Feedback / Criticism and the Forums

[ZionHalcyon]

That link to Koster's article should be required reading.

 

For Developer and Forum poster alike.

[Icykill_]

You can not discern tone from text. Tone is applied by the reader. if you're in a pissy mood or just a plain ol drama queen you'll apply whatever tone you want and most likely take the comments out of context.

 

That is true and too often people's intent or meaning is misread and then torn apart. It's why I try really hard (not always successfully) to proof read (over and over) what and how I say things and often reread what someone says...

but you're right... as an example, if my mood is a bit pissy or I feel someone has attacked good intentions or if it's terribly bad news from Bioware that I disagree with.. it can light a fuse.. I sometimes cringe later at what I've written and I will try to edit it if it hasn't done too much damage already.

[Eshvara]

Hi Keith,

 

If I may I'd invite you to read the following article from Raph Koster (for those unaware, lead designer on SWG) on getting criticism.

 

Also in regards of SWTOR current situation you might find interesting to delve into that one: Did Star Wars Galaxies Fail? Especially the part "The error of good intentions"

 

This is really well written, thanks for posting this.

[Icykill_]

I can sum up my criticism about the last three expansions (especially the last two) as saying they didn't encourage or really allow group play through story content. This prevented my partner and me from doing social content together that was outside of operations, FPs or pvp, IMO it deviated from an MMO to a solo game and ruined the casual social environment for older players who were originally attracted to the game for that reason. In short it ruined our nerdy date night.

 

But I think Keith understands this as he's alluded as much in some of his posts and interviews. I'm glad this was acknowledged and is being looked at for future content.

 

I have other criticisms too, but they aren't directly related to the core issue of what changed the type of game it used to be.

[RevorteX]

Dear all

 

First of all take my compliments for making everything what it is today. Swtor is on its way to many fine tuning and developments.

 

Just 2 issues i require your help. Server merge due to lack of group ups or pugs. Isn't it time to rearrange server categorizations as undeniably Progenitor's fleet population is on decline.

 

Secondly, class balancing... the most delicate of delicate. hehe. I read an explaination from devs' how they actually have a target dps in mind and how they raise and drop the buffs. Well at least that's what i understood. A class to me would be survivability or skills useful to ignore debuffs or dmg. Look at how many ultilities of sage compared to say a commando ( i play both classes) its absurb tbh. You kind folks cannot be serious that the sage most skills are defensive just to stay alive. And tons of mando skills are alacrity 15%? dmg xx%? i play TK sage and i couldnt do chapter 10 fireband at veteran level with a heal comp with 246/248 gears. i took one shot from the dual bosses in breaktown, zakuul. I was zapped to 85 to 90% out. meaning 10% left.

 

I have studied the changes made over time to sages. The "leaving us at version 4" has made the sage unbearable and terrible experience.

 

Dont take my word for it. create a sage and if it's possible for u to get past that zakuul fireband chapter. Inspire me and let me know.

 

With all said, please look into the 2 items i so asked of you guys to address and perharps look more into overall health of class balancing.

 

I will start also with supporting the post above me.

 

Thank you SWTOR team for your daily struggle to keep the game up and running. You know how much we SW fans love the game and the universe and we always want the best for this game and we want to help you out carry this agenda.

 

My only remark is about class balancing in support of the quoted post.

Sorcere/Sage is currently at the bottom of the lake,being smashed in both pvp and hard pve. We don't want OP Sorc,we want a class that we can have fun with the rest of the people.

Lightning has been left untouched which is the lowest dps spec at the moment. Static barrier will be nerfed in 5.3 which will make us be destroyed in 2-3 seconds. Considering our low defences and survavibility this will be devastating.

Madness got buffed very little while it needed a larger buff.

We are not talking absurd numbers like 30-50%. We are talking about buffs around 10-15-20% at max.Same as lightning we need only small numbers of buff in our abilities to be competitive in this game.

 

Please consider the big ammount of players wanting Sorc/Sage to be balanced the right way. Our section is full with threads.

Thank you for your time,we will support you as much as we can

[fifteendollers]

Before you make a critical post on the forums, ask yourself a few questions.

 

1. Am I angry? Am I making this post because I'm angry?

 

2. Am I making a valid point? Can I support my point with background information and evidence?

[Eshvara]

Before you make a critical post on the forums, ask yourself a few questions.

 

1. Am I angry? Am I making this post because I'm angry?

 

2. Am I making a valid point? Can I support my point with background information and evidence?

 

You can get as much evidence you want, if people want to be ignorant they will be.

