Bounty Hunter Archive
Thread: what are the jedi so upset about?
Akast wrote:
is it the snare thing? or the SL thing. ive neever seen such unhappiness before sure they whine alot but this, is extreme
I am 5 wins 1 loss post pub 24, which is pretty much the same as before. Out of the 5 wins only one was easy and 3 could have gone either way. Jedi just whine and whine and whine. I tried giving them advice but they don't care. If they get Rancor aid they can deal with the worst snare which is ED. So far not one Jedi has posted an account of a one or two shot incap because of the SL buffs, not one....it's sheer hysteria and you are right, it is the worstI have ever seen. /sigh
Well.....
1.) They can only get 'good' pearls tops, meaning they will have serious damage-dealing issues.
2.) LS speed is bugged. You see that "base speed" on your weapon? That's how fast they attack, not mod speed.
Those are things that were around since CU STARTED!
Then....
Nearly every single jedi related thing they did: Nerfs.
No kidding, i remember them fixing a few things like the robes, (which should have been working in the 1st place), and pub upon pubs, nerfs.
That's why they are upset. It does make sence.
After all, their enemy, (BHs), get loot, (only viable way to get good ca/aa ) , and no nerfs.
Thassk wrote:
ITK5 wrote:
650 damage and low FC...( which is possible my post CU friend has done it ... from the pearls hes gotten while hunting krayts with me)
Thassk.
.
.
.
.
.
Negative that ghost Rider...thats my friend is totally False.
Im not going to flame.... you have put up some good arguements, and i respect that.
But your statement above is incorrect.
90-100 damage lines with -8 and -9fc are achievable post CU .... off good pearls... thats the feedback ive gotten from jedi whom ive sold my pearls to.
tiggs has even stated herself that goods can tune just as well as premiums .. just at a much much lower chance
We do read our own forums and play the game.
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=jedi&message.id=1232340
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=jedi&message.id=1268110
Sorry, I'm clicky impaired. 
Grunzer wrote:
The developers made the choice to roll it back, they made that choice because they previously made a bad choice here, a bad choice there, and there, and here, and there, and here over the course of 2 years in this game they have made so many bad choices that subscribership is flagging to the point that in order to keep what's left of their player-base, they bowed down and rolled it back.
Had they not made all those bad choices that led up to the XP nerf, they would not have needed to succomb to the players.
In the end the developers and the bean counters are responsible for whether a game is made or broken. The customers will play it if it is good, and if it is bad, they won't.
So blaming a Jedi, or a BH, or an entertainer, or an AFK macroer. etc. Is putting blame where it does not belong. SOE, LucasArts, The Developers, The Marketers.. In Short, the Corporation is responsible.
Blaming me because Jedi can go waving their wands around starports and acting like idiots is not our fault. Ask yourself why it is that the developers continue to let Jedi behave this way.
Are you saying that the developers have no choice but to allow Jedi to run around NPC cities acting like idiots? You don't believe there is code that could be put into place to force Jedi into behaving?
No matter how you cut it, it is the not the player that is at fault. MMORPG's have been around long enough, and these developers have been too. The only blame we, the customer, should take, is for paying them month after month.
There is a reason why WoW can be so boring, and still have 2,000,000+ subscribers. What do you think that reason is? Everyone complains about how boring WoW is, about the horrible GRIND that it is. And yet it's smeared the SW:G franchise (which WAS much much much much bigger.) Into the ground.
Why is that? is it the players who should be held up high on pedestals, because they made the game a success? No. It is the developers. it is the customer service, it is the corporation that has made the game. Players like WoW despite it's drawbacks because Blizzard has made good choice after good choice after good choice.
Message Edited by Grunzer on 10-22-2005 02:13 AM
Thassk wrote:
We do read our own forums and play the game.
click 1
click 2
Sorry, I'm clicky impaired.
Message Edited by Thassk on 10-23-2005 06:41 AM
regarding these my feedback has been alittle different.. i would say aboutwhere he shows11% chance for 90-120** tunes .. ( thats one out of10 pearls ) , i show a 20-30% chance in just 90-100 tunes ( also one out of ten but not factoring in anything over 120 , and granted the majority will be 90 or close to 90)
.. even in this guys post .. 90-120* encapsulates about 10-11%
( i come to this conclusion thet he cuts off the 81-90 and writes up a 9% margin for those ( so being a 9 point spread i take the 90 and borrow 1% there.. a 5.1% margine for 91-100, and a 2.7% for 101-110 and last but not least a 1.3% margin gor 111-120... )
keep in mind in order to findthe percentage of 90 or aboveyou have to combine these which i do here for you..but my margin is different in 90-100 9cutting off at 100 .. not adding the 3.8% chance you get in getting something above 120 ... even by his standards that one out of 20 pearls will tune to 90-100 levels
so if anything his chart ( referring to clicky 1) shows 1-2 out of ten pearls will tune ABOVE 90 damage ... ABOVE ... so you are in fact SUPPORTING my claims
Message Edited by Thassk on 10-23-2005 07:07 AM
Thassk wrote:
Thassk wrote:
We do read our own forums and play the game.
click 1
click 2
Sorry, I'm clicky impaired.
Message Edited by Thassk on 10-23-200506:41 AM
regarding these my feedback has been alittle different.. i would say aboutwhere he shows11% chance for 90-120** tunes .. ( thats one out of10 pearls ) , i show a 20-30% chance in just 90-100 tunes ( also one out of ten but not factoring in anything over 120 , and granted the majority will be 90 or close to 90)
.. even in this guys post .. 90-120* encapsulates about 10-11%
( i come to this conclusion thet he cuts off the 81-90 and writes up a 9% margin for those ( so being a 9 point spread i take the 90 and borrow 1% there.. a 5.1% margine for 91-100, and a 2.7% for 101-110 and last but not least a 1.3% margin gor 111-120... )
keep in mind in order to findthe percentage of 90 or aboveyou have to combine these which i do here for you..but my margin is different in 90-100 9cutting off at 100 .. not adding the 3.8% chance you get in getting something above 120 ... even by his standards that one out of 20 pearls will tune to 90-100 levels
so if anything his chart ( referring to clicky 1) shows 1-2 out of ten pearls will tune ABOVE 90 damage ... ABOVE ... so you are in fact SUPPORTING my claims
Message Edited by Thassk on 10-23-200507:07 AM
Message Edited by DarthPolecat on 10-23-2005 11:04 AM
Curson wrote:
Balance? LOL there are jedi out there dying without being able to get a swipe in because there are constantly 50 meters away.... balance.
Your sabers do nearly 1000 points of damage per hit, get over it!!!Curson
No they don't. Mine does maybe 700 to an unarmored person, with power attack, maybe 900. And yes I've put time into finding better crystals, ALOT of time. I do have to work you know, at a real job, so I can't constantly farm crystals and pearls in game. Therefore I'm stuck with a 550 max damage saber.