Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

So yea...Follow

#27 Jan 21 2008 at 4:12 PM Rating: Decent
****
6,318 posts
Teklabz wrote:
Sometime soon, I'm hoping to mess around with finding ways to make vanish-stealth break. They hate us, they really do.

Just need it to work for anything, and it will break.
#28 Jan 21 2008 at 9:08 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,113 posts
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=3547620708&sid=1
#29 Jan 22 2008 at 6:47 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,011 posts
I love ollie.

And yea, where's the magical "it's Monday so we'll talk to you" post? The forums are still quiet.
#30 Jan 22 2008 at 8:06 AM Rating: Good
**
340 posts
Shaolinz wrote:


And yea, where's the magical "it's Monday so we'll talk to you" post? The forums are still quiet.



I am starting to feel offended. I just posted a "please at least acknowledge our existence" thread. I'm betting it's off the first page in an hour.

See now how TF2 doesnt have these issues? All spy attacks from the back are one-shots, but he has to destealth to attack. Spy's stealth can't be broken by damage, but you only have limited time stealthed. Its so simple.

oh yeah plus no gear, no grind, no xpacs and no patches means the game developers can't F*$& up a good thing.
#31 Jan 22 2008 at 10:33 AM Rating: Good
**
340 posts
the bug forum is a beautiful sight atm.

we coordinated and everyone created new threads about stealth being broken. Raelie made like 5 threads cursing at blizzard in different languages. Its a sight to see.

Bannings will be distributed im sure.
#32 Jan 22 2008 at 12:47 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,011 posts
It's just so funny watching this as a third party. Every possible form of debate has been attempted, whether it be the logical "this is what's wrong, here's why and here are videos to prove it" or the illogical "you guys suck" rant. Neither has received a response, and saying nothing is worse than blizzard flat out saying "we don't care".

Blizzard always used to be good about at least addressing issues, I can't believe they won't even comment on a bug that is certainly game breaking. It makes you wonder if blizzard knew why vanish didn't work all along, and just said it was lag in hopes people would believe them. They would do this only because they knew they couldn't fix the actual problem.
#33 Jan 22 2008 at 12:58 PM Rating: Good
**
340 posts
Shaolinz wrote:
I can't believe they won't even comment on a bug that is certainly game breaking. It makes you wonder if blizzard knew why vanish didn't work all along, and just said it was lag in hopes people would believe them. They would do this only because they knew they couldn't fix the actual problem.


I can't find the post, but someone theorized that Blizzard knew about this bug all along, saw it would be very costly to fix, and left it in the game as a form of pseudo-balance, nerfing rogues via bug.
#34 Jan 22 2008 at 5:08 PM Rating: Good
**
340 posts
Hortus answers!

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=4071474405&sid=1

I cant wait to see how this one turns out.

Nice dig at the end toward the few of us that spammed the crap out of the bug forum.

EDIT: And LOL, I've been banned for 24 hours in the O-boards. I will accept your praise of my martyrdom appropriately. I wonder how long they banned Raelie after cursing in foreign languages.

Edited, Jan 22nd 2008 8:11pm by DrMayhem
#35 Jan 22 2008 at 8:08 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,011 posts
Hopefully they won't take the problem out of context.

I.e. Future Patch Notes

Sapped Individuals were able to bring rogues out of combat approximately five seconds into the duration of sap. To fix this, we have decreased the duration of sap to five seconds. This should fix the problem.

Edited, Jan 22nd 2008 10:08pm by Shaolinz
#36 Jan 23 2008 at 5:09 AM Rating: Decent
*
169 posts
$5 still says that 2.4 reads:

Rogues
-Due to recent complaints of stealth breaking we have decided to remove it completely to forestall further complaints.
#37 Jan 23 2008 at 5:25 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,011 posts
It's funny how many of those posters simply don't believe the CM. I too remain skeptical, there's no way in hell vanish will ever work. Blizzard may surprise us here, but more than likely expect a fix that has absolutely nothing to do with the real issue.
#38 Jan 23 2008 at 5:32 AM Rating: Decent
*
169 posts
Oh I believe they may be looking into it, but the time they give it will probably be less than they give to anything else they are looking into atm. I don't expect to see results for several patches, if ever.

