Longbow is NOT 1500 Range

[Dralor.3701]

@"Arcaedus.7290" said:Just had a friend help me test the range of Ranger's LB on flat ground. The range is between 1840 and 1870.

Method 1:

• Medium training golem as target.
• Stretch of ground: between the bridge and the training golems (area with warrior, guardian, revenant and necro class npcs in the pvp lobby).
• Maximum range determination: Continually backed up and remained still before firing arrows. At the range at which arrows truck, and then a single quick press of the s key resulted in "Out of Range," the location was marked with necro marks/ranger traps. Returned to this precise point before continuing.
• Closed the gap between Max range point and target using skills.-The accuracy of the skill's listed range was matched against other skills of similar listed range.-Swoop (bird pet + soulbeast form) = 1200 range (accuracy tested against 1200 range teleport and 1200 non-arcing projectile attacks).-Instinctive Engage (dagger 3) = 400 range (tested against crippling leap - canine pet + soulbeast form)
• So at this point I was already at 1600 range and only needed one more skill to close the gap. Here are the skills I then attempted to use:-Whirling Defense = 180 radius. Out of Range-Maul = 220 range. Out of Range-Kick (Rock Gazelle + soulbeast form) = 270 range. Successfully hit-Wing buffet (wyvern pet + soulbeast form) = 240 range. Out of Range.-All skills tested in triplicate, obtained the same result all 3 times.

Method 2: Same as above, but repeated on a player in a guild hall duel arena (Windswept Haven. Ground is pretty flat). Same results.

If we assume 1850 range, that's a 23% range buffer. What do people think, is this too much?

Honestly it probably is a L2P issue if people are arguing over 1850 range (an "unfair" 23% range buffer) and 1650 range (a 10% range buffer) being the difference in the outcome of the fight. However, I think it's still a significant balance issue that arcing projectiles receive such a large range buffer in comparison to the non-arcing projectiles (which essentially have no range buffer). I don't really have much comment on elevation boosting the striking distance of longbow since that's a more complex issue to address.

Entirely possibly I’m mistaken but I believe some of it also had to do with projectile speed, arcing (theoretically) missing more often than one of the straight projectiles like the rifle.

[BlaqueFyre.5678]

@Dralor.3701 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Dralor.3701 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Dralor.3701 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Dralor.3701 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:

@"CantoGuy.6459" said:I don't care if it's not viable in zergs this auto attacking/rapid firing kitten is at least 1800 range and is just about the most annoying and most heavily abused weapon in the game! Please remove that 300 range buffer on this overused weapon

Some of you have not been paying attention to the fact that these arcing arrows have been traveling farther since beta and launch...

Comment from 2014...

“Muscly_Geek• Mar 24, 2014, 2:21 PMYou prompted me to take a closer look. I can't find the Dev post that explained it, but essentially all arcing projectiles have a longer valid range than listed, in the sense that the projectile will hit instead of an Out Of Range error.

The projectile actually travels father than 1500 even if you're standing at 1500, due to the arc. If the projectile was only valid for 1500 (or with a slight increase to account for the arc when your target is at the same altitude), there would be instances where a target within range would nonetheless result in an Out Of Range error.

It's not so much a bug (as in an unintended error in the code), as a deliberate mechanic to accommodate the physics of the projectile, which results in a beneficial effect. It's been around since Beta, people are very aware of it, and ANet has given no indication that they intend to change it.”

Lol still can’t back anything up with Dev posts, that quote literally doesn’t prove anything that it is intended, so trying to claim a random nobody on the Internet is proof that it’s intended interaction.

Again there have been a lot of unintended interactions that were in game since beta that Anet has been Just now getting to fixing, so trying to use that as proof of it being intended is also a complete fallacy, so please provide a Dev comment that it’s intended, I will wait for that one, again 1200 and 1500 are the max ranges listed not some other further range.To Me... It just seems like it would be such a major unintended action that has gone on for so long (years)... That I think if they wanted to make the longbow shoot like other weapons, the ones that don't seem to arc, to simplify things... well common sense tells me that they would have done so.

Common sense says 1500 = 1500 and 1200=1200I get it. I think we all do. I mean you write this like in every reply so far... but it's not as simple as that. That's just taking something at

face value

though. If It were common sense then the wiki would not have bothered listing "

can actually hit targets outside of the maximum range

", People would not be making video's trying to prove otherwise (which actually support the wiki in the part of the statement listed before) and ultimately people would not be going back and forth over this... if it were common sense. That being said, there is more to it than just numbers. If they added a better in game description... well that's another story and I believe it wouldn't hurt to look into.

But I understand certain people need every advantage they can get.So speaking for myself... none of my characters use a longbow at this time. That being said, this whole thing doesn't affect me presently =)... also I don't think we even wanna begin talking about what classes have what advantages... This isn't a one way street just FYI lol.

I’m just waiting for an actual Dev to make a statement to see if it’s intended or not.

Yea I can't wait anymore ether than you feel the need to rewrite this statement multiple times lol.

This is from an earlier reply...

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Just sounds like players are scared to lose the advantage of a big since as of yet no one can provide a statement from Anet saying that the overperforming Range is intended, must feel sad to have to rely on a bug sod badly.

So here you project the range advantage to be a "

bug

" as if it were a matter of fact. In which case, you just answered your own question on whether or not it's intentional. As "bugs" are something unintentional. Other than that, I'm curious where and what Dev you got the information from saying that this is a bug :o

Again the Wiki is maintained by players and lists thing that players find the skills to do again they have been removing interactions skills were doing since beta recently guess what the Wiki Stated those skills did those interactions, oh no with your logic they were totally intended interactions..

That's not what I said at all lol... I said all the video's and so forth... just prove that part of the statement that was given on the wiki... that is my logic there. That being said I never said it was intended ether... I said I have a hard time believing it is unintended as like I pointed out before... "if they wanted to make the longbow shoot like other weapons, the ones that don't seem to arc, to simplify things... well common sense tells me that they would have done so."

Besides you already answered your own question about it being a bug... so I'm curious where and what dev you got that information from so that I may see as well.

Nice contradiction you got here, what’s the opposite Of unintended?

That being said I never said it was intended ether... I said I have a hard time believing it is unintended as like I pointed out before

So the issue I have is you have multiple skills some say 1200 some say 1500 they go beyond the maximum range while you have others that don’t. And we have the Dev Tyler Chapman who worked with the PvP and Balance teams stating all skills Melee and Ranged are supposed to have a 15% range buffer which is clearly missing from a lot of skills, so either the bug is those skills are lacking the buffer don’t have the buffer for all those arcing projectiles are intended because no one has yet to a post the Fabled Dev statement that they claim states Arcing Projectiles having extended range over other projectiles.

