Adovir Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Only a few days until BW is supposed to get back to us with our Class questions, I wonder how much of a spit in the face it will be or if they will actually give us some feed back that is deemed useful, because from what ive seen from the sorc/sages their pretty butt hurt about BW's responces and their a community with a serious player base compared to us. but im a lion so it should make up for something right...... im a lion rawr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cjirucha Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Only a few days until BW is supposed to get back to us with our Class questions, I wonder how much of a spit in the face it will be or if they will actually give us some feed back that is deemed useful, because from what ive seen from the sorc/sages their pretty butt hurt about BW's responces and their a community with a serious player base compared to us. but im a lion so it should make up for something right...... im a lion rawr I am also excited to see what they say. Will it be a blatant slap to the face or more of a subtle "we just dont care" kind of answer. Only time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adovir Posted June 4, 2014 Author Share Posted June 4, 2014 I'm still just frustrated at the fact that we had to take all the context out of our questions and then dumb them down even more for them to just take them, that was just a low blow right there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snave Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 I'm still just frustrated at the fact that we had to take all the context out of our questions and then dumb them down even more for them to just take them, that was just a low blow right there We didn't have to take all of the context out, as some one else pointed out it could have been possible for me to strip away a small piece at a time until musco found it acceptable I just found the request rather off putting considering the nature of other class questions and the fact that all pertinent class information was contained there. I also wanted to see if he'd take the same questions without the context thus proving the point that the questions were fine and he just couldn't be bothered passing over the volume of information there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adovir Posted June 5, 2014 Author Share Posted June 5, 2014 true enough but honestly i think we would have shaved alot of the context out before it would have been acceptable to musco any way so either way a lot of it would have been taken out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fire-breath Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 Why so negative? For one, Bioware doesn't need to do the class Q&A. Its a free extra bonus we get. In the past many answers have been of good quality. At times however their view is not the same as our view. Is that 'a slap in the face'? Maybe ... or maybe not and we should grow up a bit and accept it that at times we think different. FACT remains that currently the team is open for conversation. None can even possibly deny that one. About stripping down the questions; this was a request by Erik which was very well intended. He feared it would impact the quality of the answers. Are we really going to call it a low blow if someone is on our side and trying to make the best possible case? I'm for sure not. We should be happy instead. Same about the class Q&A. Be happy that finally bioware opens up. It may not be much, in the past bioware may not always have been true to their word but that doesn't disregard their current approach which shows the willingness to communicate about class balancing (see the recent 2.8 focused feedback and the 2.7 balance sage feedback). To conclude. Yes, I can't wait for Friday. But not because I want to see in which way bioware is going to screw us this time but because I want to know what their view is on the asked questions and what possible balancing scoundrels/operatives can see forward too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adovir Posted June 5, 2014 Author Share Posted June 5, 2014 My main point of bitterness is that If you compair the last few question asked, sage sin and merc, thy all had about 1000 words used ours had 1685 used, while this is a huge discrepancy if you look just slightly closer you realize that it's only 946 words taking out the examples of things effecting our QoL. So essentially we were penalized because we wanted to list what the majority of our QoL problems so they know what they are and not need to ask because the information is right there for them. Actually if you take all the suggestions(from each category) and leave snave's into then question it would only be 721 word. So again it just seems like because we suggested things it hurt us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adovir Posted June 5, 2014 Author Share Posted June 5, 2014 Also remember that the suggestions that we put in there is to help the devs out because it gives the devs something to run with so they don't have to start from scratch thinking about how to make improvements, what they can do is implement the suggestions let the combat team test them out while you brain storm new ideas. As snave said in the actual thread that if he was the devs he would openly welcome the suggestions in the questions because he likes the idea of someone coming to him with a problem and giving him the solutions to those problems it would be helpful to figuring out how to make a solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bstr Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 (edited) thy all had about 1000 words used ours had 1685 used Something to realize is that the class questions have become wordier and wordier. If you take a look at the Scoundrel questions from last summer, they had 799 words in their 3 questions. The first set of questions from this round of questions (by the Sentinels) only had 343 words. Players have stated that the last few questions have gotten very wordy and the "context" and the actual question had multiple questions within it. BioWare had to draw a line somewhere, and decided to draw the line at more than 5x the number of words from the first set of questions this time around. Eric even stated that this was the reason he asked you to reduce the size of the "questions:" My main goal here is that I want to make sure that your questions are answered in a clear and concise way and as part of that, I think there needs be a bit of simplification to your questions. I appreciate how thorough Snave has been in creating some of the supporting information around each question. Part of the issue though in having all of that information is that each question then becomes multiple questions rolled into one. Also, your last two questions had some very strong wording in them that attacked the devs decisions. (For example, "completely neglected Lethality" could have been "no changes to Lethality" and "This was also asked previously but seemingly ignored" could have been "This was also asked previously but there has been no changes.") Eric believed that this got too close to attacking the devs themselves and asked them to be changed. EDIT: For a strongly