to be. I dont care that you "dont want to fight". You just said that you approached a camp. And you *dont want to fight*?! **If I dont kill you, you would just come back to that camp as soon as I look away.**
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would go elsewhere in search of something unguarded.
> > > > >
> > > > > That was his point.. you are a threat. Taking a camp hurts the ‘score’. Not that the score actually matters.
> > > >
> > > > When is someone 100% retreating a threat?
> > > >
> > > > > > > Imagine in sPvP if people just left circles out of the goodness of their hearts. "Please sir just let me have this cap its no bother is it?" *puppy eyes*
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But for some reason in WvW people expect to get a pass.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Decline of roaming indeed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't expect freebies. I just wanted to leave. People also chase even if we randomly cross paths in the middle of nowhere and I try to avoid them. So it's not just about defending objectives. A lot of roamers actively prey on low ranks. I have a feeling if I had a high rank, they'd at least think twice.
> > > > >
> > > > > They prey on anyone. Being platinum myself I get chased all the tine if I choose to run. Your rank is irrelevant.
> > > > >
> > > > Okay.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also, if I could give them my best puppy eyes, maybe they would be nicer! :p
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > @"Yasai.3549" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I assure you, I would hunt you down until you die or is so far away the effort of attemping to do so is more than disengaging. I dont care about ranks. I dont care how "weak" newbies are supposed to be or how "honorable" veterans are supposed to be. I dont care that you "dont want to fight". You just said that you **approached a camp**. And you *dont want to fight*?! If I dont kill you, you would just come back to that camp as soon as I look away. Like any other player. It doesnt matter if its 1 player or 5 players.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Imagine in sPvP if people just left circles out of the goodness of their hearts. "Please sir just let me have this cap its no bother is it?" *puppy eyes*
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But for some reason in WvW people expect to get a pass.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Decline of roaming indeed.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Agreed.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If they hate fighting so much then they can go somewhere else instead, and if they want a Legendary set, they can go do PvE where roamers won't delibrately chase them down and kill them.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't mind fair fights. Just wish more people were like those here who said they avoid picking on low ranks without reason, and sometimes spare their defeated opponents the stomp. Those are things I would like to do myself if I get better. But for now, since I'm at a gear, perk, and experience disadvantage, I try to avoid confrontation as much as possible.
> > > > >
> > > > > You are in a PvP zone with PvE elements in it.... that’s the nature of it. Honestly, the only way you get better at fighting is to..... fight.
> > > > >
> > > > As I said, I don't mind fair fights, or even uphill fights. It's more the indecency that turns me off. Again, veterans deliberately bullying newbies, stomping when mercy might be in order, and any sort of bm/toxic whispers.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Judging by the mostly unsympathetic responses, I guess you guys don't remember what it's like to be new and at the bottom of the food chain. Personally, I tend to feel bad for underdogs just trying to make their way, and I don't feel any joy beating a disadvantaged opponent. But hey, that's just me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Being new I joined a WvW guild and learned how to play there. I learned builds, basic tactics and then how to fight. When I got wrecked (often) I asked for guidance on how to improve.
> > > > >
> > > > > That’s how a ‘low rank new player’ can succeed instead of being a ‘toxic victim’.
> > > >
> > > > Can I get some WvW guild recommendations? What if I'm on a low tier server?
> > > >
> > >
> > > I am 100% with you on the toxic whispers. I'm just here to fight other players and have fun. I have zero interest I ruining anyone's experience.
> > >
> > > Having said that, I feel it's unreasonable to expect other players to follow arbitrary rules that they can't possibly be aware of or be held responsible for ruining your enjoyment. In my opinion, that is as much the source of toxicity in competitive play as those few who really are out to cause other players distress.
> >
> > A while back, I think I saw a YT roamer say they only fight people looking for a fight and they don't stomp unless the person keeps coming back or is rude. I guess I just hoped more people were like this. Regardless, if I stick around and get better, I plan to play by this code, whether others do or not.
>
> There are plenty of people like this. And plenty more who aren't out to get you, but are just playing a PvP game mode. Yeah, there are people who get off on making your life miserable, too. But I feel that when we make assumptions about the motivations of others while applying rules they can't possibly be expected to uphold, we set the expectation in our own mind that when others don't comply they are trying to "troll" you. That's why I say this attitude is "toxic", because it really is the source of more complaints than the actual toxic behavior (see forum threads on this exact subject, repeatedly, year after year) and leads to endless conflict.
>
> So, again, the Red Rule is the way. You don't have to be a bloodthirsty killer to follow this rule either. All you have to do is acknowledge that all kills are fair kills and that every player has a right to kill any other player they can in a PvP game. When you really start to think like this, it shouldn't matter how or why you were killed anymore and you can just play the game and enjoy it (at least, that's the idea and that's how it works for me!).
>
> Good luck out there!
Thank you so much for this perspective!
> @"aleron.1438" said:
> Your best bet if you want to show you come in peace and just want to observe:
> #1 Quaggan/Nuhoch tonic
> #2 kite/balloon
> #3 /wave
> Those are usually left alone even near big clashes. But they are also known or social cross server players. Yet the moment you show your intent in capturing/fighting an objective, you can expect to be BM'ed for using that ploy.
>
> My advice if you're just after your dailies, to be on a build that has high evac potential, one that can tank (like marauder/durability) and avoid initial bursts followed by fast egressing. Be it by access to stealth or teleports to get the fastest out of combat distance so you can mount up or tp.
>
I had no idea tonics and novelties worked in WvW. Guessing it's only these specific ones? If enemies have character models set to generic, will they even see cute, harmless, kite-waving Quaggan? Thanks for this tip!
-
> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > @"Dawdler.8521" said:
> > > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > When is someone 100% retreating a threat?
> > What do you plan on doing after you retreat?
> >
> > Stop playing WvW?
> >
> > If the answer is no, then you're still 100% a threat.
> >
> > If the answer is yes well then sure, I'll give you that. Outside WvW you're not a threat to any objectives.
>
> This^.
>
> The OP stated he was going to go to another camp. Therefore a ‘threat’.
I believe what you're thinking of is: "I would go elsewhere in search of something unguarded."
In case you two didn't know, there are three worlds in WvW. Not everyone is specifically after your world's precious territories. If your thing is to murder everything that breathes, that's your prerogative. Just don't kid yourselves trying to justify it.
obstructed.
in Ranger
Posted
> @"Hesione.9412" said:
> > @"Twilight Tempest.7584" said:
> > > @"Jabronee.9465" said:
> > > It IS a bug. Trust me it got nothing to do with LoS or non arced arrows. It happened few years back when LB shots keeps getting obstructed and they fixed it.
> > > Now it's back again. I'm having the same issue. Especially solo capping camps in WvW.
> > > Please look into this issue again Anet.
> > >
> >
> > Just experienced exactly this. Cleared all NPEs down to just the Supervisor. Unloaded a Rapid Fire burst into him only to see "Obstructed" the whole time while in fairly close range, on level, visually unobstructed ground.
> >
> > Other times this has happened with allies nearby, and I thought maybe necro minions were somehow obstructing. Guess not?
>
> Did this happen on the SEC on one of the alpine BLs? I got that problem too, and had to hit in melee range in order to attack.
It was the south middle camp on one of the Alpine Borderlands.