All I’m looking for is Dev answering if it’s intended that certain projectiles go much further than others even though they have the same max range listed or if it’s the other Projectiles missing their range buffer.

again commonsense says 1500 equals 1500 not 1500 is greater than 1500 so both 1500 should be treated the same and commonsense says a 1200 is a lot shorter than 1500 but with certain projectiles that is clearly not the case so again that’s all I’m looking for clarification .

Tyler Chapman’s quote:

“Intended. All ranged and melee skills have a 15% buffer range to take account for tracking.”

See how that says all and not some or a few?

You quoted a dev who doesn’t know what he was talking about, I believe he hadn’t worked at anet since like 2014?

And again who are you?

Told you just some dude who used to work there, idk if I have any archived dev tagged posts because I never posted much on the forums. Was mostly known in game on SoR.

Anyway, guy you are quoting was a QA embed not one of the designers. Again no disrespect intended but he was wrong.

And who’s to say you are right? Again he was a QA embed for both the PvP and Balance teams which seems a lot more credible than “some dude that used to work for Anet”

No doubt, but he still didn’t know what he was talking about. Guy was good at the game but not very knowledgeable about mechanics, IMO. :)

And again where is your proof that shows what you say is true and he did not know what he was talking about? The same can be said about you “some dude that used to work at Anet”

Hence why I am looking for an actual dev to clear this all up.

I get it, I mean I can’t give you more proof than what I’ve said. But if you look at many of the other posts above, with people testing, it just confirms what I’ve said on the subject from the beginning. :/

Which those don’t prove anything, except their is a missing buffer which was stated by a Dev that is supposed to be on all Skills Melee and Ranged, so yeah, and there is nothing currently to disprove that.

[Arcaedus.7290]

@Dralor.3701 said:

@"Arcaedus.7290" said:Just had a friend help me test the range of Ranger's LB on flat ground. The range is between 1840 and 1870.

Method 1:

• Medium training golem as target.
• Stretch of ground: between the bridge and the training golems (area with warrior, guardian, revenant and necro class npcs in the pvp lobby).
• Maximum range determination: Continually backed up and remained still before firing arrows. At the range at which arrows truck, and then a single quick press of the s key resulted in "Out of Range," the location was marked with necro marks/ranger traps. Returned to this precise point before continuing.
• Closed the gap between Max range point and target using skills.-The accuracy of the skill's listed range was matched against other skills of similar listed range.-Swoop (bird pet + soulbeast form) = 1200 range (accuracy tested against 1200 range teleport and 1200 non-arcing projectile attacks).-Instinctive Engage (dagger 3) = 400 range (tested against crippling leap - canine pet + soulbeast form)
• So at this point I was already at 1600 range and only needed one more skill to close the gap. Here are the skills I then attempted to use:-Whirling Defense = 180 radius. Out of Range-Maul = 220 range. Out of Range-Kick (Rock Gazelle + soulbeast form) = 270 range. Successfully hit-Wing buffet (wyvern pet + soulbeast form) = 240 range. Out of Range.-All skills tested in triplicate, obtained the same result all 3 times.

Method 2: Same as above, but repeated on a player in a guild hall duel arena (Windswept Haven. Ground is pretty flat). Same results.

If we assume 1850 range, that's a 23% range buffer. What do people think, is this too much?

Honestly it probably is a L2P issue if people are arguing over 1850 range (an "unfair" 23% range buffer) and 1650 range (a 10% range buffer) being the difference in the outcome of the fight. However, I think it's still a significant balance issue that arcing projectiles receive such a large range buffer in comparison to the non-arcing projectiles (which essentially have no range buffer). I don't really have much comment on elevation boosting the striking distance of longbow since that's a more complex issue to address.

Entirely possibly I’m mistaken but I believe some of it also had to do with projectile speed, arcing (theoretically) missing more often than one of the straight projectiles like the rifle.

I know that's the reason for the range buffer, but it's hard to argue for or against nerfing this buffer since we can only make hypothetical conjectures. The kind of test that would need to happen would be as follows:

Ranger A: Range buffer set to 0%Ranger B: Ranger buffer set to somewhere between 0% and the current 23%Ranger C: Range buffer set to the current 23%.

Precisely position all 3 rangers from targets, 1500 range away. Rangers will continuously fire as the target (with and without swiftness or superspeed) constantly strafes to the left and right as rapidly or slowly as possible (depending on the test condition).

If there are significantly different results in the amount of times the target is able to avoid the projectiles, then the argument is that the range buffer is necessary. If there is no difference, then the range buffer may be necessary (to account for target avoiding projectile by moving away from ranger) but should not be set at 23%. Even if the range buffer is necessary, how large it should be is still up for debate.

It's something Anet would have to test. I guess that's the point of this thread then. Open discussion about the issue and hope they see it as a potential balance issue and decide to test for themselves.

[Dralor.3701]

Agreed, Arcaedus.

[Justine.6351]

Extended bow range has been in guild wars since 2005. Once you start getting beyond listed range those arrows have a lower chance to connect.This pretty much applies to ALL non-"bullet" projectiles in guild wars 2. Ranger Longbow amplifies this but all that I am going to say about that is, yeah and? It's the archery class.

[ChartFish.1308]

Why do people find the need to complain about this? Sure ranger longbow is +1500, but so is ele staff and war bow +1200.Long range is our thing. And when is that extra 300 gonna matter? When you're running away from an already lost fight? On engage? Believe it or not you'll catch up to the ranger in no time. And most rangers don't use our unblockables (if we're even running any) at the beginning of a engage.

[reddie.5861]

@Ubi.4136 said:Things that go longer than their listed range is quite extensive.Few examples:ranger longbow autoguardian longbow autoele staff fire auto

If OP is asking for all of them to be fixed at the same time, than sure. Make ALL skills cap at their max range and just disappear without hitting anything when they pass their listed range.

staff fire auto is so slow on auto if one dies to this u might aswell rage quit.about longbow i doubt guardian is the problem i also doubt ranger is the problem.

the amount of GOOD played rangers are very rare in WvW most of the rangers are like a bad thief with long bow they just wanna pew pew pew but forget to run and die in like 2/3 hits.