worded, but not attacking question, similar to the examples mentioned above, check out the third questions from Snipers here: http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?p=7457790#post7457790 Edited June 5, 2014 by Bstr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adovir Posted June 5, 2014 Author Share Posted June 5, 2014 For my self I have a question. When I read the class questions I don't see any real hidden questions, maybe this is a perception problem for me because I helped make them I can't see them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bstr Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 For my self I have a question. When I read the class questions I don't see any real hidden questions, maybe this is a perception problem for me because I helped make them I can't see them Third questions is riddled with questions. Even the first paragraph of the question acknowledges this, then states to only answer the last one. Suggestions in the first two questions can be interpreted as questions: Could we have ________? PvP question has some commands to the devs that could be interpreted as questions. (Could you not refer to "running away" as a defensive move? Could you reintroduce Ranked 8v8?) If not, then it contributes to the fact that it looks like you are attacking the devs here. DPS Ops are in a bad spot for PvE and Ranked PvP and has a few peculiarities / bugs that need to be addressed, but we can only address 3 problems here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adovir Posted June 5, 2014 Author Share Posted June 5, 2014 Third questions is riddled with questions. Even the first paragraph of the question acknowledges this, then states to only answer the last one. Suggestions in the first two questions can be interpreted as questions: Could we have ________? PvP question has some commands to the devs that could be interpreted as questions. (Could you not refer to "running away" as a defensive move? Could you reintroduce Ranked 8v8?) If not, then it contributes to the fact that it looks like you are attacking the devs here. DPS Ops are in a bad spot for PvE and Ranked PvP and has a few peculiarities / bugs that need to be addressed, but we can only address 3 problems here. I still don't see the last part as asking 20 different questions but as bringing up what the problems are so the devs know and by saying this it does seem like we're asking can you fix all of these things, ill concede that. Suggestions are inherently can we have this, I can't think of any way to suggest something with out it being interpreted as can we have this thing. We asked not to refer to run away and heal because they have said to other classes that they are moving away from the whole LoS and heal to full strat because it doesn't really work so we would be offended if they said stealth out and heal back up. Also snave did not ask if they could reintroduce it but that If they do then it would be a slightly more viable strat. Dps ops are ok in PVE right now, they could use some utility skills/QoL improvements to make them more favorable but dps wise it's good. In PVP we struggle with in ability to survive focus from more than one target with out using our combat stealth which is as offensive as it is an escape ability. So I still don't see where we are asking a bunch of smaller questions with in a question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adovir Posted June 5, 2014 Author Share Posted June 5, 2014 But again maybe this is just me and it's a problem that I have that I can't see them and they're actually there but I just can't see them and I am genuinely sorry if this becomes a long drawn out conversation that becomes very frustrating do to my ignorance and that I can't concede your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snave Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 Can we please stop beating this dead horse? There have been about 10 pages of the same things being said on the original thread and then another 2 threads going over it again. If anyone cares enough to know what my opinion is they can go and read it in the other thread, it's nice to see some activity on the forums for a change though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bstr Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 (edited) I still don't see the last part as asking 20 different questions Here are a few of the actual questions from the last part: Would it be difficult to build this in to a top talent in those trees? It was stated that operatives were never intended to use cover as a mechanic, if this is the case why do we still have abilities tied in to using cover? (End of long sentence) do you feel the need to use both cool downs is appropriate? It seems you've acknowledged this to some extent with recent changes but would it be possible to either remove the positional requirement via talents or fix your game engine to properly reflect positions of players during PvP combat? Is this an intentional design and would it be possible to introduce a fixed duration until you left combat that actually worked? Also, most of the previous questions had at most only 1 suggestion, usually stated as how the Representative would change the class to answer their question. (Sage question 3 had multiple suggestions, but their question 3 should have been asked to be refined into only 1 actual question instead of the 1 question with 2 parts they had.) Edited June 11, 2014 by Bstr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adovir Posted June 5, 2014 Author Share Posted June 5, 2014 I'm asking about us asking too many little questions in snave's post, you just quoted me and some other people brain storming questions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cjirucha Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 So when are these answers coming? Did I miss them?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanth Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 So when are these answers coming? Did I miss them?? Wow, Scoundrel and Operative forums feel so dead... Eric got delayed in picking up our questions, was supposed to be the 23rd of May, but delayed to the 27th. The devs take 2 weeks to respond, which should be in today/tomorrow, or maybe it was supposed to be yesterday. I dunno and don't really care anymore, 2.8 update improved scrappers/concealments, although marginally, devs stated for 2.9 they are looking at dirty fighting/lethality. As a scrapper, doesn't seem like much to look forward to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adovir Posted June 11, 2014 Author Share Posted June 11, 2014 Wow, Scoundrel and Operative forums feel so dead... Eric got delayed in picking up our questions, was supposed to be the 23rd of May, but delayed to the 27th. The devs take 2 weeks to respond, which should be in today/tomorrow, or maybe it was supposed to be yesterday. I dunno and don't really care anymore, 2.8 update improved scrappers/concealments, although marginally, devs stated for 2.9 they are looking at dirty fighting/lethality. As a scrapper, doesn't seem like much to look forward to. I've just been waiting idk if I'm just a fool but I just want to get some sort of responce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts