TERA Online forum archive
Posts by jrtseven
begone heathen
Pumpedd wrote: »
jrtseven wrote: »
You've completely missed the point of almost everything that has been said to you. You're a disappointment to everyone.

If you want to keep crying about your past traumas and unrequited attention, just whisper/pm me. This thread is not the place.

Unfortunately its been a bug for over a year easily, dont think they'll ever fix it. Its been reported numerous times.

Totally true, however that doesn't mean we can't throw ideas around and possibly find a way to recreate the bug. That's also a big part of it, they can't really send a case to BHS unless their team can reproduce it.
Tewii wrote: »
Hey, I've forwarded this on in the council chat to some EME staff and pinged them, so they should get wind of this pretty quickly. As for a time scale for a solution, not a clue. Good luck.

Thanks friend.
6XTHX9KA35 wrote: »
jrtseven wrote: »
The cycle begins anew for the third time.

Manifest loses against giant alliance -> lol cya manitrash, finally stood up to the bullies
Manifest wins against giant alliance -> lol moneyfest, gear carried
giant alliance gets demoralized and quits -> lol manizerg

Never change, MT.

You spent two months competing for 2nd place entirely avoiding Yikes in CU

If you're going to post a polarizing statement at least make sure you're not entirely wrong. We fought Yikes every week, getting more or less destroyed.
jrtseven wrote: »
JXE5356AKE wrote: »
Uh, I've been in a guild that has experienced this issue a while back. Sending in tickets, changing GMs or guild declaration authority did nothing. Like it's an actual problem in game, just minimized because GvGs are done less.

Do you remember any information about this? When was your guild created? Did you declare on any other guilds prior to encountering the bug?

Ayi and myself seem to have found a "solution" that involves both guilds' cooperation to fix. Here are the steps.

1) unaffected guild declares on the affected guild (Attack declares on Manifest)
2) Manifest selects the option to "Make it a mutual GvG"
3) Both guilds withdraw

We now have the normal cooldown time that is no longer permanently stuck at "1 day." https://puu.sh/yYA4v/2e9ecb3e4e.jpg

Will update when we can declare.

Updating, did not fix. Still the "1 day" message.
Vunak wrote: »
Should be fixed. No bug should go uninvestigated. Don't get your hopes up though. Knockup retaliate bug has been around for how long now?

I would rather they look into actual GvG changes. Bring back win conditions, because these endless GvGs are horrible.

Agreed. I'd rather have the 200 kill GvG. Even the bug back then was tolerable, where one side would randomly start with a huge amount of kills.
JXE5356AKE wrote: »
Uh, I've been in a guild that has experienced this issue a while back. Sending in tickets, changing GMs or guild declaration authority did nothing. Like it's an actual problem in game, just minimized because GvGs are done less.

Do you remember any information about this? When was your guild created? Did you declare on any other guilds prior to encountering the bug?

Ayi and myself seem to have found a "solution" that involves both guilds' cooperation to fix. Here are the steps.

1) unaffected guild declares on the affected guild (Attack declares on Manifest)
2) Manifest selects the option to "Make it a mutual GvG"
3) Both guilds withdraw

We now have the normal cooldown time that is no longer permanently stuck at "1 day." https://puu.sh/yYA4v/2e9ecb3e4e.jpg

Will update when we can declare.
Go through your screenshots, you'll find that you brought up 30 mobs, not me.
I could have, but I have no clue who the leaders/officers are.

I don't think creation date matters, as both guilds are very new within 2017. What guilds did you declare before attempting to declare on Attack?
It began with "Attack/Folk please dec us we are bugged", followed by waves of [filtered] banter from those two guilds. You screenshot everything, you can verify it yourself. Good try.

Can you post the date in which your guild was created? Was it a guild namechange from a previous guild? Does your GM have the title "Guild Master" or Guild master"?
Ayi wrote: »
Except that your joke made no sense,
I can't tell whats sadder, the fact that you cling to your traumas from 2016, or that language comprehension is so beyond your skill set to the point where you're oblivious to everyone laughing at you.

The twist at the end was nice, it was a good attempt at projecting your emotional insecurity. Unfortunately (and you'd have no way of knowing, sadly) everyone knows you're furiously typing behind your monitor like your life depends on it.

You're a plethora of comedic gold. Too bad it has to come at your expense. Never change!

The "odds" are not relevant, as that is a feel based assertion.

6a248a3ac6.png
The "smack talk" started with you. In your first reply.

EME cannot send it to BHS unless they can at least reproduce the bug. This thread is for suggestions and theories that might allude EME, and/or help them find a fix.

What are the perimeters for a guild that has never decced before? Can you recreate it now?
Ayi wrote: »
jrtseven wrote: »
I'm honestly worried for you if you didn't realize that satirical quote was directly mocking how upset you were. Did... you think everyone was laughing with you?

To my understanding,
This is the exact moment where everything goes wrong for you. You're just stupid.

9934027a9d.png

To interpret my quote as self deprecating it would require an instance of my person or personal experience predicating the quote. We were actually just laughing about how angry you are.

Now that I had to explain the joke, it's not funny. Thanks a lot
If you can cite your list of every possible scenario you've produced to not only reproduce the bug, but to attempt to solve it, we could more closely come to the conclusion that no player will be able to fix it. Evidently it's not about what you "feel" is the answer, but a collaboration of ideas to contribute to the end goal (which is solving it). It may very well be that there is no solution, as you stated, however that is not a viable response unless you've exhausted every angle.