Not that you don't have good points, you do! It certainly couldn't hurt to ask yourself those things.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Eshvara

[Icykill_]

I have to interrupt this thread for a second.

 

Thank you so much for posting these articles. I found the article "Did Star Wars Galaxies Fail?" to be particularly insightful.

 

"Among the pieces of institutional knowledge lost was how to run the right sorts of metrics queries. Choices like the change to the auction house (which caused one of the single largest single-week drops of subs in SWG’s history) were the result of asking the wrong question: “how many Master Merchants are there?” rather than “how many people run a shop?” There was an almost identical situation with Creature Handlers (how many Masters, versus how many had a pet). Reducing the group size helped combat balance but devastated Entertainers. And so on.

 

Something like the group XP change was almost certainly an attempt to fix the extreme overpower of players (I mean, sum this to buffs and the rest of the combat problems, and it’s a recipe for running out of content really fast, which was the top reason for exit…). But it went to test, was loudly objected to by players, then was propped live with very little notice, then reverted too late, after it had already caused an uproar. This single event doubled the churn rate of the game, and even after it was all put back, it stayed 50% higher than it had been ever after. In fact, it was worse, in percentage terms, than the NGE was."

 

See, now I think I understand.

 

It's so easy, if you are not asking the right questions, to conclude that people leave your MMO once their characters are geared. So, put in a gear grind, and they'll stay. But that is not what happens.

 

When people's characters are geared, they play an alt.

 

The shorter the pathway to gear at max level in SWTOR, the more people stay. Why? Because in SWTOR, the 1-50 content is more compelling than the 50+ content. So the more that people are playing alts, the more likely they are to keep subscribing and spending money in the cartel market. If you want to minimize churn and maximize income, you should make it as easy as possible to get gear at max level, so that people will spend less time at max level and more time on alts.

 

The longer the pathway to gear at max level in SWTOR, the more quickly people unsubscribe or at least stop spending money in the cartel market. That gear grind makes them less likely to play alts.

 

But you won't catch that if you are asking the wrong questions.

 

It's too late now. The gear grind has caused the harm it has caused, but it is interesting for me, personally, to get some insight into how they made such a bad decision in the first place.

 

I think you nailed it on the head regarding the right questions and misinterpretation of data or responses.

 

A good example of this is the idea of gear progression for pvp, People who pvp do it for the contest of skill. They do not need gear progression at all. An example of this is the Blizzard game "Overwatch" which doesn't have gear grind.

 

Pvpers will stay subbed and play just as much, if not more pvp if we don't have have gear progression.

 

We all understand by now the investment Bio have put into the gear grind progression idea and they do not look like removing it anytime soon.

It just isn't needed at all in pvp and is having the opposite effect for retaining players, it's actually driving us away with silly gear gaps and the idea that one is needed for people to stay interested and subbed.

 

But it can still stay relevant for the game (which is what they want) by keeping all the systems in place to obtain gear in pvp, except it would really only be used in pve content. People who play pve will still pvp to get the gear, so the gear progression is still relevant.

There should be no reason to not put Bolster above the highest gear and make pvp about skill again and not gear.

My conclusions and reasons for this have been posted on this thread page regarding this topic

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=926155&page=33

 

I think the question Bio should ask a pvper is " what would make you stay subbed and play more"...

 

For me it would be

-Skill vs Skill pvp and not gear vs gear pvp.

-Proper class balance based on a real pvp environment and not a dummy parsing spread sheet based on dps targets.

-New WZs

-A queue for more advanced people to play objective pvp other than the standard one size fits all

-Fix WZ map bugs and code that can also allow players to cheat or exploit the system.

-An easy to report system if cheats are discovered

-A real deterrent to cheating with harsh penalties that are publically listed in the TOS and more importantly enforced, no slaps on the wrists.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Icykill_

[fifteendollers]

You can get as much evidence you want, if people want to be ignorant they will be.

Not that you don't have good points, you do! It certainly couldn't hurt to ask yourself those things.

 

If someone chooses to ignore the evidence you put forward, that's their problem, not yours. You've done your job in giving proper useful feedback. It's not so much a matter of convincing other players of your point of view, but giving useful feedback to Bioware. Players might argue against your feedback, and that's a good thing. Because if your argument cant stand up to scrutiny, it's not a very good argument. Bioware has to see both sides of an argument to get a clear picture.

[Transcendent]

take the comments out of context.

 

This I think is part of the problem, people (including myself here) can take things out of context.

[omaan]

Hey folks,

 

You may have been participating in the other story thread in GD which got a little derailed based on the discussion of feedback, criticism, and the SWTOR team (well everyone, but especially the SWTOR team). If you want to continue that discussion, please do so in this thread. This is a topic that we as a team are very interested in from your perspective, so keep it coming.

 

Standard reminder, please keep it civil! I know we are talking about criticism and feedback and those topics can get heated. Just please remain respectful.

 

-eric

 

Personally, i prefer the story republic vs empire, and hate cooperation between them or the story which draws on fighting some third party (zakuul, iokath etc). Of course one way of the story (reps vs imps) would be boring so I think that time-to-time we need to have some distraction from classic story (reps vs imps) which may have content related to fighting some other party, HOWEVER such plot must appear rarely and the main basis must include the content "reps vs imps".

 

About pvp:

I don't think that all players will support me, however me and many pvp friends of mine are feeling that we have a very little opportunity to kill other players in this game..

 

So i would like to criticize pvp in your game.... it's terrible, tanks can guard anyone on 50% damage transfer which means a team with 2 skilled healers (which are also opped in this game) and a tank are just unkillable. I NEVER saw an mmo where tanks could take 50% damage on them, such issue makes pvp boring since no one is dying, and healers mustn't be so effective.

 

By playing your game I noticed you guys are taking "defensive policy" for your players which means that you are defending your players from other player even on pvp servers (currently - instances): the territories on most of the planets for reps and imps are separated, builded in a way that there is a very small chance that players from different factions may meet each other, and some of the planets are just fully separated for both factions (for example taris);

 

 

the other aspects of your "defensive policy" is basic rules of warzones... you know that the warzones in your game could be won WITHOUT A SINGLE KILL? This especially occurs when both groups on warzone are skilled and really wants to win. This means Controlling-tapping on novare coast, throwing huttball, stealing (stealth capping) bases on civil war instead of killing each other. From perspective of some players such game style may be a good issue, since such game is based on "objectives gaming", "tactical gaming", HOWEVER: such gaming style doesn't provide much opportunity of killing other players (if players wont interrupt tapping, defend nodes, get-pass huttball instead of killing others - they loose). Considering that swtor has DEAD World pvp, players must have an opportunity for bloodshed, opportunity to kill high numbers of other players, yet warzones are not providing it. In this case i prefer WOW's battlegrounds which are more based on killing other team to win (you can't throw flag on war song gulch far away, in most cases you can't "stealth" cap a base on arathi basin or battle of gilneas due to most of the classes having 2-3 escape abilities, whilst in swtor "defense policy" provides many stuns and only 1 escape for most of the classes (with some exceptions,for example sorc's bubble etc).

 

Of course there are still many fights where players ignore objectives and killing each other for win, nevertheless i noticed that such games are becoming more rare, because of premades fighting each other and due to cxp system which forces players to win war zones (spam tap on novare, stealth stealing bases, passing huttball without killing etc) in order to get more cxp.

 

All thing considered, tanks mustn't have guard on 50%;whether current warzones should be rebuilt or new warzones where players actually have to kill each other to win should be implemented; maybe some other adjustments (healing diminishing etc)

Edited July 2, 2017 by omaan

[DarkSaberMaster]

For Developer and Forum poster alike.

 

I agree.

[MeNaCe-NZ]

Before you make a critical post on the forums, ask yourself a few questions.

 

1. Am I angry? Am I making this post because I'm angry?

 

2. Am I making a valid point? Can I support my point with background information and evidence?

 

Fair enough but I will point out that in public communication like this, putting forward ones opinion is still of course valid.

 

You don't always have to factual and concise when stating an opinion, it's when people state their opinions as fact (which happens far too often imo) that there is an issue.

[Eshvara]

If someone chooses to ignore the evidence you put forward, that's their problem, not yours. You've done your job in giving proper useful feedback. It's not so much a matter of convincing other players of your point of view, but giving useful feedback to Bioware. Players might argue against your feedback, and that's a good thing. Because if your argument cant stand up to scrutiny, it's not a very good argument. Bioware has to see both sides of an argument to get a clear picture.

 

No, I get it, but the people at Bioware are people too, and while we all change our minds ourselves often enough, when you're told you're being wrong people tend to resist and defend their own points, especially if they have thought of something a certain way for a long time, someone coming and claiming you're wrong often doesn't work out well. You can really see that on the forums, I've had it with myself and I've seen it in other people.

People will find whatever excuse to hang onto their opinion or their way of thinking just for the sake of not having to doubt yourself.

