I tried putting Auto-Shoot in one of my hotkeys. You have to hit it twice, since it’s a toggle, but it also breaks the freeze. However, it still delays the action. So, it’s not movement that breaks the freeze. It’s hitting another key. Hit a series (or batch) of keys and it’s good. BUT, it means no mana in a very short time. Standing still and seeing other players freeze? How is that broken? Hit a key. It’s spell batching that’s not working for us and it’s pretty frustrating. Thanks for anything you can do to fix this! 
You are correct Morgane… moving just so happens to be hitting a key… so in the end at the moment it appears that sending server an action (ie casting a spell, moving…) will cause the server to update the game on our side…
=(
this!
Blizzard’s responses are like buying time. Please find a fix. You have enough complaints to find a pattern.
When are you asz clowns going to admit there is an issue and provide us means to either test it for you or see that you are making progress.
if I could I would ask for a refund for my sub since I don’t play retail where this does not occur for me and I will not load it up on Windows just to play the game
Really annoying… I am just venting now…
There has been no update on this thread for some time so who knows what is going on…
I just hit 120 on my shammy and as I was starting the quest lines in Vol’dun the lag was horrible when I was completing the intro quest line… the part well you escape the starting zone in the back of the carriage… only to be hit with the lag… which froze the carriage in place … but since I can not input during this phase I am stuck waiting for WoW to catch…
Out of frustration… switched to another toon to do some WQs… took me three tries to complete The Cycle of Life quest for Scrollsage Nola… LAG… in fact all the turtle WQs are just frustrating to do cuz the lag hits hard and there is nothing to do about it but wait it…
Just venting… just venting… and waiting for Blue Poster to tell me again how it is my home network causing this… =(
This is still a problem for me when I fire this up on MacOS.
Windows Bootcamp is fine.
Seriously, same machine bootcamp is clean so its something in the wow client; I am tempted to run a copy of Parallels within MacOS to see if that has an issue but I doubt it would
Just wanted to chime in and say I am having the exact same issues - on a Mac - and I also have the U-verse 5268AC modem. It seems odd for that to be a coincidence.
I have used the hot spot on my phone to connect to the internet and the problem goes away, but on Wi-Fi the channeling lag always happens.
EDIT: the issue is in Classic, I haven’t checked retail.
HELLOOOOOO BLIZZZAAAAARRRDDDDDDD.
Are you even looking?
Perhaps we should make a political comment to get attention to this thread…
Hey folks,
We appreciate the information provided thus far. From the tests we’re seeing, every single one of you is having packet loss between your PC/Router which persists through your whole pathping. Why this would occur exclusively on your mac partition we’re not sure yet, but from the tests thus far it does look like there’s some issue with the way the router’s handling the packets. If you get really close to the router or swap to an ethernet cable if you have the option available, does the issue persist?
If you haven’t posted this information yet, we still need it to ensure we’re not looking at a coincidence.
1 Like
Well I ran Pathping and Traceroute with my Mac Pro connected to router via ethernet cable and here are my numbers…
Pathping
1 gateway.home (192.168.254.254) 0.973 ms 0.977 ms 0.632 ms 0.655 ms 0.629 ms 0.693 ms * 0.975 ms 0.797 ms 0.534 ms 0.664 ms 0.512 ms * 0.940 ms 0.760 ms 0.625 ms 0.682 ms 0.835 ms * 0.812 ms (15% loss)
2 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (100% loss)
3 172.102.111.184 (172.102.111.184) 4.495 ms
172.102.99.122 (172.102.99.122) 4.948 ms
172.102.111.186 (172.102.111.186) 5.364 ms
172.102.111.184 (172.102.111.184) 4.690 ms 3.185 ms
172.102.111.186 (172.102.111.186) 6.231 ms
172.102.111.184 (172.102.111.184) 5.214 ms 3.645 ms
172.102.111.186 (172.102.111.186) 6.225 ms
172.102.99.122 (172.102.99.122) 5.366 ms
172.102.111.186 (172.102.111.186) 5.923 ms 3.830 ms
172.102.104.46 (172.102.104.46) 6.392 ms
172.102.111.184 (172.102.111.184) 6.070 ms
172.102.104.46 (172.102.104.46) 4.438 ms
172.102.99.122 (172.102.99.122) 6.730 ms
172.102.104.46 (172.102.104.46) 4.864 ms
172.102.111.184 (172.102.111.184) 6.626 ms
172.102.104.46 (172.102.104.46) 4.410 ms
172.102.99.122 (172.102.99.122) 6.757 ms (0% loss)
4 ae8---0.scr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.37) 3.513 ms
ae8---0.scr02.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.49) 4.912 ms
ae8---0.scr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.37) 3.579 ms 3.435 ms 3.652 ms 3.500 ms
ae8---0.scr02.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.49) 4.586 ms 4.640 ms 5.024 ms
ae8---0.scr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.37) 3.588 ms 3.695 ms
ae8---0.scr02.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.49) 4.818 ms
ae8---0.scr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.37) 3.389 ms 3.500 ms
ae8---0.scr02.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.49) 4.662 ms
ae8---0.scr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.37) 3.368 ms
ae8---0.scr02.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.49) 4.719 ms 4.737 ms
ae8---0.scr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.37) 3.323 ms