To simplify for you, this thread is about collecting any experiences or suggestions people have pertaining to the bug. If you have none, that's fine. Just move on.
I'm honestly worried for you if you didn't realize that satirical quote was directly mocking how upset you were. Did... you think everyone was laughing with you?
Miraculously you've completely missed the fact that I've been sending tickets since 2016. I wish I was surprised.

The community on a community driven game would unsurprisingly have more relevant information and experience on recreating this bug than a GM would.

No matter how hard you try to flame under the guise that you're contributing to a thread, your opinion will never be relevant. You're just too stupid.
The day after we won CU I counted 2 instances of "moneyfest" related comments, and 3 comments about us zerging. You must have missed them.

Unfortunately, you're not nearly as informed as your ego leads you to believe. Sorry!
To reinstate, since you're slow, you can pm/whisper me about your traumas. I won't be citing them anymore in my responses.

The only remotely relevant additions to this thread are you saying "there's no fix" and "you're not deccing properly". Suffice to say, based on the quality of your responses, you're the least qualified person to offer any assistance.
Ayi wrote: »
jrtseven wrote: »
The cycle begins anew for the third time.

Manifest loses against giant alliance -> lol cya manitrash, finally stood up to the bullies
Manifest wins against giant alliance -> lol moneyfest, gear carried
giant alliance gets demoralized and quits -> lol manizerg

Never change, MT.

You are such a roleplayer, nobody even said any of that. lmao

It's repeated daily in global to wildly varying degrees. Excellent try, though!
You've completely missed the point of almost everything that has been said to you. You're a disappointment to everyone.

If you want to keep crying about your past traumas and unrequited attention, just whisper/pm me. This thread is not the place.
Ayi wrote: »
You could always submit a ticket or maybe be a child on Global chat again.

I can tell you that no player will be able to fix this issue.

P.S. Considering you are who you are, are you sure that you know how to dec properly? :)

7b585e4574.png

Reports dating back to 2016.

Asking for Attack/Folkvangyr to dec us in global is the least toxic thing you could reach for. The irony that you're crying in global about getting kicked from Manifest while calling others toxic is palpable.

I appreciate that you've solemnly swore your life to flaming me, but try to save that for global. This thread is strictly about formulating ideas to fix this bug.
The short and skinny is that I cannot declare on guilds that surrender consecutively. It gives the error "On cooldown. You can declare a GvG battle after 1 day." This error message will remain indefinitely.

6f23e83d5d.jpg

As mentioned, this occurs when a guild(s) withdraw from the GvG numerous times, the exact amount unknown. I would guess 2-6 times. This has persisted since 2016.

The guilds that are currently "bugged" for us (Manifest) are: Treehouse, Croissant, Mood, Folkvangyr, and Attack.

Things we have tested, which did not result in a fix:
- Officers deccing
- Guild master swaps
- Opposing guilds deccing
- Changing guild "style" button (PvE, PvP, or Casual)
- Deccing other guilds
- Waiting

This post is for visibility and feedback. I have already submitted numerous tickets and created a bug report on the forums. Please give me ideas for fixing it and post any similar experiences.
• What happened: Unable to declare a GvG against guilds that have previously surrendered recently. Gives the error message "On cooldown. You can declare a GvG battle again after 1 day.", despite waiting longer than the listed time.
• Date and Time the bug was witnessed: Frequently between 2016 to current. Usually after a guild surrenders 2-5 times.
• Reproduction Steps: Unable to test for reproduction, but the steps leading up to the bug are:
1) Declare a GvG on a guild
2) They surrender/withdraw
3) Repeat until the error occurs
• Screenshot:

6f23e83d5d.jpg
78dc50f020.jpg

Looking for advice to fix it.
OP's list is the perfect fixes for TERA.
The cycle begins anew for the third time.

Manifest loses against giant alliance -> lol cya manitrash, finally stood up to the bullies
Manifest wins against giant alliance -> lol moneyfest, gear carried
giant alliance gets demoralized and quits -> lol manizerg

Never change, MT.
Another banger pumped! We can really hear the cylinders firing off in your brain for that one
This might just make your brain liquify instantly, but what if I told you that requirements change frequently based on community demand

I know it’s a concept yet perceived but keep an open mind
Manifest has suffered another defeat at the hands of the skeleton army, led by Sir.Cage. Manifest's noble efforts to preserve the rebel constitution have once again been stricken down to the floor. In his dying breaths, General, leader of the geeks, muttered "At l-least... I still won.. S-skyring sl--"
Just for reference, what time are you logged in on which server where this is the case? I've been jumping between servers recently, and the only time I saw it the way you described was years ago on LoT and VoT.

I don't disagree with the point about player retention, but I tend to say that player attitudes (and their lack of welcoming of new players) is a more important factor than lacking guides. As a result a lot of people just play casually and never really integrate (because they're not really welcomed).

Here's a screenshot of MT velika at 3AM est in 2014:
9nJ1lnW.jpg
Here's one of the same spot on the same server at 5PM est in 2017:
78nqpWl.jpg

Yes, time is a factor for deadness, at 3 am today it will be completely empty... but even at busy times it's dead compared to dead times from years past. Not to mention everyone is afk, nobody is talking in global except gold sellers and people selling things in general. There are two LFG's up. The only solution is embracing and welcoming new players. Obviously our playerbase is not going to do that, they're more likely to tell those players to stfu and go away. A solution eme can actually do? Guides for new players so they don't have to rely on current players.