 

Now I'm not saying this applies to Charles or any specific person in particular, but it's something to think about! (imo)

Sorry if it's a bit off topic, but I thought it was relevant, it might not be!

Just make sure your feedback and evidence is actually what it is and have it presented as well as you can, because of some of things I've seen in the thread that got locked related to this one.... well...

Edited July 2, 2017 by Eshvara

[ZionHalcyon]

I just want to point out that well true that it is hard to decipher tone at times from a forum post or words, it is not true that you can never decipher tone.

 

The reason I said tone matters is because all too often on these forums, you have a certain group of people who talk down to others stating their opinions. That is a point in time where tone can certainly be seen in the text.

 

Let me be perfectly crystal clear: when I say talking down to others I do not mean disagreeing with their opinion. When I say talking down to others I mean not putting forth any sort of a rebuttal against someone else's opinion but instead of talking as if that person who made the opinion is either stupid or crazy or ignorant or just a jerk.

 

It's a very slick way people use to troll in these forms without technically violating the terms of service.

 

The reason I brought up tone is because I specifically think that these types of posts need to be shut down as they are toxic for the community, do nothing to encourage further debate or conversation, providing zero useful feedback, and only serve to try to enforce groupthink.

[AlrikFassbauer]

Not only this forum has become so much more filled with vitriol ... other forums are also this way.

I suspect there to be "role model forums" from which people come and taking their acquired "discussion culture" from there to here, for example.

 

We live in an age in which even Presidents don't believe in the word of "humbleness" anymore. If insulting is normal for high rank persons - wouldn't people of lower social tiers not believe "if he can do it, we can do it as well" ?

 

And - who influenced whom in terms of "discussion culture" ?

[CrazyCT]

You can not discern tone from text. Tone is applied by the reader. if you're in a pissy mood or just a plain ol drama queen you'll apply whatever tone you want and most likely take the comments out of context.

 

Can I recommend my tried and tested curly bracket*? Guaranteed to show your witty personality through your expert use of sarcasm. Just highlight the text with { and } and let the people know how hilarious you are. They can also be used to denote the you are being entirely serious by putting both together at the start of the text block, like this - {}

 

Examples

 

1. {Yes, it would make sense to have the starter tutorial hidden by default}
   
2. {}I believe the SWTOR team know what they are doing.
   

 

In the first case there, I am using the brackets to denote the sarcasm. In the second, I am showing that I am serious.

 

*Patent Pending

Edited July 2, 2017 by CrazyCT

[fifteendollers]

No, I get it, but the people at Bioware are people too, and while we all change our minds ourselves often enough, when you're told you're being wrong people tend to resist and defend their own points, especially if they have thought of something a certain way for a long time, someone coming and claiming you're wrong often doesn't work out well. You can really see that on the forums, I've had it with myself and I've seen it in other people.

People will find whatever excuse to hang onto their opinion or their way of thinking just for the of not having to doubt yourself.

 

This is a good point, and it comes back to my first point in my post. It does sting when you're told your wrong about something, especially when it's coming from an authoritative figure who ultimately decides your QoL in game. That sting, and the feeling that the people in charge aren't listening to you, will lead to anger. And as soon as that anger takes hold, that's when the toxicity spreads. You get angry, then you make others angry with your angry posts, and it just escalates. Anger, as it applies to critical feedback, distorts issues to look worse than they actually are, and distorted feedback doesn't help anyone. Keep your anger in check and you can more clearly describe the problem you have with whatever issue you're talking about.

 

Now, there is a disconnect between what the players expect from Bioware in terms of communication, and what Bioware can actually tell the players. Players want to hear what they want to hear, but Bioware can only tell them the truth. Going back to your point, players will have their own ideas about how the game should play out, and Bioware will have their internal mechanisms. The chances of both party's expectations matching up is very unlikely, so players will inevitably get upset over Bioware's actions.

 

And we come full-circle to my original point.

Are you making your post because you are angry? Further questions to ask yourself would be:

 

1. If I'm angry, what exactly am I angry about?

2. Bioware is changing something. If they aren't deliberately trying to make me angry, what might Bioware be trying to achieve with this change?

 

A person making a post out of anger will miss all of these questions and distort whatever issue they're trying to bring up.

 

Now I'm not saying this applies to Charles or any specific person in particular, but it's something to think about! (imo)

Sorry if it's a bit off topic, but I thought it was relevant, it might not be!

Just make sure your feedback and evidence is actually what it is and have it presented as well as you can, because of some of things I've seen in the thread that got locked related to this one.... well...

