It’s solely no advantage when the class is sub-par in every aspect and not in a single place superior to anything else.
I’m not even sure what you mean by that. You certainly didn’t “take his words at face value”, even when he explained that your “object-based texture” comment was how LE currently works more than once. Have you always assumed that everybody else is an idiot/wrong?
Because you know you’re running with a solid argument when you have to start using perjoratives. 
You ignored DJ & thought he was wrong & he is an actual programmer, so why would you believe an accountant who says the same thing? Just scroll up. You could also do a quick search of the forums for the explaination being given in the past except you can’t be arsed and somehow that’s now my fault. You do usually own your mistakes, but apparently not this one. 
Yes & no. We’d have had less other art, so presumably the chapter reworks & new chapters would have been slower to come out. But if that meant that EHG hadn’t needed to sell to Krafton? We will sadly never know.
To be an advantage, it needs to perform the best. The bar is not ‘sub-par’.
Yeah, but in every place sadly. It cannot ever be the best in anything then… otherwise it becomes P2W after all, no matter at which time. More classes? No combination ever allowed of any to be superior to all others at any moment.
As mentioned… that’s a hard ask, because to uphold it EHG would need to immediately nerf stuff when a surprising synergy with something comes up… or it’s P2W suddenly, no matter when.
Dunno what you’re reading there… as I didn’t argue against the point there.
I took it at damn face value what DJ said. The statement that object-based texture changes are also forced to be set and then limited to ‘1’ when compiling.
Which by the way… by now the information that it causes stuttering and worst-case artifacts was something I could read up on, which by the way is in one of the threads I didn’t read back when it was written, so obviously not in my knowledge base.
All others provide jack in relation to that, and if it’s actually true then DJ was even wrong with that statement I simply took and the issue is one step further along… also because of Unity’s messy engine, but it’s actually doable if that’s the case… just broken.
That’s why I’m calling you a clown. Unlike me and DJ talking around the precise point and then coming to a conclusion you’re just yelling randomly out.
The replies you’ve quoted are right at the end of the discussion, so you’re ignoring all of the disagreement & “taking at face value but assuming DJ’s either wrong or an idiot” that you were doing before. So well done you!
You didn’t, you consistently assumed that you knew more than he did & that he was either wrong or an idiot.
I refer you to my previous comment about perjoratives. You can call me as many names as you want, but it doesn’t make you right and tearing other people down doesn’t lift us up.
Anyway, on to the receipts:
Comment #1 on the topic:
[quote=“Llama8, post:15, topic:80177”]
Which they can’t other than recreating Yolo mouse. That’s also a kinda dumb argument, but at least it’s less dumb than the previous one.
This is when you replied to DJ & evidently assumed that he was either wrong or an idiot & you googled for some examples to support your point of view while, while fair, didn’t deal with the actual request from the person originally asking.
The rest of that post was based off of you not having understood the initial request, which happens & running with your initial assumption that you did understand & that everyone else was either wrong or an idiot & doubly so given they continued to disagree with you.
Nope.
It is, but so does PoE & Diablo (all of them). One might almost say it’s a genre-related issue.
This is DJ getting into some of the details without going full Kulze War & Peace, because brevity is good, he’s trying to get you to understand the issue (since you don’t) without wasting all of his time because this issue has been discussed repeatedly on the forum. I’ve bolded the relevant bits.
And here, DJ’s telling you the issue, so if you’d “taken that at face value”, you’d have stopped arguing with him about it.
This is DJ telling you that your proposed “object solution” is how LE already works & thus would not be sufficient & for bonus points he gives a way to work around it while also degrading performance, because LE has bucketloads of that to burn so it’s totes a good solution (this isn’t me being sarcastic to DJ)!!
You’re still not getting his point, or taking it “at face value” because you go back to the exact same thing despite DJ having told you why it won’t work.
So DJ tells you a third time (I think, I might have misscounted, oh the horror for an accountant!!) but you’ve totally “taken his words at face value”, maybe 4th time’s a charm?
We’re getting so close now, we’re at the vinegar strokes! Still assuming he’s either wrong or an idiot.
THERE WE GO!!! YOU’VE FINALLY UNDERSTOOD!!! DJ IS NEITHER AN IDIOT NOR IS HE WRONG!!! I’ve lost count of how many times you’ve “taken his words at face value” (which means that you assume they’re correct BTW, totally not what you displayed here).
This is a very amusing quote given that’s what you didn’t want to do yourself vis-a-vis Yolomouse & Unity, but anyway, just thought I’d leave that here…
Exactly! That’s the point, because:
Those resolve it as the other parts are to progress to that?
