View Full Version : Tactical implications of archer weapon trails
linearguild
07-11-2010, 02:58 PM
So NGD implemented archer weapon trails on Amun, and I'm not sure I like the impact of this feature on archer gameplay when it goes live.
I have nothing against the weapon trails for warriors, since they attack at melee range and so the trails are purely visual. You don't learn anything from seeing them, except maybe that the color shows what type of gem is in the weapon slot. However, weapon trails for archers give away two important facts: (1) the location of the archer and (2) the person under fire, destroying much of the advantage of clever positioning and removing all surprise in ranged attacks.
NGD, is this the dynamic that you want? Is this change deliberate, or simply nobody looked at archer weapon trails beyond the visual eye candy aspect?
UmarilsStillHere
07-11-2010, 03:05 PM
I agree that they will give an advantage to people who have trails turned on, but I dont think its game breaking. You can already tell whos being shot if see their health move or the impact animation when the hit lands, this will just also show who is shooting who a bit more.
I agree that it will be easier to see the direction you are attacked from, but a quick spin of the camera can show this too so I dont think you would be at to much of a disadvantage with the trails off.
Its already clear what direction a warrior or mage (in most cases) it hitting you from, so I dont think it will be a huge disadvantage to archers to ne the same.
Lastly dont people with high graphic abilitys already have an advantage? Without partical effects you cannot see important buffs such as Ao1 or Strategic, and someone with 60fps will be able to play far better than someone with 6.
Note: On a pure graphical note when you shoot flying creatures such as wasps the trail will always end on the ground below the mob, making it appear that you missed, only minor but if NGD want to do this it should be fixed. I also guess the trails will be effected by certain great gems in the same way was warrior trails? I would like the trails to be shorter, no more than a couple of meters at any one time, a trail from the bow to its target 30+ meters away looks strange.
I tested it on Amun:
- arrow trails are too visible to me
- sound is inapropriate on most living targets
In big battles it will clutter the scene even more, and reduce fps, so it will be optionnal (hopefully), tactically it will make archers easy to locate.
So it will prevent some interesting situations:
- firing from tower, in a captured fort
- firing from behind an obstacle (tree, rock, fort, ...) without being noticed immediatly
- instantly identify the target of many archers
I tend to agree with Xia, RO is a war game, once more such change will reduce the field of possibilities.
What is the point ?
Its already clear what direction a warrior or mage (in most cases) it hitting you from,
This is true for normal attacks only.
UmarilsStillHere
07-11-2010, 03:35 PM
Well you can see where a fireball (or similar) is coming from and if a warrior is dancing on your face its pretty clear hes hitting you :p
I do agree that the trails are to visable, they should be more translucent and preferably more like staff shots where they leave a 'fade' just behind them instead of tracing all the way to the attacker. As they are now I agree with several archers on both sides the place would be a mess of trails.
They are not really needed, but so long as they dont offer a huge tactical advantage (and with changes suggested so far I dont think they will) since NGD already made them they may as well see how the community reacts to them on the live servers in real war situations.
tjanex
07-11-2010, 04:45 PM
If they put it in why stay the trails 20 secs? why not just 1 sec... would be nicer otherwise at big wars you will see 1000 of trails...
NotScias
07-11-2010, 07:52 PM
Well the trails are still bugged I think, esp. the blunt and ice ones that stay in air almost indefinely...
Well I think it's a good move, to be able to see immediately what archer is shooting you, but Imo the trails are way too visible. I don't know if you saw yet the fire/lightning ones but it looks more like the archer is shooting you using a sort of super laser from Unreal Tournament...
I would rather see these trails as a party feature: you only see trails of archers in your party and you only see trails of enemy archers targeting a member of your party (with a different color hopefully).
veluchami
07-11-2010, 09:21 PM
I would rather see these trails as a party feature: you only see trails of archers in your party and you only see trails of enemy archers targeting a member of your party (with a different color hopefully).
Knowing NGD you think that will happen? :p
I would rather see these trails as a party feature: you only see trails of archers in your party and you only see trails of enemy archers targeting a member of your party (with a different color hopefully).
Nice idea, make parties more useful.
I agree that they will give an advantage to people who have trails turned on, but I dont think its game breaking. You can already tell whos being shot if see their health move or the impact animation when the hit lands, this will just also show who is shooting who a bit more.