Keep in mind that Velika is not the only endgame hub for players. A better comparison would be Kanstria + Velika in 2014, vs Velika + Highwatch in 2017.
Everyone knows that Manifest [Insert accusation]. It’s the only way they can [insert achievement]. Manifest is nothing without [insert object].

Save yourselves some time and simply fill out the template next time.

As JasonTERA previously said, please feel free to report every instance of injecting or hacking that you encounter to EME. Don’t waste your time harassing the players that are being accused, you’ll just be chat banned.
Pumpedd wrote: »
Mistruss wrote: »
(Remember guys, please state your reason why for a placement change. That way others can agree with further reasoning or disagree)

I'm only going to be making changes with logical reasoning behind suggested changes.

A while ago i was non stop dueling my brother lancer v lancer. He kept beating me.
I logged in a zerk, with some knowledge on how to play one and i was able to beat him back to back.

Zerkers are perhaps the most underrated class in Tera. The reason people say they're ''bad'' or ''decent'' is because they lack in 3s due to the fact that lancer and priests are meta. Zerkers arent able to keep up with the low CD kaia shield that prevents kd and rally.

As a class, They win against slayers lancers brawlers valkyries easily..

You'd be surprised at how well a double energetic zerker does against lancer/priest. It's a lot of pressure and mobility.
I'd suggest Sorc and Zerk being A tier. I think class disparity, realistically, doesn't need a C tier.
Pumpedd wrote: »
jrtseven wrote: »
My list is based off no rule set.

Based off no rule set yet you listed them lower because the rule set is they arent allowed to use bots.

??

e5abe016bc.png

Reading isn't as difficult as you make it seem.
The statement in that quote is my assumption that people are promoting gunners’ tier due to their experiences under the arbitrary NA ruleset. The point being that if you’re going to discredit the opinion of others while citing a relatively unfair metric of comparisons, it’s pretty baffling to those who have more experience than just 1 ruleset’s meta.

Yes, Gunners would use bots, as the rest of the classes would use their locked abilities. You can reread one of my initial posts for more info.

Gunners would be S under the NA duel etiquette. My list is based off no rule set. The cross comparisons about regional etiquettes is simply a means to explain why gunners are highly regarded under arbitrary limitations. Hopefully that clears any confusion you had.
> @Mistruss said:
> Most people here wouldn't be familiar with KR rules so perhaps to avoid this sort of confusion in the future it would be best to inform everyone that your list is based on rules in another region.
>
> It would be a nice discussion to have in a separate thread on setting the "Official" rules for duels in Tera since what we go by now was never openly discussed on a forum and was simply adopted by word of mouth.

My list is actually based off all out 1v1s to a degree, the Korean rules is just a tool to explain how the NA rules aren’t the best measurement. If you’re getting PKd, or have to duel in fwc/cs, nobody is following any region specific “anti bm” rules.

I implore others to add to a discussion rather than throw in empty, condescending responses.
Given NAs rules I would place gunner as S as well. However, OP did not specify what perimeters to account for when providing a tier list. In my opinion, NA rules are an arbitrary and archaic system that should not be the standard for class comparisons.

This is indeed ‘Murica and not Korea, however that should not disable critical thinking when discussing the metagame. I think Gunner, under a better PvP “ruleset” or lack thereof, is not in contention for an S ranking. If OP wants the list of BM skills crafted by VO duellists in 2015, then gunner is the cats whiskers.
The last words of someone who had nothing relevant to say from the beginning, and ran out of edgy phrases. How ironic.
Unfortunately your opinion isn’t necessarily relevant outside your own head if you’re not willing to expand on your thinking.

My post is deliberately labelled as my opinion, if you want your response of “u clearly don’t 1v1” to be taken seriously by anyone, it would help if you at least provide reasons as to why you think it’s wrong. Being redundant in your limited reasonings and contrary in your responses makes you look like a hormonal woman.
Uh oh, now he’s upset!
I’ll try to simplify.

Fraywind not same as medium scale pvp and above

Archer not best in big fight

Need to crit skill for damage

Stun and stagger not as good in big fight

Rain of arrow good in giga but not best
OP did not ask for a fwc tier list. If you’d prefer to dodge the gunner discussion by picking another topic you disagree with, go for it.

Archer’s damage is unreliable in medium scale fights, as you are reliant on critting RA and pen. Your CC is negligible. The only synergy you have is giga presence, which is reliant on CC stacking and no enemy cleanses.
Let’s not make ourselves look that stupid. It’s an open forum, you’re invited to contribute by writing why you disagree with someone else’s opinion.
Uh oh, looks like you’ve hit the inevitable brick wall. Time to find a new thread to be contrary on!
OP asked for a 1v1 tier list, and I’m giving you insight into why gunner isn’t strong in 1v1. Citing ktera isn’t an attempt to standardize dueling etiquette, it’s a glimpse into why you falsely believe gunner to be stronger than it really is. I invite you to challenge gunners without using bot (ie: feeling gunners strength under equal “etiquette”), or flag on a gunner using your entire kit (ie: simulating a 1v1 that would most frequently occur).

It’s not as strong a class as you think.
Baffles me that none of you are considering the fact that NA gunners use bots in duels. If you don’t believe me, go watch any ktera vod on Afreeca during their 1v1 money duels or 1v1 tournament. They don’t use it.

