Crafting Changes in Fallen Empire

[MeNaCe-NZ]

Well this is where i'm happy i got all skills and professions, i just hope doing weekly conquest wont take to long, i got to have all my alts on 65, since they removed the repeatable crafting, then im curious to know what the new missions is, it's only 20k a week, but 8 chars atleast need to be capped so i can get my weekly mats. but with 100% sh bonus you should be able to cap each character each week.

lol dont change now make new character with the wanted prof, or if you are sub use the free 60 for that prof

 

Problem is you'll have to actually do something gameplay wise on each toon if you want to get the 20k.

 

PVP/GSF are quickest but you can do it via fps/ops too as well assuming it would give you the points needed.

 

Problem then is people with your desire to get the mats from all toons and who don't give a crap about other people are going to turn pvp and gsf into the most horrible grief fest ever seen in this game.

I hope I'm wrong on that part because even though I don't pvp/gsf personally I don't think they should suffer over BW's poor design choice here.

[WingsofCrystal]

After four years of the crafting skills doing the same things, and players picking them and leveling them and grinding them and REing in them base don what they do...

 

...this sudden change really just feels like Bioware jerking the players around, and trying to find one more thing they can try to get players to waste time on between KotFE chapters.

 

Well look at it this way. Some time next year players are supposed to get one 60 minute chapter a month. That leaves 30*24-1 hours a month that players have to find something to do.

[eartharioch]

I can't even begin to argue that point because I really am not sure what you meant around the mat statement you made in regards to the rest of your argument around development difficulty/testing etc.

Khevar pointed out that crafted gear wouldn't be deleted, it would just be transformed, and said it would be nice if the same could be done for the schematics. My point was that *in addition* to changing the main stat to Mastery, you would also need to change the mats used for schematics. I could be wrong -- it is possible that the game actually keeps track of which mats would be used to craft an item (for RE purposes) and that items would have to have the mat info updated as well.

 

Also why are you calling your point of view or opinion a fact? The "fact" could equally be they just couldn't be bothered much like they couldn't be bothered giving us equivalent schematics. Doesn't actually mean it's too hard for them or "they have no control" over their automation processes.

Based around your comments of you being a software engineer I thought you would have a better grasp on the developmental process and that nothing is ideally ever "out of their control" to paraphrase you.

Feel free to replace "weren't able to" with "didn't". I don't doubt that somebody at BW has the ability to make the change, I used "weren't able to" to encompass having permission to do so, but yes, it's possible that they just cba to do it. However, I'm trying to give the actual programmers some credit and not assume that they are lazy or incompetent.

 

It's more or less what they bother to direct their developmental resources to and I would believe the issues you mentioned weren't considered overly major to them to resolve ( also I would wager development went straight from 3.0 to 4.0 after the Christmas break which is somewhat backed up by the lack of fixes we got ).

If you accept "they cba" for 3.x, why does the thought of that disappoint you for 4.x?

 

This conspiracy theory:

 

Funny though because here you say the devs knew of the bugs and basically implied EA directed them to not bother fixing them where as above you seem to imply they plain couldn't fix them.

That's not what I said. I doubt EA directly ordered them to ignore specific bugs, but I don't doubt that EA told them to ship something as scheduled. The obviousness of many of the bugs with which 3.x shipped (many of which have never been fixed) precludes them not knowing about them (either through their own QA, the closed beta, or reports after launch). And it's not like I'm saying this is an EA-specific thing, it's standard practice in the industry. That doesn't make it good or acceptable IMO, but that's an entirely different discussion.

 

Also a few broken schematics or bugs in however many 100's ( 100's perhaps ) schematics means they don't have automation tools to do so? Even though they are doing it in other areas of the game like the actual items produced by the schematics I believe get upgraded in our inventory/gear not just plain removed?

 

That makes perfect sense ...