It's not so much that you can tell whether or not someone is being shot, but that you can tell from which direction the shot is coming from. There is a very clear difference between attacks which do give away your location, and those which don't. For example - I'm a warlock from Alsius. Syrtis has Menirah. I run and hide in the ditch near Menirah fort, within attacking range of the enemy, but out of visual range of them. A lot of warlock spells don't give away our location - terror, golem fist, lightning, stalagmite, mana burn, etc. So, I manage to make careful use of those spells to deal damage without Syrtis figuring out where I'm attacking from. It's the same case for archers - normal hits and some spells, at least. But with arrow trails, all that goes away.
Kyrottimus
07-12-2010, 02:19 PM
It's not so much that you can tell whether or not someone is being shot, but that you can tell from which direction the shot is coming from. There is a very clear difference between attacks which do give away your location, and those which don't. For example - I'm a warlock from Alsius. Syrtis has Menirah. I run and hide in the ditch near Menirah fort, within attacking range of the enemy, but out of visual range of them. A lot of warlock spells don't give away our location - terror, golem fist, lightning, stalagmite, mana burn, etc. So, I manage to make careful use of those spells to deal damage without Syrtis figuring out where I'm attacking from. It's the same case for archers - normal hits and some spells, at least. But with arrow trails, all that goes away.
If warriors don't get the luxury of anonymous attack locations, I don't mages and archers should.
Anyone who's shot a bow (or seen the Archer's Paradox) can see the arrow in flight. That much is a nice addition to simulate.
As far as mages, well, they're slow. The fact that archers have high-speed and evasion for escaping means that invisible arrows are a bit too much of an advantage to them IMO.
tjanex
07-12-2010, 04:06 PM
And they die quick especially hunters... I think they are good but they need more Regnum and less time duration just 1 second you see a normal arrow only fly a second than it reached target you can't see his trail 20 seconds...
UmarilsStillHere
07-12-2010, 04:09 PM
1 second you see a normal arrow only fly a second than it reached target you can't see his trail 20 seconds...
I agree with this, imo make them more like staff shots, the 'trail' shouldent trace all the way from the bow to a target 30m away, it just dosnt look right.
If warriors don't get the luxury of anonymous attack locations, I don't mages and archers should.
This is a lame excuse. Each class has plus and minus.
Xia made a good point about arrows trails, it modifies the way we fight, and this is perhaps not intended.
If you want to see this change as a balancing change, you can, but it isn't, it's just a visual effect following the one added recently (weapons trails for warriors).
But note trails on a barb axe don't change anything from tactical POV.
To be clear, reducing tactical possibilities for any class is a bad move, especially in a game that has only one positive point: the war.
Personally, i dislike this move, not aesthetically but tactically.
MalaTempora
07-12-2010, 05:30 PM
the best thing NGD could do (imvho) is to add NAILED arrow on target and on ground staying for a min... so maybe i cant see the trail but i can see on my
body from where the arrows come..
(indeed i would really love to see arrow nailed on body... and when blocked
staying on front of my shield..)
this would be very very cool and useful (to see from where the toltard ambush :D)
just my 2 cents,
otherwise, to return on topic, i like them too... (any add that reduce the
imbalance of arrow-thrower is welcome )
tjanex
07-12-2010, 07:23 PM
the best thing NGD could do (imvho) is to add NAILED arrow on target and on ground staying for a min... so maybe i cant see the trail but i can see on my
body from where the arrows come..
(indeed i would really love to see arrow nailed on body... and when blocked
staying on front of my shield..)
I'm sorry but I rather be tracked by the arrows than I'm a walking arrow holder :superpusso:
KryHavoK
07-12-2010, 07:39 PM
I'm not seeing the arrow trails on Amun. I don't know if it's my video cards, or is there a box to check to see them.
My Nvidia card is a few years old and runs on fixed pipe, so maybe that's why I don't see them on that computer.
My Raedon card is running Shader 2, I would think that would be enough but maybe not.
Any ideas?
Kyrottimus
07-13-2010, 12:52 AM
This is a lame excuse. Each class has plus and minus.
And right now archers and mages have way more pluses than warriors do, and way fewer minuses. Hence my appeal to this argument with balance in mind.
If you disagree I suggest leveling a warrior to 50 and warring with it for a week or two. The difference is pretty profound.
Xia made a good point about arrows trails, it modifies the way we fight, and this is perhaps not intended.
