Yea, reported it to ATL staff bc they're a demise emulator.The Silvertiger wrote:Much love Eos!
Nice bug find Jose! Can you report it to OSI?
A thread not about casting
Re: A thread not about casting
Re: A thread not about casting
Yah let’s report to osi that their casting is wrong. And not true “Demise osi casting” bc eos says so.
I’ll hit up my boys at EA games and send them this fourm and MBs biased discord in case they need more info to get their casting fixed
I’ll hit up my boys at EA games and send them this fourm and MBs biased discord in case they need more info to get their casting fixed
Random PvP Videos:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWcxNq ... igMf7_2Nuw
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWcxNq ... igMf7_2Nuw
Grifo and Bad Religion like this.
Top
- The Silvertiger
- Posts: 4469
Re: A thread not about casting
He literally found a bug that 2/5 doesn't have the same mechanics as 2/6... Why the sass? Give him a pat on the back.Arden wrote:Yah let’s report to osi that their casting is wrong. And not true “Demise osi casting” bc eos says so.
I’ll hit up my boys at EA games and send them this fourm and MBs biased discord in case they need more info to get their casting fixed
Unlike your guildmate, I'm proud of you Jose. Good job!
Never forget June 4th 1989!
Selling List & Vendor
"Screenshots will never be used as evidence but more of a reference tool for us to help in our investigations."
Selling List & Vendor
"Screenshots will never be used as evidence but more of a reference tool for us to help in our investigations."
Re: A thread not about casting
The reason why 2/5 right now is better than 2/6 is not that your spells are faster with 2/5,but that casting with 2/5 is easier to macro.Actually your macros for the old casting work flawlessly with 2/5.So one key gameplay is almost unchanged.
But the worst part is,current 2/5 is still highly ping-based.Uos built-in managed casting macros check recovery information received from the server to decide if it can cast next spell.As a result,the lower your ping,the faster you cast with 2/5.So the highly ping-dependent casting is unchanged too.
Its true that you cast 'faster' with 2/5 on OSI
just like on Demise.But what makes a difference is that OSI has fizzle penalty.Overcasting takes place when a spell is casted right after the last spell is disturbed.2/5 is worse than 2/6 in this case.Not only that you can't avoid overcasting with 2/5,but also that 2/5 will delay your next spell.
I.E.You overcast a Ma.With 2/6,you wait 0.25-0.5 sec(casting time) for the 'broken' spell to finish,then you are ready for the next spell.But with 2/5 you have to wait additional 0.25 sec(recovery time).You will receive 'you have not yet recovered from casting a spell',if you try to cast a spell when overcasting happens.
That is probably why you don't see ppl mainly use 2/5 on OSI.
But the worst part is,current 2/5 is still highly ping-based.Uos built-in managed casting macros check recovery information received from the server to decide if it can cast next spell.As a result,the lower your ping,the faster you cast with 2/5.So the highly ping-dependent casting is unchanged too.
Its true that you cast 'faster' with 2/5 on OSI
just like on Demise.But what makes a difference is that OSI has fizzle penalty.Overcasting takes place when a spell is casted right after the last spell is disturbed.2/5 is worse than 2/6 in this case.Not only that you can't avoid overcasting with 2/5,but also that 2/5 will delay your next spell.
I.E.You overcast a Ma.With 2/6,you wait 0.25-0.5 sec(casting time) for the 'broken' spell to finish,then you are ready for the next spell.But with 2/5 you have to wait additional 0.25 sec(recovery time).You will receive 'you have not yet recovered from casting a spell',if you try to cast a spell when overcasting happens.
That is probably why you don't see ppl mainly use 2/5 on OSI.
Cold Blood, Duke, Shallan and 2 others like this.
Top
Re: A thread not about casting
Dg nailed it. But there's more wrong with the casting then just that. Delayed spell damage is still off. Overcasting penalty is still to aggressive. (Time to cast after finishing a spell is to long)
PM me or contact me on discord mortoburger#5040
Buying List
Selling List
Trading Brsk for Arties
My vendor in Luna
Buying Tailor/Smith resets in bulk.