I mean… that’s how a discussion works. If you realize new points unknown formerly along the way you remedy your stance.
You know… how it’s supposed to go?
Which in hindsight I actually did… cause my argumentation line was right… but the issue is a different one then what DJ argued about. My solution actually works functionally but not performance wise sadly.
So yeah… I actually was right there surprisingly, my solution is a functional one… but not possible to implement anyway because of the engine’s crap implementation of that functionality.
True… but I tend to tear people down when I speak about a specific thing and people start trying to tear it down with something that’s not talked about. Which by the way… in this case both you and DJ did. You ignored the specific point entirely and DJ actually was wrong about the possibility of the solution for object based cursor changes via multi-highlighting. Functionally mind you, performance wise the engine fucks up.
And doubling or tripling down on that doesn’t make it better for your position. If you’ve read my argumentation line then my argumentation position either reinforced points which weren’t mentioned yet… or switched to the aspects of it which weren’t talked about instead.
Which is factually wrong though… but the performance from the engine is not holding up.
Functionally it is possible. But it sucks to do.
‘Clean’ solution but still broken.
Cause he actually was if you read the point I’m making. And the actual issue wasn’t mentioned once.
It’s about in-game cursor changes. Which yes… are possible with my provided solution once again… but not performance wise feasable thanks to the engine screwing up.
Which I understood and it’s actually natively provided. Which you can see at the example even:
This is the native methodology to do it.
This is functional.
This allows for non-runtime compulation base cursor changes.
The issue:
This causes stutters and artifacts.
But yes… it absolutely is possible. Still not a solution sadly.
Which is still not in relation to object based cursor changes. As I’ve found out by now object based ones are freely changeable. This still only relies on the default cursor.
Hence it still missed the point.
Which is why I’m saying DJ and me talked beside each other. Unlike you do now… which is simply lacking understanding of what the heck was even talked about and self-inserts into a finished conversation to prove a point for someone who’s already finished the conversation.
Which still didn’t properly take my solution into consideration.
Obviously the triggers are designed at runtime. Well… actually not all too obviously as you can create a code which does create the overlay object with the respective trigger for every single trigger-object into it. But that’s a performance nightmare even without the Unity crap going on.
So not even that is inherently true. But it would demand a check for a check for every object and hence doubles the performance hit at every tick, which actually starts to have even with clean coding inside the engine (which it doesn’t have as we’ve already determined) would start to cause performance impact.
But actually by now I know… he was! And the topic was entirely missed 
Thanks to you I only found out that DJ actually was wrong and I was right! Kudos there, I learned something new! But you didn’t yet, and DJ would need to read this mess here.
Cause nobody asked?
I mean… if you don’t know it exists you cannot search for it.
In my case I noted ‘read back, you can see it there’.
This is not a friggin attack… it’s a clarification. If you’re feeling attacked with something like that I recommend you re-evaluating how you perceive posts first.
Yes, but someone saying that “they took the other person’s words at face value” means that they didn’t challenge them & accepted them as true, which, as I’ve shown (& didn’t want to and most definitely couldn’t on my phone) you really didn’t over a long discussion.
Yes, because you didn’t understand what the original person was asking for & why your proposed solutions wouldn’t work, especially the first & second one (which is how LE’s always worked).
Yes.
No & no. You misunderstood what the original person was asking for, since that was the same thing that’s always asked for in this situation - the ability to pick & choose a “unique” mouse pointer that helps them see where the mouse is during the pixel soup of combat, without being forced to have the exact same mouse pointer that everyone else has who may or may not have the same issues when trying to work out where the fuck the mouse pointer is during combat.
Your position was based on a misunderstanding of the original ask.
All of which had been discussed or mentioned in the past few years since this started being asked for. And all of which were not viable solutions either due to performance (using overlays to allow for different cursors) or because the engine just doesn’t allow for it for reasons (allowing the player to pick & choose from a variety of cursors in a menu). But you just refused to accept that these had been discussed before & weren’t viable/allowed. One might almost say you were doubling down on it. Repeatedly.
Yes, just like me loosing enough weight to get back into the 28 inch jeans I wore when I was at uni. doesn’t make it a particularly useful argument.
He wasn’t & it was, you’re just ignoring it. Purposefully or not I wouldn’t hazard a guess at.
Yes, and at the risk of repeating myself, these have been mentioned repeatedly over the past few years. DJ even said it early on in the discussion which is in my post above. Complete with reasons why to not do that.
I assume you mean compilation, and yes, as has been said many times, that’s how LE currently works.
Edit: TBF, the script didn’t really mean much to me so I’d defer to @DJSamhein on this.
Of coooooooooooooooouuuuurse you were darling!! 