 

It's a good post, the sort of post this thread needs. And yeah I think I'm going off on a rant too.

Edited July 2, 2017 by fifteendollers

[WayOfTheWarriorx]

That's ideally already against forum rules. If encounter this then report. If nothing is done then maybe question if it really was name calling or personal attacks.

 

And yes they most certainly do police forums, fairly well too though my first post questions where the line is at times.

I know from personal experience posts get deleted and worse (both posts I've made and posts I've reported).

 

 

Speaking from experience, I can assure you they most definitely do 'monitor' the forums. I have a list of infractions and bans the length of my arm. In this last year or so, I've had ban times over half a year [ got two 3 month bans that had about 2 months between them and than 2 or 3 one week bans. They are definitely willing to hold you accountable and do more than just warn you.

 

I couldn't post at all for the first two and half months of 5.0 because one my 3 month bans just started like 10 days before 5.0 dropped and it was very frustrating because like any other new meta there are so many things being discussed about the changes a new meta brings in and this one more than many others!

 

Tread carefully if you do not want to be banned, they don't just give you slaps on the wrist.

[Icykill_]

Speaking from experience, I can assure you they most definitely do 'monitor' the forums. I have a list of infractions and bans the length of my arm. In this last year or so, I've had ban times over half a year [ got two 3 month bans that had about 2 months between them and than 2 or 3 one week bans. They are definitely willing to hold you accountable and do more than just warn you.

 

I couldn't post at all for the first two and half months of 5.0 because one my 3 month bans just started like 10 days before 5.0 dropped and it was very frustrating because like any other new meta there are so many things being discussed about the changes a new meta brings in and this one more than many others!

 

Tread carefully if you do not want to be banned, they don't just give you slaps on the wrist.

 

I know what that's like...

 

What I find amazing though is what is policed. Something as innocuous as a bump or a reference to this sort of topic and next thing you're on the naughty girls list again. But someone can continue to bait you and a whole thread till they get someone to explode and its the person who explodes who is in the dog house and the person baiting can just sit back and laugh.

The amount of times I get that dumb email or msg in my inbox (you know the one) and I've got no idea why its there is amazing. When I actually look at what it is I can only think some people have a reporting agenda and know just where that line is or how to word the complaint to those above.

Sometimes just asking the most innocent of questions has you sleeping on the lounge. What I dislike is there is no recourse to defend yourself, especially when you have clearly not stepped over the line or for that matter not even got to your feet. There is always a link in those things to respond. I think I've only ever got one response when I've disputed it and that was because I was so infuriated I took it to Tait, who apologised and agreed it wasn't in the spirit of things, but still let it stand on a technicality, which I'd love to share, but that's also a naughty thing to do.

It's a pity they don't apply that same "no wrist slapping" attitude to people cheating or hacking in pvp.

[WayOfTheWarriorx]

Personally, i prefer the story republic vs empire, and hate cooperation between them or the story which draws on fighting some third party (zakuul, iokath etc). Of course one way of the story (reps vs imps) would be boring so I think that time-to-time we need to have some distraction from classic story (reps vs imps) which may have content related to fighting some other party, HOWEVER such plot must appear rarely and the main basis must include the content "reps vs imps".

 

I don't think that all players will support me, however me and many pvp friends of mine are feeling that we have a very little opportunity to kill other players in this game..

 

So i would like to criticize pvp in your game.... it's terrible, tanks can guard anyone on 50% damage transfer which means a team with 2 skilled healers (which are also opped in this game) and a tank are just unkillable. I NEVER saw an mmo where tanks could take 50% damage on them, such issue makes pvp boring since no one is dying, and healers mustn't be so effective.

 

By playing your game I noticed you guys are taking "defensive policy" for your players which means that you are defending your players from other player even on pvp servers (currently - instances): the territories on most of the planets for reps and imps are separated, builded in a way that there is a very small chance that players from different factions may meet each other, and some of the planets are just fully separated for both factions (for example taris);

 

 

the other aspects of your "defensive policy" is basic rules of warzones... you know that the warzones in your game could be won WITHOUT A SINGLE KILL? This especially occurs when both groups on warzone are skilled and really wants to win. This means Controlling-tapping on novare coast, throwing huttball, stealing (stealth capping) bases on civil war instead of killing each other. From perspective of some players such game style may be a good issue, since such game is based on "objectives gaming", "tactical gaming", HOWEVER: such gaming style doesn't provide much opportunity of killing other players (if players wont interrupt tapping, defend nodes, get-pass huttball instead of killing others - they loose). Considering that swtor has DEAD World pvp, players must have an opportunity for bloodshed, opportunity to kill high numbers of other players, yet warzones are not providing it. In this case i prefer WOW's battlegrounds which are more based on killing other team to win (you can't throw flag on war song gulch far away, in most cases you can't "stealth" cap a base on arathi basin or battle of gilneas due to most of the classes having 2-3 escape abilities, whilst in swtor "defense policy" provides many stuns and only 1 escape for most of the classes (with some exceptions,for example sorc's bubble etc).