[Dralor.3701]

If they are being objective I think their argument is the tooltips are not accurate.

Hopefully nobody thinks ranger is OP with the current state of the meta.

[Turk.5460]

@niconori.7235 said:

@CantoGuy.6459 said:

@"snake.6051" said:The max hit range is about 2000 distance but the autotargeting stops at 1500 so you will get hit if you stay still or run in a straight line.As a ranger if you use action camera you can aim youre arrows to actually hit targets at verry long range but it requires high skill cos you need to aim and lead youre targets just like fireing a sniper rifle in a fps only a little harder.Things like these actually make the game more cool and add needed depth.

Action camera? If the guy in this video who is firing a longbow auto from over 2000 range is using action camera then they wouldn't be able to move their mouse cursor...which they clearly do in the video

...On equal level it hits 1500...

No it doesn't, it hits further on equal level. That's the whole purpose of this thread???

[Aeolus.3615]

@Dralor.3701 said:If they are being objective I think their argument is the tooltips are not accurate.

Hopefully nobody thinks ranger is OP with the current state of the meta.

With some of the stupid design on class skills that PoF added, borked up range mechanic from ranger it becomes a balance thingy.

When bugs actually are better than Anet dev's.....changes or decisions, issue is some classes like hammer rev.. sometimes i got my target arorund 400-800 and it states out of range, or obstructed in plain sight(open field)....

[zinkz.7045]

@"reddie.5861" said:the amount of GOOD played rangers are very rare in WvW...

So just like most players in WvW and WvW guilds then, you know like people who stream themselves blobbing on their scourge, demonstrating levels of "skill" that would have Helseth and co falling off their chair with laughter. ;)

[Shadowcat.2680]

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:

@"CantoGuy.6459" said:I don't care if it's not viable in zergs this auto attacking/rapid firing kitten is at least 1800 range and is just about the most annoying and most heavily abused weapon in the game! Please remove that 300 range buffer on this overused weapon

Some of you have not been paying attention to the fact that these arcing arrows have been traveling farther since beta and launch...

Comment from 2014...

“Muscly_Geek• Mar 24, 2014, 2:21 PMYou prompted me to take a closer look. I can't find the Dev post that explained it, but essentially all arcing projectiles have a longer valid range than listed, in the sense that the projectile will hit instead of an Out Of Range error.

The projectile actually travels father than 1500 even if you're standing at 1500, due to the arc. If the projectile was only valid for 1500 (or with a slight increase to account for the arc when your target is at the same altitude), there would be instances where a target within range would nonetheless result in an Out Of Range error.

It's not so much a bug (as in an unintended error in the code), as a deliberate mechanic to accommodate the physics of the projectile, which results in a beneficial effect. It's been around since Beta, people are very aware of it, and ANet has given no indication that they intend to change it.”

Lol still can’t back anything up with Dev posts, that quote literally doesn’t prove anything that it is intended, so trying to claim a random nobody on the Internet is proof that it’s intended interaction.

Again there have been a lot of unintended interactions that were in game since beta that Anet has been Just now getting to fixing, so trying to use that as proof of it being intended is also a complete fallacy, so please provide a Dev comment that it’s intended, I will wait for that one, again 1200 and 1500 are the max ranges listed not some other further range.To Me... It just seems like it would be such a major unintended action that has gone on for so long (years)... That I think if they wanted to make the longbow shoot like other weapons, the ones that don't seem to arc, to simplify things... well common sense tells me that they would have done so.

Common sense says 1500 = 1500 and 1200=1200I get it. I think we all do. I mean you write this like in every reply so far... but it's not as simple as that. That's just taking something at

face value

though. If It were common sense then the wiki would not have bothered listing "

can actually hit targets outside of the maximum range

", People would not be making video's trying to prove otherwise (which actually support the wiki in the part of the statement listed before) and ultimately people would not be going back and forth over this... if it were common sense. That being said, there is more to it than just numbers. If they added a better in game description... well that's another story and I believe it wouldn't hurt to look into.

But I understand certain people need every advantage they can get.So speaking for myself... none of my characters use a longbow at this time. That being said, this whole thing doesn't affect me presently =)... also I don't think we even wanna begin talking about what classes have what advantages... This isn't a one way street just FYI lol.

I’m just waiting for an actual Dev to make a statement to see if it’s intended or not.

Yea I can't wait anymore ether than you feel the need to rewrite this statement multiple times lol.

This is from an earlier reply...

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Just sounds like players are scared to lose the advantage of a big since as of yet no one can provide a statement from Anet saying that the overperforming Range is intended, must feel sad to have to rely on a bug sod badly.

So here you project the range advantage to be a "

bug

" as if it were a matter of fact. In which case, you just answered your own question on whether or not it's intentional. As "bugs" are something unintentional. Other than that, I'm curious where and what Dev you got the information from saying that this is a bug :o

Again the Wiki is maintained by players and lists thing that players find the skills to do again they have been removing interactions skills were doing since beta recently guess what the Wiki Stated those skills did those interactions, oh no with your logic they were totally intended interactions..

That's not what I said at all lol... I said all the video's and so forth... just prove that part of the statement that was given on the wiki... that is my logic there. That being said I never said it was intended ether... I said I have a hard time believing it is unintended as like I pointed out before... "if they wanted to make the longbow shoot like other weapons, the ones that don't seem to arc, to simplify things... well common sense tells me that they would have done so."

Besides you already answered your own question about it being a bug... so I'm curious where and what dev you got that information from so that I may see as well.

Nice contradiction you got here, what’s the opposite Of unintended?

That being said I never said it was intended ether... I said I have a hard time believing it is unintended as like I pointed out before

So the issue I have is you have multiple skills some say 1200 some say 1500 they go beyond the maximum range while you have others that don’t. And we have the Dev Tyler Chapman who worked with the PvP and Balance teams stating all skills Melee and Ranged are supposed to have a 15% range buffer which is clearly missing from a lot of skills, so either the bug is those skills are lacking the buffer don’t have the buffer for all those arcing projectiles are intended because no one has yet to a post the Fabled Dev statement that they claim states Arcing Projectiles having extended range over other projectiles.

All I’m looking for is Dev answering if it’s intended that certain projectiles go much further than others even though they have the same max range listed or if it’s the other Projectiles missing their range buffer.

again commonsense says 1500 equals 1500 not 1500 is greater than 1500 so both 1500 should be treated the same and commonsense says a 1200 is a lot shorter than 1500 but with certain projectiles that is clearly not the case so again that’s all I’m looking for clarification .