I didn't say they don't have automation tools -- in fact, what I was saying was that they *do* and that they (as of 3.x) didn't work reliably. The level 172 vendor having absorb/defense on cunning mods makes it quite clear that it was automated. It just isn't *good* automation, and whether they just didn't check the automated results, ignored reports about them, or couldn't justify the changes necessary to make the corrections is irrelevant, and there is no reason to expect things to change for 4.x

 

Outsider's view is it? You work for Bioware then do you? I can answer that for you, no you don't.

I was referring to *you* as an outsider to the software development industry, not BW specifically.

 

Willing to do or unable to do? I seem to be getting mixed messages from your posts - make up your mind which is it? Your entire argument came around from you stating it would be "a lot of extra work" not just "more" work. In reality you have no grasp on how much extra work it would or would not be, you can just make assumptions like I can except I can base my assumptions on how much EXTRA work it would be around the changes they are already making which are more or less already in line with changing chems and giving us a copy of the upgraded schem ( same as we would for mods etc. unless they are going to strip those from everyone too ).

Selectively editing what I said doesn't make *me* look bad.

 

And really based on the statement in your post here I think it's you who may be lacking in general knowledge around software developmental processes but I do try keep real life out of these sorts of arguments because at the end of the day people can pretend to be whatever they like and so I'll deal with what you actually post and facts around it rather than some self inflated opinion of your supposed knowledge outside of this game ... so far those posts are lacking but there is always room for improvement.

 

But hey by all means, pretend you know me, what I do, self inflate yourself some more and you'll just look all the more silly when your posts don't back up anything to do with the knowledge you supposedly possess from your "insider's view" heh.

 

Make sure you look in the mirror when doing your daily self-affirmation. I'm not pretending to know you, I only know what you say. And what you say isn't consistent with understanding software development.

 

This is what you said that started this discussion:

Yup and just removed the double ups, sounds too much like hard work though.

That's you saying that you know exactly what they need to do but were just too lazy to do it. I'm not saying that it's not possible that it is that easy or that they aren't that lazy, just that there is no evidence that that is the case.

Edited October 18, 2015 by eartharioch

[Krazhez]

In Knights of the Fallen Empire, we are making quite a few adjustments to how Crafting will work.

 

Read more

 

Specifically, "If a player chose to, they could level up exclusively by crafting Components!"

This is just crafting level correct? not player level?

[Mowermanx]

Specifically, "If a player chose to, they could level up exclusively by crafting Components!"

This is just crafting level correct? not player level?

 

It did read like that, but I'm sure he means the skills.

It reminded me of a game I used to play years ago, Pirates of the burning seas, and got to max level doing only crafting, took like a year but I got there.

[Tsillah]

Not sure if this was answered but I do have a question about augments based on the following part:

 

•To match the above listed changes. Augments have been reduced to 8 tiers. The MK8 Augment Kit is now the highest Augment Kit. Existing MK9 and MK11 Kits will turn into MK8 when Fallen Empire launches.

 

Can I take that to mean that the current Mk-10, renamed to Mk-8, will stil be the highest augment, therefore we are not getting higher augments this time around?

 

And as a side question, what happens to existing augments with stats that will no longer exist like surge?

[Max_Killjoy]

Not sure if this was answered but I do have a question about augments based on the following part:

 

•To match the above listed changes. Augments have been reduced to 8 tiers. The MK8 Augment Kit is now the highest Augment Kit. Existing MK9 and MK11 Kits will turn into MK8 when Fallen Empire launches.

 

Can I take that to mean that the current Mk-10, renamed to Mk-8, will stil be the highest augment, therefore we are not getting higher augments this time around?

 

And as a side question, what happens to existing augments with stats that will no longer exist like surge?

 

 

Am I the only one who worries that our gear, both worn and stashed, is going to be a bloody mess come Wednesday?

[Tsillah]

Am I the only one who worries that our gear, both worn and stashed, is going to be a bloody mess come Wednesday?

 

Maybe that's why our commendations are being transferred 1 to 1 into the new system.