If you want to see this change as a balancing change, you can, but it isn't, it's just a visual effect following the one added recently (weapons trails for warriors).
But note trails on a barb axe don't change anything from tactical POV.
Agreed, it does modify the way you fight, but invisible arrows have been around far too long and always have offered a tactical advantage that was already augmented by superior range and speed. Ethereal arrow notwithstanding, I don't think archers should get any invisible attacks.
And regardless of what you may think regarding "intent" based on a simple visual effect, one wrought with implications such as this (showing origin of the shooter) will invariably alter the balance. So yes, in fact, it is (perhaps indirectly) a balancing change.
To be clear, reducing tactical possibilities for any class is a bad move, especially in a game that has only one positive point: the war.
It's not reducing tactical possibilities, only shifting their focus. For example, spells such as Ethereal Arrow would give the the marksman an invisible attack (as it is a spiritual arrow), which can still be applied as such.
Also, Hunters already have camouflage and stalker and insane speed.
Personally, i dislike this move, not aesthetically but tactically.
I like it, as archers already have the range and speed (and damage resistance) advantage over mages and barbs (and 2/3rds of the time knights).
I'd love to see things like Ensnaring Arrow, Ambush and Shield Piercing/Dual Shot get trails as well.
Umaril said:
I agree with this, imo make them more like staff shots, the 'trail' shouldent trace all the way from the bow to a target 30m away, it just dosnt look right.
+1
I don't think the trail should have such a long-lasting streak. Something that is there for a flash of a moment is gone. People need to have a visual indicator of their nearest threat but should learn to have rapid perceptions, and not have their hands held as to where the threat is.
And right now archers and mages have way more pluses than warriors do, and way fewer minuses. Hence my appeal to this argument with balance in mind.
If you disagree I suggest leveling a warrior to 50 and warring with it for a week or two. The difference is pretty profound.
...
The point i disagree is that arrows trail were meant to improve balance, and as such arrow trails are a bad way to improve it somehow.
Still i agree warriors need more work, but by improving them, not killing the fun of playing other classes.
The class balancing issue has to be handled, but weapon/arrow trails aren't implemented for that, here it is an unwanted side effect, and such thing should not occur (you may think it is positive this time, but still any balance change has to be thought twice).
Revealing position of an archer by tracing arrow trails reduce tactical possibilities, final dot.
It is a bit like if, irl, snipers were using tracer bullets... quite stupid.
Currently, in game, it doesn't take that long to locate an archer (at least, for me, but your mileage may vary...)
tjanex
07-13-2010, 12:34 PM
They look way better now :P
UmarilsStillHere
07-13-2010, 01:05 PM
Far better :)
Kyrottimus
07-13-2010, 04:59 PM
The point i disagree is that arrows trail were meant to improve balance, and as such arrow trails are a bad way to improve it somehow.
I agree and highly doubt the arrow-trails were ever thought of by NGD as a mechanism for balance.
Still i agree warriors need more work, but by improving them, not killing the fun of playing other classes.
I agree, that angle of approach could (and should) be taken. But I'll explain later in my reply why I still prefer this change.
Revealing position of an archer by tracing arrow trails reduce tactical possibilities, final dot.
It does, but being an avid traditional archer myself (using a symmetrical Magyar horse bow), there is no such thing as an invisible arrow.
I realize this is a fantasy MMO, but even in all the fantasy movies like LotR's the archers' arrows are seen in flight. Even the Legolas fanboys would agree with me on this. In RO, the arrows seen in the quivers on the backs of the players all have white fletching. Thus I'd imagine a white streak to the target would be appropriate from the fletching.
It is a bit like if, irl, snipers were using tracer bullets... quite stupid.
Indeed as tracer-fire works on both sides. To see where your shots are going, and others to see where they're coming from. But archers use arrows going around 300-400 feet per second, not a .300 Win Mag going 2900 feet per second at the muzzle.
Currently, in game, it doesn't take that long to locate an archer (at least, for me, but your mileage may vary...)
True, in small-scale fights. But in a large maelstrom of battle it's hard to pinpoint where you're being shot from in the zerg of 40+ along the horizon, let alone target whomever is shooting you.
The fact that NGD put physical, tangible arrow-filled quivers on the backs of archers (note how the arrows are not invisible), only lends to the idea that archers aren't supposed to be shooting invisible arrows.
