Bounty Hunter Archive
Thread: publish 21 sux
This type of post is indictive of the enviorment we have in this game. Try something for 5 min and then whine about it because you couldn't figure it out. That is why mastering a profession is so easy in the game because of you cannot complete your template in 1 month people whine about it. That is how a player can claim that a publish sucks before it even comes out. Or the most classic overreaction of all time, people saying that it would take 7.5 years to level Jedi just 1 day after the CU.
We all need to stop overreaction and and give change time. When something changes, we all have an opinion about it (I know I do) but if you are goingto prejudge it and / or base the success / fail of that change off 1 day of trying it, you are wasting everyone's time.
So, just food for thought next time a change in implimented. It is fine if you want to comment on an upcoming change, just try not to make your opinion so rock solid that you don't give it a fair chance. Give it a REAL chance before you form your opinion is stone and make sure that the chance has actually happened before you tell everyone how much it sucks.
I write:
Hehe. He said indictive. J/K
I would like to salute you rYsyn for a very well put post.
/salute
Yoshiyuki wrote:People thought the CU would suck(How many people really quit?)
LOL, It does suck and thousands quit, and will slowly continue to do so.
The combat revamp (no, it isn't an upgrade) was (foolishly) timed to coincide with the cinema release of episode three and the RotW expansion. All this meant that SWG should have increased it's player base. When that time actually came, even the SWG devs admited in public that the player base had "remained constant". So at a time when they were pulling in lots of new players, the overal total of the players stayed the same. What does this tell you? It tells you that SOE were loosing as many people as they gained, and I wonder how long the newbies will stick around.
Message Edited by DaveG on 08-05-2005 09:43 AM
You ignore the thousands who quit because the CU was pushed back for so long. I quit because they made JtL a priority over a balanced combat system, and I didn't come back until the CU was a reality.
Don't ignore the droves who quit before - precisely because SOE cares less about long-term satisfaction than short-term gain. But the game needed this, like it or not. Only the powergamers tend to disagree.
Shaan'ti Hokai (Kauri) 
TashunkaSapa wrote:
Only the powergamers tend to disagree.
Read my signature, we weren't all power gamers.
As for comparing how many quit before and quit after the combat revamp, I never seen the game so quiet as it has been since the combat revamp hit, so I think I know which had the worst effect.
DaveG wrote:
Read my signature, we weren't all power gamers.
As for comparing how many quit before and quit after the combat revamp, I never seen the game so quiet as it has been since the combat revamp hit, so I think I know which had the worst effect.
If your sig is to be believed, what's your beef with the CU?
As for quiet?Most of the noise and activity before was from AFK hologrinders. THAT had a far worse effect - it killed the economy and resulted in a loss of dedicated, skilled tradesmen. Personally, I'd rather have a game without "players" like that and mounds of AFK spam.
TashunkaSapa wrote:
DaveG wrote:
Read my signature, we weren't all power gamers.
As for comparing how many quit before and quit after the combat revamp, I never seen the game so quiet as it has been since the combat revamp hit, so I think I know which had the worst effect.
If your sig is to be believed, what's your beef with the CU?
As for quiet? Most of the noise and activity before was from AFK hologrinders. THAT had a far worse effect - it killed the economy and resulted in a loss of dedicated, skilled tradesmen. Personally, I'd rather have a game without "players" like that and mounds of AFK spam.
Before the combat revamp I was a ranger, one of the most gimped professions in the game - Despite this, I used nothing more than brandy and stims to hunt everything in the by just using tactics and patience. I'll give you a breif list of issues with the combat revamp, I don't have time to go into them indepth:
- Combat Level system : This wasn't needed, and has unbalanced many things, most importantly things beyond combat are broken because of it. (To name a few issues: non-combatants suffer, creature harvesting has been linked to CL which has destroyed "wild hunting").
- Combat Que : Because the combat que is removed it's harder to keep a track of what you're doing. The old combat que system was superior to the "two move que" we have now simply because you could wipe the que clear and que up new moves as the combat situation changed.
- Weapons : Professions are homogenised now because of the combat level certification of weapons. Using pistol specials at rifle range is wrong.