Tyler Chapman’s quote:

“Intended. All ranged and melee skills have a 15% buffer range to take account for tracking.”

See how that says all and not some or a few?

Please stop beating the dead horse that is some supposed quote from some dev that doesn't even work at Anet anymore. If you can't link to the quote, then it's just hearsay at best and likely taken out of context.

[Aeolus.3615]

@zinkz.7045 said:

@"reddie.5861" said:the amount of GOOD played rangers are very rare in WvW...

So just like most players in WvW and WvW guilds then, you know like people who stream themselves blobbing on their scourge, demonstrating levels of "skill" that would have Helseth and co falling off their chair with laughter. ;)

Level of skilll key bashing and mouse cliking and how bad Anet has become ... on the pvp genra... >_<#I guess Anet wants low skills high rewards the more of a lamer behavior u have... :\ while scourging in wvw.. i ment blob.

WvW combat is way to much dependable of scourge stacking the more, the better... and this is a bad design, duno why Anet refuses to accept....IF Anet wants them to be spam based Anet needs to make them cone based rather than aoe everything on easy mode.

Low spam capability -> AOE skillsClass weapons and utilities based on spam -> Cone or other form.

[Cogbyrn.7283]

It's really easy to remember that time you got caught by a Ranger's LB #2 and basically went from 100-0, then use that as the foundation for wanting change. That's just how the game is though.

[Aeolus.3615]

@Cogbyrn.7283 said:It's really easy to remember that time you got caught by a Ranger's LB #2 and basically went from 100-0, then use that as the foundation for wanting change. That's just how the game is though.

Ill just block.... dead...Ill just use shield 5... deadIll just use sanctuary... deadill just use Wall of Refelction... deadill use all above.... deadIll use a medi or medi DH build that melts targets easilly and can be carried with it... Win.

Ranger unblockables uptime is another story of bad counter design, unblockables should only effect blocks and not count everything like reflection and absortion.That another stupidity from Anet developers... they could make classes that would punish reflective skills, absortions skills etc... no, fake balance is better...

[Cogbyrn.7283]

@Aeolus.3615 said:

@Cogbyrn.7283 said:It's really easy to remember that time you got caught by a Ranger's LB #2 and basically went from 100-0, then use that as the foundation for wanting change. That's just how the game is though.

Ill just block.... dead...Ill just use shield 5... deadIll just use sanctuary... deadill just use Wall of Refelction... deadill use all above.... deadIll use a medi or medi DH build that melts targets easilly and can be carried with it... Win.

Ranger unblockables uptime is another story of bad counter design, unblockables should only effect blocks and not count everything like reflection and absortion.That another stupidity from Anet developers... they could make classes that would punish reflective skills, absortions skills etc... no, fake balance is better...

I'm not saying the arms race between offensive and defensive effects/abilities doesn't create an environment of extremes, but that problem is deep at the core of the system. How much fun do you think LB Rangers had back when every single one of those things you listed just countered them outright? Probably as much fun as your defensive abilities being countered outright feels.

I guess maybe I'm just used to having to make choices with respect to what I'm strong against vs. what I'm weak against since I solo roamed as a power Necro pre-HoT. Will I find a shatter mes, condi mes, d/d thief, p/p thief, d/d ele, etc.? Who knows? Do I need to corrupt boons, transfer condis, break stuns, have more AoE to hunt for stealth? I remember actively swapping up my utilities, at the very least, when I'd see a class off in the distance. Sometimes I'd swap up weapons too.

Just this past weekend, I dabbled a lot in a glassy backline Staff Weaver, and LB Rangers were incredibly frustrating to deal with. On reflection though, that's their job, especially against a role like I was in. I switched it back to my roaming sw/d build and started instead finding and trying to pick these rangers off/otherwise make them break their attack cycle.

If there's one pattern I've heard recently, it's that:

Scourge is too strong.Rangers can gun Scourges down quickly.

I want to see some guild create a little sub-group of 5-10 rangers whose job is to just blunt the nose of a charging zerg, just to see what happens. If it's a potential meta solution to a meta problem, I don't think we should be talking nerfs. Not even to range. No matter how frustrating it is to be killed by something you used to most likely ignore as an annoyance at worst.

[Aeolus.3615]

@Cogbyrn.7283, rangers vs scourge is more "on paper story" than actually work in practive,it will work on practice IF other side has very few scourges and not even a hand of Fb's, wich m8 also mean a smaller group than the ones the ranger are.

[Cogbyrn.7283]

@Aeolus.3615 said:@Cogbyrn.7283, rangers vs scourge is more "on paper story" than actually work in practive,it will work on practice IF other side has very few scourges and not even a hand of Fb's, wich m8 also mean a smaller group than the ones the ranger are.

I'll believe that currently, Rangers vs. Scourge is simple theorycrafting, but that also means that the counter-argument against it is simple theorycrafting as well. The problem with testing it is that you have to find people who might actually enjoy/want to play LB Ranger.

[Turk.5460]

@Shadowcat.2680 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:

@"CantoGuy.6459" said:I don't care if it's not viable in zergs this auto attacking/rapid firing kitten is at least 1800 range and is just about the most annoying and most heavily abused weapon in the game! Please remove that 300 range buffer on this overused weapon

Some of you have not been paying attention to the fact that these arcing arrows have been traveling farther since beta and launch...

Comment from 2014...

“Muscly_Geek• Mar 24, 2014, 2:21 PMYou prompted me to take a closer look. I can't find the Dev post that explained it, but essentially all arcing projectiles have a longer valid range than listed, in the sense that the projectile will hit instead of an Out Of Range error.

The projectile actually travels father than 1500 even if you're standing at 1500, due to the arc. If the projectile was only valid for 1500 (or with a slight increase to account for the arc when your target is at the same altitude), there would be instances where a target within range would nonetheless result in an Out Of Range error.

It's not so much a bug (as in an unintended error in the code), as a deliberate mechanic to accommodate the physics of the projectile, which results in a beneficial effect. It's been around since Beta, people are very aware of it, and ANet has given no indication that they intend to change it.”

Lol still can’t back anything up with Dev posts, that quote literally doesn’t prove anything that it is intended, so trying to claim a random nobody on the Internet is proof that it’s intended interaction.