I'm not advocating some long white streak that stays in the air for a few seconds. I'm talking a fast blur that lasts for less than .25 seconds. Just long enough for those with a quick eye to discern the threat's origin.
tikinho
07-13-2010, 06:23 PM
Weapon trails for archers give advantage to the players that are using shader 3.0 and can see the trails. - The players with better hardware.
:/
Arafails
07-14-2010, 09:23 AM
The problem that it clearly gives yet more tactical advantage to those with better hardware is grounds alone to not have something like this. It's almost as bad as having a premium RADAR device.
If, if the existing texture-based indicator is given a longer fade time, and altered such that it's easier to see the direction of origin, it might be an idea.
I agree that if this "feature" takes up too much hardware resources then it shouldn't be implemented IMO. A lot of us are already running very low settings just to make the game work. This will give too much of an advantage for users with high-end machines.
If however NGD can optimize this feature well enough not to cause massive FPS drops on large fights, then I'd go for my party suggestion a few posts up.
I'm afraid that on huge fights, this "feature" will become more of a visual hindrance. I'd prefer to see this only within a party.
UmarilsStillHere
07-14-2010, 09:29 AM
The 'new' trails only go about 3 or 4 ft from the bow, so I dont see how they can give any advantage other than maybe seeing the player has X type of greater gem in their bow.
As with warrior trails, they can be turned off (I think)
PT_DaAr_PT
07-14-2010, 09:58 AM
Weapon trails for archers give advantage to the players that are using shader 3.0 and can see the trails. - The players with better hardware.
:/
Fuck that, I've been playing on fixed pipeline for long time and never complained about the fact that I can't see certain buffs like AoO. So this feature won't arm anyone.
Lord_Latem
07-14-2010, 10:59 AM
The 'new' trails only go about 3 or 4 ft from the bow, so I dont see how they can give any advantage other than maybe seeing the player has X type of greater gem in their bow.
As with warrior trails, they can be turned off (I think)
I checked it out last night (night for me) and it looked like it went from bow to target. However, I did not notice any difference in the appearance of the trail with varying damage types (maybe I need to increase quality of my graphics). Also, I found that I had to get closer than normal to be within range of the target, even after the visual image indicating that the target was in range. For some strange reason I was not able to change bows using my hotbar setup, but I digress...
Anyhow, I believe you are correct in that the trails can be turned off. Overall I am of the opinion that the trails do not present a significant advange, or disadvantage. This is based on the fact that when I am being hit, I generally know where it originates. Then again, I could be entirely wrong.
UmarilsStillHere
07-14-2010, 11:30 AM
Hmm Ill check again (loading amun now) but last night the trails seemed much shorter, though they did used to go from the bow all the way to the target when this thread first started. I cant test the gem effects since I dont have a bow with a great gem, but a bow with a great fire gem for example should produce a 'firey' trail. I dont think the other gems As/Cs/non-element damage produce a unique trail.
You need to re-set the items in your bar and then they will work, weird Amun bug thats been around for years :) Some archers in INQ have commented range seems about 5m less than before though we have not tested this is any way.
EDIT: seems they changed it back, though the trails are thinner they still trace all the way, personally I prefered the short trails.
Lord_Latem
07-14-2010, 12:00 PM
^^
Thanks for the update and the info regarding the hotbar. I have some bows that have various magical damage gems, but as I noted...I did not see a difference. I may have to work with my graphics settings a bit. Relative to the range, a 5m range reduction seems about right.
warriors are in a disadvantage anyway so this may even the odds for them.
sound fair for me to see where the attack came from.
________
Shower young (http://www.fucktube.com/categories/993/young/videos/1)
Depending on how this is implemented, it can also work as a good way to focus archer fire to single targets. Just set a "lead" archer and hit everyone he hits.
I re-tested on current Amun.
Arrow trails don't show up with shader 2.0.
With shader 4.0, i have long trails (from bow to target), please don't do it, this is awful from tactical POV.
Tracing a line between archer and his target is clearly not the way to go.
It doesn't make sense.
tjanex
07-18-2010, 10:04 AM
Also only people with a good video cart has this advantage... :thumb_down:
Greyman_tle
07-18-2010, 11:40 AM
At the moment if your the target then you know who's hitting you, but not from which direction, unless they use certain spells - which tbh is allmost guarenteed. If the trails are short enuf, say 1-2m in length, then you get additional direction info for when your being hit by normals.
