DosPeros Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 The funny thing is, there is an entire thread dedicated to this quote and you're the only one trying to twist the quote in your own way. But I guess you're the only one over here who speak English "properly". What a clown... Wow a thread where everyone agrees!! Point me to this miracle! What I broke down for you is the only logical understanding one can derive from that sentence. He did not say we have a statistical measure of how people feel, he said they have a very good statistical measure of war zone performance. It implies that they look at the metrics to see what falls outside their expectations. Obviously when one group is either above or below expectations then it will mean a high likelihood of dissatisfaction with the product for those who are most adversely affected. It so happens this issue had manifested itself in the forums exactly as would be expected by people QQ. Many people argued the world was flat, and from their narrow uninformed and uneducated point of view they believed they were correct. Much as you do! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bocherel Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Wow a thread where everyone agrees!! Point me to this miracle! What I broke down for you is the only logical understanding one can derive from that sentence. He did not say we have a statistical measure of how people feel, he said they have a very good statistical measure of war zone performance. It implies that they look at the metrics to see what falls outside their expectations. Obviously when one group is either above or below expectations then it will mean a high likelihood of dissatisfaction with the product for those who are most adversely affected. It so happens this issue had manifested itself in the forums exactly as would be expected by people QQ. Many people argued the world was flat, and from their narrow uninformed and uneducated point of view they believed they were correct. Much as you do! LOL, you seriously believe your own crap, fantastic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProfessorWalsh Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 LOL, you seriously believe your own crap, fantastic. He has a point. BioWare saw stun locking as a bad thing as it upset players, upset players don't continue to play. They saw a trend where groups of Operatives would work together to down targets (and yes, I have seen such groups. Not full groups mind you but 2-3 Operatives working in tandem.). They determined that Operatives had the capability to stun lock people. They determined that this was a bad thing and thus they removed the ability for Operatives to stun lock people. That is exactly what happened. It makes far more sense than your logic of, "Operatives are played by fewer people so it was okay to nerf them for no real reason." Operatives were a little on the OP'ed side when used in a specific way, BioWare saw them used in that specific way, BioWare fixed the problem. End of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howbadisbad Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 He has a point. BioWare saw stun locking as a bad thing as it upset players, upset players don't continue to play. They saw a trend where groups of Operatives would work together to down targets (and yes, I have seen such groups. Not full groups mind you but 2-3 Operatives working in tandem.). They determined that Operatives had the capability to stun lock people. They determined that this was a bad thing and thus they removed the ability for Operatives to stun lock people. That is exactly what happened. It makes far more sense than your logic of, "Operatives are played by fewer people so it was okay to nerf them for no real reason." Operatives were a little on the OP'ed side when used in a specific way, BioWare saw them used in that specific way, BioWare fixed the problem. End of story. 2-3 of any class can 'stun lock' Also, true stun lock doesn't even exist due to resolve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redmarx Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 There is no such thing as stun lock. It's just something bad players think is killing them when it's their own lack of knowledge about PVP that confuses them enough to make them think they are stun locked. Bad players ran around solo without PVP skill, without healers and tanks and group tactics of any sort, and got killed by operatives who got the drop on them. Hence the term tactical advantage. Now I would say it is fine to take stealth classes away from that path if the path is simply unsuitable. But then operatives need to have the same tools and buffs provided by marauders or assassins, namely either: a) a tank spec with guard/taunt and better CC + mobility b) a gap closer, heal debuff, immunity cooldowns, and the utility of predation/bloodthirst activated by using Tactical Advantage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bocherel Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) He has a point. BioWare saw stun locking as a bad thing as it upset players, upset players don't continue to play. They saw a trend where groups of Operatives would work together to down targets (and yes, I have seen such groups. Not full groups mind you but 2-3 Operatives working in tandem.). They determined that Operatives had the capability to stun lock people. They determined that this was a bad thing and thus they removed the ability for Operatives to stun lock people. That is exactly what happened. It makes far more sense than your logic of, "Operatives are played by fewer people so it was okay to nerf them for no real reason." Operatives were a little on the OP'ed side when used in a specific way, BioWare saw them used in that specific way, BioWare fixed the problem. End of story. First off, there is no such thing as a 'team of operative', at best it means 4 people in a BG, in reality there is barely one or two operative per WZ. So let alone a team winning their WZ solely on stun lock. Second, mind you but 2/3 of ANY class will "stun lock" anyone under focus and kill it just as fast, this is