Again there have been a lot of unintended interactions that were in game since beta that Anet has been Just now getting to fixing, so trying to use that as proof of it being intended is also a complete fallacy, so please provide a Dev comment that it’s intended, I will wait for that one, again 1200 and 1500 are the max ranges listed not some other further range.To Me... It just seems like it would be such a major unintended action that has gone on for so long (years)... That I think if they wanted to make the longbow shoot like other weapons, the ones that don't seem to arc, to simplify things... well common sense tells me that they would have done so.

Common sense says 1500 = 1500 and 1200=1200I get it. I think we all do. I mean you write this like in every reply so far... but it's not as simple as that. That's just taking something at

face value

though. If It were common sense then the wiki would not have bothered listing "

can actually hit targets outside of the maximum range

", People would not be making video's trying to prove otherwise (which actually support the wiki in the part of the statement listed before) and ultimately people would not be going back and forth over this... if it were common sense. That being said, there is more to it than just numbers. If they added a better in game description... well that's another story and I believe it wouldn't hurt to look into.

But I understand certain people need every advantage they can get.So speaking for myself... none of my characters use a longbow at this time. That being said, this whole thing doesn't affect me presently =)... also I don't think we even wanna begin talking about what classes have what advantages... This isn't a one way street just FYI lol.

I’m just waiting for an actual Dev to make a statement to see if it’s intended or not.

Yea I can't wait anymore ether than you feel the need to rewrite this statement multiple times lol.

This is from an earlier reply...

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Just sounds like players are scared to lose the advantage of a big since as of yet no one can provide a statement from Anet saying that the overperforming Range is intended, must feel sad to have to rely on a bug sod badly.

So here you project the range advantage to be a "

bug

" as if it were a matter of fact. In which case, you just answered your own question on whether or not it's intentional. As "bugs" are something unintentional. Other than that, I'm curious where and what Dev you got the information from saying that this is a bug :o

Again the Wiki is maintained by players and lists thing that players find the skills to do again they have been removing interactions skills were doing since beta recently guess what the Wiki Stated those skills did those interactions, oh no with your logic they were totally intended interactions..

That's not what I said at all lol... I said all the video's and so forth... just prove that part of the statement that was given on the wiki... that is my logic there. That being said I never said it was intended ether... I said I have a hard time believing it is unintended as like I pointed out before... "if they wanted to make the longbow shoot like other weapons, the ones that don't seem to arc, to simplify things... well common sense tells me that they would have done so."

Besides you already answered your own question about it being a bug... so I'm curious where and what dev you got that information from so that I may see as well.

Nice contradiction you got here, what’s the opposite Of unintended?

That being said I never said it was intended ether... I said I have a hard time believing it is unintended as like I pointed out before

So the issue I have is you have multiple skills some say 1200 some say 1500 they go beyond the maximum range while you have others that don’t. And we have the Dev Tyler Chapman who worked with the PvP and Balance teams stating all skills Melee and Ranged are supposed to have a 15% range buffer which is clearly missing from a lot of skills, so either the bug is those skills are lacking the buffer don’t have the buffer for all those arcing projectiles are intended because no one has yet to a post the Fabled Dev statement that they claim states Arcing Projectiles having extended range over other projectiles.

All I’m looking for is Dev answering if it’s intended that certain projectiles go much further than others even though they have the same max range listed or if it’s the other Projectiles missing their range buffer.

again commonsense says 1500 equals 1500 not 1500 is greater than 1500 so both 1500 should be treated the same and commonsense says a 1200 is a lot shorter than 1500 but with certain projectiles that is clearly not the case so again that’s all I’m looking for clarification .

Tyler Chapman’s quote:

“Intended. All ranged and melee skills have a 15% buffer range to take account for tracking.”

See how that says all and not some or a few?

Please stop beating the dead horse that is some supposed quote from some dev that doesn't even work at Anet anymore. If you can't link to the quote, then it's just hearsay at best and likely taken out of context.

It's more of an argument than "The text that states 1500 is intended to not actually be 1500 and instead much further, because it's been this way for x amount of time." - which is the only other thing being spewed out of this thread.

[Dralor.3701]

@Turk.5460 said:

@Shadowcat.2680 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:

@"CantoGuy.6459" said:I don't care if it's not viable in zergs this auto attacking/rapid firing kitten is at least 1800 range and is just about the most annoying and most heavily abused weapon in the game! Please remove that 300 range buffer on this overused weapon

Some of you have not been paying attention to the fact that these arcing arrows have been traveling farther since beta and launch...

Comment from 2014...

“Muscly_Geek• Mar 24, 2014, 2:21 PMYou prompted me to take a closer look. I can't find the Dev post that explained it, but essentially all arcing projectiles have a longer valid range than listed, in the sense that the projectile will hit instead of an Out Of Range error.

The projectile actually travels father than 1500 even if you're standing at 1500, due to the arc. If the projectile was only valid for 1500 (or with a slight increase to account for the arc when your target is at the same altitude), there would be instances where a target within range would nonetheless result in an Out Of Range error.

It's not so much a bug (as in an unintended error in the code), as a deliberate mechanic to accommodate the physics of the projectile, which results in a beneficial effect. It's been around since Beta, people are very aware of it, and ANet has given no indication that they intend to change it.”

Lol still can’t back anything up with Dev posts, that quote literally doesn’t prove anything that it is intended, so trying to claim a random nobody on the Internet is proof that it’s intended interaction.

Again there have been a lot of unintended interactions that were in game since beta that Anet has been Just now getting to fixing, so trying to use that as proof of it being intended is also a complete fallacy, so please provide a Dev comment that it’s intended, I will wait for that one, again 1200 and 1500 are the max ranges listed not some other further range.To Me... It just seems like it would be such a major unintended action that has gone on for so long (years)... That I think if they wanted to make the longbow shoot like other weapons, the ones that don't seem to arc, to simplify things... well common sense tells me that they would have done so.

Common sense says 1500 = 1500 and 1200=1200I get it. I think we all do. I mean you write this like in every reply so far... but it's not as simple as that. That's just taking something at

face value

though. If It were common sense then the wiki would not have bothered listing "

can actually hit targets outside of the maximum range

", People would not be making video's trying to prove otherwise (which actually support the wiki in the part of the statement listed before) and ultimately people would not be going back and forth over this... if it were common sense. That being said, there is more to it than just numbers. If they added a better in game description... well that's another story and I believe it wouldn't hurt to look into.

But I understand certain people need every advantage they can get.So speaking for myself... none of my characters use a longbow at this time. That being said, this whole thing doesn't affect me presently =)... also I don't think we even wanna begin talking about what classes have what advantages... This isn't a one way street just FYI lol.