This seems to me to be a sensible addition as it will only really help in a small number of cases - ie when your being flanked or attacked from behind, which you really would/should be aware off - 'oh look an arrow in my back. I wonder where that came from?'. In a fort/bridge/open field fight then the direction is pretty much always in front of you so your not gaining any extra info anyway.
From an archers point of view, you/we get a very slight nerf compared to the other classes - obviously, but not one that i can argue against as we are both attacker and target - we gain the same direction info as everyone else, but lose a small amount to the ability to attack repeatedly from the flanks/behind. But as most players scan around this is not going to alter than amount of times you can do this anyway.
As long as the trail is kept very short - so it looks like an arrow - then i also dont see how it could be used as a 'tracer' for concentrated fire, and archers allready concentrate fire.
Also, id assume that the smaller it is, the less processing it will require so more people can see them.
I'm all for it, AS LONG as the 'trails' are small enuf.
tjanex
07-18-2010, 02:57 PM
yeah small trails :thumb_up:
power-digital14
07-18-2010, 03:20 PM
nice idea, maje parties more eseful...
Here is how arrows trail is looking for now on Amun (today).
I'm clearly against such trail, arrows are not fireworks.
It has negative tactical implications for sure.
From an archers point of view, you/we get a very slight nerf compared to the other classes - obviously, but not one that i can argue against as we are both attacker and target - we gain the same direction info as everyone else, but lose a small amount to the ability to attack repeatedly from the flanks/behind. But as most players scan around this is not going to alter than amount of times you can do this anyway.
In the current implementation, this isn't a "very slight nerf".
As an example, i had a nice fight yesterday at doorless L4 Shaana on Horus, i hit my lovely enemies a long time before they notice me and bother to send someone to make me stop.
With current implementation of trails, my position will be so obvious i doubt i last that long.
No, some players don't scan around enough, this is their own fault. With trails, no need to scan, position is immediatly obvious.
Greyman_tle
07-23-2010, 06:41 PM
In the current implementation, this isn't a "very slight nerf".
As an example, i had a nice fight yesterday at doorless L4 Shaana on Horus, i hit my lovely enemies a long time before they notice me and bother to send someone to make me stop.
With current implementation of trails, my position will be so obvious i doubt i last that long.
No, some players don't scan around enough, this is their own fault. With trails, no need to scan, position is immediatly obvious.
As I said
As long as the trail is kept very short - so it looks like an arrow - then i also dont see how it could be used as a 'tracer' for concentrated fire, and archers allready concentrate fire.
Also, id assume that the smaller it is, the less processing it will require so more people can see them.
I'm all for it, AS LONG as the 'trails' are small enuf.
Yes I agree completely that the current system is...um...pants :sifflote:
veluchami
07-25-2010, 08:02 PM
I am kinda sceptical of this update, for very different reasons stated above.
I play both a barb and a marks.
This 'feature' is gonna skew realm balance more in favor of Syrtis. They having more archers, means firepower can be concentrated on one target in a fortwar.
When I play with a group of marksmen, I target the person who is being hit by most of my marksman mates, so we can ensure the kill. Any experienced player knows its better to team up against a single target rather than trying to kill your own target.
As a warrior now, I have no way to hide behind the incompetence of (some) Syrtis archers, as with this update, it doesn't take experience to hit the target that everyone is hitting.
Gideon_Slack
07-25-2010, 11:00 PM
I am kinda sceptical of this update, for very different reasons stated above.
I play both a barb and a marks.
This 'feature' is gonna skew realm balance more in favor of Syrtis. They having more archers, means firepower can be concentrated on one target in a fortwar.
When I play with a group of marksmen, I target the person who is being hit by most of my marksman mates, so we can ensure the kill. Any experienced player knows its better to team up against a single target rather than trying to kill your own target.
As a warrior now, I have no way to hide behind the incompetence of (some) Syrtis archers, as with this update, it doesn't take experience to hit the target that everyone is hitting.
It looks like arrow trails are implementing "raid assist" by the backdoor.
Probably what will happen is ranged characters will follow the senior archer in the party. He will fire first, indicating the target; then the rest will pile on.
Obviously, this will mean for more concentrating of fire power, and also some satisfaction of team play. As has been said, this is at the expense of the "run and gun" archer who will be more obvious.