 

We'll find out soon enough, won't we...but no not worried. If it's messed up I'll fix it.

[asbalana]

Not sure if this was answered but I do have a question about augments based on the following part:

 

•To match the above listed changes. Augments have been reduced to 8 tiers. The MK8 Augment Kit is now the highest Augment Kit. Existing MK9 and MK11 Kits will turn into MK8 when Fallen Empire launches.

 

Can I take that to mean that the current Mk-10, renamed to Mk-8, will stil be the highest augment, therefore we are not getting higher augments this time around?

 

And as a side question, what happens to existing augments with stats that will no longer exist like surge?

 

MK-X refers to kits and kit components which provide the slots and are not the augments themselves. It appears to be saying that whatever the new augments are (if there are new augments) the top tier will be using currently available (as converted) slots.

 

The actual dev comment was very poorly written and confusing.

Edited October 18, 2015 by asbalana

[TheSeventhJedi]

Well look at it this way. Some time next year players are supposed to get one 60 minute chapter a month. That leaves 30*24-1 hours a month that players have to find something to do.

 

Hopefully some of those hours will be spent sleeping, eating, working, going outside, etc. If you play this game all day every day, the amount of content released is not the problem.

[IanArgent]

Am I the only one who worries that our gear, both worn and stashed, is going to be a bloody mess come Wednesday?

 

It's one of my fears, as well.

[MeNaCe-NZ]

Khevar pointed out that crafted gear wouldn't be deleted, it would just be transformed, and said it would be nice if the same could be done for the schematics. My point was that *in addition* to changing the main stat to Mastery, you would also need to change the mats used for schematics. I could be wrong -- it is possible that the game actually keeps track of which mats would be used to craft an item (for RE purposes) and that items would have to have the mat info updated as well.

 

Still not making sense. The "replacement" schems would have whatever mat changes are in them anyway. No extra work in a mat regard to just swapping the replaced schem with the replacement schem instead of having us re-learn etc.

 

Feel free to replace "weren't able to" with "didn't". I don't doubt that somebody at BW has the ability to make the change, I used "weren't able to" to encompass having permission to do so, but yes, it's possible that they just cba to do it. However, I'm trying to give the actual programmers some credit and not assume that they are lazy or incompetent.

 

Well you should endeavour to be more clear then because you basically implied they are incompetent as you said "The fact that they obviously use some sort of automation over which they have no control" which really holds no logic that it's a "permission" issue with how you presented that "fact".

 

If you accept "they cba" for 3.x, why does the thought of that disappoint you for 4.x?

 

Who said I wasn't disappointed at 3.x? I made a comment regarding 4.0 and us not auto getting replacement schems and the cba attitude I feel is coming from BW. I shouldn't have to justify with how I felt around 3.x.

 

That's not what I said. I doubt EA directly ordered them to ignore specific bugs, but I don't doubt that EA told them to ship something as scheduled. The obviousness of many of the bugs with which 3.x shipped (many of which have never been fixed) precludes them not knowing about them (either through their own QA, the closed beta, or reports after launch). And it's not like I'm saying this is an EA-specific thing, it's standard practice in the industry. That doesn't make it good or acceptable IMO, but that's an entirely different discussion.

 

It's not? Strange how I quoted it then.

 

I didn't say they don't have automation tools -- in fact, what I was saying was that they *do* and that they (as of 3.x) didn't work reliably. The level 172 vendor having absorb/defense on cunning mods makes it quite clear that it was automated. It just isn't *good* automation, and whether they just didn't check the automated results, ignored reports about them, or couldn't justify the changes necessary to make the corrections is irrelevant, and there is no reason to expect things to change for 4.x

 

Right, I might have misinterpreted this statement then ... "What conspiracy theory? There were plain-as-day bugs in 3.x that still haven't been resolved and that (as I just illustrated above) show that they don't have the kind of automation tools to make what you want easy."

