Patch Notes 28/05/2021

[saupreusse]

Spoiler:

Noone reasonable(good player) would use 1st and 3d of your statements to gimp themselves. Its all about understanding why it gimps u while in the rotation. 2nd statement is something that u dont need like at all (Doac, buffhead...) unless u r spaming cc on cd inside the rotation, lul. 4th is QoL thing, nothing more. But in general everyone had(addon is avaliable for everyone) this kind of advantge until it got "blocked". And now it will be a shady zone addon that will be used by some ppl, and its not only me saying this.

I just give examples of what ive encountered ingame. I for myself did use an immunity check on my hard cc but left it out of the rotation. It was very handy because then i could never accidentally waste cc on immune targets. Before that i always used buffhead and watched out for the immunity icons. It worked, but ofc sometimes i made mistakes because im not a robot. With nb i never wasted my cc again. Its just an example of possibly unfair advantage such a condition check gives you.
Another example is my heal debuff condition. It checked if the target had any of my parties heal debuffs on it and would avoid my own healdebuff in this case and turn to my burst abilities instead. I did the same for my armour debuff. Ofc i could have done the same using buffhead (which i did). But buffhead does not prevent me from human error. Nb on the other hand for sure does. Im not against macros by any means. But everyone whos saying that nb cant do shady stuff is a liar

Immunity checks were never functional, ones checking for unstoppable, immovable, etc. At least they never worked for me or anyone else I knew who was using it, which is why I never thought NB was an issue.


Honestly baffles/scares me that someone who was "former staff" doesn't know this.

They worked just fine. You just have to enter a few several Ids (literally the same that buffhead uses to display immunities). Honestly baffles/scares me that someone who has such a loud opinion doesnt know this

Edit1: Sry, I didnt mean the immunity checks (they didnt work), but a work around was to use a check on the immunity buffs themselves. hope that makes it clearer
Edit2: i think ive made my point. If NB returns I will gladly use the advantages of it again. If not I hope we get a macro alternative. I dont think removing NB without a replacement is a wise choice, but I can understand why the devs don't want these condition checks in the game. What I dont understand is why a lot of people (who obviously never tried NB) are spreading so much false information about it. At this point its like a witch hunt. Ill see myself out of this conversation now :^) have a nice day

[Tosher85]

Spoiler:

I just give examples of what ive encountered ingame. I for myself did use an immunity check on my hard cc but left it out of the rotation. It was very handy because then i could never accidentally waste cc on immune targets. Before that i always used buffhead and watched out for the immunity icons. It worked, but ofc sometimes i made mistakes because im not a robot. With nb i never wasted my cc again. Its just an example of possibly unfair advantage such a condition check gives you.
Another example is my heal debuff condition. It checked if the target had any of my parties heal debuffs on it and would avoid my own healdebuff in this case and turn to my burst abilities instead. I did the same for my armour debuff. Ofc i could have done the same using buffhead (which i did). But buffhead does not prevent me from human error. Nb on the other hand for sure does. Im not against macros by any means. But everyone whos saying that nb cant do shady stuff is a liar

Immunity checks were never functional, ones checking for unstoppable, immovable, etc. At least they never worked for me or anyone else I knew who was using it, which is why I never thought NB was an issue.


Honestly baffles/scares me that someone who was "former staff" doesn't know this.

They worked just fine. You just have to enter a few several Ids (literally the same that buffhead uses to display immunities). Honestly baffles/scares me that someone who has such a loud opinion doesnt know this

And again noone reasonable was using it in rotation unless they wanted to gimp themselves. So whats the point of mentioning it as "advantage"? Just to creat more fake value to block it?

Edit. But i support your edited message.

[vobex16]

Have you been hired?

[oaliaen]

My 2 cents about NB: We agree whit the automate conditions that the addon offered, but why ban the cast sequencer if we can use Plan B ?

[Brutinho]

I have to admit when I first saw the changes on NB I was intrigued were this would lead, it seemed like a good idea until I read a few posts of people with different disabilities.

I rarely agree with Wargrimnir or how he usually replies, but his post was perfect (tbh I thought he was hacked lol).

Personally, I don't mind people using conditionals as they gimp themselves. I used NB for sequencing skills like shammy dots, or buffing attacks con BG which is basically a QoL present in more current MMOs such as Aion. WAR graphics are poop so there are not reliable visual Qs to know what the target is using e.g. swtor has amazing animations and competitive pvp is played without even looking at buff/debuff icons, everything is visual. Many add-ons were created for that purpose, like buffhead.

I have no personal stake whether is allowed or not (I got used to my new keys in a couple of days), but there should be some sort of sequencer for people with legitimate reasons.

My 2cents

[Wakoo]

My 2 cents about NB: We agree whit the automate conditions that the addon offered, but why ban the cast sequencer if we can use Plan B ?