Go to the O Boards and look around. The place is an uncontrolled desolace that, you could almost bet your life on it, Blizz never visits.

Do I have any belief in Blizzard to take care of our problems and provide good(or even marginally acceptable) customer service? No.

They just hit 10 million subscribers. Clearly the game still draws people so I really doubt they will put any effort into fixing what, I am sure, they consider a minor bug.
#39 Jan 23 2008 at 6:52 AM Rating: Good
**
340 posts
Nocthil wrote:
$5 still says that 2.4 reads:

Rogues
-Due to recent complaints of stealth breaking we have decided to remove it completely to forestall further complaints.


Noc, I wanted to respond to you on the O-boards, but got banned for taking part in the bug forum spamming.

Dask and Zodar made it clear that combat pulses are knocking rogues out of stealth. We basically found that getting bombarded with combat pulses can occasionally effect you like getting hit with no damage. Zodar's unstealthing causing his targeted rogue to unstealth baffles me in that context.

I would bet a lot more than $5 that Blizzard:

(A) Doesn't fix the real problem. I bet Blizzard finds an easy, cheaper fix, like making sapped players unable to ping out combat pulses. This wouldn't address people's coming out of stealth near the sparring demons in BT (is it BT?), or randomly losing stealth in AV etc...

(B) They actually do consider removing stealth from the game. This would throw the game's current "balance" completely out of whack. They would have to find some serious rogue buffs to make up for it. I'm not sure they could actually do this without killing the rogue class. The trouble is, all other classes hate stealth as much as they hate stun-lock....and they killed stun-lock.




Edited, Jan 23rd 2008 10:04am by DrMayhem
#40 Jan 23 2008 at 7:27 AM Rating: Decent
In my opinion, they ARE killing the rogue class, albeit slowly. The fact that a post that was as well thought out and written as the original post was completely ignored for days tells me quite simply that Blizzard doesn't give a flying leap about it's consumers. The fact that when they did respond it was with the normal BS platitudes and also with a snide comment points toward their apparent apathy even more.
#41 Jan 23 2008 at 7:33 AM Rating: Excellent
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,659 posts
Mistress Kleshya wrote:
In my opinion, they ARE killing the rogue class, albeit slowly. The fact that a post that was as well thought out and written as the original post was completely ignored for days tells me quite simply that Blizzard doesn't give a flying leap about it's consumers. The fact that when they did respond it was with the normal BS platitudes and also with a snide comment points toward their apparent apathy even more.

It could be worse. They could be SOE.
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#42 Jan 23 2008 at 7:38 AM Rating: Decent
****
6,318 posts
Mistress Kleshya wrote:
In my opinion, they ARE killing the rogue class, albeit slowly. The fact that a post that was as well thought out and written as the original post was completely ignored for days tells me quite simply that Blizzard doesn't give a flying leap about it's consumers. The fact that when they did respond it was with the normal BS platitudes and also with a snide comment points toward their apparent apathy even more.

It was "ignored" for a weekend (when they dont work) and a holiday(when they werent at work). It probably could have been responded to faster if the whole forum wasnt spammed...

But your logic of "they didnt respond when they werent there, so we will give them a huge workload for when they get back, then complain that they didn't get the work done fast enough" works too.
#43 Jan 23 2008 at 7:48 AM Rating: Decent
http://www.worldofraids.com/

Rogue: Stealth/Vanish Breaking Bug (src)

I'd like to inform everyone that the issue with Stealth and Vanish breaking 5 seconds after sapping or breaking stealth has been identified and a fix is being worked on.
#44 Jan 23 2008 at 8:23 AM Rating: Decent
I could possibly give them the benefit of the doubt given the circumstances, i.e. the timing, but my problem is I have seen several examples of this before and there were no holidays and was not over a weekend. The post that Shaolinz links to at the very beginning of this thread was dated at 8:58 am on Thursday, and from what I understand a blue had to have seen it simply because the post count was extended.
#45 Jan 23 2008 at 8:30 AM Rating: Default
***
3,011 posts
Quote:
It was "ignored" for a weekend (when they dont work) and a holiday(when they werent at work). It probably could have been responded to faster if the whole forum wasnt spammed...