 

Of course there are still many fights where players ignore objectives and killing each other for win, nevertheless i noticed that such games are becoming more rare, because of premades fighting each other and due to cxp system which forces players to win war zones (spam tap on novare, stealth stealing bases, passing huttball without killing etc) in order to get more cxp.

 

All thing considered, tanks mustn't have guard on 50%;whether current warzones should be rebuilt or new warzones where players actually have to kill each other to win should be implemented; maybe some other adjustments (healing diminishing etc)

 

 

 

I agree with much of this. Stars Wars at it's core us about Lightside vs Darkside, Jedi vs. Sith, The Republic vs the Empire traditionally speaking and certainly the basis upon which fans first fell in love with Star Wars. I've said it before in a different context, but I think it still applies. Star Wars is forever.

 

I don't want to be fighting alongside Jedi, I want to be fighting Jedi. I don't want to try and explain why the Darkside isn't bad to the Jedi I was to be shoving my lightsaber's thru thier sternum stating why the Darkside is Stronger than the Lightside [which it is, come on, it's so obvious!] while relishing the fact that even if it's not true, that Jedi won't be able to try and convince me of the 'error of my ways'.

 

In essence, all Pubs must die. Not be our allies, not fight along side one another facing a greater evil, not coming to understand each other better, not become more tolerant of the differences between us, dead dead dead. I don't care how it improves quece times allowing pubs and imps to be on the same team. They are the enemy, we're supposed to hate each other and kill each other on sight.

 

There is no middle ground when it comes to Jedi and Sith [and please with the grey jedi bs, it's lore breaking and just dumb]. There is a Lightside and there is a Darkside, one of for knowledge and defense and the other is for attack and control. These are insurmountable differences, these are ethical differences, these are diametrically opposed ideologies. Even if you enjoin the idea that the Jedi are willing to try and help Darksiders repent and come to the light, Sith are not willing to do the same in return. You can say that the Jedi don't actually hate darksiders, they feel pity for them, but Darksiders do not share that sentiment. You can join the Darkside, or you can die, there is no middle ground. Dead, dead, dead.

 

Wzs where you are fighting against pubs are so much funner than same faction WZs. It okay for a temporary alliance, but as it is now its gone on far too long. I think most people enjoy the tradtional model best, Pubs vs Imps to the death.

 

We're enemies, we always were, we always will be, and quite honestly I don't want that to ever change.

 

I'm not interested in winning WZs soley on strategy because we out thought the enemy, I want to fight my enemies, and I want to kill them. It's called a "war" zone for a reason. I play WZs for one reason and one reason only, because I Love to fight.

 

I personally don't have much of a problem with healing and tanking in WZs, there are different roles for a reason, but there may be a bit too much of these things overall. A little less healing would be better and a little less protection going out, but I am not at all against it in theory, just in adjusting the amounts slightly.

 

Certainly there are times when no one is dieing much because of all the healing going on, but I am virtually never encountering instances wherein during regular WZs people aren't dieng and I'm not killing anyone. If that were the case I'd stop playing because killing is the only thing I really am interested in doing in this game.

 

Class balance is most certainly an issue and the class imbalances current are among some of the worst I've ever seen in this game. That said more balance would improve the enjoyment level of the experience, and I think it would be of even greater value to address the amount of CCs being constantly thrown around every 3 seconds and would say this is one of the most unfun aspects of WZs. Less CC would make the experience funner.

 

I'd be lieing if I said I wasn't enjoying PVP, but it certainly has it's downsides and at times it can be down right sickening when there are such differences in enemy groups [i.e, one group having 2 or 3 healers and the other none], it is often the case because of such inequality between groups that matches are often won or lost before they even start. There definately needs to be more balancing going on and consideration given to the inequalities groups often face, if one thing is going to kill PVP that will be it if it continues in the form has been.

 

Just some thoughts.

[WayOfTheWarriorx]

I know what that's like...