where the ignorance and ridiculousness of Greg show. Third, no sh*t it upset people ?! That's the WHOLE point, it upset MORE people than it please (3% of people play operative) so who do you think he is going to listen to? The mass. He just admitted it, so get over it instead of trying to justify such a claim. Plus I'm 100% right when I said BW have nobody else but them to blame since they are the one who made the resolve system. If they are not happy with it they should change it. I feel sorry that some common sense and reading comprehension is beyond a couple of people over here. Edited March 21, 2012 by Bocherel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProfessorWalsh Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 a) a tank spec with guard/taunt and better CC + mobility b) a gap closer, heal debuff, immunity cooldowns, and the utility of predation/bloodthirst activated by using Tactical Advantage That would be a good offer but if you wanted the same bonuses of Marauders and Sentinels then you also have to give up all of your stuns. (You can keep one, three second, 10 meter range, channeled stun that stuns you as well and does low damage however.) As well as have your combat vanish only last for 4 seconds. Your immunity cooldowns must cost you a minimum of 50% of your own health as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DosPeros Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 First off, there is no such thing as a 'team of operative', at best it means 4 people in a BG, in reality there is barely one or two operative per WZ. So let alone a team winning their WZ solely on stun lock. Second, mind you but 2/3 of ANY class will "stun lock" anyone under focus and kill it just as fast, this is where the ignorance and ridiculousness of Greg show. Third, no sh*t it upset people ?! That's the WHOLE point, it upset MORE people than it please (3% of people play operative) so who do you think he is going to listen to? The mass. He just admitted it, so get over it instead of trying to justify such a claim. Plus I'm 100% right when I said BW have nobody else but them to blame since they are the one who made the resolve system. If they are not happy with it they should change it. I feel sorry that some common sense and reading comprehension is beyond a couple of people over here. Your own writings condem you for your obvious ignorance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bocherel Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) Your own writings condem you for your obvious ignorance. I guess you have to blame my writings since you can't beat logic; Nice try though Edited March 21, 2012 by Bocherel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatNeechi Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 He has a point. BioWare saw stun locking as a bad thing as it upset players, upset players don't continue to play. They saw a trend where groups of Operatives would work together to down targets (and yes, I have seen such groups. Not full groups mind you but 2-3 Operatives working in tandem.). They determined that Operatives had the capability to stun lock people. They determined that this was a bad thing and thus they removed the ability for Operatives to stun lock people. That is exactly what happened. It makes far more sense than your logic of, "Operatives are played by fewer people so it was okay to nerf them for no real reason." Operatives were a little on the OP'ed side when used in a specific way, BioWare saw them used in that specific way, BioWare fixed the problem. End of story. This makes no sense at all. It doesn't matter how many Operatives are playing and working together, they can't stunlock because of resolve. Eventually, if you keep stunning a player, they become immune to it for a short period. It doesn't matter if it's 3 or 8 Operatives, resolve means only a limited number of stuns may occur per unit time. If you're refering to ROOTS like Sever Tendon specced with Pin Down (2 point talent) in the Concealment tree, they haven't ever and will never address that. Even after 1.2 a group of Operatives will be able to chain root you with you Sever Tendon, and Bioware hasn't once moved against this practice. So, your idea that stunlock makes Operatives OP is just asinine. What made Operatives OP was the instantaneous, front-loaded DPS they could open up with immediately. Players who complained about stunlock had absolutely no clue what the real problem was. Because of the instantaneous front-load DPS, you didn't really have time to react before all that damage came pouring on top of you. Of course, with that front-loaded DPS, even the SLIGHTEST stunlock becomes a game breaker. Well, guess what Professor Walsh, they didn't NERF STUNLOCK. They nerfed the DAMAGE. We can still chain root and chain CC you to a limited degree, Bioware has no problem with that. But, apparently, players complain about tactically minded Operatives who make use of all of their abilities. I respecced into medicine yesterday in preparation for the big Operative 1.2 heal buff, and that's fine. Operatives will become medics now. What then? Going to complain about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProfessorWalsh Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) This makes no sense at all. It doesn't matter how many Operatives are playing and working together, they can't stunlock because of resolve. Eventually, if you keep stunning a player, they become immune to it for a short period. It doesn't matter if it's 3 or 8 Operatives, resolve means only a limited number of stuns may occur per unit time. Unfortunately Neechi, the issue is that the person can be dead before the timer from those limited numbers of stuns has expired. Especially from an Operative duo. I have been killed in 5 seconds from 2 Operatives, I literally never got out of the stun. The problem isn't the stun it is the death from the stun. Thus lowering the damage mitigates the stun lock. Edited March 21, 2012 by ProfessorWalsh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatNeechi Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) Unfortunately Neechi, the issue is