 

Not having and not working correctly are different things entirely in software development in terms of the work required in getting to the point you have a fully working suite of tools. I shouldn't really have to tell you this though with your supposed extensive experience.

 

Again maybe you should have been more clear.

 

Also there is every reason to expect things to change in 4.x or are you again implying they are inept and can't learn from their mistakes?

 

I was referring to *you* as an outsider to the software development industry, not BW specifically.

 

Oh because you know what I do for a living right? Would you like to message me your mailing address so I send you copies of my qualifications perhaps? Maybe whip it out so we can compare size while we're at it?

 

Pfft, pathetic. Back up your argument with facts and logic not petty, unfounded statements around your or my experience.

 

Selectively editing what I said doesn't make *me* look bad.

 

I edited nothing of *your* posts. Read back over it yourself, it's getting somewhat nonsensical as to what your point of view is e.g. you don't assume they are incompetent but then go on to assume nothing will change between 3.x and 4.0 in regards to their development/testing processes which just cries incompetence.

 

It's not always entirely what you say it's what you imply by saying it. It's how language and communication work don't ya know.

 

Make sure you look in the mirror when doing your daily self-affirmation. I'm not pretending to know you, I only know what you say. And what you say isn't consistent with understanding software development.

 

This is what you said that started this discussion:

 

 

Quote:

 

Yup and just removed the double ups, sounds too much like hard work though.

That's you saying that you know exactly what they need to do but were just too lazy to do it. I'm not saying that it's not possible that it is that easy or that they aren't that lazy, just that there is no evidence that that is the case.

 

That's EXACTLY what my opinion is yes, I thought that was clear? Wow you finally get it. Funny thing is you've attacked the point and defended the point - you might as well argue with yourself.

 

Of course if I say/mply they might be lazy I don't have a consistent understanding of software development but when you say/imply it then it's perfectly fine.

[Zenpasin]

I only read through the first few pages so if this has been asked and answered already I apologize.

 

As an Artificer, I am losing an entire line of recipes (enhancements). Will I be compensated for the credits I spent to learn all those recipes?

[Zenpasin]

Not sure if this was answered but I do have a question about augments based on the following part:

 

•To match the above listed changes. Augments have been reduced to 8 tiers. The MK8 Augment Kit is now the highest Augment Kit. Existing MK9 and MK11 Kits will turn into MK8 when Fallen Empire launches.

 

Can I take that to mean that the current Mk-10, renamed to Mk-8, will stil be the highest augment, therefore we are not getting higher augments this time around?

 

And as a side question, what happens to existing augments with stats that will no longer exist like surge?

 

My understanding is that the MK kits 1 thru 8 will get stat changes and any MK-9 or 11 kit will be changed to an MK-8 kit and there will be no more MK-9 or 11 kits. I think at this point pounding out a bunch of mk-8 kits while they are cheap to make is the way to go.

[MeNaCe-NZ]

I only read through the first few pages so if this has been asked and answered already I apologize.

 

As an Artificer, I am losing an entire line of recipes (enhancements). Will I be compensated for the credits I spent to learn all those recipes?

 

Nothing has said that we will be compensated in any or form so I would be surprised if they actually did do this.

[eartharioch]

Still not making sense. The "replacement" schems would have whatever mat changes are in them anyway. No extra work in a mat regard to just swapping the replaced schem with the replacement schem instead of having us re-learn etc.

Khevar was talking about applying the logic they use for *items* to *schematics*. I said that *items* don't [explicitly] have mats attached to them, so updating the *schematics* would require more work than just updating the statistics (mainstat -> mastery, surge->crit, etc.).

 

Right, I might have misinterpreted this statement then ... "What conspiracy theory? There were plain-as-day bugs in 3.x that still haven't been resolved and that (as I just illustrated above) show that they don't have the kind of automation tools to make what you want easy."

You are the only one talking about conspiracies.

 

Again maybe you should have been more clear.

