Bioware AUSTIN has some PR issues right now.

[EricMusco]

Thanks for the response eric. I do have one request.

 

Can we get a WEEKLY UPDATE on the progress of the COMBAT DEV Team's review or "Watching" of the Sage/Sorc class? A great many folks are very concerned this is a brush off and would like to know what different type of watching is being done that the last year of metrics/log/Bug Reports/Forums Posts, etc. can already provide. (Reference "watch Sorcerers' performance and will see if any tweaks need to be made")

 

EDIT: I'm asking because you stated an additional "Combat Dev Team" update was going to happen "Today" when you and Courtney both posted and that was yesterday. I sure hope they are working on something a little more detailed and maybe PR vetted as well for obvious reasons.

 

Hey dscount,

 

I can completely appreciate the request, it is just not something that we would do. Internally, it isn't like we have a meeting once a week to discuss things like this where I can come out of the meeting and provide an update. Part of it is that even if changes were to come for Sorcerers/Sages, they would not be coming for some time. As we have stated we are not really planning any big balance changes coming in to 2.4.

 

What I can say is that I will provide you all with updates as I have them. It just wouldn't be logical that every week I came on the forums and said "still no updates, check back next week!" I know it can be hard sometimes but I assure you that things like this don't fall off my radar and I am always eager to deliver you all updates as I have them.

 

As an example, I can assure you Assassins and Shadows have not been forgotten, I just don't have any new updates. We are still actively having discussions about all classes and their balance but I wont pass that on until we have things locked down and more concrete.

 

-eric

[Satedbuffalo]

To clarify, Eric, are you saying that a weekly update is not something that you/devs would do or that discussion of the types or and/or raw results of and/or dev analysis of metrics (including something more than 'good' or 'bad', but actual metrics) something that you/devs would do?

 

My major frustration with dev responses to class questions has been the near total lack of quantitative data and very poor use of qualitative data in the responses so far. They read like any other forum post - they don't carry the authority of metrics/information/discussions that BW has unique access to. Are you saying that dev responses will always be data/analysis shallow? Is this be design?

 

Perhaps you can clarify whether we can expect deeper answers to future questions or if this is the quality of response (ignoring the tone issue in this most recent round) that the combat teams aspire to produce.

[EricMusco]

To clarify, Eric, are you saying that a weekly update is not something that you/devs would do or that discussion of the types or and/or raw results of and/or dev analysis of metrics (including something more than 'good' or 'bad', but actual metrics) something that you/devs would do?

 

My major frustration with dev responses to class questions has been the near total lack of quantitative data and very poor use of qualitative data in the responses so far. They read like any other forum post - they don't carry the authority of metrics/information/discussions that BW has unique access to. Are you saying that dev responses will always be data/analysis shallow? Is this be design?

 

Perhaps you can clarify whether we can expect deeper answers to future questions or if this is the quality of response (ignoring the tone issue in this most recent round) that the combat teams aspire to produce.

 

I am saying a weekly update is just not something we would likely do. The reason isn't that I am trying to hide anything, it is just that I simply wouldn't actually have an update every week. If I had an update every week on a specific topic (such as Sorc/Sage changes) I would absolutely give them to you

 

I guess in short I am saying I can't really aim to give a weekly update (because there isn't likely to be anything to update about) but like anything else, I will be sure to update you as early and often as I can.

 

-eric

 

PS - I will pass on your feedback about trying to supply more supportive data in our answers.

[idnewton]

PS - I will pass on your feedback about trying to supply more supportive data in our answers.

 

This is only half of what we want to see. The other half is, when you do realize you have no supportive data, to say so. Realize the class needs adjustment, and act on it.

[Ottoattack]

I have not seen that BW responded to this forum yesterday, but that's nice that they did. Edited August 28, 2013 by Ottoattack

[Satedbuffalo]

I will pass on your feedback about trying to supply more supportive data in our answers.

 

Awesome, awesome, awesome, thanks for clarifying. I'd expect anything close to a weekly update would be of relatively poor quality, so I am very pleased by this answer. The general timeline y'all have traced it great (honestly, the turn around time on your end seems short for the kinds of questions that are being asked!).

 

Supportive data or even more in depth analysis would definitely move these responses from what has so far felt like PR into a really valuable resource for players and devs alike.

 

(Thanks for the fast response!)

[AdrianDmitruk]

I am saying a weekly update is just not something we would likely do. The reason isn't that I am trying to hide anything, it is just that I simply wouldn't actually have an update every week. If I had an update every week on a specific topic (such as Sorc/Sage changes) I would absolutely give them to you

 

I guess in short I am saying I can't really aim to give a weekly update (because there isn't likely to be anything to update about) but like anything else, I will be sure to update you as early and often as I can.