 

What I find amazing though is what is policed. Something as innocuous as a bump or a reference to this sort of topic and next thing you're on the naughty girls list again. But someone can continue to bait you and a whole thread till they get someone to explode and its the person who explodes who is in the dog house and the person baiting can just sit back and laugh.

The amount of times I get that dumb email or msg in my inbox (you know the one) and I've got no idea why its there is amazing. When I actually look at what it is I can only think some people have a reporting agenda and know just where that line is or how to word the complaint to those above.

Sometimes just asking the most innocent of questions has you sleeping on the lounge. What I dislike is there is no recourse to defend yourself, especially when you have clearly not stepped over the line or for that matter not even got to your feet. There is always a link in those things to respond. I think I've only ever got one response when I've disputed it and that was because I was so infuriated I took it to Tait, who apologised and agreed it wasn't in the spirit of things, but still let it stand on a technicality, which I'd love to share, but that's also a naughty thing to do.

It's a pity they don't apply that same "no wrist slapping" attitude to people cheating or hacking in pvp.

 

Yeah, you are right about that, some people seem to get away with things I have gotten banned for doing something far less provoking for. I literally got a 3 month ban for making a joke to a friend on the forums siting something to the effect of "Well, Germany did lose the war", that is a statement of historical fact and I nailed for it because they said it was racially insensitive. Racially insensitve to state a historic fact? Even if I don't say it, they still lost that War! heh

 

Sometimes you respond to being provoked, and that's a natural response when you were not the initial provoking agressor, but the person who did provoke you using something that could not be seen any other way than but "fighting words", they don't get in trouble for initiating it, and you get in trouble for responding in kind.

 

You shouldn't be held accountable for defending yourself or responding to an unprovoked insult in kind. It's human nature, and people aren't generally accostomed to having to worry about what they said to someone in return because people are used to having the right to speak their minds.

 

Now to be fair, the 'right to free speech' does not exist on the internet. Forums in partiular have the legal right to set the rules and standards of speech on thier forums, that is true. The right to free speech ONLY applies in reference to the Government forbidding speech [ unless such speech can lead to endangering lives [thats why it's against the law to yell fire in a crowded theater if there isn't one because it could lead to someone getting hurt while trying to flee from a "fire" that doesn't exist], but even with that mind, it is within BWs right to say okay, this person was prevoked and was responding to that, they don't need to be punished for it. They have that discretion. But, like any other kind of discretion, they can choose to use it or not and even precedents will not make it mandatory. That's why you see them not being even handed, because they are not obliged to do so, right or wrong.

 

They punish us on the forums over such trivial things that no one really cares about at the end of the day, but like you said, cheats and hackers, they linger year after year even when they are known about and pointed out. There is very little uniformity in their policies, and it's perfectly understandable why you feel as strongly as you do about cheats and hackers getting away with things that actually have effects on others. They give them no real reason to desist breaking such rules, they know they'll get away with it! I totally agree with you.

[Jdast]

Related to what Icykill said with respect to arbitrariness, I would simply add the following:

 

It is obvious to me some individuals (happens on every forum) are very "report" happy. One doesn't have to be Scooby Doo to figure this out -- they happily acknowledge it. Point being, while I know BW can't report who reported you, etc., I do hope the CM's have a way of monitoring how many times a person is pushing the "report" button and against whom.

 

I have little doubt that some use that button as a means to silence debate or simply as a personal vendetta. The problem is, as Icy points out, some posts are probably on the cusp and in that gray area. Depending on the mood of the CM, they may act in ways that leave you head scratching. Sadly, this isn't like *********** where US Supreme Court Justice Potter famously opined, "I know it when I see it."

 

I imagine, for example, my sense of humor (which is witty, razor-edged and boundless) likely rubs some people the wrong way. But just as I can tone it down (at very rare and select times), some people also need to lighten up. The forum shouldn't become its own meta-game and it would be nice if people can express themselves in ways where you don't have some Dalek screaming at you (oh wait, wrong genre! ): "Report! Report! Report!":rak_03:

 

TL;DR: I hope the CM's monitor how many times people report overall as well as against specific, individual users.

 

Edit: Apparently BW blocks out the word referencing naked people engaged in sexual acts in fine cinematic features.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Jdast

[omaan]

I agree with much of this. Stars Wars at it's core us about Lightside vs Darkside, Jedi vs. Sith, The Republic vs the Empire traditionally speaking and certainly the basis upon which fans first fell in love with Star Wars. I've said it before in a different context, but I think it still applies. Star Wars is forever.