ae8---0.scr02.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.49) 4.833 ms (0% loss)
5 ae1---0.cbr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.214) 4.121 ms 4.060 ms 4.110 ms
ae0---0.cbr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.198) 3.504 ms 6.112 ms 7.575 ms 3.619 ms
ae1---0.cbr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.214) 4.364 ms
ae0---0.cbr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.198) 3.784 ms
ae1---0.cbr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.214) 4.046 ms 4.043 ms
ae0---0.cbr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.198) 3.706 ms 3.752 ms 3.499 ms 3.508 ms
ae1---0.cbr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.214) 4.540 ms 3.998 ms 4.261 ms
ae0---0.cbr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.198) 3.894 ms
ae1---0.cbr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.214) 4.089 ms (0% loss)
6 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (100% loss)
7 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (100% loss)
8 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (100% loss)
9 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (100% loss)
10 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (100% loss)
Traceroute
1 gateway.home (192.168.254.254) 1.009 ms 0.751 ms 0.635 ms
2 * * *
3 172.102.104.46 (172.102.104.46) 4.155 ms
172.102.111.184 (172.102.111.184) 6.367 ms
172.102.99.122 (172.102.99.122) 4.436 ms
4 ae8---0.scr02.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.49) 4.701 ms 4.564 ms
ae8---0.scr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.37) 3.405 ms
5 ae0---0.cbr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.198) 3.548 ms
ae1---0.cbr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.214) 5.670 ms
ae0---0.cbr01.lsan.ca.frontiernet.net (74.40.3.198) 3.764 ms
6 * * *
7 * * *
8 * * *
9 * * *
10 * * *
Still wondering why this only happens on my Mac but not on PC…
=(
Polynomial,
What IP address did you run this test to? It seems to stop before it gets anywhere near our servers so we can’t see all the info we’re after unfortunately. It definitely looks cleaner than others but I’m still seeing that high loss between PC/Router in the first hop.
Reposting this so it doesn’t get lost in conversation:
Thanks everyone for being so proactive and patient with this! It’s frustrating with it being so persistent and going on a long while now.
[/quote]
1 Like
Hey Drakuloth,
I followed the instruction from your link… and used the 137.221.105.2 (US West) as the IP address in the commands… per the instructions…
Did I do something wrong…???
Was i suppose to let the Pathping or Traceroute run a bit longer???
I can redo and post the results again… if you need me to…
Polynomial,
No, you did it correctly, it just looks like part of the internet is blocking the test so unfortunately we can’t see the whole test. I’ll need to watch this thread for more reports to see if we can determine any network/ISP quality issues.
1 Like
I solved my problem by simply deleting my classic game install and saying screw it. There was just no point considering the aggravation of trying
the simple fact Drak, is for many of us this only occurs with the Classic client and not retail.
You may be getting lucky with the PC if it’s connected to the same router. Your router is showing a rather significant 15% packet loss. Overall packet loss is likely smaller percentage-wise over time, but any packet loss at the router will result in no signal or delayed signals sent and thus received by the game client.
The first thing I’d do is power cycle the router. Not simply a reset, but a full unplug and re-plug, waiting at least 30 seconds until you plug the power connector back into it. This way you (hopefully) eliminate it as a variable in this frustrating equation.
Then we can go from there.
The reason I didn’t point that specific thing out just yet is that I’m still waiting for more pathping tests to come in. Back in the day a lot of macs would show 13% packet loss when everything was fine. I suspect that this is the case now but with 15% instead, but without more tests I can’t be sure. I will say that nearly everybody here and who’s reported this through tickets has the packet loss, but it may be a quirk of macOS.
Oddly enough, the one I tested in office now shows no loss despite being on wifi so that’s why I need more info. I’m mostly suspect because it’s exactly 15% on these.
1 Like
I have done a complete power cycle (unplug… wait long period of time…) with no improvement…
And the problem may well be the router…
The thing that keeps bothering me is that I can be logged into WoW and experience this awful lag… and at he same time be logged into WoW(on a different account) with a PC laptop and not get the same lag…
AND… I got this router earlier this year when I activated my account with my provider… there was no hint of lag up until Aug… before that… no problems…
Again not denying that something could have gone wrong with router in Aug… but… BUT… how come my gaming experience changes with a PC… on the same router… yeah that is the thing that keeps bothering me… =(
1 Like
If indeed it is a macOS thing, one thing to look into is whether or not the MTU size is causing the problems. Back in the early days of OS X, it was recommended to lower the MTU size from 1500 to 1420. If this issue is cropping up again on modern OS X, it might be worth revisiting that alternative.
1 Like