Let me be clear:

 

You said that something in software should be easy when you obviously have no grasp on what is involved.

 

I said that since you don't have any grasp on what is involved your statement is invalid. It may be your "opinion", but since it is an uninformed opinion, it is worthless.

 

I haven't been trying to *prove* anything, since I don't have any special knowledge about BW's organizational structure or staffing. Showing that your statement was baseless is not the same as making a statement of my own.

 

I get tired of listening to people whine about things they don't understand, that is all.

[zartane]

so i see were removing things from one class and giving it to another.. i have an artifice and a cybertech.. many hours on both getting schematics.. and now.. i lose the ability to make both and have to start over? um.. isnt that bull?

this is in direct reference to armorings and enhancements.. i have purple schematics for both for many different levels. and ill go to none?

[MeNaCe-NZ]

Khevar was talking about applying the logic they use for *items* to *schematics*. I said that *items* don't [explicitly] have mats attached to them, so updating the *schematics* would require more work than just updating the statistics (mainstat -> mastery, surge->crit, etc.).

 

The schematics are already updated ... how are you not understanding this? They already exist and they will already be there for us to learn ( as opposed to just giving us them ) thus there is NO extra work involved around mats as it was already done.

 

You are the only one talking about conspiracies.

 

Wow what a retort ... seems I've about hit the limit of your debating skills with this one.

 

Let me be clear:

 

You said that something in software should be easy when you obviously have no grasp on what is involved.

 

I said it sounded too much like hard work, I even went on to justify why I thought it wouldn't be that much extra work in the scheme of things. You assume I have no grasp when really all you've demonstrated is your own lack of knowledge in this area with your own strawman arguments.

 

I said that since you don't have any grasp on what is involved your statement is invalid. It may be your "opinion", but since it is an uninformed opinion, it is worthless.

 

Again, you have no clue of what grasp I do or do not have. do I spend my days earning a living in software development or perhaps do I stack shelves at a supermarket for a living? Fact is you don't have a clue and thus your entire argument on that point is utterly flawed.

 

I've been quite literally laughing at you on this point since " I base mine on years of experience as a software engineer and years of experience with BW/swtor." as though that makes anything you say in regards to this argument in any "factual" heh.

 

I haven't been trying to *prove* anything, since I don't have any special knowledge about BW's organizational structure or staffing. Showing that your statement was baseless is not the same as making a statement of my own.

 

Well being that you've failed in every regard to do so isn't really doing you any favours.

 

The humorous point in all this is you make a statement around your experience as a software engineer and fail to back it up with any logic debate on these points that a software engineer should actually have and understand but c'est la vie.

 

I get tired of listening to people whine about things they don't understand, that is all.

 

Then why are you doing it? Take your own advice perhaps.

[eartharioch]

The schematics are already updated ... how are you not understanding this? They already exist and they will already be there for us to learn ( as opposed to just giving us them ) thus there is NO extra work involved around mats as it was already done.

If they are already updated, why are you and Khevar asking for them to be updated? Think about it.

 

 

 

Wow what a retort ... seems I've about hit the limit of your debating skills with this one.

Well, we hit yours a while ago...all you can do is spout insults.

 

I said it sounded too much like hard work, I even went on to justify why I thought it wouldn't be that much extra work in the scheme of things. You assume I have no grasp when really all you've demonstrated is your own lack of knowledge in this area with your own strawman arguments.

Do you even know what a straw man is? I've seen you use the term in several threads, and haven't ever seen you use it correctly. Neither of us have alleged that we know what BW's code looks like, so neither of us should have an opinion as to how hard or easy the changes would be. I've tried to explain a few things that *could* make them harder than they might look to a layman, but if you're not a layman, you shouldn't need them explained or said what you did in the first place.

 

Again, you have no clue of what grasp I do or do not have. do I spend my days earning a living in software development or perhaps do I stack shelves at a supermarket for a living? Fact is you don't have a clue and thus your entire argument on that point is utterly flawed.