But let’s assume people in NA magically grow a brain and either properly “etiquette” duel with gunner, or go all out (Rally, second wind, mocking shout, shadow reaping, deadly gamble, feign death, stone skin, icb, bull rush bug, melee classes kiting ranged with regen build) the list goes on. Gunner isn’t as strong as you think assuming the players are skilled on both sides.
Toi wrote: »

I don't know about berserker being S tier in 3v3, compared to sorcerer which can be run with any other class and do well, berserker doesn't have that same flexibility nor are they part of a broken comp. As 3s is primarily comp based, I'd evaluate the classes based on how strong their "best" comp is as well as their flexibility in how many comps they can do well in.
I'd amend it to:
3v3:
S tier: Sorcerer
A tier: Reaper, Lancer, Archer, Brawler, Valkyrie
B tier: Slayer, Berserker, Warrior
C tier: Ninja, Gunner
Priest >>>> Mystic because 19s kaias
I value the ability to be part of a comp like lancer sorcerer priest or lancer archer priest that invalidates 90% of other comps highly. Warrior's scythe crit nerf a while back has relegated the class from top tier to more of a CC bot. Keep in mind that this is all context based as solo q has different gear than team q 3v3. In solo q, the classes that have the ability to kill in 1 stun combo or kd chain are far stronger there than in teams with real gear balance.
Berserker has insane pressure cap and damage cap, easily the highest in the game if played properly. I think it is S tier
Opinion of a veteran since nobody else has replied:

1v1:

S Tier: Valkyrie, D-Stance Warrior, Brawler, Reaper
A Tier: Sorcerer, Lancer, Ninja, Berserker, Archer
B Tier: Gunner, A-Stance Warrior, Slayer

3v3:

S Tier: Priest, Sorcerer, Berserker
A Tier: Reaper, Mystic, Lancer, Archer, Brawler, Valkyrie, Warrior, Slayer
B Tier: Gunner, Ninja

15v15+:

S Tier: Brawler, Valkyrie, Sorcerer
A Tier: Priest, Gunner, Lancer, Mystic, Reaper
B Tier: Ninja, Archer, Berserker
C Tier: Warrior, Slayer

Equalized gear in fwc is full crit, so this negatively benefits most classes aside from healers. Gunners, Valks are the worst off since they do full power more or less.
Zoknahal wrote: »
I took the liberty to read through 7 pages of this drama.

My take on this matter, will be in the form of some snips, taken straight from the Rules of Conduct we agree by making an account.

1e1i4jG.png
0EdLFim.png
ZfxYMzj.png
D0uZAUy.png

Yes, There is an actual rules of conduct in the game for those who did not know. Interpretation of this rules may be different from person to person, but you get the idea.

Which would have a justifiable interpretation if they were regular mobs. If someone steals your regular bam/mob, they would be doing it out of spite and/or grievance. There are dozens more to choose from.

The difference is that these are highly contested mobs that drop endgame enchanting materials. They are on multiple hour cooldowns. People aren't fighting over them to be "that guy", they're contesting the loot. Had BHS not intended for them to be fought over, they would have given them loot parameters akin to rally bams (everyone gets loot in accordance to most damage done).

If two people feel "uncomfortable" having to compete with others over a deliberate, optional boss that is designed to only drop loot to people who a) hit it first and b) do more than 50% of the bosses damage, and reliably drops rare endgame enchanting materials, then we can all feel uncomfortable about a LOT of things on MMOs.
EME just decided to arbitrarily change their stance on resetting bams. It had already been cemented that resetting bams was okay since vm2 times. ibams would spawn during non PvP times in alliance on PvE servers. Reports were null because it was all operating under intended game mechanics (aggro range, aggro mechanics, spawn timers). Bluehole quite literally implemented the new world boss content under the same moral schematic. You can read Inven and realize that even on PvP servers in KTERA, people consider PvP "BM" and will choose to have aggro reset fights over bams. The developers in KTERA acknowledge this.

Arguments citing that it's against the rules are just blatantly wrong. Unfortunately there's quite literally nothing to be done against EME's decision roulette.

Just run shadowplay/plays.tv constantly and tag the bam as a level 11 and kite it until you can justifiably ban the remainder of your server's population.
Coolkicl wrote: »
IMO zerk (Astance with doom and fear) is the best of all. They have infinite block and they now have 2 rolls. If someone with a good knowledge of how to counter every class, they can destroy everyone. This can only happen in the hands of someone with low ping though. They also have mocking shout and tenacity which allows them to go in with ease. In non-BM duels they are still busted because of infinite block but they can fall short against range class with mobility (Ex. Gunner, Archer, Sorc).

hey stop using ur brain
Can confirm, skill is broken. Rob even sent me a video clip with his camcorder to prove that it's true.

xoBarb wrote: »
3EAKKCMHXW wrote: »
Don't get why any of you is even bringing up the real Death. LOL

cause fake death blows

the real ones worse have u seen him on pubg
xoBarb wrote: »
Piltover wrote: »
Great discussion with great contributions from both the opposing parties. It will be very interesting to see how next week goes as me and my other Manifest comrades have upgraded to dual gtx 1080 ti's to ensure we are the ones who get the jump on yikes/backcrit/idk's tower.

God bless and godspeed.

Did you load in this week?

my goblet needs filling
Blurberry wrote: »
jrtseven wrote: »
xoBarb wrote: »
inevitable downfall of the Manifest era and liberation of Mount Tyrannas.

you'll never free the slaves!

rnt u suspended?

back to work please
xoBarb wrote: »
inevitable downfall of the Manifest era and liberation of Mount Tyrannas.

you'll never free the slaves!
xoBarb wrote: »
attack seemed pretty successful to me

kEmt3kd.png

We knew when we saw the TFT logo we wouldn't need to defend any towers or avoid pvp to burn fod towers like Manifest because in the end TFT will always reign supreme.

At least you managed to get something correct, I had no idea TFT was coming prepared for CU.
holy fug lmao
xoBarb wrote: »
jrtseven wrote: »
Marvellous VOD, excited for next week. I feel bad for the 40 guildies still rendering while getting fire blasted by my vape twin.

I'll trade you our CU comms for your CU comms?

It started with a "tenacity's now, ranged aoe at the choke" while my guild was loading, and ended with a "Wow we're getting [filtered]" before our tower fell. You'd be pretty disappointed. The rest was just summon coordination as well as 2nd raid comms.
Marvellous VOD, excited for next week. I feel bad for the 40 guildies still rendering while getting fire blasted by my vape twin.
So it was you whole killed Gdoe and Keny all along. I knew your guild was up to no good but I hadn't conceived the magnitude of it.
Excellent discussion, I'm glad to see individuals from all minorities adding to the conversation.

We did indeed kill our own allies' tower, as was discussed prior to CU. Please whisper Lucylea from Croissant and Pomtato from Amaterasu if it's gonna keep you awake tonight.

We did panic as well, we had a mixup with Croissant which was my fault in communication. The call was for our 2nd raid to destroy Fairy Tale while we finished the tower at the ranch. When they arrived they found Croissant already there and decided to help defend Amaterasu. Had I been able to coordinate my comms better we would've killed tft first, and then ultimately Croissant.

If you have any more questions or concerns please feel free to ask!
> @Teekz said:
> Funny you use the word zerg but yikes is not paying a pve guild every week for their back up

You might have to start, I can't imagine a third place finish without monetary gain to be very enticing.
> @Blurberry said:
> Lionadias wrote: »
>
> I wasn't there for CU, can someone post like the wreckage of the [filtered] fest? Like someone SS and Mani had like 60 kills 300 deaths or something like that? Anyone got a Video of it?
>
>
>
>
> Rob is making a video using POVs from me, him, Puag, and Zing

I look forward to seeing the Converge POV, I have no doubt we will learn a great deal.
> @xoBarb said:
> Hey Blur big fan here! Wanted to comment to share some of the insight and knowledge I have.
> Well it might be true Manifest did load in slower this does not take away from the fact that after a crushing 1min defeat on top of their own tower Manifest prioritized burning fod towers to secure themselves a silver laurel instead of actually pvpng this new underdog group.
> Now from what I've been told by my Manifest insiders is that their CU comms were an absolute mess, after the 1 minute defeat many of them simply sounded "demoralized and mad". Although Manifest secured 2nd by prioritizing towers they left their dedicated ally to fend for themselves so they could secure rank 2 instead of defending Amaterasu and securing first for Amaterasu. This slip up could have costed Manifest their alliance as many Amaterasu members have expressed how unimpressed they were by Generals selfish leadership tactics which was clearly shown last night.
> I've been lead to believe Amaterasu and Manifest work together for the CU funds and the profit gained from all 3 bams; Manifest inadvertently avoided both of these in an attempt to save face which in my opinion is quite pathetic and a blatant slap in the face to the dedicated Amaterasu members who give it their all each week for Manifests laurel.
>
>
> - Robv, "Lf Toxic EGF" of Yikes

Excellent analysis! You managed to capture almost 2 aspects of the events correctly. I'll take my own guesses and say that at this rate, FF transfer guilds will be on the map in no time.

To contrast your inapt depictions of the events, I'll allow you a brief glimpse into our side;

- Our plan from Friday was to deny bams and have CU end early, however you are correct in that we got run over due to tactics we haven't witnessed on MT. Your 5 guild collaboration played very well, as we were unable to recover with our limited numbers. We played by our initial plan, as agreed on by leaders and officers in both guilds.

- Had we known Amaterasu would barely lose to your guild faster than we could burn your fodder towers, we would have made the call. In the moment, both leaders agreed to destroy towers, as it seemed like the best reaction based on our initial plan.

Unfortunately, blaming the representative of an iconic guild for less than ideal result is indirectly insulting the leadership of their allied guilds. I hope we can avoid stepping on toes in the future.

As for original discussion, I hope your many guilds had as much fun as ours did. We haven't had that kind of excitement in a long time.
Yikes has indeed proven they cannot be messed with. Hopefully you guys join us in team 3s and perhaps one day inhouses.
> @Blurberry said:
> And give credit to the FF idiots that dogged your whole alliance.

A well deserved third place! Unfortunate that Amaterasu lost the 50/50 on last hitting our tower, it would've been nice to see them with a top 3.

Thematics aside, the FF transfers have indeed been playing well. It's nice to see real competition on MT again.
07/30/17 Discussion: Civil Unrest

Last CU was the second in TERA history where Manifest did not receive rank one. This also marks the first time where a guild that wasn't actively participating got first place.

We saw a brilliant tactic by the MT collaboration force, effectively loading in twice as fast on average and burning our tower to 70% before the majority loaded into the map. We gained a lot of insight from this.

Should Converge 2.0 have been able to burn Amaterasu's tower in an equal fight before allowing Manifest to destroy their alt towers? Are there any mathematicians that could confirm whether or not Converge would have gotten above rank 3 had they been successful in their attack?

