MisterBlackJack Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 This post is a preemptive warning to Bioware based on what was stated by Jack Wood at the Los Angeles Cantina Tour. Was listening to one of my favorite podcast, Ootinicast, recent episode (147) and they were running down some of the information that was received by one of the community members who spoke to Mr Wood after the Q&A. A lot of good small info that has me really excited. However this one info has me concern, which is currently only GMs will have the power to pilot the guild flagship from one place to the next. If this is apart of your testing then I would strongly encourage against it as it put too much owness on one person as well as limits the use of the flagship if the GM is not on when the guild needs it. At the very least allow the GM to give authority to a few of their high ranking officers so it gives more flexibility Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth_Wicked Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 Ahoy, Cap'n. Wherrr uzz beess seilinn' toad-ayyyy...?!?! ARRRGHHHHHHHHHH... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
znihilist Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 This post is a preemptive warning to Bioware based on what was stated by Jack Wood at the Los Angeles Cantina Tour. Was listening to one of my favorite podcast, Ootinicast, recent episode (147) and they were running down some of the information that was received by one of the community members who spoke to Mr Wood after the Q&A. A lot of good small info that has me really excited. However this one info has me concern, which is currently only GMs will have the power to pilot the guild flagship from one place to the next. If this is apart of your testing then I would strongly encourage against it as it put too much owness on one person as well as limits the use of the flagship if the GM is not on when the guild needs it. At the very least allow the GM to give authority to a few of their high ranking officers so it gives more flexibility Or at least let there be an option in Guild Management to assign that privilege to certain guild ranks in the same way invite and kick are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjonxb Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 I would wager that the decision is less about them only wanting GM's to have the rights and more making implementing this easier. The issues that could come up if multiple people are on a ship with the rights to move a ship could be a bit crazy. I would rather they keep it this way for launch so they can focus on other things and then later on figure out a graceful solution to handle this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ergos Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 I would wager that the decision is less about them only wanting GM's to have the rights and more making implementing this easier. The issues that could come up if multiple people are on a ship with the rights to move a ship could be a bit crazy. I would rather they keep it this way for launch so they can focus on other things and then later on figure out a graceful solution to handle this. Sadly if they would leave it like that for release, then i doubt they would go back and try to get it to work as "intended" The list of old buggs that havent been fixed, and other things in game that needs fixing makes the obvious. Think BW would use the old "If its not broken why fix it" meaning if people dont complain, then work on new stuff, instead of fixing old stuff (allready released) So i really hope they dont release it that way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icestar Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 (edited) I think this will lead to mass exodus from many guilds into those guilds who have a active guildmaster that follows what the guild wants. Imagine a guild buying a flagship for many millions only to be wasted on a guildmaster that does not know what to make of it. I would not stay in that kind of guild. Edited June 23, 2014 by Icestar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjonxb Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 (edited) Sadly if they would leave it like that for release, then i doubt they would go back and try to get it to work as "intended" The list of old buggs that havent been fixed, and other things in game that needs fixing makes the obvious. Think BW would use the old "If its not broken why fix it" meaning if people dont complain, then work on new stuff, instead of fixing old stuff (allready released) So i really hope they dont release it that way I wouldn't say that is true. Look at GSF and all of the additions it has received since it was originally released. I wouldn't say GSF was incomplete it was released either. It is all part of Agile (which Bioware follows). Edited June 23, 2014 by ninjonxb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghoul_drool Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 There was a ton of stuff revealed in that podcast about guild ships and housing that I wasn't aware of yet. Good listen. Thanks for the heads up on Reddit, OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeterno Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 The E7 tie-in nugget is exciting! Nice to see we're gonna at least try to hop on SW the hype train. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth_Wicked Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 (edited) I wouldn't say that is true. Look at GSF and all of the additions it has received since it was originally released. I wouldn't say GSF was incomplete it was released either. It is all part of Agile (which Bioware follows). And why not look at this, while at it? Hey folks, I wanted to give you all an update on the new ship role that Bruce had mentioned previously in his roadmap, slated for Game Update 2.8. Unfortunately, that ship role has been pushed out indefinitely. Not to say it is impossible to be brought in at a future date, but it has been pushed off of our current roadmap. (...) Because it is inconvenient for some? Probably so. I think this will lead to mass exodus from many guilds into those guilds who have a active guildmaster that follows what the guild wants. Imagine a guild buying a flagship for many millions only to be wasted on a guildmaster that does not know what to make of it. I would not stay in that kind of guild. My experience with MMO's is fairly limited but even so, one can see from a mile away the kind of person that the GM usually is, unless he suffers from the RARE psychotic outbreak whenever a new feature is released. Edited June 23, 2014 by Darth_Wicked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 At the very least allow the GM to give authority to a few of their high ranking officers so it gives more flexibility Absolutely. To plan it otherwise is just nonsensical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjonxb Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 And why not look at this, while at it? Because it is inconvenient for some? Probably so. Whats your point? That is one example of something they delayed compared to the other improvements that we have actually gotten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth_Wicked Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 (edited) Whats your point? That is one example of something they delayed compared to the other improvements that we have actually gotten. My point is fairly obvious in fact. Ergos pointed out a SEVERE ISSUE, which is Bioware slacking on stuff which has released in the past, including some old bugs which he finds bothersome I assume. You on the other hand found pertinent - for whatever reason - to mention GSF, as if the latter is a fine example of a feature that was added to the game and supported throughout its lifetime adequately. I have shown it HAS NOT. That Bioware chose to delay indefinitely(!!!) some GSF-related stuff in order to focus on the upcoming expansion. Thus... I wouldn't say that is true. Look at GSF and all of the additions it has received since it was originally released. I wouldn't say GSF was incomplete it was released either. It is all part of Agile (which Bioware follows). Your point is moot. That which Ergos says stands. Edited June 23, 2014 by Darth_Wicked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghoul_drool Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 Some details on housing that I heard in the Ootinicast that the OP linked. - Three dimensional item placement is in. You'll be able to rotate and even tilt items.