I don't care what you do, I only care about what you show, and all that you've shown is ignorance.

 

I've been quite literally laughing at you on this point since " I base mine on years of experience as a software engineer and years of experience with BW/swtor." as though that makes anything you say in regards to this argument in any "factual" heh.

I wasn't attempting to argue from claimed authority, I was simply giving you my background as insight as to why I think the way I do. Everything I've explained is in terms of software engineering and BW's prior conduct. And every time I explain something, you ask me why I couldn't have been clearer at first. That was *why* I offered my background, so that you would know that what I was saying would require a general familiarity with those issues.

 

Well being that you've failed in every regard to do so isn't really doing you any favours.

Nor you. Horse, water, etc.

 

The humorous point in all this is you make a statement around your experience as a software engineer and fail to back it up with any logic debate on these points that a software engineer should actually have and understand but c'est la vie.

I don't have time to give you a degree in software engineering, sorry. And even if I did, it probably wouldn't help b/c most degree programs don't cover what actually goes on (at least from what I've seen of fresh outs).

 

Then why are you doing it? Take your own advice perhaps.

About what do you think *I* am whining? I was just (uselessly, as usual) responding to your whining.

Edited October 19, 2015 by eartharioch

[MeNaCe-NZ]

If they are already updated, why are you and Khevar asking for them to be updated? Think about it.

 

*sigh* the replacement schematics are updated, doesn't mean we are getting them automatically though to replace the ones we are losing - if you don't understand this basic concept why did you even bother posting to begin with?

 

Well, we hit yours a while ago...all you can do is spout insults.

 

Don't be so precious, there aren't any insults beyond the point you were trying to imply you were more knowledgeable due to whatever you may or may not do in the real world compared to what you perceive I do.

I just felt like going out of my way to point out what a ridiculous concept that is to put forward as a basis to support any argument you are making or any point of mine you choose to attack.

 

 

Do you even know what a straw man is? I've seen you use the term in several threads, and haven't ever seen you use it correctly. Neither of us have alleged that we know what BW's code looks like, so neither of us should have an opinion as to how hard or easy the changes would be. I've tried to explain a few things that *could* make them harder than they might look to a layman, but if you're not a layman, you shouldn't need them explained or said what you did in the first place.

 

Right and now you want to tell me whether or not I should have an opinion. You're gold.

 

I made a statement around "sounds too much like hard work" to which you've now said "You said that something in software should be easy when you obviously have no grasp on what is involved." Yes I know what a strawman argument is and that is one example of you making one.

 

I don't care what you do, I only care about what you show, and all that you've shown is ignorance.

 

Which is why every time I put forward a logical basis to my opinion ( which you asked for and I've even clarified for you in this thread a second time but at this rate no doubt I'm going to have to do it AGAIN for you some time ) you're best retort has been along the lines of "wah you know nothing, you're not a software engineer like me, you can't be right I must be" ... paraphrased for dramatic effect of course.

 

Maybe if you could actually make any sort of logical debate beyond the "I'm a software engineer and you're not" I might actually be able to start taking you seriously.

 

As for ignorance heh, go read your own posts in this thread.

 

I wasn't attempting to argue from claimed authority, I was simply giving you my background as insight as to why I think the way I do. Everything I've explained is in terms of software engineering and BW's prior conduct. And every time I explain something, you ask me why I couldn't have been clearer at first. That was *why* I offered my background, so that you would know that what I was saying would require a general familiarity with those issues.

 

I asked you to clarify the mats example you made ( a couple of times ) which you took your time doing and you're still completely off base to what the topic was to begin with it would seem based on your above point.

This is probably one of those times you should have just kept to yourself.

 

I've even noted a few examples of where your opinion isn't even line with good software development processes or at least your assumptions of how Bioware operate might not be but you skipped over those and picked and chose what you replied to.

Go back over the argument and you'll see what I mean or do I have to do that for you too?