Still, if you want to implement group targets without breaking the immersion of the game (with arrows or glowing circles on the ground), this is the way to do it.
veluchami
07-26-2010, 08:17 AM
You like it because you are an archer. My archer side likes this, but on the other hand my barb side loathes this. Now it becomes too easy for the noobs to pick the right target. Because the better archer has done it already for them.
Against an archer realm like syrtis, you get no second chance as a warrior.
It is tactically gives an unfair advantage to marksmen. I really don't understand why all the marksmen here cry about it :S
It looks like arrow trails are implementing "raid assist" by the backdoor.
Probably what will happen is ranged characters will follow the senior archer in the party. He will fire first, indicating the target; then the rest will pile on.
Obviously, this will mean for more concentrating of fire power, and also some satisfaction of team play. As has been said, this is at the expense of the "run and gun" archer who will be more obvious.
Still, if you want to implement group targets without breaking the immersion of the game (with arrows or glowing circles on the ground), this is the way to do it.
Veluchami wrote a good point.
Target designation is too easy with all those trails.
I vote for removing of these long trails, but add a power to be used by archers (tricks tree), to designate a target.
tjanex
07-26-2010, 10:27 AM
I like the trails and I don't think they will give any advantage to the archers themselfs. And as knight/barb you just have to be aware of the envoirement.
And as knight/barb you just have to be aware of the envoirement.
I don't understand. With "invisible arrows", knight/barb has to be more aware of their environment than with these laser beams. In a fort war, the advantage of easier target selection may slightly outweigh the disadvantage of standing out in the crowd, but in smaller group fights and while hunting, there is no advantage.
And as knight/barb you just have to be aware of the envoirement.
LOL, i think they are, but with trails, a barb will die even faster from marks, for sure.
From archer POV, i don't like trails as already said here, because they reduce tactical possibilities.
So from warrior, mage or archer POV, trails are bad ;)
UmarilsStillHere
07-26-2010, 11:59 AM
Archers used to use Death Sentance to 'mark' a target because it was a obvious highlighter for a target and made attacking the target more effective, there are already ways to mark targets if you pay a bit of attention.
Constant obvious spells like mana burn are also good, if any spell should be a 'marker' then Death Sentance should be changed so the target is constantly highlighted by the 'target' effect and the damage magnifier should be increased (now that everyone is doing less damage then back when it was 50% a higher bonus isnt as bad, 50% is still a bit much but 30%~ would be fair)
linearguild
07-26-2010, 12:41 PM
Against an archer realm like syrtis, you get no second chance as a warrior.
It is tactically gives an unfair advantage to marksmen. I really don't understand why all the marksmen here cry about it :S
Focusing fire was already possible through several ways without broadcasting the attackers' locations. I wouldn't mind eye candy with shorter trails (shorter in length and in duration), but it's annoying to be forced to fire these tracer arrows since it reduces the possible archer tactics.
I don't think these trails automatically mean better targeting for archers anyway. You're assuming that people will actually follow that senior archer, but self-absorbed people won't magically get teamwork sense just because NGD implemented weapon trails I think. It's more likely that some excitable guy will start shooting the nearest target (like, say, a rushing Ao1 knight) and then all the other excitable guys will copy this target.
tjanex
07-26-2010, 01:43 PM
That means more rushing oO?
metsie
07-26-2010, 03:12 PM
Long trails sure makes it harder to hide near forts and shoot enemies from behind while using landscape as advantage. (like when 2 enemy realms are fighting and archer goes there alone to shoot them from good spot)
and in group fights sounds like it makes it too easy to target same target as rest of archers. I personally like that it requires some extra effort to watch who is being shot and then start to shoot him, not just watch some fancy effect.
Gideon_Slack
07-28-2010, 08:41 PM
Archer weapon trails could also give advantage to those with better computers.
Many people turn down their graphics in order to play in group battles. If this means they have to turn off trails and can't see them, they will be at a disadvantage.
tjanex
07-29-2010, 08:26 AM
And also it is not a must why would NGD implent trails that we are able to see from a disctance with shader 3-4 while others can't see them. They give an advantage and they give people with a bad computer a disadvantage for something that is not even a must.
Please NGD just don't do it.
And also it is not a must why would NGD implent trails that we are able to see from a disctance with shader 3-4 while others can't see them. They give an advantage and they give people with a bad computer a disadvantage for something that is not even a must.
Please NGD just don't do it.
Agreed.
Please NGD just skip this change, it has not enough positive (i see just one, eye candy for high end users) and many negative points (listed in this thread).
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.