I tried login on today; I had a patch, I have the issue with plan B of not being able to use an ability for 10s after the bar switch. I removed all the other addon(only kept PlanB and LibSlash), I still have the issue. I didn't have the problem at the 28/05 patch.

[vobex16]

@Wargrimnir https://youtu.be/-d7Acj8U9HM

[sundey]

And everyone whos saying that NB is an unfair advantage is also a liar (since it was available to everybody).

I'll say it again, maybe some will read it this time :
Ppl in favor of more tactical playstyle will be in favor of removing NB and will lie to prove they are right.
Ppl in favor of more strategic playstyle will be in favor of NB and lie to prove they are right.

And the CC immunity checks weren't working, which you should know if you weren't lying about NB

I find it quite strange that you speak so boldly, here and in your blog post, when this perception you have of why people differ with regard to NB is exactly that -- your perception; the fact that you recognise it's a motivating factor for you but then go on to project it on to all other players seems quite bizarre. You also paint essentially everyone as a liar or "pushing [their] agenda", and I suppose we're to assume you're the sole exception to that. It's odd to me that you write in such a reactionary way and yet seem to think you're a voice of reason; you certainly don't come across to me as someone genuinely interested in hearing the (non-ridiculous) arguments against NB.

I can't comment on whether immunity check conditionals were functional recently, but I'm more inclined to believe Saupreusse, particularly after his edited explanation. If he's right, I guess that winky face accusation of lying (seeing the pattern here?) will have to be retracted.

I've picked out your comment, but it exemplifies the approach of trying to brand everyone who disagrees as either extremely biased, lying or ignorant. Much has been made -- understandably and rightly so -- of how people who used NB have been ostracised and attacked; I think it's worth pointing out that those in the contra-NB group have received similar.

-----

As usual, the thread has mostly devolved into the same points just getting repeated ad nauseam, or the same posts getting +1ed, whether or not they've already been countered or deconstructed previously. I'd be genuinely interested in seeing a breakdown of arguments for and against; as far as I can tell, the main arguments against the change that have some degree of consensus are 'consequentialist' in nature, i.e., concerns about a possible -ve effect on population, NB offshoots being 'pushed underground', -ve effect on people with certain disabilities etc, rather than countering the actual reason for the change as stated by the devs. I wonder whether a separate thread attempting to counter that specific argument would be helpful, if mods agreed.

[vobex16]

And everyone whos saying that NB is an unfair advantage is also a liar (since it was available to everybody).

I'll say it again, maybe some will read it this time :
Ppl in favor of more tactical playstyle will be in favor of removing NB and will lie to prove they are right.
Ppl in favor of more strategic playstyle will be in favor of NB and lie to prove they are right.

And the CC immunity checks weren't working, which you should know if you weren't lying about NB

I find it quite strange that you speak so boldly, here and in your blog post, when this perception you have of why people differ with regard to NB is exactly that -- your perception; the fact that you recognise it's a motivating factor for you but then go on to project it on to all other players seems quite bizarre. You also paint essentially everyone as a liar or "pushing [their] agenda", and I suppose we're to assume you're the sole exception to that. It's odd to me that you write in such a reactionary way and yet seem to think you're a voice of reason; you certainly don't come across to me as someone genuinely interested in hearing the (non-ridiculous) arguments against NB.

I can't comment on whether immunity check conditionals were functional recently, but I'm more inclined to believe Saupreusse, particularly after his edited explanation. If he's right, I guess that winky face accusation of lying (seeing the pattern here?) will have to be retracted.

I've picked out your comment, but it exemplifies the approach of trying to brand everyone who disagrees as either extremely biased, lying or ignorant. Much has been made -- understandably and rightly so -- of how people who used NB have been ostracised and attacked; I think it's worth pointing out that those in the contra-NB group have received similar.

-----

As usual, the thread has mostly devolved into the same points just getting repeated ad nauseam, or the same posts getting +1ed, whether or not they've already been countered or deconstructed previously. I'd be genuinely interested in seeing a breakdown of arguments for and against; as far as I can tell, the main arguments against the change that have some degree of consensus are 'consequentialist' in nature, i.e., concerns about a possible -ve effect on population, NB offshoots being 'pushed underground', -ve effect on people with certain disabilities etc, rather than countering the actual reason for the change as stated by the devs. I wonder whether a separate thread attempting to counter that specific argument would be helpful, if mods agreed.

And you look like a person who could not cope with the configuration of the NB or macro (for convenience, not for cheating) With respect.
Karak will never fall!!!

[Swissguru]

I disagree with blocking NB, but that's your perogative. I'll stick with other games until I see patch changes addressing my issues with ROR.

Either way, thank you for your work.