Buying List
Selling List
Trading Brsk for Arties
My vendor in Luna
Buying Tailor/Smith resets in bulk.
-
- Posts: 88
Re: A thread not about casting
i do thimk ppl want to change the casting back even cant understand what dg writes lol
Re: A thread not about casting
Its joke post, right?
(2023) MY BUYING LIST - https://www.uogdemise.com/community/vie ... =7&t=29983
Re: A thread not about casting
Not true... eos checked.Loler wrote:Dg nailed it. But there's more wrong with the casting then just that. Delayed spell damage is still off. Overcasting penalty is still to aggressive. (Time to cast after finishing a spell is to long)
Demise casting is correct and OSI’s casting is wrong and and buggy. Get with the program here
Random PvP Videos:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWcxNq ... igMf7_2Nuw
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWcxNq ... igMf7_2Nuw
Re: A thread not about casting
Yea, osi is a pretty shitty demise emulator :/Arden wrote:Not true... eos checked.Loler wrote:Dg nailed it. But there's more wrong with the casting then just that. Delayed spell damage is still off. Overcasting penalty is still to aggressive. (Time to cast after finishing a spell is to long)
Demise casting is correct and OSI’s casting is wrong and and buggy. Get with the program here
- The Silvertiger
- Posts: 4469
Re: A thread not about casting
Cry me a river. It's kinda funny that Josh actually proves that OSI casting is buggy, but is in denial.Josh wrote:Yea, osi is a pretty shitty demise emulator :/Arden wrote:Not true... eos checked.Loler wrote:Dg nailed it. But there's more wrong with the casting then just that. Delayed spell damage is still off. Overcasting penalty is still to aggressive. (Time to cast after finishing a spell is to long)
Demise casting is correct and OSI’s casting is wrong and and buggy. Get with the program here
Never forget June 4th 1989!
Selling List & Vendor
"Screenshots will never be used as evidence but more of a reference tool for us to help in our investigations."
Selling List & Vendor
"Screenshots will never be used as evidence but more of a reference tool for us to help in our investigations."
Re: A thread not about casting
You're retarded. It bugged out on osi at one point, but that was just the steam macro bc I've had it do that shit on many many servers where the targeting bugs out (when afk macroing skills). If you watch it says "target canceled" which is when a spell is successfully cast and then you cast another spell without selecting a target.The Silvertiger wrote:Cry me a river. It's kinda funny that Josh actually proves that OSI casting is buggy, but is in denial.Josh wrote:Yea, osi is a pretty shitty demise emulator :/Arden wrote:
Not true... eos checked.
Demise casting is correct and OSI’s casting is wrong and and buggy. Get with the program here
My video shows the difference in 2/6 on osi and demise. I think it's pretty clear that demise was eating some spells while the osi one wasn't, which the likely reason is the overcast penalty is slightly too high on demise for 2/6.
2/5 seems accurate, i said that before.
And get off my dick.
- The Silvertiger
- Posts: 4469
Re: A thread not about casting
I'm retarded and I thought you liked that kinda thing...Josh wrote:You're retarded. It bugged out on osi at one point, but that was just the steam macro bc I've had it do that shit on many many servers where the targeting bugs out (when afk macroing skills). If you watch it says "target canceled" which is when a spell is successfully cast and then you cast another spell without selecting a target.The Silvertiger wrote:Cry me a river. It's kinda funny that Josh actually proves that OSI casting is buggy, but is in denial.Josh wrote: Yea, osi is a pretty shitty demise emulator :/
My video shows the difference in 2/6 on osi and demise. I think it's pretty clear that demise was eating some spells while the osi one wasn't, which the likely reason is the overcast penalty is slightly too high on demise for 2/6.
2/5 seems accurate, i said that before.
And get off my dick.
You found a bug with OSI casting where 2/5 was better than 2/6 therefore OSI casting is buggy. However, if we are going to have OSI-LIKE casting, I want it to be accurate. I don't know how many posts I have to make to get you to understand that.
Never forget June 4th 1989!
Selling List & Vendor
"Screenshots will never be used as evidence but more of a reference tool for us to help in our investigations."
Selling List & Vendor
"Screenshots will never be used as evidence but more of a reference tool for us to help in our investigations."
Re: A thread not about casting
no, 2/5 isnt better than 2/6 on osi. 2/5 is better than i thought for sure, that i admitted. The last video shows clearly that 2/5 is inferior to 2/6 when timed properly. Also add on what DG said, it would also make 2/6 better than 2/5The Silvertiger wrote:I'm retarded and I thought you liked that kinda thing...Josh wrote:You're retarded. It bugged out on osi at one point, but that was just the steam macro bc I've had it do that shit on many many servers where the targeting bugs out (when afk macroing skills). If you watch it says "target canceled" which is when a spell is successfully cast and then you cast another spell without selecting a target.The Silvertiger wrote: Cry me a river. It's kinda funny that Josh actually proves that OSI casting is buggy, but is in denial.
My video shows the difference in 2/6 on osi and demise. I think it's pretty clear that demise was eating some spells while the osi one wasn't, which the likely reason is the overcast penalty is slightly too high on demise for 2/6.
2/5 seems accurate, i said that before.
And get off my dick.
You found a bug with OSI casting where 2/5 was better than 2/6 therefore OSI casting is buggy. However, if we are going to have OSI-LIKE casting, I want it to be accurate. I don't know how many posts I have to make to get you to understand that.
edit: 2/5 is better than 2/6 when holding down a button, but when casting at proper timing 2/6 will be superior, the video shows that too, it had 2/6 and 2/5 portions, you can see it say "you have not recovered" on the 2/5 portion, but 2/5 is very close to accurate on demise.
- The Silvertiger
- Posts: 4469
Re: A thread not about casting
That sounds buggy to me. Listen to yourself:
holding a button down 2/5 is better than 2/6
You're supposed to recover faster on 2/6 whether timed right or not. I guess as Eos stated before implementing it to Occlo the overcast is buggy. If I were Eos and holding to the accurate without bugs, I would implement it without the overcast, but aren't you glad I'm not Eos even though you and your friends address us about the same.
holding a button down 2/5 is better than 2/6
You're supposed to recover faster on 2/6 whether timed right or not. I guess as Eos stated before implementing it to Occlo the overcast is buggy. If I were Eos and holding to the accurate without bugs, I would implement it without the overcast, but aren't you glad I'm not Eos even though you and your friends address us about the same.
Never forget June 4th 1989!
Selling List & Vendor
"Screenshots will never be used as evidence but more of a reference tool for us to help in our investigations."
Selling List & Vendor
"Screenshots will never be used as evidence but more of a reference tool for us to help in our investigations."
Re: A thread not about casting
I'm aware it sounds buggy, I am just pointing out the observations from testing, it's really not a matter up for debate so I dont get why you're arguing. Watch the video, 500 ms 2/6 > 2/5. If you watch eos's gif with 0ms delay 2/5 > 2/6. But timed correctly 2/6 > 2/5, that's how osi works and not how demise works currently (based on the video), and that is one thing that needs to be adjusted and I believe it's because the overcast feature is off, Morto pointed out at the beginning that the "random delay" they had implemented he didn't think was correct, maybe he was right, the video supports his hypothesis at least.The Silvertiger wrote:That sounds buggy to me. Listen to yourself:
holding a button down 2/5 is better than 2/6
You're supposed to recover faster on 2/6 whether timed right or not. I guess as Eos stated before implementing it to Occlo the overcast is buggy. If I were Eos and holding to the accurate without bugs, I would implement it without the overcast, but aren't you glad I'm not Eos even though you and your friends address us about the same.