- You will have autonomy in what sort of rooms you unlock. You'll be able to choose from several templates of rooms, making your Stronghold very distinct from others.- You will be able to give keys to your Stronghold to other players for permanent access to it. Of course, you can also ban players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghoul_drool Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 Absolutely. To plan it otherwise is just nonsensical. Definitely. Real world problems are a thing, it would be a shame for an entire guild to miss out on the weekly event because the GM was sick or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth_Wicked Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 Some details on housing that I heard in the Ootinicast that the OP linked. - Three dimensional item placement is in. You'll be able to rotate and even tilt items. - You will have autonomy in what sort of rooms you unlock. You'll be able to choose from several templates of rooms, making your Stronghold very distinct from others. - You will be able to give keys to your Stronghold to other players for permanent access to it. Of course, you can also ban players. I wonder... Do we get to... Errrrrr... "Confiscate" other people's decorations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjonxb Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 My point is fairly obvious in fact. Ergos pointed out a SEVERE ISSUE, which is Bioware slacking on stuff which has released in the past, including some old bugs which he finds bothersome I assume. You on the other hand found pertinent - for whatever reason - to mention GSF, as if the latter is a fine example of a feature that was added to the game and supported throughout its lifetime adequately. I have shown it HAS NOT. That Bioware chose to delay indefinitely(!!!) some GSF-related stuff in order to focus on the upcoming expansion. Thus... Your point is moot. That which Ergos says stands. I mention GSF because regardless of the fact that this new class has been indefinitely delayed. We HAVE gotten improvements to GSF. I also mention GSF because it is a recent example of an expansion that they released and have since added various improvements and features to GSF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sangrar Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 when I get one of those ships myself I will want only me and one or two of our higher ups in control of it so I think it would be great if we could give privilege to certain people, I just do not want a random new recruit coming aboard the ship and piloting the ship away against my orders Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth_Wicked Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 (edited) I mention GSF because regardless of the fact that this new class has been indefinitely delayed. We HAVE gotten improvements to GSF. Improvements ≠ New Features I also mention GSF because it is a recent example of an expansion that they released and have since added various improvements and features to GSF. "Recent"...?! GSF was first released over half a year ago(!). Edited June 23, 2014 by Darth_Wicked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjonxb Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 (edited) Improvements ≠ New Features "Recent"...?! GSF was first released over half a year ago(!). (Depending on when we call the release, subs got access in 2.5) 2.6: -Bomber Role -Team Deathmatch 2.7: -New GSF map I can't find the note but somewhere in there they added the screen that shows you your history playing GSF (which I would call a new feature) Edit: Software world... 6 months is recent Edited June 23, 2014 by ninjonxb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth_Wicked Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 (Depending on when we call the release, subs got access in 2.5) 2.6: -Bomber Role -Team Deathmatch 2.7: -New GSF map I can't find the note but somewhere in there they added the screen that shows you your history playing GSF (which I would call a new feature) The fact that they chose to overstretch the content over two months doesn't make it new last I checked. For example... If I had just seen the first James Bond movie, would it be logical for me to consider it "new"? Edit: Software world... 6 months is recent Subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apeth Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 I agree op, all starships have helmsman and first officers to take duty when the captains entertaining some strippers in his room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 I mention GSF because regardless of the fact that this new class has been indefinitely delayed. We HAVE gotten improvements to GSF. I also mention GSF because it is a recent example of an expansion that they released and have since added various improvements and features to GSF. GSF will prove to be one of this games biggest mistakes imo. THREE update cycles for something very few people wanted, followed by stagnation. GSF wasn't what PvPers wanted, it wasn't what PvEers wanted. Personally, I love it...but I'm in the extreme minority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjonxb Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 The fact that they chose to overstretch the content over two months doesn't make it new last I checked. For example... If I had just seen the first James Bond movie, would it be logical for me to consider it "new"? Subjective. I am talking about Software Development patterns here. A movie does not relate in the slightest. A movie comes out and then its done. Maybe we get a sequel but thats a different movie. Not an iteration on the original movie. They originally released GSF with 2.5 to all subscribers. At that point GSF was basically feature complete. They could have kept it the way it was and not add features to it. But they did because Bioware follows the Agile development pattern. This means that they release something as soon as it has minimum viability to be released and is then later iterated on. For marketing reasons they just happened to call the first version an early release. Bioware could very easily add additional features and changes post release of strongholds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaximilianPower Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 (Depending on when we call the release, subs got access in 2.5) 2.6: -Bomber Role -Team Deathmatch 2.7: -New GSF map I can't find the note but somewhere in there they added the screen that shows you your history playing GSF (which I would call a new feature) Edit: Software world... 6 months is recent You're right, of course. More than this, too...multiple new ships (first T3 strikes and scouts, then the T3 GS and bomber in 2.8) and a number of QoL improvements/tweaks (eliminating ion railgun lovetaps, putting a stop to capital ship fire in TDM). Just because BW withheld the release of one new type of ship does not in any way mean GSF hasn't been "adequately supported" since release. Silliness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts