Creature Handler Archive
Thread: Feedback Requested: Your Top 10 Questions for TH
SioBabble wrote:
...However, let's face it, this is a negotiation...
I disagree. I'm a paying customer, who between software and a possible expansion pack will fork out somewhere around $250 over 12 months. If they lose 500 players, the cost of that loss is $125,000 on their annual revenue.
Where will that come from? Directly out of the costs attributed to this project, namely salaries. So then, with smaller staff, the program will languish further and the downward spiral becomes unstoppable unless SOE wants to put more investment into it, which they probably won't since they already see it as a loser.
The other fallacy is that we represent only a small number of users. Of all the players, only a certain percentage of those even read the boards, and of that, a lesser percentage actually post comments.
So what they need to do is listen to their customers. What they should really do is shelve the expansion pack, put that dev team back on the main program until the issues are resolved. The expansion will only add to the 'issues' and I doubt I'll buy one if the present issues haven't been fixed.
If their intent was to only field softball type questions, then they don't know what in the sam hill they're doing
fantoq wrote:
SioBabble wrote:
...However, let's face it, this is a negotiation...
I disagree. I'm a paying customer, who between software and a possible expansion pack will fork out somewhere around $250 over 12 months. If they lose 500 players, the cost of that loss is $125,000 on their annual revenue.
Where will that come from? Directly out of the costs attributed to this project, namely salaries. So then, with smaller staff, the program will languish further and the downward spiral becomes unstoppable unless SOE wants to put more investment into it, which they probably won't since they already see it as a loser.
The other fallacy is that we represent only a small number of users. Of all the players, only a certain percentage of those even read the boards, and of that, a lesser percentage actually post comments.
So what they need to do is listen to their customers. What they should really do is shelve the expansion pack, put that dev team back on the main program until the issues are resolved. The expansion will only add to the 'issues' and I doubt I'll buy one if the present issues haven't been fixed.
If their intent was to only field softball type questions, then they don't know what in the sam hill they're doing
)
Vertexon wrote:
CavemanGamer wrote:
But (unlike some people on this forum) when I don't care for something myself, I never argue *against* it - I respect that some people want those things, even if I don't.
But personally, I would rather get some answers (and maybe some "pet" issues) cleared up.
Which answers? Which pet issues? Finding that out was the point of creating this thread. I put together that list of ten questions by going through the notes I've been taking from regular forum posts since December, matching them up against the replies to this thread, and editing the thoughts to achieve what I hope will be maximum impact in a concise form. I realize that some people think that we're doomed (and I try to communicate those feelings in the more "free verse" posts like the state of the profession), but turning this opportunity into an emotional rant is not the best path to getting thoughtful answers.
Many of the "questions" take on the form of feature requests, yes. That's because I wanted the ten questions to be things that people on this forum care about (and yes, I have seen that many people really want things like increased storage and static content - or at least want to know what the Devs think so the discussion can be planned accordingly). I purposely did not include things that are very narrow in focus (why don't huurtons and vernes make sounds when they vocalize?) or things that CHs seem to have heated differences of opinion on (should seeing CL be taken away from Master Scout and given to CHs? or Should the entire cloning line be removed from BE and replaced with "pet slicing?").
I didn't realize using the words "trade-off" was going to generate this level of contraversy, or I would have rephrased it. I do think we need to keep in mind that database space is at a premium, and letting the Devs know that we don't expect them to magically create it for us can only help our cause. The Merchants were just hit with a "vendor storage space nerf," and increasing the number of customization-heavy pets in thedatabase is going to be a hard sell. At the time, making it clear that we're willing to "negotiate" seemed like it would decrease our chances of being rejected out of hand. I still believe this to be the case, though I absolutely understand the concerns people have with the wording.
I was only meaning that easy-to-fix, or quick answers, (that had a reasonable chance of getting a response) was more likely to get something (even if it's a little something) than asking for a whole new building or whatever.
Yet on the other hand:
I said crap in an earlier post about not being happy with the role of BE's in the life of CH's (wanting to protect the "fun" aspect of taming animals instead of simply buying them) - Which would require a redesign of the BE profession (clearly NOT going to happen, right?).
So obviously, I am not being very consistent.
However, I did NOT mean to imply that your top 10 questions were inappropriate - if you got that impression, then I apologize.
You're top 10 questions are a very good mix of important issues and wishlist items that cover most of what CH's feel are important.
- all of the issues are important to some of the people...
- some of the issues are important to all of the people...
- and other issues are only important to some of the people...
(sometimes you have to represent a minority view in order to be a fair representative of all people.)
Personally, all I expect the devs to do (because I'm cynical) is that the "easy" things will get a quick yes/no/maybe answer from the devs, and the "wishlist" stuff will continue to get ignored since they've already heard it before in our top issues thread and state of the profession thread.
The two examples that you mentioned leaving out of your post was the BE's role in CH, and seeing CL when you examine a creature.
I realize now that the BE thing is a perfect example of an issue that is far too complicated than to merely ask the devs to "fix" it.
Perhaps there is a "simple" way to approach those two issues:
1. Perhaps the devs can be convinced to use a common formula for determining CL with BOTH cloned and wild pets.
(this wouldn't require a redesign of the BE profession, but it would ensure that when comparing two creatures the CL is a consistent indicator of the creature's power.)
2. Perhaps the devs can be convinced to add +5 creature knowledge skillmod to novice ch without taking anything away from any other profession.
whether this is appropriate or not is a question that I wish you'd let the devs answer instead of substituting your own judgment.
Maybe both of these examples could be "simplified" enough to warrant a reasonable chance of getting an answer from the devs?
(assuming of course that you are willing to present them?)
Again, I realize that I was not being consistent with my own comments when you go back and examine my 10 questions...
And, I apologize if you got the impression that I thought your 10 were not appropriate... that is not the case.
Your 10 questions are a fair representation of issues that all or some people feel are important...
...I never meant to imply otherwise.
I may be ambivalent to some of those issues, but realize that not everyone has to feel strongly about every single item. I try to always respect that someone else may really feel strongly about something that I don't, especially since my "pet" issue (creature knowledge) never seems to make the final cut with you.
Vertexon wrote:
Thanks fantoq.For what it's worth, I have been continuing to express the community's concerns about the 30 second timer thing (fighting tooth and nail over it at times). It seems pretty clear to me that we're in the right, but it will be hard work to overcome some of the misconceptions about CHs in PvP (particularly with PvP currently mired in genuineexploits and imbalances that have nothing to do with us).
Hey Vert. Can you stress the rare tameables nonsense also?
For instance, i feel most everyone wants a stand still and attack command. Something that tells our pets dont CHASE.
Then there are things like fetch my harvest from that red mobs corpse i just killed in the middle of that other lair of red mobs. Something like this while a plus feature for most CH does spoil the kill or be killed aspects of the wild. If you will never bring this up please tell us.
I mean you are a representative but i believe you do only address your own agendas. You do very little corresponding, but rather merely post other threads where we can find the information. It seems we are more reliant upon hearing from TH than you yourself. Then there is the last role of community moderater/mediater. If there is division in the community it is likely you should make sure we even know that we are split on issues. I mean if you arent going to bring them up because we are split then there is nothing to work towards. You only fuel further division by your silence.
There have been many posts about BE and their usefulness to us. In light of the recent DH class that really seems to be going to the back burner i realize that i want us to be a true combat class now more than ever. I am becoming more settled in the fact CH pets from the wild will never be equal to BE pets. If something like this is what you are percieving as divisions then you are only hurting us by not expressing it and encouraging further dialogue. While i realize it is impossible to represent the community as a whole on split issues it is more reasonable to hammer out split issues within the community before approaching the Devs. Something that you seem unwilling to do. You are taking the easy way out of everything. Telling us that BE slicing is something the community disagress upon so you will not ask is your own agenda. You do not wish to be embarrassed amongst your dev peers, desiring their respect over ours.
1. MEAT!.... Whats up with that? Why does a CH loot only 60% of anyone else who is also soloing. If a CH has a pet, he harvests at 60%. Is it because the CH is overpowered? This is nuts.
2. Killing speed. Why is the CH the slowest killer of any soloing profession? With my pet hitting at 410, I have filled 6 boxes in marksman and out damage him. I have novice Marksman, pistol I, II, III, IV and novice Pistoleer. Also my 4 pistols allow me to do damage in heat, acid, blast and energy. The pet does kinetic only.
3. Damage choice. The creatures I fight will go after the stat that is lowest. Why can't my pet do that?
I mean you are a representative but i believe you do only address your own agendas. You do very little corresponding, but rather merely post other threads where we can find the information. It seems we are more reliant upon hearing from TH than you yourself. Then there is the last role of community moderater/mediater. If there is division in the community it is likely you should make sure we even know that we are split on issues. I mean if you arent going to bring them up because we are split then there is nothing to work towards. You only fuel further division by your silence.
Vertexon wrote:
I mean you are a representative but i believe you do only address your own agendas. You do very little corresponding, but rather merely post other threads where we can find the information. It seems we are more reliant upon hearing from TH than you yourself. Then there is the last role of community moderater/mediater. If there is division in the community it is likely you should make sure we even know that we are split on issues. I mean if you arent going to bring them up because we are split then there is nothing to work towards. You only fuel further division by your silence.
Er... that's because TH has both information and permission to post that information, whereas usually I do not? I try to make my posts count, and not post just for the sake of posting. I have been trying to chime in more often and post things like "I don't know," "I haven't heard anything yet," or "I don't have any information." It just seems kind of questionable to me whether people find that more helpful or annoying?
I'd love to pass out information like the vitality in PvP tidbit more often. But I just don't have it. Game development on a project of this magnitude is not done overnight, and there are many many other things on the Devs' plate beside our issues. Most of the time there is nothing new for me to tell you.
Vertexon wrote:
I didn't realize using the words "trade-off" was going to generate this level of contraversy, or I would have rephrased it. I do think we need to keep in mind that database space is at a premium, and letting the Devs know that we don't expect them to magically create it for us can only help our cause. The Merchants were just hit with a "vendor storage space nerf," and increasing the number of customization-heavy pets in thedatabase is going to be a hard sell. At the time, making it clear that we're willing to "negotiate" seemed like it would decrease our chances of being rejected out of hand. I still believe this to be the case, though I absolutely understand the concerns people have with the wording.
Like I said I think you did a great job on the list bud. I just think we are allVERYupset 
about the 30 second issue. If getting more space means we have to be nerfed again I would rather just forget it. It's not worth anymore nerfs, we can't handle anymore. People are already leaving the game over the ones we have. What's next, we log in and all we can do is lay on the ground twitching and whimpering all pitiful like? LOL ... that will be our new special skills at master ... "fall down twitching 1" and "pitiful cry 1".
Aakhperkare wrote:
I'd like to ad that I am still incredibly frustrated with the rare tameables. Namely, Bull Rancors. Thank you...
lol