I’m just waiting for an actual Dev to make a statement to see if it’s intended or not.

Yea I can't wait anymore ether than you feel the need to rewrite this statement multiple times lol.

This is from an earlier reply...

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Just sounds like players are scared to lose the advantage of a big since as of yet no one can provide a statement from Anet saying that the overperforming Range is intended, must feel sad to have to rely on a bug sod badly.

So here you project the range advantage to be a "

bug

" as if it were a matter of fact. In which case, you just answered your own question on whether or not it's intentional. As "bugs" are something unintentional. Other than that, I'm curious where and what Dev you got the information from saying that this is a bug :o

Again the Wiki is maintained by players and lists thing that players find the skills to do again they have been removing interactions skills were doing since beta recently guess what the Wiki Stated those skills did those interactions, oh no with your logic they were totally intended interactions..

That's not what I said at all lol... I said all the video's and so forth... just prove that part of the statement that was given on the wiki... that is my logic there. That being said I never said it was intended ether... I said I have a hard time believing it is unintended as like I pointed out before... "if they wanted to make the longbow shoot like other weapons, the ones that don't seem to arc, to simplify things... well common sense tells me that they would have done so."

Besides you already answered your own question about it being a bug... so I'm curious where and what dev you got that information from so that I may see as well.

Nice contradiction you got here, what’s the opposite Of unintended?

That being said I never said it was intended ether... I said I have a hard time believing it is unintended as like I pointed out before

So the issue I have is you have multiple skills some say 1200 some say 1500 they go beyond the maximum range while you have others that don’t. And we have the Dev Tyler Chapman who worked with the PvP and Balance teams stating all skills Melee and Ranged are supposed to have a 15% range buffer which is clearly missing from a lot of skills, so either the bug is those skills are lacking the buffer don’t have the buffer for all those arcing projectiles are intended because no one has yet to a post the Fabled Dev statement that they claim states Arcing Projectiles having extended range over other projectiles.

All I’m looking for is Dev answering if it’s intended that certain projectiles go much further than others even though they have the same max range listed or if it’s the other Projectiles missing their range buffer.

again commonsense says 1500 equals 1500 not 1500 is greater than 1500 so both 1500 should be treated the same and commonsense says a 1200 is a lot shorter than 1500 but with certain projectiles that is clearly not the case so again that’s all I’m looking for clarification .

Tyler Chapman’s quote:

“Intended. All ranged and melee skills have a 15% buffer range to take account for tracking.”

See how that says all and not some or a few?

Please stop beating the dead horse that is some supposed quote from some dev that doesn't even work at Anet anymore. If you can't link to the quote, then it's just hearsay at best and likely taken out of context.

It's more of an argument than "The text that states 1500 is intended to not actually be 1500 and instead much further, because it's been this way for x amount of time." - which is the only other thing being spewed out of this thread.

It isn’t because it’s been that way x amount of time, it is because the designers(not some random dev) have stated this is how the mechanics of those skills work.

Testing should show all arcing projectiles currently work in this manner, unless you think it is coo incidence they just missed on all of these skills.

The game used to be on a two week release cadence with living world updates, build verification tests were constantly being run and the skills tested.

If anything was off with the tooltips or functionality it was sent to a designer as a bug. If it wasn’t fixed it was either A. Super low priority or B. Working as intended.

Something like this where the range is much longer than the tooltip would be considered a pretty high priority. In this case it is intended so it’s never been “fixed.”

[Kovu.7560]

Wow this thread. Okay, so firstoff to the people who want ranged projectile attacks nerfed:• Fuck you. Get good.

To those who want more accurate tooltips so they don't have to refer to a wiki article to be able gauge a general idea of how far a skill is supposed to travel:• Good on you, that should be information provided right within the game. It really should be more clear.

To those necros who are irritated that rangers eat you alive:• Yeah, and so does every other ranged spec. That's an issue with a necro's lack of mobility, not the potency of ranged attacks. All other classes have adequate tools to deal with those ranged attacks (reflects, evade abilities, stealth, teleports & mobility, passive skills that cause chill or cripple, retaliation etc). Don't bitch, your elite spec is about 40% of this gamemode.

The range of a ranger's longbow is about the distance it takes for a sentry to mark you, plus 50~.

~ Kovu

[BlaqueFyre.5678]

@Dralor.3701 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@Shadowcat.2680 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:

@"CantoGuy.6459" said:I don't care if it's not viable in zergs this auto attacking/rapid firing kitten is at least 1800 range and is just about the most annoying and most heavily abused weapon in the game! Please remove that 300 range buffer on this overused weapon

Some of you have not been paying attention to the fact that these arcing arrows have been traveling farther since beta and launch...

Comment from 2014...

“Muscly_Geek• Mar 24, 2014, 2:21 PMYou prompted me to take a closer look. I can't find the Dev post that explained it, but essentially all arcing projectiles have a longer valid range than listed, in the sense that the projectile will hit instead of an Out Of Range error.

The projectile actually travels father than 1500 even if you're standing at 1500, due to the arc. If the projectile was only valid for 1500 (or with a slight increase to account for the arc when your target is at the same altitude), there would be instances where a target within range would nonetheless result in an Out Of Range error.

It's not so much a bug (as in an unintended error in the code), as a deliberate mechanic to accommodate the physics of the projectile, which results in a beneficial effect. It's been around since Beta, people are very aware of it, and ANet has given no indication that they intend to change it.”

Lol still can’t back anything up with Dev posts, that quote literally doesn’t prove anything that it is intended, so trying to claim a random nobody on the Internet is proof that it’s intended interaction.

Again there have been a lot of unintended interactions that were in game since beta that Anet has been Just now getting to fixing, so trying to use that as proof of it being intended is also a complete fallacy, so please provide a Dev comment that it’s intended, I will wait for that one, again 1200 and 1500 are the max ranges listed not some other further range.To Me... It just seems like it would be such a major unintended action that has gone on for so long (years)... That I think if they wanted to make the longbow shoot like other weapons, the ones that don't seem to arc, to simplify things... well common sense tells me that they would have done so.

Common sense says 1500 = 1500 and 1200=1200I get it. I think we all do. I mean you write this like in every reply so far... but it's not as simple as that. That's just taking something at

face value

though. If It were common sense then the wiki would not have bothered listing "

can actually hit targets outside of the maximum range

", People would not be making video's trying to prove otherwise (which actually support the wiki in the part of the statement listed before) and ultimately people would not be going back and forth over this... if it were common sense. That being said, there is more to it than just numbers. If they added a better in game description... well that's another story and I believe it wouldn't hurt to look into.

But I understand certain people need every advantage they can get.So speaking for myself... none of my characters use a longbow at this time. That being said, this whole thing doesn't affect me presently =)... also I don't think we even wanna begin talking about what classes have what advantages... This isn't a one way street just FYI lol.

I’m just waiting for an actual Dev to make a statement to see if it’s intended or not.

Yea I can't wait anymore ether than you feel the need to rewrite this statement multiple times lol.

This is from an earlier reply...

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Just sounds like players are scared to lose the advantage of a big since as of yet no one can provide a statement from Anet saying that the overperforming Range is intended, must feel sad to have to rely on a bug sod badly.

So here you project the range advantage to be a "

bug

" as if it were a matter of fact. In which case, you just answered your own question on whether or not it's intentional. As "bugs" are something unintentional. Other than that, I'm curious where and what Dev you got the information from saying that this is a bug :o

Again the Wiki is maintained by players and lists thing that players find the skills to do again they have been removing interactions skills were doing since beta recently guess what the Wiki Stated those skills did those interactions, oh no with your logic they were totally intended interactions..

That's not what I said at all lol... I said all the video's and so forth... just prove that part of the statement that was given on the wiki... that is my logic there. That being said I never said it was intended ether... I said I have a hard time believing it is unintended as like I pointed out before... "if they wanted to make the longbow shoot like other weapons, the ones that don't seem to arc, to simplify things... well common sense tells me that they would have done so."

Besides you already answered your own question about it being a bug... so I'm curious where and what dev you got that information from so that I may see as well.

Nice contradiction you got here, what’s the opposite Of unintended?

That being said I never said it was intended ether... I said I have a hard time believing it is unintended as like I pointed out before

So the issue I have is you have multiple skills some say 1200 some say 1500 they go beyond the maximum range while you have others that don’t. And we have the Dev Tyler Chapman who worked with the PvP and Balance teams stating all skills Melee and Ranged are supposed to have a 15% range buffer which is clearly missing from a lot of skills, so either the bug is those skills are lacking the buffer don’t have the buffer for all those arcing projectiles are intended because no one has yet to a post the Fabled Dev statement that they claim states Arcing Projectiles having extended range over other projectiles.

All I’m looking for is Dev answering if it’s intended that certain projectiles go much further than others even though they have the same max range listed or if it’s the other Projectiles missing their range buffer.

again commonsense says 1500 equals 1500 not 1500 is greater than 1500 so both 1500 should be treated the same and commonsense says a 1200 is a lot shorter than 1500 but with certain projectiles that is clearly not the case so again that’s all I’m looking for clarification .

Tyler Chapman’s quote:

“Intended. All ranged and melee skills have a 15% buffer range to take account for tracking.”

See how that says all and not some or a few?

Please stop beating the dead horse that is some supposed quote from some dev that doesn't even work at Anet anymore. If you can't link to the quote, then it's just hearsay at best and likely taken out of context.

It's more of an argument than "The text that states 1500 is intended to not actually be 1500 and instead much further, because it's been this way for x amount of time." - which is the only other thing being spewed out of this thread.

It isn’t because it’s been that way x amount of time, it is because the designers(not some random dev) have stated this is how the mechanics of those skills work.

Testing should show all arcing projectiles currently work in this manner, unless you think it is coo incidence they just missed on all of these skills.

The game used to be on a two week release cadence with living world updates, build verification tests were constantly being run and the skills tested.

If anything was off with the tooltips or functionality it was sent to a designer as a bug. If it wasn’t fixed it was either A. Super low priority or B. Working as intended.

Something like this where the range is much longer than the tooltip would be considered a pretty high priority. In this case it is intended so it’s never been “fixed.”

Please show the Dev statement to support your claim that it’s intended, I’ll wait, but we already know the outcome.

Again just because it has been in game for a long time doesn’t mean it is intended as shown with vey recent patches/bugfixes.

So far we have a Dev post stating all skills are supposed to have a buffer that is clearly missing on certain weapons/skills, and no Dev statement stating only Arcing Projectiles are supposed to have that buffer, go figure.

https://imgur.com/a/kfKnFfh

[Whiteout.1975]

@Turk.5460 said:

@Shadowcat.2680 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:

@"CantoGuy.6459" said:I don't care if it's not viable in zergs this auto attacking/rapid firing kitten is at least 1800 range and is just about the most annoying and most heavily abused weapon in the game! Please remove that 300 range buffer on this overused weapon

Some of you have not been paying attention to the fact that these arcing arrows have been traveling farther since beta and launch...

Comment from 2014...

“Muscly_Geek• Mar 24, 2014, 2:21 PMYou prompted me to take a closer look. I can't find the Dev post that explained it, but essentially all arcing projectiles have a longer valid range than listed, in the sense that the projectile will hit instead of an Out Of Range error.

The projectile actually travels father than 1500 even if you're standing at 1500, due to the arc. If the projectile was only valid for 1500 (or with a slight increase to account for the arc when your target is at the same altitude), there would be instances where a target within range would nonetheless result in an Out Of Range error.

It's not so much a bug (as in an unintended error in the code), as a deliberate mechanic to accommodate the physics of the projectile, which results in a beneficial effect. It's been around since Beta, people are very aware of it, and ANet has given no indication that they intend to change it.”

Lol still can’t back anything up with Dev posts, that quote literally doesn’t prove anything that it is intended, so trying to claim a random nobody on the Internet is proof that it’s intended interaction.

Again there have been a lot of unintended interactions that were in game since beta that Anet has been Just now getting to fixing, so trying to use that as proof of it being intended is also a complete fallacy, so please provide a Dev comment that it’s intended, I will wait for that one, again 1200 and 1500 are the max ranges listed not some other further range.To Me... It just seems like it would be such a major unintended action that has gone on for so long (years)... That I think if they wanted to make the longbow shoot like other weapons, the ones that don't seem to arc, to simplify things... well common sense tells me that they would have done so.

Common sense says 1500 = 1500 and 1200=1200I get it. I think we all do. I mean you write this like in every reply so far... but it's not as simple as that. That's just taking something at

face value

though. If It were common sense then the wiki would not have bothered listing "

can actually hit targets outside of the maximum range

", People would not be making video's trying to prove otherwise (which actually support the wiki in the part of the statement listed before) and ultimately people would not be going back and forth over this... if it were common sense. That being said, there is more to it than just numbers. If they added a better in game description... well that's another story and I believe it wouldn't hurt to look into.

