[Volgograd] WL and AM are OP !

[Zealote]

Spoiler:

well it worked on live, it works here why would i have to make any arguments about it...especially when some one is calling it cheesy...thats a great argument right here

Yep you could on live, hence why I previously wrote:

You could on AoR yeah, but I believe the intention at one point was to make it so you couldn't here as it's a pretty cheesy tactic.

(Emphasis added)

As for your implication that I've just stated that it's cheesy without providing any arguments: You mustn't have read the whole thread, particularly my first spoilered post, since that's exactly what I did there.

Edit: In case it isn't clear, my post that I'm referring to is the second-to-last one on page 3.

Edit reason: added spoiler.

[RyanMakara]

Spoiler:

Here's a counter argument; despite the fact that it may be considered an exploit, it has yet to be fixed and has no punishment attached to it. Therefore, people presume it's an okay thing to do, and there's nothing cheesy about it.

Except I don't believe I've ever said it's an 'exploit' that's deserving of punishment, or that it's not an 'okay thing to do' atm when it's possible. What I have said, is that I don't like the tactic and would rather it weren't possible.

Since 'cheesy' doesn't mean 'against the rules' or 'punishable', I don't believe that's actually a counter-argument at all. But feel free to clarify.

You imply that it's a wrong thing do to, as it's supposed to be an escape tool. It can be considered an exploit exactly because of that, as well; it makes both escape AND engagement easier, and since the tooltip states this is not the intended effect, it should be changed. Not to rid itself of the 'cheesinees', but simply to do what it's supposed to do, in your view.

well it worked on live, it works here why would i have to make any arguments about it...especially when some one is calling it cheesy...thats a great argument right here

Yep you could on live, hence why I previously wrote:

You could on AoR yeah, but I believe the intention at one point was to make it so you couldn't here as it's a pretty cheesy tactic.

(Emphasis added)

As for your implication that I've just stated that it's cheesy without providing any arguments: You mustn't have read the whole thread, particularly my first spoilered post, since that's exactly what I did there.

Edit: In case it isn't clear, my post that I'm referring to is the second-to-last one on page 3.

Despite what the tooltip says, you can use it as an engagement method. If you wish to argue this tactic is cheesy as it is not 'the way it's supposed to be used' on RoR, you're simply wrong, since you CAN use it that way and thus far there has been made zero attempt to change that. It is slowly but surely becoming part of the game meta, as a lot of people seem to be in support of it working this way.

[Zealote]

Spoiler:

You imply that it's a wrong thing do to, as it's supposed to be an escape tool. It can be considered an exploit exactly because of that, as well; it makes both escape AND engagement easier, and since the tooltip states this is not the intended effect, it should be changed. Not to rid itself of the 'cheesinees', but simply to do what it's supposed to do, in your view.

Only the first paragraph (of four) of my original spoilered post mentioned the tooltip, the rest involved its effect on gameplay (none of which you've addressed). Please don't misrepresent my post(s) by implying that my only argument revolves around the tooltip. And to settle this pointless semantic argument: I don't consider using Flee + AP potting an exploit, I simply don't like that it was/is possible. That's a personal opinion, in case it's not clear.

Despite what the tooltip says, you can use it as an engagement method. If you wish to argue this tactic is cheesy as it is not 'the way it's supposed to be used' on RoR, you're simply wrong, since you CAN use it that way and thus far there has been made zero attempt to change that. It is slowly but surely becoming part of the game meta, as a lot of people seem to be in support of it working this way.

Fortunately, I've never said that it's "not 'the way it's supposed to be used' on RoR", so I suppose that precludes me from being "simply wrong." What I have done, is state my opinion on the tactic, and said that the tooltip would seem to suggest it wasn't intended to be used for purposes other than escaping/in 'emergencies.'

Oh and btw, it was already a part of the game meta; it's nothing new.

Edit reason: spoilered it.

[RyanMakara]

Spoiler:

You imply that it's a wrong thing do to, as it's supposed to be an escape tool. It can be considered an exploit exactly because of that, as well; it makes both escape AND engagement easier, and since the tooltip states this is not the intended effect, it should be changed. Not to rid itself of the 'cheesinees', but simply to do what it's supposed to do, in your view.

Only the first paragraph (of four) of my original spoilered post mentioned the tooltip, the rest involved its effect on gameplay (none of which you've addressed). Please don't misrepresent my post(s) by implying that my only argument revolves around the tooltip. And to settle this pointless semantic argument: I don't consider using Flee + AP potting an exploit, I simply don't like that it was/is possible. That's a personal opinion, in case it's not clear.

Despite what the tooltip says, you can use it as an engagement method. If you wish to argue this tactic is cheesy as it is not 'the way it's supposed to be used' on RoR, you're simply wrong, since you CAN use it that way and thus far there has been made zero attempt to change that. It is slowly but surely becoming part of the game meta, as a lot of people seem to be in support of it working this way.

Fortunately, I've never said that it's "not 'the way it's supposed to be used' on RoR", so I suppose that precludes me from being "simply wrong." What I have done, is state my opinion on the tactic, and said that the tooltip would seem to suggest it wasn't intended to be used for purposes other than escaping/in 'emergencies.'

Oh and btw, it was already a part of the game meta; it's nothing new.

Practically everything surrounding the use of flee is based on what the tooltip states, no? Otherwise we are free to interpret its use based on how it actually works currently. Whatever gameplay aspect is associated to its misuse, seems pretty clear to me, and does not require addressing. If you can determine how it affects playstyles, exactly where does the cheese come in if it benefits nearly every archetype in various situations?