- Armour : Before when we had encumbrance for armour there was a tactical basis on whether you wore armour or not. As such when I was a ranger, even if I was hunting Rancors, I chose not to wear armour. However if I was going with a group down into something like the Geo lab, armour was worth the cost. However now because encrubmrance is removed and Mastering a combat profession gives you full mitigation, wearing armour is a no-brainer, there's no reason not to wear it.
- Healing : healing is now some sort of "magic" skill, no equipment is required. This is not appropriate for a sci-fi mmogrpg.
All that was needed to address the old combat problems was to nerf doctor buffs, and re-adjust armour encumbrances and get rid of DoT weapons. That's all we needed, not all the extra crap.
DaveG wrote:
- Combat Level system : This wasn't needed, and has unbalanced many things, most importantly things beyond combat are broken because of it. (To name a few issues: non-combatants suffer, creature harvesting has been linked to CL which has destroyed "wild hunting").
Listen to yourself and think about it: why would non-combatants suffer in the new combat system? Could it be because they are NOT fighters? As for CL, it makes it easier to get a sense of your chances of success and risks. Before, a red con could be just a little tougher than a yellow, or it could kill you in one shot.
And I'd like to see any proof that harvesting is linked to CL.
- Combat Que : Because the combat que is removed it's harder to keep a track of what you're doing. The old combat que system was superior to the "two move que" we have now simply because you could wipe the que clear and que up new moves as the combat situation changed.
So you're unhappy because you have to actually pay attention now, not just hit a bunch of buttons and go get a sandwich? You can still clear the combat queue by hitting Escape twice, so there's no other reason to complain.
- Weapons : Professions are homogenised now because of the combat level certification of weapons. Using pistol specials at rifle range is wrong.
Shooting a guy in center of mass or legging him is the same whether your target is 30m or 60m away, let's be serious. What didn't make sense is that a given combat technique would cease to work merely because of the length of the gun barrel.
- Armour : Before when we had encumbrance for armour there was a tactical basis on whether you wore armour or not. As such when I was a ranger, even if I was hunting Rancors, I chose not to wear armour. However if I was going with a group down into something like the Geo lab, armour was worth the cost. However now because encrubmrance is removed and Mastering a combat profession gives you full mitigation, wearing armour is a no-brainer, there's no reason not to wear it.
Sure, and back then, everyone wore composite everywhere. If encumbrance had truly been a limitation, that wouldn't have been so. So your concern is that fighters wear armor in combat? Wow! What a concept!
All that was needed to address the old combat problems was to nerf doctor buffs, and re-adjust armour encumbrances and get rid of DoT weapons. That's all we needed, not all the extra crap.
I've never known SOE to do more than what was needed, and regardless, everyone had a different idea of "all that was needed". Sadly, your opinion was not the deciding factor. Mine wasn't, either - or the CU would have happened a lot sooner.
"Listen to yourself and think about it: why would non-combatants suffer in the new combat system? Could it be because they are NOT fighters?"
That's exactly why, they're not fighters, so they'd suffer because they don't know how to fight, not because they have a greater amount of esoteric "hit points". As for con colours, we had them before the combat revamp.
"And I'd like to see any proof that harvesting is linked to CL."
Take my word for it, or go to the Ranger or Scout forum and ask them.
"So you're unhappy because you have to actually pay attention now, not just hit a bunch of buttons and go get a sandwich? You can still clear the combat queue by hitting Escape twice, so there's no other reason to complain."
The old system required your attention, otherwise how'd you know when to clear the que and change your plan?Trust me, I didn't rely buffs or armour to survive, I had to rely on my wits so I know.
"Shooting a guy in center of mass or legging him is the same whether your target is 30m or 60m away, let's be serious. What didn't make sense is that a given combat technique would cease to work merely because of the length of the gun barrel."
Your example relies on ranged professions. My problem with it applies equally well to ranged and melee. If someone has been trained to use one particular weapon, then why are they able to pick up another type of weapon they're not trained for and use it almost as well. It sounds like asking fencer to perform with a battleaxe.
"Sure, and back then, everyone wore composite everywhere. If encumbrance had truly been a limitation, that wouldn't have been so. "
It wasn't a limitation because doctor buffs were over powered.
I'll assume you agreed with my healing comments but weren't feeling civil enough to say so?