The 50 Manifest that participated were excited to see competition and look forward to next week. Please post your thoughts below.
Manifest topics and discussions are to be posted in this thread. Please refrain from racial slurs and profanity. If you wish to donate to Manifest or affiliates, please contact me in-game (General).
Opinion of a veteran PvPer, (if you want your game to die please ignore)

Loot:

Reduce drop rate of HP Potions by 20% across all bg's loot tables
Make HP Potions stacks of 10 rather than individual
Increase T11 feedstock to a random amount between 20 and 50
Reduce drop rate of dragon's scales by 20%
Increase stack of dragon's scale from 3 to 5
Increase stack of War Keybadges from 1 - 3 to 2 - 5

Do not increase the drop rate of VM materials, but make the other rewards feel meaningful. Currently, people don't want to farm the boxes due to fear of bad RNG resulting in a complete waste of time.

Skyring specific loot:

Increase droprate of feedstock by 20%, decrease the drop rate of HP Potions by an additional 20%.

This has the potential to be the fastest popping BG as well as the fastest completed BG, so it makes sense that the drop rate of HP potions are higher. As previously stated, making the HP potions drop in stacks of 10 will make them moderately more meaningful. Increasing the drop rate of feedstock will encourage people to continue to queue despite having less than ideal luck with drops.

Skyring changes (Solo):

Tooltip upon entry (toggled off in options) specifying a moderately correct crystal setup for each class role.
Add 7.2% CDR line to weapon
Add two additional 8% HP lines to the chest
Draws do not result in a loss of rating

Currently, the pace in solo queue is too slow, and redundantly too punishing as well. Adding a CDR line will make the PvP more akin to team queue without revamping all the stats and gear. Adding more HP lines to the chest will force players to use their 'one shot' abilities more tactfully, and make the flow of the matches more akin to team queue as well.

Skyring changes (Team):

Remove the maximum rating gap between teams (So you will eventually pop regardless of rating)
Players with an item level below 430 will receive a full set of +12 conflate, PvP rolled, as well as mid-tier PvP rolled jewelry for the duration of the battleground
Draws do not result in a loss of rating

Team queue is the last remaining competitive goal now that leaderboards, crusades, alliance, vanarchy, and tournaments are nonexistant. Teams need to pop against each other over time regardless of rating gap, as the community is currently too small.

Add an equalized gear option that has actual usable stats (since none of you at EME play your own game, make sure to consult with PvPers to confirm the correct rolls) that will be enabled below a certain item level. This enables people without BiS gear to compete in a competitive environment, without punishing the players that worked for their BiS gear.


Fraywind changes:

Remove automatic equalization of gear
Players with an item level below 430 will receive a full set of +12 conflate, PvP rolled, as well as mid-tier PvP rolled jewelry for the duration of the battleground
2/3 captured points give an additional 2 point per second. 3/3 capture points give an additional 4 points per second
Remove loser buff

Add an equalized gear option that has actual usable stats (since none of you at EME play your own game, make sure to consult with PvPers to confirm the correct rolls) that will be enabled below a certain item level. This enables people without BiS gear to compete in a competitive environment, without punishing the players that worked for their BiS gear.[/i]

Gridiron changes:

Gridiron specific loot boxes share the same drop table as Gridiron victory boxes
Reduce damage of bombs by 40%
Increase duration of bomb debuff by 60% (Cannot be healed)

Gridiron specific loot boxes are bad. Because grid does not offer the multiple box mechanic for high ranking players, allow the gridiron specific boxes to contain useful rewards as well.

Bombs should be used strategically to engage a fight, not to one-shot people. Reduce the damage to enable micro counterplay, while adding duration to the debuff as to give a strong opening to the team that is engaging.

Corsair's Stronghold changes:

Loot table now identical to Fraywind
Increase the HP of inner gate by 20%
Increase damage of bombs by 40%
Siege weapon destruction also results in the death of the player controlling it

Corsair's is in a good state currently, although the rewards are lacking. It's absurd to reward a 20 minute strategic victory with a health potion.

Gate/bomb changes will reward both attacking and defending teams for meaningful decisions, and punish them for bad decisions.


General changes:

You can queue for as many battlegrounds as you want concurrently
Re-introduce pre-crusade leaderboards
Leaderboards reset monthly
Places 1-5 in each battleground receive 5x Diamonds ea. Places 6-15 receive 3x Diamonds ea. 16-50 receive 1x Diamond ea. 51-100 receive 1x Emerald ea.

Multiple BG queue is a long overdue feature.

Leaderboards are essential to any game that has battlegrounds. Reward your players for using your game as a competitive venue, considering you don't do any tournaments anymore. Make the leaderboards visible, as they were pre-crusade. This in combination with the top 100 rewards will increase the quality and volume of BGs. It will also help EME identify the win trading players.
Truly a memorable moment, despite it being a 50v80. Tera needs this kind of passion again.
image
> @Blurberry said:
> Ya'll using our choke now huh????

It ends up being pretty good against 8 guilds


Credits to Arvind for making this video. Enjoy!
make fraywond elite only
Whoa there bucko let's stay on topic. Please find the appropriate section on the forums and post it there instead for EME to ignore.

Please keep in mind the team at EME is very limited in terms of resources as they are an indie company. Their tasks include, but are not limited to:

- Communications with bluehole
- Translating patches (google)
- Setting up OBS
- Crankin' the ol' wheel (we got another guy to push to fix server instability)
- Using a keyboard
- Sometimes thinking
- MucH mOrE
Spacecats wrote: »
Transfers are now available for all servers.