 

-eric

 

PS - I will pass on your feedback about trying to supply more supportive data in our answers.

 

Now as far as the "more supportive data in our answers" bit goes...

 

Part of the reason why we sorcs had a PR Perception Problem was because Bioware's response to our Q&A specifically lacked any quantitative data/statistics/metrics to support the points the developers were trying to convey. As a consequence, it was easy for those of us who were experienced with and familiar with the class, as well as the way such classes are generally intended to play, to write off the response as "Umm. No. Do the devs even play their own game?"

 

Therefore, we sorcs healed the forums to full in an effort to Make The Devs Pay over the weekend.

 

Now are there any plans to re-do the sorcerer answers to actually provide us with the quantitative data you rely on to make the decision that sorcerers were not in need of balance changes? If not, why not? We sorcs deserve at least the same consideration you showed snipers and sentinels in providing hard data to back up your answers, and we find that consideration sorely lacking even as Bioware now attempts to tamp down the damage.

[Satedbuffalo]

NWe sorcs deserve at least the same consideration you showed snipers and sentinels in providing hard data to back up your answers...

 

Oh no, don't let them think that those answers were okay. Better than what we got for sorcs and PTs in terms of tone, for sure, but hard data? Not even close.

[AdrianDmitruk]

Oh no, don't let them think that those answers were okay. Better than what we got for sorcs and PTs in terms of tone, for sure, but hard data? Not even close.

 

You got more data/metrics to support your answers than we got! (Which was absolutely zero)

[JimG]

My major frustration with dev responses to class questions has been the near total lack of quantitative data and very poor use of qualitative data in the responses so far. They read like any other forum post - they don't carry the authority of metrics/information/discussions that BW has unique access to. Are you saying that dev responses will always be data/analysis shallow? Is this be design?

And what data was provided in the questions? These questions read as basically being based on perception or an anecdotal "feel" of gameplay. I didn't read the questions submitted to the class rep, but if there was data there, then the class rep did a poor job of writing the questions to BW. So if they aren't supplied with any data, then why would they need to expend significant time pulling together data to refute something that doesn't have any data backing it up in the first place? The answers gave as much detail and data as the questions did.

We sorcs deserve at least the same consideration you showed snipers and sentinels in providing hard data to back up your answers, and we find that consideration sorely lacking even as Bioware now attempts to tamp down the damage.

You must be reading different forums than the rest of us. The Sent/Marauder and the Sniper/Gunslinger answers had no hard data and the answers were 1 and done. So you got the same consideration as those classes.

[warstory]

I am saying a weekly update is just not something we would likely do. The reason isn't that I am trying to hide anything, it is just that I simply wouldn't actually have an update every week. If I had an update every week on a specific topic (such as Sorc/Sage changes) I would absolutely give them to you

 

I guess in short I am saying I can't really aim to give a weekly update (because there isn't likely to be anything to update about) but like anything else, I will be sure to update you as early and often as I can.

 

-eric

 

PS - I will pass on your feedback about trying to supply more supportive data in our answers.

 

, they are not going to change anything. I can bet money that if they do anything it will be a redesign which will probably come with the next expansion.

 

They do not understand what the problems are, their data numbers look good. The barrier has extended time to death the way they wanted it to.

 

There is a saying that you can not manage from behind a desk. You have to get on the floor e.i. Play the class to understand the problems.

 

Just like how weaken mind was all fluff numbers pre 2.0. Heal numbers are the same no one off heals as a dps sage, we can easily get 200k healing for just trying to keep ourselves alive. So our off heal numbers look good from behind the desk.

 

Tk sage ha the worst problems of all 3 spec because our root is tied to tk wave. I like that its tied to that skill but how we get that skill to proc I don't like. The proc chance is too low at 30%. How can we constistanly kite when our spec is inconsistent. Does that make sense to anyone

 

Does playing an offensive spec defensively make sense to anyone. Dps means damage per second how do u dish out dmg when u are forced to play defensively.

 

All I read yesterday and today is lip service ignorant (lack of knowledge) developers of how their own game works.

Edited August 28, 2013 by warstory

[warstory]

I know what lip service from dev teams looks like, I was there in swg And told smedley his game would not get better if he did not roll back nge. He quoted me saying it will (lip service). I am now here telling these devs that making a class that has to play defensively and use LOS in a game where melee can jump to u is flawed design.

