Architect Archive
Thread: Ten Questions *** Submitted 2.1.04 ***
In a professional environment, when I send someone a memo saying "Here are 10 questions that I need answers for" I expect an *EXPLICIT* point by point response to them. That is, if I have something like "#5: When will we get X?", then I'm used to seeing something back that says "#5: In patch 9". It might not be the answer that I *want*, but it is an answer.
In that kind of environment getting a "hand wave" answer of "oh, some of those things have been taken care of" would .... disturb me. And I would proceed to create new orifaces (orifi?) for the people who responded that way.
So, my very stupid question is (and maybe I just missed the respond): Have we *gotten* a *formal, point-by-point response* to our 10 questions? Because if we have I want to read it. And if we haven't then I think it's a patent waste of time to prepare another set.
Zen.
At some point Dvnce said that Thunderheart indicated he was doing these Ten Questions as a side project on his own time rather than it being an official SOE thing. I don't think that was really spelled out up front but for me at least it makes it quite a different expectation level. (hope I've caught all this correctly) If it was an offiial SOE thing then I'd have higher expectations and be less forigving if they didn't get around to answering us in a timely manner and/or completely failed to do so. However if this is just TH trying to help out on his spare time then I'm a whole lot more forgiving if he ends up getting swamped and doesn't get back to us.
Either way though I hope they do realize that setting up expectations with your customers and then failing to meet those expectations is not good. It would be much better to never ask for 10 questions than to for the questions and then never deliver answers.
However, that explains the "10 questions". Have we ever gotten a formal response on the "5 top items" in the past? The same logic applies, and I *thought* that the "top 5" *were* official SOE things?
ZenDragonMLS wrote:
Ah, so TH gets his lesson in "customer expectation setting" on our dime? OK - I can understand that. The sooner the lesson is learned, the better.
However, that explains the "10 questions". Have we ever gotten a formal response on the "5 top items" in the past? The same logic applies, and I *thought* that the "top 5" *were* official SOE things?
As far as the top 5 not many professions had Direct Dev.. response to the open forums but all of them were debated and discussed amongst the devs and the other Correspondends as well as directly with the specific correspondent that submitted them ..
The problem with most of the Top 5 issues is that there was so much changing in the game play that by the time professions submitted their issues they were already outdated..
that is why I have choosen the format for the top 5 that I have ... though the individual items within each issue "topic" may change it will be very easy for the over all Issue "topic" to evolve as the game changes....
I understand that it would take someone a little time to sit down with our *last* "top 5" and document, for the record, what the resolution was. However, I suggest that in terms of continuing interaction, that would be a very good investment on their part.
A "dialog" between the users of a system and the developers of the system is only a *dialog* if both sides say things and felt like they are being heard. If one side feels like they are talking to a brick wall, then it stops feeling like a dialog.
I'm just suggesting that some formal closure that we can all read and point others to would be a Good Thing.
ZenDragonMLS wrote: I understand that things are changing. However, if we submit a "top 5" list, and *never* formally hear back, then there is a strong sense of "why bother?". I understand that it would take someone a little time to sit down with our *last* "top 5" and document, for the record, what the resolution was. However, I suggest that in terms of continuing interaction, that would be a very good investment on their part. A "dialog" between the users of a system and the developers of the system is only a *dialog* if both sides say things and felt like they are being heard. If one side feels like they are talking to a brick wall, then it stops feeling like a dialog. I'm just suggesting that some formal closure that we can all read and point others to would be a Good Thing.
This is what was submitted as out last Top 5 Issues.. Along time ago .. ( before my time as Corr)
1.Factories cannot unload certain items from crates for use as components in schematics. You must load them all by hand."Structural module crates can't beused in walls when producing them in a factory"is a good example of this.
this was taken care of
2. Architect products are significantly devalued, selling at 4-5cpu vs. the weaponsmith or amorsmiths overall higher cpu income. Renewable incoming for architects is non-existant(obviously devs might not be able to resolve income problems, as players set the price at which they want to buy, but there must be something that can be done to close the gap between the professions)
okthis issue will forever be one
3. Critical failures can cause severe economic damage to an architect, especially when suffering several in a row, or when just hitting the next tier in the construction tree and failing on the first object. A working suggestion is that only ressources, and not subcomponents are lost. (Our dev has reported that he was looking into it, but I haven't heard anything about it since then)
This was taken care of
4. Lot issues. PA Halls do not use equal lot sizes. Lot sizes for PA Halls are too high in relation to actual item storage availability. PA leader can't store his equipment, and have a nicely furnished PA Hall at the same time. Being PA leader also limits gameplay possibilities because no lots are available to do anything else (especially true for architects, whose factories take 2 lots). Having 3 small houses is better than having 1 large house, and is as good as having3 mediums.
Dvnce wrote:
This is what was submitted as out last Top 5 Issues.. Along time ago .. ( before my time as Corr)
Didn't you submit a newer Top 5 issues shortly after you became correspondent?
...
2. Architect products are significantly devalued, selling at 4-5cpu vs. the weaponsmith or amorsmiths overall higher cpu income. Renewable incoming for architects is non-existant(obviously devs might not be able to resolve income problems, as players set the price at which they want to buy, but there must be something that can be done to close the gap between the professions)
okthis issue will forever be one
I certainly hope that at some point we can get some sort of fix to the lack of renewable income at that this will not "forever be" an issue. Have the DEV's said anything about renewable income except for candles? Are they working on something? Anything?
So..
We didn't get answers to the Ten questions cause TH was too busy.
We didn't get answers to the old set of Top 5 issues cause those were too old.
We didn't get answers to the latest set of Top 5 issues cause they are changing the process.
Right?
Hmm...
Hmm, I don't suppose anyone has a link to any of these discussions? I follow the Dev Tracker pretty regularly, andcan't recall ever seeing a discussion of why these are the way they are. It is still an issue of ours as it limits sales of medium and large houses.
Dvnce wrote:
4. Lot issues. PA Halls do not use equal lot sizes. Lot sizes for PA Halls are too high in relation to actual item storage availability. PA leader can't store his equipment, and have a nicely furnished PA Hall at the same time. Being PA leader also limits gameplay possibilities because no lots are available to do anything else (especially true for architects, whose factories take 2 lots). Having 3 small houses is better than having 1 large house, and is as good as having3 mediums.
though this really isnt our issue this has been discussed several times.. from devs in open forum discussion