You can, you go to the little magnifying glass icon in the top right corner & start typing appropriate terms in. I’m slightly surprised I have to tell you how to use search functionality.
You missed the point. You calling people clowns is a perjorative.
the problem is devs literally said in 2018 there WONT BE ANY PAID CONTENT AND ALL UPDATES WILL BE FOR FREE in the next year you will see bunch of classes for money and sub classes this is just the begining you are delusional if you think it wont be
Sadly, All of the PoE Tencent simps will destroy this game. They will never stop, they will continue to piss on an experience that is more entertaining, cheaper, and less punishing then anything on the market today. They will keep complaining and mischaracterizing the game until it is gone. They will make sure NO developer ever, ever makes a non pay to win multi player game ever again, they will make sure NO investor will ever get behind a game that does not have malicious micro transactions ever again and then they will complain that, nothing exists that does not have shitty micro transactions. I don’t understand why.
I read every comment every reason under here and not one of them comes from a place derived from any truth or logic.
I will say I absolutely love this game and everything that comes with it so far, I am not a fan of the parent company or a tencent fan but we have to deal with them.
And personally I have been depressed as fuck about the world as a whole and this game has been a brief but nice break from “gestures at everything that exists”
But I have little hope for the long term because a bunch of imbeciles are relentlessly attacking the community.
I do have one and only one suggestion…
Ban everyone that has these crazy unhinged unproductive points of view from every medium that exists. Do everything to block them and go over board you can not reason with people that clearly don’t give a shit about reason
Also stop trying to reason with these people call for a ban on every post that is totally unproductive and hateful
Judd has replied to every thing everyone has bothered to complain about that can be replied to and clearly people don’t care. They don’t want a change they don’t want an alterative course of action that is possible they will scorch the earth and complain about the fire.
Stop replying to non productive posts everywhere don’t give in to these things all of us need to do this ignore them and enjoy the game.
Next season I will do my best to buy EVERYTHING I can afford no matter what, I just wish the haters would move on
Which I did when he stated that objects are also runtime based. Which wasn’t stated before, the wording in the post before that was a little ambigious and I didn’t take it in that meaning.
As soon as that meaning came through though I took it ‘at face value’ 
Despite it actually being wrong I realized!
Yeah, but with the object-based solution you can have 100 different cursors in a menu as a choice and the sub-cursors as well changing related to that one. Sure… the program still has a ‘default’ cursor but you would instead simply have a permanent ‘mouse-over’ cursor texture.
The 2 core issues are size and performance. Because you also cannot change the size of the cursor in Unity properly for some weird reason.
So… they wouldn’t have a unique cursor but a choice of a variety of them… like many many games provide. Especially shooters with the aiming reticle. Albeit there it’s not quite the same anyway as it’s not a cursor.
When the discussion topic is solely about ‘is it possible’ then yes… it makes sense. You gotta lay the foundation before the follow-up makes sense… the issue was that we didn’t get through the foundation part… so the roof - the actual issue - didn’t come through.
Yeah, I spoke about non. Hence the opposite.
Possible but unfeasable.
The statement was ‘it is not possible’
My stance was ‘here is the code, it is possible’.
The resolution was a wrong information leading to the same end-result.
The right information leads through circumstance to the same, that one wasn’t mentioned though.
If you don’t know something exists.
I mean… that’s kinda obvious, right?
Imagine trying to search for every possible circumstance ever imaginable and non-imaginable before doing anything… you won’t get far
So my point stands. Just because an issue exists and people talked about it doesn’t mean from the bazillion topics you’ve actually read the detailed reasoning rather then the - common - broad handwaving without any attached details.
Which in this situation is the case:
We cannot change the cursor as the unity engine doesn’t allow us to (this is the common end-point of the discussion, no technical aspects) → but here is the code which lets you do it individually (this is the follow-up commonly not mentioned) → and this is the technical reason as to why that one is non-functional in practicality (which came up in one thread to my knowledge and I haven’t seen it anywhere else yet, outside of here).
If the knowledge provision stops at ‘Point 1’ but you find ‘Point 2’ then obviously you’ll state ‘But hey, Point 1 isn’t right!’ unless you found ‘Point 3’.
Point 1 was discussed, I argued about Point 2, Point 3 was not mentioned outside of a link, which didn’t change the initial statement of possibility.
Stop expressing your opinions because it differs mine! I sure fucking hope you say nothing positive about this game as I have opposite feelings. How dare you dislike the actions of a person? Hitler did nothing wrong! Also no I am not saying EHG is Hitler just pointing out how dumb it is to ask people to stop having opinions just because you dont like them.