that the person can be dead before the timer from those limited numbers of stuns has expired. Especially from an Operative duo. I have been killed in 5 seconds from 2 Operatives, I literally never got out of the stun. LOL Wait, you're saying it is OVERPOWERED for ONE to lose to TWO?? Are you ... serious? Do you even think before you type? Edited March 21, 2012 by TheGreatNeechi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatNeechi Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 I get mowed down by multiple Sentinels in just seconds. You don't see me saying Sentinels are overpowered do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bocherel Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Unfortunately Neechi, the issue is that the person can be dead before the timer from those limited numbers of stuns has expired. Especially from an Operative duo. I have been killed in 5 seconds from 2 Operatives, I literally never got out of the stun. You still don't get it. You can do the same with pretty much every class, I play double commando as well as double operative. If you are not happy about going down in a matter of seconds under a coordinated focus+crowd control then play with a teammate who may help you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatNeechi Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 2 on 1, stun wise, it need not be multiple Operatives... LOL just ONE Operative + Any other class and you've got yourself a stunlock/DPS duo! NERF EVERYBODY!! LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bocherel Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 2 on 1, stun wise, it need not be multiple Operatives... LOL just ONE Operative + Any other class and you've got yourself a stunlock/DPS duo! NERF EVERYBODY!! LOL! Well you don't even need one operative as long as you are playing a duo who have a CC each. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SableShadow Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) 2 on 1, stun wise, it need not be multiple Operatives... LOL just ONE Operative + Any other class and you've got yourself a stunlock/DPS duo! NERF EVERYBODY!! LOL! You're off message: "Nerf everyone except Sents." Unfortunately Neechi, the issue is that the person can be dead before the timer from those limited numbers of stuns has expired. Especially from an Operative duo. I have been killed in 5 seconds from 2 Operatives, I literally never got out of the stun. The problem isn't the stun it is the death from the stun. Thus lowering the damage mitigates the stun lock. Please reconsider this chain of logic: 1) I can't do anything while stunned 2) Since I can't do anything, 2+ people kill me zap bang 3) Therefore, the problem is damage, not that I'm stunned Now, I *do* think there's a point in here; intelligently designed PvP games have a "min play time" associated with them just as PvE games have a "max succeed time". I think, though, they should first look at the system that lets all the min/max shenanigans go on before they single out classes, if you follow me. Edited March 21, 2012 by SableShadow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatNeechi Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 You're off message: "Nerf everyone except Sents." Oh, sorry I forgot. =) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Whiterabbit Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Marauder - the strongest DPS in the game and arguably most powerful PvP class in organized PvP get massive buffs. Operative - the weakest sustained DPS in the game has sustained DPS nerfed while keeping high burst. This should confirm to everyone how clueless Bioware is when it comes to class balance. I've lost all hope. I hate to say it but this puts the nail in the coffin for me. I don't see bioware suddenly having an epiphany and understanding class balance any time in the near future. Do you? Grand Piano on one end box of kittens on the other see you in GW2 tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shiroikage Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Unfortunately Neechi, the issue is that the person can be dead before the timer from those limited numbers of stuns has expired. Especially from an Operative duo. I have been killed in 5 seconds from 2 Operatives, I literally never got out of the stun. The problem isn't the stun it is the death from the stun. Thus lowering the damage mitigates the stun lock. Oh really and what do u think will happen if two coordinated Sents decide to nuke the same operative? Oh, w8! You didnt even need 2 to begin with... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DosPeros Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 I guess you have to blame my writings since you can't beat logic; Nice try though If logic existed in your ill worded ramblings I did not see it. Please feel free to point it out so we can have an intellignet conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bocherel Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 (edited) If logic existed in your ill worded ramblings I did not see it. Please feel free to point it out so we can have an intellignet conversation. You might have an "intellignet" conversation the day you spell it correctly. (See? I can do it too) Edited March 22, 2012 by Bocherel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DosPeros Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 You might have an "intellignet" conversation the day you spell it correctly. (See? I can do it too) Thank you for pointing out my error. When warranted I will correct. So far the only point you have made! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SableShadow Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 You might have an "intellignet" conversation the day you spell it correctly. (See? I can do it too) Thank you for pointing out my error. When warranted I will correct. So far the only point you have made! Get a room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DosPeros Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Get a room. Only if it has twin beds! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts