Doctor Archive
Thread: Doctor Top 5 (11/11/03)
We are so well off, mainly because we were so loud in beta (none louder then Texxie 
) though I tried to stay close.
healing is one of the main foundations of a MMOG, and for all we complain about the details... all we are complaining about are details.
Chefs are Borked,
DE's are borked.
Squad Leaders are ultra-borked.
Smugglers actuakly have an empty branch and master box (and what's more Starwarsy then Smuggler?)
BE's just got a very nice fix for their busted branch.
We are at the turning point where everything is flipping over to bugfixes and content (IMO).
-T
(mmm content)
Xanobia: I'm not sure I understand you. #2 is a statement that there probably isn't quite enough benefit to being a Master Doc. And On Fire Cure would be something new that could be added there. In fact if you look at the Dev Response thread fro this top 5:
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=doctor&message.id=24681
You'll find a compiled listing of ideas for things to be added to Master Doc. On Fire Cure is even listed as one of them.
(I kinda get the feeling TH "bumped" the wrong thread, since this one just states what the Top 5 are that I sent in, it's not the responses... hmmm.... maybe I should edit that other thread to include the full issue from this thread so Traigus can have a consolidated thread and reduce some of the clutter I made here. 
)
Last time I read this forum two issues where in it that have vanished.
- The large variation between a buffs (500 to 3000)
- The fact that when the server crashes, you cant rebuff for an hour or until you commit suicide.
I do not know why these two issues are not mention but this should be priority 1 and 2 as they are the biggest time wasters in game and the most frustrating bugs I have encountered.
The delay of healing(stims, bleeds, etc)is also quite bad mainly because of lag. Nothing more frustrating then clearing all your attacks to get a heal in right away and the heal not going off for 20-50 seconds.
Zarlor wrote:
Xanobia: I'm not sure I understand you. #2 is a statement that there probably isn't quite enough benefit to being a Master Doc. And On Fire Cure would be something new that could be added there. In fact if you look at the Dev Response thread fro this top 5:
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=doctor&message.id=24681
You'll find a compiled listing of ideas for things to be added to Master Doc. On Fire Cure is even listed as one of them.
(I kinda get the feeling TH "bumped" the wrong thread, since this one just states what the Top 5 are that I sent in, it's not the responses... hmmm.... maybe I should edit that other thread to include the full issue from this thread so Traigus can have a consolidated thread and reduce some of the clutter I made here.
i mean that i dont agree that revive should be a master doc thing, would be more harm then good
The reason they were not in this Top 5 is pretty simple, really. Because they didn't get enough votes. If you take a look over at the voting thread, though, you can always try to vote for those issues to get them up higher on the priority listing. It's up to all of the Doctors out there to determine what gets put onto a Top 5 list and what does not. It's not my choice (you can see my personal Top 5, in fact, on the Voting thread as well.
lavoir wrote:
Last time I read this forum two issues where in it that have vanished.
- The large variation between a buffs (500 to 3000)
- The fact that when the server crashes, you cant rebuff for an hour or until you commit suicide.
)To fix the issue listed in number 1.
Why not limit the doctor to survey only not sample. No power sampling only finding ability.
Just to clarify for all of the folks with the ideas on Issue #1, they're all great, but so far they've all been brought up as well as more than a few others. (They can all be found on the links listed with the issue.)
I've pushed this from many angles, but it's still a process that we really need a good dialogue to occur on. That dialogue has started, but it really needs to get a bit more steam occuring and feedback from the Dev team. Hopefully then we can finally get something moving on it. I would REALLY like to see something happen on that front a lot faster than it is right now.
However, even though I think the discussion phase on this issue should be going faster than it is, I expect any kind of implementation phase to actually take some time... a few months at least. So once we get to that point (IF we get to that point) then patience will have to be our watchword, I think.
Zarlor wrote:
The reason they were not in this Top 5 is pretty simple, really. Because they didn't get enough votes. If you take a look over at the voting thread, though, you can always try to vote for those issues to get them up higher on the priority listing. It's up to all of the Doctors out there to determine what gets put onto a Top 5 list and what does not. It's not my choice (you can see my personal Top 5, in fact, on the Voting thread as well.
lavoir wrote:
Last time I read this forum two issues where in it that have vanished.
- The large variation between a buffs (500 to 3000)
- The fact that when the server crashes, you cant rebuff for an hour or until you commit suicide.
With all due respect for your work, you must realise that a bug should make priority over a new requested feature(survey) anyday.
The bug that means you can t rebuff when you crash, means you loose hours of playtime.
Perhaps you could emphazise the game stopping bugs on the voting page and educate the lower level doctors who have not experienced them yet.
The problem is that if I did emphasize something over something else, even if it's a bug, I would be misrepresenting the requests of the community. The job I volunteered to do has nothing to do with what *I*, personally, or you or any one individual thinks is the most important problems we have in the profession. To do so would be misrepresentation. So I used a voting process.
However, even so it should be noted that the issue you bring up was ALREADY brought up to the Devs previously, the issue was acknowledged and they have stated they are working on it.
Now if I submitted it to them again... well what would be the point? They know it's a problem, they've acknowledged that it's a problem so now WE know that they know it's a problem. All they could do is say "Yeah, we know it' a problem and we're working on it." Putting it on the list would have done nothing productive, anyway.