 

 

I don't have time to give you a degree in software engineering, sorry. And even if I did, it probably wouldn't help b/c most degree programs don't cover what actually goes on (at least from what I've seen of fresh outs).

 

Based on the software development knowledge you've demonstrated so far in this argument I think any degree you would other would be written on the back of napkin.

 

About what do you think *I* am whining? I was just (uselessly, as usual) responding to your whining.

 

Uselessly heh .

 

Again, maybe you should have minded your own business before you got in over your head.

[eartharioch]

*sigh* the replacement schematics are updated, doesn't mean we are getting them automatically though to replace the ones we are losing - if you don't understand this basic concept why did you even bother posting to begin with?

I was responding to Khevar...ask him if you don't know what he meant.

 

Don't be so precious, there aren't any insults beyond the point you were trying to imply you were more knowledgeable due to whatever you may or may not do in the real world compared to what you perceive I do.

I just felt like going out of my way to point out what a ridiculous concept that is to put forward as a basis to support any argument you are making or any point of mine you choose to attack.

I wasn't trying to insult you...if stating facts about myself makes you feel inadequate, that's all on you.

 

Right and now you want to tell me whether or not I should have an opinion. You're gold.

Assigning a value to your opinion is not equivalent to saying that you shouldn't have one.

 

I made a statement around "sounds too much like hard work" to which you've now said "You said that something in software should be easy when you obviously have no grasp on what is involved." Yes I know what a strawman argument is and that is one example of you making one.

I rejected your *actual* argument, not a straw man. And as I said, this isn't the first time you've used that term incorrectly.

 

Which is why every time I put forward a logical basis to my opinion ( which you asked for and I've even clarified for you in this thread a second time but at this rate no doubt I'm going to have to do it AGAIN for you some time ) you're best retort has been along the lines of "wah you know nothing, you're not a software engineer like me, you can't be right I must be" ... paraphrased for dramatic effect of course.

I have not (as far as I recall) ever asked for your opinion. You've given it up freely, and I've told you why I don't value it. That is all.

 

Maybe if you could actually make any sort of logical debate beyond the "I'm a software engineer and you're not" I might actually be able to start taking you seriously.

Given your lack of competence (in so many areas), I'm not concerned about whether or not you take me seriously. In fact, if you ever agreed with me on anything, I'd probably pause to make sure I hadn't made a mistake.

 

I've even noted a few examples of where your opinion isn't even line with good software development processes or at least your assumptions of how Bioware operate might not be but you skipped over those and picked and chose what you replied to.

Go back over the argument and you'll see what I mean or do I have to do that for you too?

If you want to be taken seriously, you'll have to name at least one. Vague "I know you are, but what am I?" comments don't really hold up.

 

Based on the software development knowledge you've demonstrated so far in this argument I think any degree you would other would be written on the back of napkin.

Let's see.. I tell you that I have experience in a field, and your response is "how do you know I don't?" I tell you how, and your response is what? You don't understand what I've said. Well, duh, if you understood what I said, you wouldn't be asking. Put up or shut up.

 

Again, maybe you should have minded your own business before you got in over your head.

Maybe you should check your compass...I'm not the one in over my head.

[MeNaCe-NZ]

I was responding to Khevar...ask him if you don't know what he meant.

 

See my reply to Khevar.

 

You pretty much directed me to that and when asked for clarification around it you ignored it twice and now go off on some nonsensical tangent around mats and schems. I doubt you even know what you mean anymore.

 

 

I wasn't trying to insult you...if stating facts about myself makes you feel inadequate, that's all on you.

 

Facts supported by ineptitude ... right ...

 

Assigning a value to your opinion is not equivalent to saying that you shouldn't have one.

 

so neither of us should have an opinion as to how hard or easy the changes would be.

 

Yup you definitely didn't say that ... heh. Feel free to not have an opinion yourself sometime though, careful though that might mean you don't get the last word in regardless of how riddiculous your argument has become.

