Recommended Posts

Anyone have a scroll of resurrection to spare? I think my sub date is later than the cut off for the benefits of the mount/level 80 char/ect, but I'd still appreciate if someone can throw one my way.

Is there anyway to add steady shot (I know it's /cast steady shot) to this hunter macro?

/petattack

/cast Hunter's Mark

/startattack

If I replace /startattack with steady shot it does nothing, just keeps casting hunters mark each time I click it. If I add it after /startattack it does nothing either.

I want my pet to attack, a hunters mark to be cast and then steady shot to be cast.

edit: Ahh don't think it's possible due to global cooldowns.

/castsequence should help

This is the macro I use for my hunter.

Marksmanship Macro


/castsequence [mod]Aimed Shot;reset=target Serpent Sting,Hunter's Mark,null
/castsequence Steady Shot
/castsequence Kill Command,Chimera Shot,Arcane Shot
/castsequence reset=120 Rapid Fire,Readiness,Chimera Shot,Chimera Shot,Rapid Fire
/cast Kill Shot
[/CODE]

Survival Macro

[CODE]
/castsequence [mod] Arcane Shot;reset=target Serpent Sting, Hunter's Mark,null
/castsequence Cobra Shot
/castsequence reset=5 Kill Command,Explosive Shot,Explosive Shot
/castsequence Black Arrow
/castsequence Rapid Fire
/cast Kill Shot
/use 13
/use 14
[/CODE]

Each macro will use Serpent Sting then cast Hunter's Mark and go into the rotation. The initial two (ss/hm) are only cast once unless I switch targets. My pet automatically attacks the target once I start the macro, so there is no need for /petattack.

Just started playing again a couple of days ago, hadn't played since 4.1. Got back into it pretty quickly on my DK, decided to go level my archaeology and got the fossilized raptor and I got a souldrinker on my first normal DS so I'm pretty chuffed :)

  • 2 weeks later...

Anyone kinda think the final Deathwing fight (Madness) is a bit lame for an end of expansion boss?

Not the most epic fight so far, Illidan and The Lich King were awesome compared to this :/

So I never did his back part, as the LFR I joined was already at the final stage, but I really enjoyed the fight. Maybe doing Illidan at 80 had less of an impact on me but i was mainly just mad we killed him. I thought there were so many other ways that could have ended, like his freaking brother showing up, that I didn't like it. I do agree though that Arthas was way better, and as time moves up I like LK more and more for the story content that was delivered. On a recent alt I did all the quest in stormpike and loved the hell out of it as well as the major quest line in dragonblight and BT. Of course the intro cinematic will go down as my favorite for a long time as well.

Lich King wasn't a terrible end boss encounter. I'm a fan of Sunwell but I'll be the first to admit that from a 'health of the game' perspective the instance was flawed. Go back and look at posts from ~2008 and see how many people in this thread were able to actually see the second boss in the instance (never mind actually clear the place). I had a lot of fun there but it was a huge expense that was largely wasted on the top 0.5%.

Tier 11 was excellent - if you didn't get a chance to see it at an appropriate level of gear (and didn't get a chance to see the heroic 10m stuff, because some encounters were just better?more challenging, and more fun?on that size) you missed out on stuff that, at least in my opinion, sits beside Sunwell in terms of awesomeness (but did so without the class-stacking absurdity). Al'akir, Sinestra, or Twilight Council as the final boss would have been brilliant - I'd argue the later two are still harder than heroic madness (especially on 25m which is as big a joke at 0% as 10m is at 20%)

Tier 12 went to hell for me after the nerfs: the heroic bosses just aren't fun when they can't hurt you. Pre-nerf I think beth'tilac, alysrazor, and ragnaros were pretty solid. Rag was head-and-shoulders above the others but they were alright. Our very first domo kill we did "legitimately" (that is taking slashes then cat jumps, then more slashes) and that made the encounter pretty exciting. Our second kill we learned about the "no slashes" strategy and that kinda ruined it. Ragnaros as a final end boss for the expansion would have been brilliant.

Tier 13 was not great content. I blame LFR for giving us simple "A -> B -> A -> B" encounters that the random goons could complete without explanation. They couldn't give as an encounter like Twilight Council or Heroic Rag with multiple different phases and mechanics per encounter. They also couldn't give us "you need to trust a few people not to screw up" mechanics (like gong-clicking, or nef's pillar killing/interrupting) everything had to be bland. It's so dull, that even with the buff off nobody in my guild is enjoying the stuff - I can't even convince them to farm it in order to sell mounts (20k gold/hour/person and it's still not worth doing). IMO the best encounter in there are 10m hagara, 25m pre-nerf yorsahj (it's just a numbers check, the 10% HP nerf in december killed it), and gunship (either size).

If they'd have forced you to do heroic gunship while doing the achivement (no little circles hit the boat) the encounter would have been one of the best of this expansion, but they didn't so it was bad.

As someone who has had guild trouble(******* GMs, falling apart, just getting busy) I real like LFR. But they should have taken the time to make the non-lfr fights more complicated. I really liked working my way through T11 pre-nerfs even though I never did heroics. A lot of fights just had a lot going on that made then fun.

As someone who has had guild trouble(******* GMs, falling apart, just getting busy) I real like LFR. But they should have taken the time to make the non-lfr fights more complicated. I really liked working my way through T11 pre-nerfs even though I never did heroics. A lot of fights just had a lot going on that made then fun.

Yeah, I agree with ya. I played before the nerfs as well. Was annoying having people give me crap for playing as a frost mage, but they quickly shut up when they saw the level of control I brought to the fights. Cho'gall and Maloriak were my favorites in particular for that spec. :]

  • 3 weeks later...

I have a few level 85 characters I play on a daily basis, but I don't know if maybe im getting burned out or not, I just dont find the fights really fun anymore. The past 5 days I have gotten more enjoyment out of farming herbs on my tauren druid, and playing the undercut game on the AH. Its quite funny actually, people always try to get me by a gold or two, and I just move all of my auctions around 20g lower than theirs is. So far, in 3 days (around an hour a day) I have earned close to 5000g from just farming Whiptail, and selling it for 25g a stack, Heartblossom form 50g a stack, and Volital Life's for 25g/10. This (for some stupid reason) is actually making me relax and calm down after work. And i'm making gold for MoP. In case anyone is wondering, my druid is on Stormreaver. It gets interesting on a pvp server trying to farm as well, but for the most part no one messes with you.

Adam's guild is very different from what I'm used to - it's fun, but probably not the sort of group I could see being my main group. The people are cool but the priorities are very different: I wouldn't last if I tried to main-raid there. Still, my guild is dead so helping some people finish up an expansion seems like a pretty good use of my gear. We've always more-or-less shut down between tiers or between expansions because for the most part we're only interested in raiding. Everyone's got more gold than god - they've seen all the content too. In the middle of a tier we can justify farming for 9 months by saying we're preparing for the race next tier - but at the end of an expansion that just isn't true.

I'm selling my last mount this week. I agreed to take cash-monies ($400) instead of gold to sell 2 madness titles + mount + gurglethurgle (if it dropped) to some healer priest and her warrior boyfriend. They were supposed to provide a 7/8h lockout and we'd just do a quick 25m kill to get them their stuff. They brought us a 10m lockout and then it kinda went down hill from there: 3 hours of wiping on platform 4 or head phase because we just couldn't carry 2 useless people on 10m. I'm tempted to return the money and just call it off: it was unbelievably demoralizing - to the point I'll probably not do that encounter again. I like the fact that I can pay for my play time by being "skilled" but sometimes it's just not worth it. $25 for 15 minutes of "fun" is a deal. $80 for 3-6+ hours of "work" is terrible.

If you guys think your real WoW players come play the real WoW not that new crap made by Blizzard 2.0!

Go here http://www.wow-one.com Download the vanilla client and jump on this server to play the realy World of Warcraft the way it was meant to be played lets see if you got what it takes to be a true WoW warrior!

No because this is illegal. Go read Wow`s TOS agreement.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!