Nice vids!

What happened to not being able to use AP pots after fleeing though? Did ppl complain about it or sth?

Not sure what you mean. You can always Flee+ AP pot. Its just sometimes I am out of pot in bag, but i have some in bank, so it may look like I cant use em.

You could on AoR yeah, but I believe the intention at one point was to make it so you couldn't here as it's a pretty cheesy tactic.

All of this is pretty funny in hindsight, regarding the first comment you've made. You assumed the ability was actually removed under the guise of 'complaint', and now you've made your own complaint as to why it shouldn't be in-game, while it always has been.

Perhaps you didn't say "it's not supposed to be that way in RoR", yet you assume this would be the premise of the change, while channeling the original argument of "it's pretty cheesy" to "i believe it is cheesy".

So, what is it? It is cheesy since it shouldn't be this way, or do you believe it is cheesy since it remains possible?

[Reklaw]

And how a feelgood movie thread has to derail into a 2 or 3 person discussion .. again.. Some people just don't know when to quit.

[Zealote]

Spoiler:

You could on AoR yeah, but I believe the intention at one point was to make it so you couldn't here as it's a pretty cheesy tactic.

All of this is pretty funny in hindsight, regarding the first comment you've made. You assumed the ability was actually removed under the guise of 'complaint', and now you've made your own complaint as to why it shouldn't be in-game, while it always has been.

Perhaps you didn't say "it's not supposed to be that way in RoR", yet you assume this would be the premise of the change, while channeling the original argument of "it's pretty cheesy" to "i believe it is cheesy".

So, what is it? It is cheesy since it shouldn't be this way, or do you believe it is cheesy since it remains possible?

Ahhh I understand your confusion now. When I said "I believe the intention...", I was referring to such past posts as:

I suggested to make that flee+AP pot crap impossible in the very early days of this server.

I want to point out that from what ive heard az mention a few times, this will not work in ror, apparently as long as you have flee debuff you will not be able to generate ap from any source hence no more using flee like a ghetto charge

Az already said ap pots will not work during flee to prevent abuse of the ablilty to be a qusi charge like you could on live

You're wrong (again) in saying "You assumed the ability was actually removed under the guise of 'complaint'...", since I actually said that I thought the intention was to do so, and just wondered why it hadn't been. I think the above quotes make that clear.

There's no 'perhaps' necessary, I simply didn't say what your quotes might be taken to imply that I said. And again, I assumed no such thing. I can see your misunderstanding (see above) - even though I did say 'here' in that quote, referring to RoR - but at no point did I say, or, indeed, imply that "It's not supposed to be that way on RoR", and so no, I never thought that was the premise of the change.

I'm not going to preface every single opinion with "I think/believe/feel" (though I do generally try to make that clear), but sure, you can take that "it's pretty cheesy" to mean "I believe it's pretty cheesy."

To your last sentence: neither. It's simply that I believe it's cheesy that it was/is possible, and would prefer it be changed in future on RoR (for which I've given gameplay reasons).

And how a feelgood movie thread has to derail into a 2 or 3 person discussion .. again.. Some people just don't know when to quit.

I agree it's not optimal, and I even said I was avoiding that in my first spoilered post; then I got three pointless responses (inc. one from you) calling me 'salty'/'butthurt'/'jealous'. It's nothing to do with "not knowing when to quit", but I'm not gonna ignore Ryan's posts that're challenging mine, particularly given that I think they mostly ignore or misrepresent what I've written.

If a mod wants to remove them, fair enough. I'd just request that they get moved to a new topic (or tell me to do it, to save them a job, before they del) so it's not all lost in the ether

[RyanMakara]

Spoiler:

To be honest, I am a fervent user of the flee + AP pot tactic, and despite the mobility it adds as a tank, I'd like to see it removed entirely as well. Not since it is cheesy, but because it is outright against the actual intent of using it as nothing but an escape tool, and the benefit it may give to some classes over others if it remains.

I'm not in charge of any forum moderation, but I did spoiler my posts in the same way Zealote has, out of respect for Volgograd's OP. I hope we can all do the same to effectively stay on-topic on the actual videos Volgograd makes and uploads here, and not have half the pages clouded in argumented text-walls

With that said; I DEMAND MORE VOLGOGRAD!

[Zealote]

Yep maybe we should just leave it there on this now?

On a more related note: Is that our very own Dana @5:43 in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx-7cCiQtY4

[Eathisword]

@Everyone : Don'T mind my thread. I'm kinda enjoying the argument ! I had never really though of flee, as ''fleeing''. Just as a tool like any other ability. But it's kinda true that it probably goes against the original purpose. Then again, its the only way to beat Rdps for tanks. Without it, it would be 100% one sided even against fairly bad kiters.

@Zealote : Dunno who Dana is, but that is definitely one of the coolest memory of my WAR career : RR75 SW versus 2 RR100 WE :p

@Gummy : next is gonna be guides, PuG play or group play, I think. I kinda exhausted the solo thing. I don't think i can do better than the 1v5 from volume 3. And I wanna git gud in group play. I am pretty sucky at it right now.

[Zealote]

@Zealote : Dunno who Dana is, but that is definitely one of the coolest memory of my WAR career : RR75 SW versus 2 RR100 WE :p

One of the devs (https://www.returnofreckoning.com/about.php)

I'm sure he had 'Bloodkiss' in an avatar/sig at some point as well, not 100% though.

Edit: Yeah 'Bloodkiss' is in his Github name... must be him!