Community Relations Archive
Thread: Happy with the CU? Returning to SWG because of it? Sign here
Page 1 of 2
LordScotticus
Mon Apr 18, 2005 6:23 pm
#1
This thread is to be a companion to its opposite in which I invite signatures from people quitting the game because of the CU (duely linked in signature).
Are you enthusiastic with the CU as it stands currently? Are you returning to SWG because of the CU? Please post here. Posters are reminded to be respectful of the community on whole and to please refrain from flaming.
Thank you!
EDIT: The thread opposite to this one keeps getting deleted. This one doesn't. So much for listening to player feedback!
Are you enthusiastic with the CU as it stands currently? Are you returning to SWG because of the CU? Please post here. Posters are reminded to be respectful of the community on whole and to please refrain from flaming.
Thank you!
EDIT: The thread opposite to this one keeps getting deleted. This one doesn't. So much for listening to player feedback!
Message Edited by LordScotticus on 04-19-2005 09:28 PM
ElfDruid
Mon Apr 18, 2005 6:29 pm
#2
I've been playing since launch and I'm really looking forward to the CU!!
MyrddinSidhe
Tue Apr 19, 2005 9:40 am
#4
I'm back (after 7 month absence) to try the CU. No, I'm not in Beta (nor want to be). I Beta tested JtL and came out of it frustrated. SO, I'll "test" the CU when it's live and see for myself.
Will I still here to renew my subscription come July after a month or so of trying it out? We'll see. 
I hope so.
ProjectUnknown
Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:26 am
#5
ElfDruid wrote:
I've been playing since launch and I'm really looking forward to the CU!!
*lookes at ElfDruid's forum name and wonders why.
La-grange
Wed Apr 20, 2005 6:24 pm
#6
So ummm...
What happened to the twice deleted post that people could sign if they were against the CU huh?
What happened to the twice deleted post that people could sign if they were against the CU huh?
jrscott
Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:26 pm
#7
ProjectUnknown wrote:
ElfDruid wrote:
I've been playing since launch and I'm really looking forward to the CU!!
*lookes at ElfDruid's forum name and wonders why.
MAJOR ROFL!!!!
Zennez
Thu Apr 21, 2005 12:46 pm
#8
jrscott wrote:
ProjectUnknown wrote:
ElfDruid wrote:
I've been playing since launch and I'm really looking forward to the CU!!
*lookes at ElfDruid's forum name and wonders why.
MAJOR ROFL!!!!
Omg... i wish i didnt read that as i was taking a drink.... just spit it all over my keyboard...
Teebone8
Thu Apr 21, 2005 1:07 pm
#9
I think those that are happy with the CU are the ones that haven't been to the TC... As of right now, I support a very, VERY, small portion of the "up"grade.
LordScotticus
Thu Apr 21, 2005 3:44 pm
#10
La-grange wrote:
So ummm...
What happened to the twice deleted post that people could sign if they were against the CU huh?
Deleted repeatedly. When I kept putting it back, I got banned.
THAT'S who runs these forums: "You can say anything you want, so long as it's what we want to hear." Tough news for you, SOE, but the fact is that most players dislike the CU and plenty more are quitting because of it than staying.
GrimBear
Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:15 am
#11
It's well known and fairly obvious that people who are happy with something are busy getting on with being happy about it and enjoying it.
I've read a lot of comments, a common on seems to be "scrap the cu and balance the live system"
Lets think about this ... to balance the system we need to make some changes ...
Lets considerArmour Piercing vs Armour Resistance. This system needs to go, right now pistoleers/fencers etc are worthless in high end content. Maximum AP they get is light, anything thats high end has medium/heavy armour with 350k ham an 60-100% resists. By the time you factor in a light AP weapon against a Heavy AR mob, the player is already on 1/4 damage before damage resists are applied. Now considering an untaped MR/MM can end up firing very closely to the speed cap with a T21. When it comes to high end content ... how often do you ask for more pistoleers? it's all swordsman, rifleman and generic tanks.
Combat is all about the mind targetting, the heaviest damaging people hit the weakest pool (mind). It's also unhealable for the most part. Which basically says most combat professions are at a major disadvantage to others. How do we fix this?
Make mind healable? wrong ... make mind healable and suddenly rifleman/swordsman are even more powerful with novice medic in their templates. They effectively become invincible behind their composite.
Make mind healable, but not by yourself? wrong ... two rifleman team up and become just as dangerous.
Mind healing used to be possible, they removed it for these very reasons.
Remove mind targetting alltogether? Ok, we do this, we now have a pool that empties to govern special use and we limit the number of targettable pools. We can change mind attacks to effect other pools, keeping those professions viable while stopping the range between professions from being too unbalanced and stop them being invunerable. So to do this we redesign Rifleman, Swordsman, Bounty Hunter, Marksman, Brawler etc. plus we only make certain pools to be attackable ... hang on ... CU is doing just this ...
I could go on but I believe my argument is made. The CU may feel like dumbing down, but it's what needs to be done to balance the combat system. The current combat system is so completely unbalanced and broken with combat requiring people to eat/drink food, spice or get buffs to survive.