What about moderately decent loot from PvP boxes?
jHdPIpq.jpg
Z1avkiJ.png
GIrOGfx.png
this is from like 2013 dont remove pls
FnrNG8H.jpg
LESbTvp.jpg
8TVtGgu.gif
NDHsiPx.jpg
Q6HhzDt.jpg
Spacecats wrote: »
jrtseven wrote: »
Spacecats wrote: »
Ultimately it's a Bluehole decision to make. I'm sure we've passed the request along in the past because it's a topic that comes up fairly often in the NA community, but it's time we checked in with the development team again to see if there are other ways players can keep track of their damage output beyond comparing character stats.

What about passing the request to bring back leaderboards?

That's not really on topic here, but yes it has been requested. There are a number of things we regularly keep up on in hopes that it will be implemented or improved by the development team.

Thats awesome to hear. I hope you guys keep pushing for crusades and/or leaderboards.
Spacecats wrote: »
Ultimately it's a Bluehole decision to make. I'm sure we've passed the request along in the past because it's a topic that comes up fairly often in the NA community, but it's time we checked in with the development team again to see if there are other ways players can keep track of their damage output beyond comparing character stats.

What about passing the request to bring back leaderboards?
jrtseven wrote: »
LagunaZio wrote: »
"Modification to the client" is an extremely broad concept. options menu adjustments could technically fall into this verbiage.

Wait, how is options menu part of modifying this game?

The changes to your options menu actually modify commands in your S1 options text file, and vice versa.

Yea that makes sense.
The bans are unreasonable at this point but I wouldn't risk it.

It's really just a reaching joke at this point. Obviously they won't ban people for changing their S1 input.

What is concerning however is their priorities and how long they take to react to any disturbances in their product. These modifications have been out for 3-4 months, yet only choose now to address it amidst a server routing crisis.

What's even worse is their complete ignorance to requests for NA to KR communication. Leaderboards have been suggested for almost a year, and not once have they passed that information on to the developers. Of course, come any small issue that could impact their short term revenue, that pigeon is out the window to chaiwan faster than you can imagine.
LagunaZio wrote: »
"Modification to the client" is an extremely broad concept. options menu adjustments could technically fall into this verbiage.

Wait, how is options menu part of modifying this game?

The changes to your options menu actually modify commands in your S1 options text file, and vice versa.
Spacecats wrote: »
Has anyone noticed a change either inside or out of dungeons since this morning's maintenance?

If you're still experiencing lag, please post the following in this thread:
    [1] Your location globally.
    [2] The time you experienced the lag (give your time zone).
    [3] Where in TERA were you and what were you doing?
    [4] What was the lag experience like? Could you walk? Did your PC freeze? Did you take damage while lagging? Did others around you experience the lag also?

British Columbia, Canada.
7:00 PM PST - 8:00 PM PST (Specifically, but it happens all day everyday)
Harrowhold, trying to play your game's content.
Everyone runs in place, unable to use skills. Unfreezes 2-3 seconds later, releasing all queued abilities from both players and NPCs. (Yes you take damage.) Yes, everyone else experiences it at the same time.
EME has been a complete joke since Treeshark + Tonka left, the lack of communication during 4+ months of server lag is unacceptable. Obviously there isn't a simple fix, or else qualified technicians would have fixed it within the first month. However leaving the community to speculate while continuing to hold weekly streaming events is downright pathetic.
Very insightful mix of responses. I appreciate your guys' time.
Here is one of the discussions that happened at the time (only one I could easily find since I had posted in it):
https://forums.enmasse.com/tera/discussion/9028/recent-server-stability-issues/p1

Here was Eme's official response to the issues:
http://tera.enmasse.com/news/posts/network-outages-compensation

I remember these issues, and they are separate from my initial post's issue. There are still continual small blips that have a high impact in scenarios such as Harrowhold, or large scale PvP.
(also conjecture)

Perhaps part of the issue is that as soon as you show transparency, like official statements regarding exact server behavior, you sort of relinquish your assumed role as producer and provider of a product. This is likely something EME is not too keen on doing, and the community might react unexpectedly to transparency and, who knows, it might affect the business model as a whole.
I can see this being a strong reason.
From what I'm aware of, these long term continual small "blips" were happening a few months back when EME was still using Zayo for their routing (since some of the Zayo nodes had a large packet loss during fixed hours of the day). The fix for this was them switching over to Savvis which caused a lot of Sea players to have a higher average ping but gave a more stable overall connection. So to say that they are blatantly ignoring it would unfair. EME addressed the situation when it came up and had identified that the problem wasn't the actual servers; but rather, it was the routing that was being used.

Do you have any previous sources to cite? I'd like to educate myself on that troubleshooting if possible. From what I'm aware of also, the blips do persist even now, especially in Harrowhold.
Before reading, please keep in mind this is meant as a constructive discussion.

How extensive do you believe EME's understanding of the server issues are? If they have a semblance of understanding, do you think it's right to perpetually leave the community in the dark?

I don't have an opinion on whether or not they're aware of their long standing server issues. I don't mean the Valkyrie release, although providing the playerbase with 5 extremely unstable servers for the majority of a work day is alarming in itself. I mean the continual 1 to 1.5 second blips in connection, routinely happening every 1-2 minutes since... good lord, how long has it been? 6 months? People have tried to articulate this issue previously many times on the forums, which are promptly shot down by specifically uneducated individuals, or blatantly ignored by staff.