 

Anyways I am done talking I got to get back to levelling my sent cause something has to change.

Edited August 28, 2013 by warstory

[CosmicKat]

 

They do not understand what the problems are, their data numbers look good. The barrier has extended time to death the way they wanted it to.

...

 

They don't understand the MMO market or the MMO player.

 

They designed this game for a particular type of player that never bothered to show up. I'm not sure what type of player they were designing for, but apparently they don't exist. Console gamers who secretly wish they played PC games instead?

 

Who did show up was MMO and RPG veterans. The 1-55 game is face roll easy and turned off a huge percentage of those players.

 

Their response to the failure to launch has been hit and miss.

 

They've added and improved many "quality of life" and fluff features, quite well actually. But then they made ALL of it "extra charge" and pissed off even more people.

 

The 1-50 game has received zero attention. Its exactly as it was at launch. It's the game's albatross. Without a compelling levelling game, it's going to lose 80% of the people who ever try it before they even get close to the endgame, if previous history is any indication. This part of the game should have been drastically overhauled within the first 6 months. But they continue to pour all non-CM resources into expanding the endgame.

[Tatile]

The 1-50 game has received zero attention. Its exactly as it was at launch. It's the game's albatross. Without a compelling levelling game, it's going to lose 80% of the people who ever try it before they even get close to the endgame, if previous history is any indication. This part of the game should have been drastically overhauled within the first 6 months. But they continue to pour all non-CM resources into expanding the endgame.

 

I can think of a few things, but apparently story content is the lowest of the low priorities.

[CosmicKat]

I can think of a few things, but apparently story content is the lowest of the low priorities.

 

Everyone to whom story is important is already here.

 

They should have worried about the 8/10 who are no longer here and why they are no longer here. Story and endgame were not the reasons.

 

A lot of TOR's problems at launch were similar to City of Heroes' problems at launch. Too easy, too solo, too repetitive. CoH fixed/improved those issues within months and had a long, healthy life. TOR won't at this pace.

[Tsillah]

I really like this game. Is that allowed?

[AdrianDmitruk]

And what data was provided in the questions? These questions read as basically being based on perception or an anecdotal "feel" of gameplay. I didn't read the questions submitted to the class rep, but if there was data there, then the class rep did a poor job of writing the questions to BW. So if they aren't supplied with any data, then why would they need to expend significant time pulling together data to refute something that doesn't have any data backing it up in the first place? The answers gave as much detail and data as the questions did.

 

Asked and answered; second paragraph. TL;DR: We players do not have the tools to objectively and accurately parse PVP efficacy, unlike PVE NiM parses, in a controlled environment; the devs do but fail to utilize it.

 

You must be reading different forums than the rest of us. The Sent/Marauder and the Sniper/Gunslinger answers had no hard data and the answers were 1 and done. So you got the same consideration as those classes.

 

From sent, first question they basically gave sents what they wanted no questions asked

 

second question

 

It is also unlikely that you are testing on a target dummy with your own personal armor-debuffer (which you should definitely have against a real raid boss). So that 9% gap you may be seeing on target dummies is closer to approximately 4% in reality.

 

All

 

That alone is more hard data than we sorcs got. You may feel the sent response was light on metrics but it is just sad they didn't even bother to try with the sorcs.

 

Third question didn't give sents what they wanted but they said the only reason why they weren't giving it to them was because it would put sents even further ahead than everyone else (and they did so respectfully).

 

You were right about the sniper (I just reread) but they acknowledged lethality/eng hybrid does more damage than full lethality if there are adds and they don't like that but must figure out how to fix it.

 

Ironically Bioware tried to cite burnout in response to pyro concerns but got trounced by the PVE parses that said it still wasn't doing enough.

 

PVP balance questions by their nature will be qualitative and not quantitative, but we want some of what Bioware was smoking when they said sorc survivability and damage was as intended because of "heal to full" i.e. unacknowledged hybrid tax.

[Tatile]

I really like this game. Is that allowed?

 

Only if you also like avocado.

[Tsillah]

Only if you also like avocado.

 

Oh I do, cause I love guacamole. Nacho's and guacamole are the bomb.

[Tatile]

Oh I do, cause I love guacamole. Nacho's and guacamole are the bomb.

 

Then feel free to like the game.

 

(It's possible to like something and yet still find fault with it or problematic elements. In fact, that's probably the best place to be when it comes to a medium like this - hailing something's perfection stagnates it, calling out the flaws for review allows evolution and development.)

[Kesphin]

Just reroll sniper. It's a waste of time. When something's broken, they just forget it and remove it from the game.

[SlimsPicken]

The real issue is the fact that 2 people doing all PVP/combat balance is not a "team"

 

its two people.

 

two opinions, narrow focus.

 

You dont have a true advocate for some classes/specs performance, because simply, two people cannot play 8 ACs/3 skill trees.

 

And unless they play themselves, they really cannot know the issues at hand with some specs being so far out of balance.

[Andryah]

Just reroll sniper. It's a waste of time. When something's broken, they just forget it and remove it from the game.

 

Actually, there is a certain valid self-interest in diversifying your play across multiple classes in any MMO (well.. except for maybe TSW).

 

Classes are always evolving in an MMO, and balance changes are a part of that. Some you like.. some you hate. If you like an MMO intrinsically.. then inoculate yourself from the class wars that are inevitable by diversifying your account to multiple classes you like to play.

 

First thing I rolled in this game was a sniper.. because at the end of the day.. I know from years of playing MMOs.. I always like playing a ranged pure dps class. From there I branched out into other classes.. because I also know playing a pure ranged dps all the freaking time gets old and there might be patches in the games life cycle where I don't like some changes made to the class either.

 

Pragmatism. Play smarter, not harder.

Edited August 29, 2013 by Andryah

[dscount]

Hey dscount,

 

I can completely appreciate the request, it is just not something that we would do. Internally, it isn't like we have a meeting once a week to discuss things like this where I can come out of the meeting and provide an update. Part of it is that even if changes were to come for Sorcerers/Sages, they would not be coming for some time. As we have stated we are not really planning any big balance changes coming in to 2.4.

 

What I can say is that I will provide you all with updates as I have them. It just wouldn't be logical that every week I came on the forums and said "still no updates, check back next week!" I know it can be hard sometimes but I assure you that things like this don't fall off my radar and I am always eager to deliver you all updates as I have them.

 

As an example, I can assure you Assassins and Shadows have not been forgotten, I just don't have any new updates. We are still actively having discussions about all classes and their balance but I wont pass that on until we have things locked down and more concrete.

 

-eric

 

Thank you for your response! While I do appreciate "semi-bad" news it is at least honest and upfront information.

 

I'm not sure what's needed to help move the DEV team along, but I think this class has been waiting for some resolution for a while. I can understand major class changes not happening in 2.4 or even in 2013, but I can honestly say you are going to lose a lot more interest in this class if your team can't get the lead out. The data has been present for a while, the problems have been stated for a while, but for some reason "utility" appears to be great on paper, but poorly effective in reality.

 

PLEASE: Throw this class a bone and at least tweak SOMETHING immediately that helps address one or more issues. CRIT is an issue you say? OKAY then double "Seeping Darkness/Penetrating Light" while you continue to analyze the elusive utility balancing metrics. That is a single numerical value PATCH and even in a clustered Oracle/SQL Database that has a single digit value can be changed fairly easy.

 

I'm going to be just as honest with you as you have with us:

 

You really don't have a couple months left to screw around on this class balancing. It's broken you know, we know it and everyone seems to be in agreement it has issues. What's the hold up? When PVP 4x4 rolls out you are going to see FOTM and a crap ton of QQ on Sage/Sorc forums like you do now, but worse.

 

Waiting another 4-6 months is most likely not an option for a great many people of which have left or already rolled FOTM positions that don't have half the problems (Armor/Energy). I've been waiting patiently for over year+ since the great 1.2 NERF and this is why you have such a volume of NEGATIVE forum's right now. Nobody has been listening or at least responding based on the lack of action or response over the past year.

 

Thanks for reading. (Yes I know your team does actually read most of our posts even if no response)

Edited August 29, 2013 by dscount

[LordArtemis]

Give sorcs the original overload back, disable it in PVP, give them the current overload under a different name.

 

Give classes stances that allow them to alter their role substantially in order to fit content needs.

 

For instance, a Sorc healer has two stances...one is "dark storm", boosting all offensive output by 15 to 20 percent but reducing healing by 50 to 75 percent, or "dark power", giving them a boost of 5 to 10 percent on healing, reduces threat by 30 percent with no DPS boost, but have the ability to cast the following abilities.....

 

AoE leech - medium strength AoE attack, returns 20 percent of damage as health to caster.

Single target leech - strong strength single target attack, returns 20 percent of damage as health to caster.

 

Something similar can be done for all DPS healers.

 

Basically you solve the problem by adding buffs or debuffs, abilities or disabled/altered abilities depending on the type of play the character is involved in. Flashpoints, PVP, Arena or plain world PVE.