But I understand certain people need every advantage they can get.So speaking for myself... none of my characters use a longbow at this time. That being said, this whole thing doesn't affect me presently =)... also I don't think we even wanna begin talking about what classes have what advantages... This isn't a one way street just FYI lol.

I’m just waiting for an actual Dev to make a statement to see if it’s intended or not.

Yea I can't wait anymore ether than you feel the need to rewrite this statement multiple times lol.

This is from an earlier reply...

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Just sounds like players are scared to lose the advantage of a big since as of yet no one can provide a statement from Anet saying that the overperforming Range is intended, must feel sad to have to rely on a bug sod badly.

So here you project the range advantage to be a "

bug

" as if it were a matter of fact. In which case, you just answered your own question on whether or not it's intentional. As "bugs" are something unintentional. Other than that, I'm curious where and what Dev you got the information from saying that this is a bug :o

Again the Wiki is maintained by players and lists thing that players find the skills to do again they have been removing interactions skills were doing since beta recently guess what the Wiki Stated those skills did those interactions, oh no with your logic they were totally intended interactions..

That's not what I said at all lol... I said all the video's and so forth... just prove that part of the statement that was given on the wiki... that is my logic there. That being said I never said it was intended ether... I said I have a hard time believing it is unintended as like I pointed out before... "if they wanted to make the longbow shoot like other weapons, the ones that don't seem to arc, to simplify things... well common sense tells me that they would have done so."

Besides you already answered your own question about it being a bug... so I'm curious where and what dev you got that information from so that I may see as well.

Nice contradiction you got here, what’s the opposite Of unintended?

That being said I never said it was intended ether... I said I have a hard time believing it is unintended as like I pointed out before

So the issue I have is you have multiple skills some say 1200 some say 1500 they go beyond the maximum range while you have others that don’t. And we have the Dev Tyler Chapman who worked with the PvP and Balance teams stating all skills Melee and Ranged are supposed to have a 15% range buffer which is clearly missing from a lot of skills, so either the bug is those skills are lacking the buffer don’t have the buffer for all those arcing projectiles are intended because no one has yet to a post the Fabled Dev statement that they claim states Arcing Projectiles having extended range over other projectiles.

All I’m looking for is Dev answering if it’s intended that certain projectiles go much further than others even though they have the same max range listed or if it’s the other Projectiles missing their range buffer.

again commonsense says 1500 equals 1500 not 1500 is greater than 1500 so both 1500 should be treated the same and commonsense says a 1200 is a lot shorter than 1500 but with certain projectiles that is clearly not the case so again that’s all I’m looking for clarification .

Tyler Chapman’s quote:

“Intended. All ranged and melee skills have a 15% buffer range to take account for tracking.”

See how that says all and not some or a few?

Please stop beating the dead horse that is some supposed quote from some dev that doesn't even work at Anet anymore. If you can't link to the quote, then it's just hearsay at best and likely taken out of context.

It's more of an argument than "The text that states 1500 is intended to not actually be 1500 and instead much further, because it's been this way for x amount of time." - which is the only other thing being spewed out of this thread.Here is the last piece of that discussion...@Whiteout.1975 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:Nice contradiction you got here, what’s the opposite Of unintended?

That being said I never said it was intended ether... I said I have a hard time believing it is unintended as like I pointed out before

So the issue I have is you have multiple skills some say 1200 some say 1500 they go beyond the maximum range while you have others that don’t. And we have the Dev Tyler Chapman who worked with the PvP and Balance teams stating all skills Melee and Ranged are supposed to have a 15% range buffer which is clearly missing from a lot of skills, so either the bug is those skills are lacking the buffer don’t have the buffer for all those arcing projectiles are intended because no one has yet to a post the Fabled Dev statement that they claim states Arcing Projectiles having extended range over other projectiles.

All I’m looking for is Dev answering if it’s intended that certain projectiles go much further than others even though they have the same max range listed or if it’s the other Projectiles missing their range buffer.

again commonsense says 1500 equals 1500 not 1500 is greater than 1500 so both 1500 should be treated the same and commonsense says a 1200 is a lot shorter than 1500 but with certain projectiles that is clearly not the case so again that’s all I’m looking for clarification .

Tyler Chapman’s quote:

“Intended. All ranged and melee skills have a 15% buffer range to take account for tracking.”

See how that says all and not some or a few?

Lol what? there is literally no contradiction there lol... What something is from

a point of fact vs what someone believe's (what I believe) are 2 totally different things

... but seeing as you can make the claim about the range being a bug from the point of fact... unless it is instead belief... then I can see how you could mix up what I said. As I'm still waiting to see where you got the information from.

I get your issue. Like I said before basically... I'm fine with you wanting more clarification (I'm interested as well) in regards to the descriptions given in game as far as range goes and I don't think it could hurt.I can't find that quote...@Turk.5460 said: "The text that states 1500 is intended to not actually be 1500 and instead much further, because it's been this way for x amount of time."

... I'm not surprised.Also, I listed years "3" years (about 3). Since they last touched the range on the weapon. It's not some random amount of time. It's not like this just happened yesterday or this year. Having said that... I have not herd anything myself about it being a bug throughout that time. But apparently someone... claims it to be a bug. So I was curious to see where the information came from that actually says something along the lines of "Hey this is a bug"...

Gonna link this in case anyone else gets confused on what a fact and a belief is...

• https://merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fact
• https://merriam-webster.com/dictionary/belief

Now that we hopefully know the difference between the two. That said, I never said "1500 is intended" because that would be a what?... Yes! a Fact very good class you all get gold stars... Though instead, I was giving examples that lead to my what?... Belief Yes, very good =)

So when you say "only other thing being spewed out of this thread" despite the examples being giving... Only thing? Hmm, ok then...>That said you don't need to agree with my examples, but there is more than time illustrated that gives me that belief.

[Turk.5460]

@"Whiteout.1975" said:Literally nothing of importance

You're arguing semantics when my message was clearly not meant to be taken as a direct quote from anyone in particular. You obviously have nothing more to contribute to this conversation, not that you really contributed anything in the first place. Your immature and irrelevant "rebuttal" shows that you have already lost an argument that never even happened. Sit down.

[briggah.7910]

here is a video from 2016. the red bar underneath shows when skill is out of range. just look how far you can still hit when it is out of range. working as intended