Jump on embrace

[Azarael]

End-cast check: fires when an ability which has a cast time and can be cast while moving ends. Abilities which require you to stand still do not use this check, but since a move-cast ability allows the player to move and stay within range, you are expected to do so.

I'm fairly sure the end cast range check on live had a small buffer to make sure a cast made near max range wouldn't usually fail if one player was running away from the other. At least it certainly felt that way as I very rarely got issues with that when casting near max range on live. I agree it shouldn't be possible to start the cast and run the opposite way and still get it to work, but it should (imo) work if the opponent moves 5-10 feet out of range during the cast.

It does, and so does RoR, but that check is only used here for abilities that don't allow you to move. If you can move to maintain the ability, I see no reason why you should have range grace on it, especially when it gets abused by deliberately running back during the last 40% of the ability to increase the power of the ability. That's not on.

To the people who are talking about disrupt on jump: can we use the term "break" instead of "Disrupt" if it's not actually a magical Disrupt?

the problem is when the cast is interrupted near the end, the ability goes off cd or bugs. Sometimes the mara is stuck in the purple laser animation but the cd is triggered. It looks like a lot of situations where the client and the server are supposed to accepts the pull are cancelled by the slightly over punitive code resulting in bugs and the loss of the cd almost every time in a moving mass vs moving mass even if TB button was light up during the whole cast.

Been testing this on dev and I do not see this issue. Neither the client nor the server is "supposed" to do anything when a spell ends on the client - that spell ends in response to reception of an ability packet sent by the server, either marking end or interruption.

[Bozzax]

IMO the mid and last checks should be vs (range + the length target can run during the channel).

So assuming the target can run 10 feet during the TE channel.
1 check 65 feet
2 check 71 feet
3 check 75 feet

Now ppl just see the animation and run away resulting in a range failure 90% of the time.

So LOS, disrupt and charge, flee as counters but not just normal back-pedalling or movement.

Ofc the Mara could alos move back 10feet as for a 75feet pull well but only if the target remains in place during the entire channel.

[Azarael]

I don't see how this is a problem. A pull is a very strong ability and it's a death sentence in the case of pull to zerg, so yes, it should require some effort to make work. The WL also has such a stringent restriction on Fetch, which can only go off if the pet is within 5 feet of the target and the WL is within 65 feet of the target.

[Marsares]

Seriously? People again complaining about TE?

When executed right, this is one of the most powerful abilities in the game as it's an almost guaranteed kill. Same applies to the Fetch! on my WL.

The ability clearly states it's range is 65 feet, and people complain that it now actually adheres to that, whilst the WL has much more stringent conditions placed on it, the pet doesn't instantly connect to the target like the Mara's tentacle does (i.e. travel time) and is reliant on terrible pathing whilst CC can be applied to the pet (or better, kill it in 3 GCD).

Just goes to show, Mara's have had it way too good for too long and some of them have just gotten lazy. You're a MDPS and complain about having to be in a 65 range. The mind boggles. Try Fetch! on the WL, and then see how good you have it. An interrupt on jump (if such a thing really works) should be fixed, but complaining about the correct range checks being applied is a bit rich.

[Bretin]

Try Fetch! on the WL, and then see how good you have it.

actually i can't agree with that, i think Fetch and TE are equally strong and for most people it is a learn2play issue. i recently started to play my white lion in t4 and i have no problem with fetching people. ofc the pet can be rooted and in that case it will not go off but it has other advantages the marauder doesn't have hence i'd call them equally strong but again it's just me. i really like both skills and still don't understand why white lions are complaining about it.

[Marsares]

Try Fetch! on the WL, and then see how good you have it.

actually i can't agree with that, i think Fetch and TE are equally strong and for most people it is a learn2play issue. i recently started to play my white lion in t4 and i have no problem with fetching people. ofc the pet can be rooted and in that case it will not go off but it has other advantages the marauder doesn't have hence i'd call them equally strong but again it's just me. i really like both skills and still don't understand why white lions are complaining about it.

I couldn't agree more about the L2P comment and that they're both strong, albeit in different ways. I have a good success rate with Fetch!, but there are inherently more limitations placed upon it:

- It takes time for the pet to get to the intended target, as opposed to the Mara tentacle which connects instantly
- The pet pathing remains an issue unfortunately
- The pet can be CC-ed or killed, which renders Fetch useless in anything larger than 12v12.
- The pet needs to be within 5ft, which is another limitation the Mara doesn't have
- If the pet dies, the WL loses a good chunk of its damage and nearly all its CC

This probably sounds like a broken record, as the above has been stated on numerous occasions. Now, I'm not advocating for a nerf to TE or a buff to Fetch, as both can be equally successful.

However, there are two phases to a successful pull: (1) Connecting with your target and (2) The actual pull. (1) is much easier for the Mara and thus it seems fair to me that the WL perhaps has a somewhat higher success rate with (2), i.e. at risk of being parried rather than disrupted. Fetch is more difficult to execute, whilst TE is easier I'd argue but a bit more reliant on RNG for making the actual pull work.

[Shadowgurke]

People act like TE is a free kill every time you pull.

If you are fighting vs a zerg then Rift/Magnet are worse by a large margin.
The pull can be seen for 2 seconds. Enough time for your team to react. Enough time to taunt or CC the marauder (RKD is convenient, isn't it?) That is not even factoring in that it never works against SWs with selfpunt up or healers. If I had to guess I would say it works on healers 25% of the time due to disrupt.

I know the ability is cancer when it comes to chasing people but don't we at least want the ability to be useful in actual combat?

[Bozzax]

However, there are two phases to a successful pull: (1) Connecting with your target and (2) The actual pull. (1) is much easier for the Mara and thus it seems fair to me that the WL perhaps has a somewhat higher success rate with (2), i.e. at risk of being parried rather than disrupted. Fetch is more difficult to execute, whilst TE is easier I'd argue but a bit more reliant on RNG for making the actual pull work.

After the change everybody just run away from the mara for 2s when the "in your face" animation appears meaning the mara will needs to abort, fail or "follow" into the heart of the order front line to make successful pull.

imo fetch is actually harder to detect/avoid as pet moves separately and if he gets to you it fires.

Still regardless of right or wrong it is a very noticeable change considering TE always was the counterweight for fetch, pounce and rkds.

[Scrilian]

It was completely broken in a way that mara uses charge, casts TE and runs away while the target runs away from marauder at the same time resulting in absurdly long range pull.
The only thing is that now it needs to have 1m CD to be perfectly balanced, coz 30sec CD with 30sec immunity is bullshit on the best melee class in the game

[Ridduk]

The only thing is that now it needs to have 1m CD to be perfectly balanced, coz 30sec CD with 30sec immunity is bullshit on the best melee class in the game

Ummm...no.