 

I rejected your *actual* argument, not a straw man. And as I said, this isn't the first time you've used that term incorrectly.

 

You tried to reword or you just lacked the comprehensions skills to understand it to begin with - either way more your issue than mine. I just thought I would point it out being the nice guy that I am.

 

 

I have not (as far as I recall) ever asked for your opinion. You've given it up freely, and I've told you why I don't value it. That is all.

 

I understand, my question was what is the basis of your opinion that it wouldn't be that much extra work? A question you've spent a lot of time not answering.

 

Right you didn't want me opinion but you wanted me to justify it ( which I've done numerous times and you've not managed to refute logically once beyond "I'm a coder you're not" ).

 

Given your lack of competence (in so many areas), I'm not concerned about whether or not you take me seriously. In fact, if you ever agreed with me on anything, I'd probably pause to make sure I hadn't made a mistake.

 

Now who is resorting to petty insults eh? Don't go getting too riled up now.

 

If you want to be taken seriously, you'll have to name at least one. Vague "I know you are, but what am I?" comments don't really hold up.

 

Based around your comments of you being a software engineer I thought you would have a better grasp on the developmental process and that nothing is ideally ever "out of their control" to paraphrase you.

 

There is one - if you go from that point on your basically kept digging yourself in deeper and deeper because you just come across as a person that can't possibly deal with the possibility they might be wrong so you just start strawmaning and spouting nonsense more and more to try muddy the waters and confuse the issue.

 

As for ""I know you are, but what am I?" comments - here is one of yours ...

 

You are the only one talking about conspiracies.

 

when accused of talking about conspiracies heh. Winning.

 

 

Let's see.. I tell you that I have experience in a field, and your response is "how do you know I don't?" I tell you how, and your response is what? You don't understand what I've said. Well, duh, if you understood what I said, you wouldn't be asking. Put up or shut up.

 

And what do you base your opinion on? I base mine on years of experience as a software engineer and years of experience with BW/swtor. See my reply to Khevar.

 

We are losing the schems and there will be schems to learn in their place thus the new schems which that they could "auto give us" but won't already have or have not got new mats associated with them.

 

All people are saying here is basically that If you are replacing Schem X with Schem Y then why not run an analysis on players with versions of Schem X in purple and give them Schem Y in purple. What materials Schem Y uses is irrelevant as it already exists and we can already get it but we have to RE it again to get where we effectively were.

 

A script to run this through the database could have been developed and extensively tested months ago when they were aware of their changes so it would be readily be available to run come patch time. For whatever reason they decided it wasn't worth the effort to do unless you're implying a multi million dollar software house aren't actually capable of it heh.

 

Stating my thoughts yes and that's simply based around the amount of work they had already put into having a "swap" system in place for things like materials, augments, comms etc.

 

You wanted my opinion justified I justified it, you failed to refute any of it ( or really attempt to do so ) ... all you've managed to try and is imply you work in the software development field and put forward opinions that show you lack much in the way of understanding of the field so whether or not it's true I kind of don't care because ...

 

I do try keep real life out of these sorts of arguments because at the end of the day people can pretend to be whatever they like and so I'll deal with what you actually post and facts around it rather than some self inflated opinion of your supposed knowledge outside of this game ... so far those posts are lacking but there is always room for improvement.

 

Still waiting for that improvement ...

 

Maybe you should check your compass...I'm not the one in over my head.

 

Lol what was that about "I know you are, but what am I?" comments? Priceless.

[DarkJediMage]

there is no incentive to gather. bioware just nailed the coffin on the lower planets.

[IanArgent]

there is no incentive to gather. bioware just nailed the coffin on the lower planets.

 

I thought the "increased yields from lower level nodes if you have high-level gathering" was a pretty decent incentive.

[Foreignobjects]

In Knights of the Fallen Empire, we are making quite a few adjustments to how Crafting will work.

 

Read more

 

I think this is an AWESOME addition