 

I don't want to be fighting alongside Jedi, I want to be fighting Jedi. I don't want to try and explain why the Darkside isn't bad to the Jedi I was to be shoving my lightsaber's thru thier sternum stating why the Darkside is Stronger than the Lightside [which it is, come on, it's so obvious!] while relishing the fact that even if it's not true, that Jedi won't be able to try and convince me of the 'error of my ways'.

 

In essence, all Pubs must die. Not be our allies, not fight along side one another facing a greater evil, not coming to understand each other better, not become more tolerant of the differences between us, dead dead dead. I don't care how it improves quece times allowing pubs and imps to be on the same team. They are the enemy, we're supposed to hate each other and kill each other on sight.

 

There is no middle ground when it comes to Jedi and Sith [and please with the grey jedi bs, it's lore breaking and just dumb]. There is a Lightside and there is a Darkside, one of for knowledge and defense and the other is for attack and control. These are insurmountable differences, these are ethical differences, these are diametrically opposed ideologies. Even if you enjoin the idea that the Jedi are willing to try and help Darksiders repent and come to the light, Sith are not willing to do the same in return. You can say that the Jedi don't actually hate darksiders, they feel pity for them, but Darksiders do not share that sentiment. You can join the Darkside, or you can die, there is no middle ground. Dead, dead, dead.

 

Wzs where you are fighting against pubs are so much funner than same faction WZs. It okay for a temporary alliance, but as it is now its gone on far too long. I think most people enjoy the tradtional model best, Pubs vs Imps to the death.

 

We're enemies, we always were, we always will be, and quite honestly I don't want that to ever change.

 

I'm not interested in winning WZs soley on strategy because we out thought the enemy, I want to fight my enemies, and I want to kill them. It's called a "war" zone for a reason. I play WZs for one reason and one reason only, because I Love to fight.

 

I personally don't have much of a problem with healing and tanking in WZs, there are different roles for a reason, but there may be a bit too much of these things overall. A little less healing would be better and a little less protection going out, but I am not at all against it in theory, just in adjusting the amounts slightly.

 

Certainly there are times when no one is dieing much because of all the healing going on, but I am virtually never encountering instances wherein during regular WZs people aren't dieng and I'm not killing anyone. If that were the case I'd stop playing because killing is the only thing I really am interested in doing in this game.

 

Class balance is most certainly an issue and the class imbalances current are among some of the worst I've ever seen in this game. That said more balance would improve the enjoyment level of the experience, and I think it would be of even greater value to address the amount of CCs being constantly thrown around every 3 seconds and would say this is one of the most unfun aspects of WZs. Less CC would make the experience funner.

 

I'd be lieing if I said I wasn't enjoying PVP, but it certainly has it's downsides and at times it can be down right sickening when there are such differences in enemy groups [i.e, one group having 2 or 3 healers and the other none], it is often the case because of such inequality between groups that matches are often won or lost before they even start. There definately needs to be more balancing going on and consideration given to the inequalities groups often face, if one thing is going to kill PVP that will be it if it continues in the form has been.

 

Just some thoughts.

 

Yep, you took the point. Watching cinematic videos where imps kill reps and reps kill imps but then log in and see tanks guarding healers with damn 50% dps transfer, healers outhealing everyone, people throwing the ball like on the beach makes me wonder if it is really star wars? Darth Bane would say " guys, *** are you doing? Tapping panels on novare instead of fighting? Are you damn crazy?". I don't remember when i killed another player in open world pvp lol, whereas in wow i kill 10-12 players each day in different zones. This game requires a new pvp conception, away from "defense policy".

 

In fact, i think bioware is confident that they must treat us like child's.... Defending us from each other due to the reason that "if players are dying much - they will probably leave the game". Of course this is a wrong concept of pvp which leads to its stagnation and total disappearance.

Edited July 2, 2017 by omaan

[Nmyownworld]

My perspective on feedback/criticism on the forums:

 

When posting about someone else's opinion or decision:

-- Stick with posting your viewpoint of a topic. If someone posts an ever lasting love for an aspect of the game you despise with a fiery passion, post why you don't like that aspect of the game. Refrain from posting what you think of someone who doesn't share your viewpoint.

 

And also:

-- Disagreement on a topic is not an automatic personal attack. If someone posts that they do not like something you love, the dislike is not about you, it's about the topic. Everyone will not always share your opinion on a topic.

 

Use your words:

-- "I love it." "I hate it." Why?

 

I don't condone personal attacks on anyone, at all. Referencing the previous thread, I think criticizing the story is acceptable. Personal attacks on the writer are not acceptable.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Nmyownworld