I call foul. The original post was posted mid-Firday, and if you check other CM logs some of them are still commenting at that time. How much additional "work" would it have been to write a simple "we shall look into this matter"? 3-4 seconds? Just one blue poster having typed that sole line would have alleviated all the wide spread panic and hyping this issue received. But no. That was apparently too much for them.

As for Blizzard's success, sure the game in itself is doing well. This is because of the quality of PvE and the time sink it presents. Casual PvP however is falling apart. There are still only four battlegrounds to choose from after ~three years of existence, and they're all dwarfed by AV. You "can" play in the others, but you're usually just wasting time getting that precious honor. Then when you look at the Arena the game is remarkably unbalanced. ~Three classes dominate all three brackets and don't give many other classes a chance at playing. For people like myself who used to play the game for PvP and didn't really have the time for PvE, this means you either roll as those classes or you're basically SOL. As hard as it seems to grasp, blizzard fixing stealth or even fixing vanish would be a tremendous "buff" to the rogue class as it would make one of our abilities finally work. That being said, the core problem of the game still wouldn't be fixed: warriors would still trump us in terms of pvp.

In other words, my argument is not that the game is doing poorly or that Blizzard seems to hate the rogue class. My argument is that blizzard does seem to hate PvP'rs, as the "content" seen is largely unbalanced and is too dull and repetitive. I know they are "working on it" with WoTLK, but should a game really take two expansions before PvP works effectively? Even then, I doubt blizzard will address the class power balancing issue. What I am hoping for eventually is that when you see the statistics of top arena teams, you see an even spread of all classes represented in all brackets. This is the definition of a balanced game, and is quite a stark contrast from the actual results one usually sees: Three Classes having +20% representation while everyone else just kind of festers at the bottom.

In Short:

-The Game is doing well because of the quality of its PvE time sinks. For casual (and even hardcore time sink) pvp however, the game is failing miserably.
-Only one new battleground has surfaced since the game's release, and all of the battle grounds are "pointless" except for AV.
-PvP Brackets are unbalanced, with ~three classes representing 60% of all classes played. With a game that has nine classes, that's a pretty big problem.
-Blizzard seems to think Gear is the solution for everything. You can bet your *** that pvp players would have rather seen an increase in balance and better quality of pvp then "lol,gearout" races.

But it's like RPzip has said many times: this game is PvE with PvP on the side. Hence, one of the many reasons why a pvp-oriented person like myself no longer plays.

Edited, Jan 23rd 2008 10:32am by Shaolinz
#46 Jan 23 2008 at 10:15 AM Rating: Good
**
340 posts
Shaolinz wrote:


one of the many reasons why a pvp-oriented person like myself no longer plays.



seconded.
#47 Jan 23 2008 at 3:04 PM Rating: Decent
****
6,318 posts
Shaolinz wrote:
Hence, one of the many reasons why a pvp-oriented person like myself no longer plays.
Then why are you wasting your time here? I thought your RL required you to cut back on distractions.

#48 Jan 23 2008 at 3:13 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,011 posts
It does. As sad as it sounds, you guys are my only current social interaction. I'm either posting here or in the lab/in a book/in a class.
#49 Jan 23 2008 at 3:27 PM Rating: Good
****
8,779 posts
yeah, the "joys" of college.

wake up, go to class, come home, read crap till your eyes fall out, maybe toss in a bit of on-campus work either for some kind of lab project or a paper (or both) then go to sleep and do it all over again.

repeat for 12-ish weeks with a break or two in the middle.

so glad im done with college for now. i would get so burnt out in the 2-3 weeks prior to semesters' end.
#50 Jan 23 2008 at 3:33 PM Rating: Good
Terrorfiend
*****
12,905 posts
Shaolinz wrote:
sad


indeed.
#51 Jan 23 2008 at 4:14 PM Rating: Excellent
Wow, sounds like I missed out on some quality drama!

Here's hoping the hotfix actually fixed something.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 189 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (189)