Sure ... there are some faults with the CU but they will be sorted in time. The only thing I would change is to make guns and armour equipable at any level but perhaps with a penalty ... just like they are now.
AmishRevolutionary
Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:22 am
#12
It is not being done for those reasons, it is being done for xbox and ps2 versions of swg. http://shop.gameplay.co.uk/webstore/productpage.asp?productcode=PT0446&title=star_wars_galaxies
http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/ps2/data/561472.html
there is the true reason for it. Profit, pure and simple.
http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/ps2/data/561472.html
there is the true reason for it. Profit, pure and simple.
LordScotticus
Fri Apr 22, 2005 1:43 pm
#13
This thread already got way off topic. Screw it, let's run with it.
GRIM: Your argument focuses on the live game's b0rkt HAM system, specifically as relevant to particular professions in high-end content participation. A rethinking of HAM seems to be in order for the live game, I agree with you, but I don't so readily subscribe to your implied assertion that pistoleers and fencers ought be high-end content tanks. I don't at all think that every profession should be just as capable as another in any given context; if that were the case, there'd be no need for our plethura of colorful templates.
What you failed to point out was how useless swordsmen are in PvP, especially against stun-wielding fencers and eye-shotting bounty hunter / pistoleers with nasty geo blasters. Swordsmen deal 2 types of damge, and they're both easily resisted to 90% by cheap comp and a decent a slice. What I intend to demonstrate here is that in the live game, professions have roles / environments in which they excel and those in which they don't. Don't get me wrong: I support some of the profession role changes implied by the CU, particularly with the freeing up of skillpoints for combat medics and bounty hunters. But I cannot with good conscience look at a new system which turns the glory and pride of armorsmiths and weaponsmiths into trivial jokes, their wares being not nearly as deterministic on combat performance as some arbitrary rank number on a character sheet. I cannot look at the role of our prized doctors being reduced to a matter of extreme inconsequence and say that this is "balanced" or an "upgrade."
Your argument suggests that AP is broken. I agree, to a point: I don't think that every profession should have access to uber AP. As a swordsman, I never had it but I made do with what I *did* have. This CU thing had potential, but the implementation is so completely inconsiderate of the more skilled crafting professions and the already-working-fine combat professions as to be offensive to me. I see far more potential in the existing live game, given some serious blunt evaluation and meaningful improvement, than I do in an entirely *new* game and the associated array of new exploits, bugs, and as yet unforeseen imbalances. How long will we let the imbalances of CU remain in live before it, too, is scrapped for a replacement rather than being fixed? What the CU says is "we've learned nothing in the last 2 years, and despite millions of hours of work by thousands of people, the current game is completely unfixable and needs a full replacement. We failed, and we're starting over."
I object, especially with how little consideration is being given to customer feedback on the CU. Good for you if you like it, but most of us don't.
GRIM: Your argument focuses on the live game's b0rkt HAM system, specifically as relevant to particular professions in high-end content participation. A rethinking of HAM seems to be in order for the live game, I agree with you, but I don't so readily subscribe to your implied assertion that pistoleers and fencers ought be high-end content tanks. I don't at all think that every profession should be just as capable as another in any given context; if that were the case, there'd be no need for our plethura of colorful templates.
What you failed to point out was how useless swordsmen are in PvP, especially against stun-wielding fencers and eye-shotting bounty hunter / pistoleers with nasty geo blasters. Swordsmen deal 2 types of damge, and they're both easily resisted to 90% by cheap comp and a decent a slice. What I intend to demonstrate here is that in the live game, professions have roles / environments in which they excel and those in which they don't. Don't get me wrong: I support some of the profession role changes implied by the CU, particularly with the freeing up of skillpoints for combat medics and bounty hunters. But I cannot with good conscience look at a new system which turns the glory and pride of armorsmiths and weaponsmiths into trivial jokes, their wares being not nearly as deterministic on combat performance as some arbitrary rank number on a character sheet. I cannot look at the role of our prized doctors being reduced to a matter of extreme inconsequence and say that this is "balanced" or an "upgrade."
Your argument suggests that AP is broken. I agree, to a point: I don't think that every profession should have access to uber AP. As a swordsman, I never had it but I made do with what I *did* have. This CU thing had potential, but the implementation is so completely inconsiderate of the more skilled crafting professions and the already-working-fine combat professions as to be offensive to me. I see far more potential in the existing live game, given some serious blunt evaluation and meaningful improvement, than I do in an entirely *new* game and the associated array of new exploits, bugs, and as yet unforeseen imbalances. How long will we let the imbalances of CU remain in live before it, too, is scrapped for a replacement rather than being fixed? What the CU says is "we've learned nothing in the last 2 years, and despite millions of hours of work by thousands of people, the current game is completely unfixable and needs a full replacement. We failed, and we're starting over."
I object, especially with how little consideration is being given to customer feedback on the CU. Good for you if you like it, but most of us don't.
Page 1 of 2