Secondly, do you think it's healthy to, as previously stated, keep the community in the dark? Spacecats has been making a strong PR effort to try and gather information from the community to aid in fixing the servers, however generally speaking there are never any official statements regarding ongoing investigations, updates, nor when the problems are fixed. I'm not suggesting transparency regarding issues, I am simply suggesting more in-the-loop style updates, especially when there are persistent issues that still remain unfixed.

Please discuss your thoughts in a constructive way.
depore: zerker
Stricera wrote: »
uq2Rr.jpg
When you call upon the Moondancer

I know what I'm voting for!
O2gT3ik.jpg
It's a tough choice, really.
O2gT3ik.jpg
The choice is yours!
O2gT3ik.jpg
Is the choice really that hard for people?
StarSprite wrote: »
They also fixed the pvp zones on MT so you can flag in them again but it's not listed.

Locations?
hey can u make the gvg penalty .5% of the starting guild funds per hour
996dab3b96.png
4qpZfpp.jpg
TWMagimay wrote: »
So, you and I are supposed to fight 1v1. You call a friend to help you. Afterwards, I call a friend to help me as well. have I ruined the fight or have I evened the odds after you tried to ruin the fight? Think carefully before you answer.
he's still thinking real carefully it seems

Annavind wrote: »
If you want to stop the abuse of CU:V it's easy take out the BAMS. CU:V is suppose to be pvp so why is it the only spot that gives ambush boxes. If you want straight up pvp then take out the BAMS then all that will be left will be the people who actually want to pvp not those who want to try and snipe or kill a BAM for drops. Now with that being said I have been to several of these now and see many flaws with CU:V for one I understand the map concept but putting obstacles so only one way in is kinda silly it boils down to who can get the best defensible position and if you're unlucky to get that spot the remaining spots are just bad. I also think that if people don't sign up or have at least a party of raid size in the zone at the start shouldn't be allowed a tower that would cut out the whole strongest guild/alliances can block with multiple alt towers just to prolong CU:V to farm all three BAMS. also if your party falls below the minimum requirements your tower is destroyed. That would keep people from forming a starter raid only to flip to a main raid just so enough towers are there to start it or continue it. also I have seen this now a few weeks in a row now and I find it to be a little cheap people are bringing in alt healers and placing them in certain areas just to log them out and on whenever they need a teleport I'd say to fix this if you are not logged in or lose connection that within 5 mins after a d/c,offline that the person is removed from the zone. but in ending this I still say if it's all about pvp WHY IS THERE BAMS and PVE? They could easily rectify a lot of the anger and frustration by simply removing the BAMS that would stop all the bickering but then if they did it only a few would actually participate since pvp for the most part is dead.

This combined with significantly increased rewards for first through third. It would be cool if the BAMs were on a respawn timer similar to alliance bams throughout the week, excluding CU times.
jrtseven wrote: »
you can challenge us as did the guilds during the first 3 weeks of CU. nothing has changed except their ambition to try.
killing PvP
>third time trying to use the excuse "killing PvP"
It's not difficult to challenge us in any way, as proven by the first three weeks of CU.
You don't want PvP. You don't want fights.
That's how you lose your legitimacy.
incorrect again
hellno wrote: »
you dont lose legitimacy by working together with allies. youre the only one trying to draw connections between manifest being #1 and monopolizing CU. we've never declined a challenge for equal numbers.

I have actually never seen Manifest accept an equal number fight. Everytime I have tried doing that with Manifest they say yes we can do a 20v20. They lose a few people into the fight and then summon a whole extra raid to wipe us.
the next time this happens, have someone record it and post it online. I can assure you that any equalized fight coordinated by a leader/officer will always be fair.
hellno wrote: »
As for CVU they are putting in the work to get the number and alliances to constantly win so nothing anyone can actually do or say about it.
you can challenge us as did the guilds during the first 3 weeks of CU. nothing has changed except their ambition to try.
hellno wrote: »
Alliance had the buff losing teams got so even with less numbers you could stay competitive. They should probably add something like that to CVU
this would be an awesome change
Competitive guilds do what they can to win, but in using others as meat shields they lose legitimacy to claim they're elite or earned a win.
you dont lose legitimacy by working together with allies. youre the only one trying to draw connections between manifest being #1 and monopolizing CU. we've never declined a challenge for equal numbers.
It has nothing to with seeking to fight at a disadvantage and more to do with not going out of your way to break PvP simply because others do the same.
youre trying to revive the "breaking pvp" excuse. we've already gone over how alliances arent the reason PvP is dead.
The majority of Manifest members I've had the pleasure of dealing with do believe they are unbeatable.
the opinion that youve gathered from the behavior of a small minority of manifest does not equate to manifest believing they are unbeatable.
Why do you need allies to ensure victory if you're comfortable with losing? If you already have the best players in the game, all with end-game gear, why do you need to form up an alliance to win CU? You don't need Ambush boxes or gold, so why not just shed all your allies and fight outnumbered?
being comfortable with losing =/= wanting to lose.

youre making it much more complex for yourself to understand. competitive guilds do what they can do win. just because we will fight at a disadvantage doesn't mean were going to seek that situation because its convenient for you.
You can contact Tera Online dev tracker at contact@teradevtracker.com - Privacy policy - Tera Online dev tracker is not affiliated with Tera Online or En Masse entertainment.