Jedi Archive
Thread: This statement from soe is almost laughable...
TheCapn2000 wrote:
again I ask for a complete list of each and every skill with the DEV's intended use of it in order to make it clear going forward...In many cases the players dictate how a given skill will be used in battle...I really do not think the DEVs play the game they have invented...
reminds me of how after a certain skill was in the game for over a year (feign), they suddenly come out and say the skill was not intended to be used in the manner players were using it.
I would laugh if I didn't think they were being serious.......they said they were unaware ofthis skill being used in a certian way for almost 2 years????? I seriously doubtthe word of the devs when theypreachthey play the game.
and that is why I question whether they actually play the game my friend...
DocSavag wrote:
TheCapn2000 wrote:
again I ask for a complete list of each and every skill with the DEV's intended use of it in order to make it clear going forward...In many cases the players dictate how a given skill will be used in battle...I really do not think the DEVs play the game they have invented...
DocSavag wrote:
Novock wrote:
The big question is viability. For a 4th tier skill is it a viable use under the current force costs? I'd say in most cases no, unless you have an already depleted oppenent. With powers already low damage high force cost attack abilities why would I sink myself in a further force whole by wasting a bunch of force to sneak up on another jedi who can mitigate most of dmg anyway? This is where it doesn't make any sense, because of the force cost it seems attacks must be made fast not slow. You end starport ganking by taking away transfer and channeling abilities while cloaked. You take away PVE exploits by not allowing containers to be looted whil cloaked. Snare makes no sense for cloak it doesn't limit escape it limits attacking. i may need to travel 250 meters (because of radar) to sneak up on my oppent to hit em, I only need 20 meters to escape. once I'm cloaked I have effectively escaped. This design does not effectively and viably create a alpha strike ability.
DocSavag wrote:
Jacella wrote:
KelnMacil wrote:
I have never used cloak to runaway.
I've never initiated combat with it either.
What I do use it for (besides being invisible most of the time), is a counter attack tool. I break off contact during a fight, run and cloak, suffer all the name calling while I am circling around behind them, and break cloak with an attack like KD or choke. It is awesome for that.
AKA Alpha Strike
See now we're talking. That is right..exactly the definition of an alpha strike abilty. The ability to get behind your enemy and attack before he knows you are there. The fact that he initiated comabt initially is irrelevent. You use it offensively to get the jump on him. Thats an alpha strike.
No, I agree that it doesn't. I think the force cost has to come down for it to be a viable first strike ability. I think the point that is being made by the dev team is that they view it as such instead of the current usage of it.
I always wonder why people seem so sure of this when there is evidence everywhere that they are wrong. If you name a dev name that you know I can probably find evidence that they do play the game.
You're right. Players determine ultimately how a skill and won't be used. The issue arises when the intended use of the skill causes it to be given certain abilities that when used differently cause it to be unbalanced in the eyes of the designers of the game.
TheCapn2000 wrote:
and that is why I question whether they actually play the game my friend...
DocSavag wrote:
TheCapn2000 wrote:
again I ask for a complete list of each and every skill with the DEV's intended use of it in order to make it clear going forward...In many cases the players dictate how a given skill will be used in battle...I really do not think the DEVs play the game they have invented...
DocSavag wrote:
Novock wrote:
The big question is viability. For a 4th tier skill is it a viable use under the current force costs? I'd say in most cases no, unless you have an already depleted oppenent. With powers already low damage high force cost attack abilities why would I sink myself in a further force whole by wasting a bunch of force to sneak up on another jedi who can mitigate most of dmg anyway? This is where it doesn't make any sense, because of the force cost it seems attacks must be made fast not slow. You end starport ganking by taking away transfer and channeling abilities while cloaked. You take away PVE exploits by not allowing containers to be looted whil cloaked. Snare makes no sense for cloak it doesn't limit escape it limits attacking. i may need to travel 250 meters (because of radar) to sneak up on my oppent to hit em, I only need 20 meters to escape. once I'm cloaked I have effectively escaped. This design does not effectively and viably create a alpha strike ability.
DocSavag wrote:
Jacella wrote:
KelnMacil wrote:
I have never used cloak to runaway.
I've never initiated combat with it either.
What I do use it for (besides being invisible most of the time), is a counter attack tool. I break off contact during a fight, run and cloak, suffer all the name calling while I am circling around behind them, and break cloak with an attack like KD or choke. It is awesome for that.
AKA Alpha Strike
See now we're talking. That is right..exactly the definition of an alpha strike abilty. The ability to get behind your enemy and attack before he knows you are there. The fact that he initiated comabt initially is irrelevent. You use it offensively to get the jump on him. Thats an alpha strike.
No, I agree that it doesn't. I think the force cost has to come down for it to be a viable first strike ability. I think the point that is being made by the dev team is that they view it as such instead of the current usage of it.
I always wonder why people seem so sure of this when there is evidence everywhere that they are wrong. If you name a dev name that you know I can probably find evidence that they do play the game.
You're right. Players determine ultimately how a skill and won't be used. The issue arises when the intended use of the skill causes it to be given certain abilities that when used differently cause it to be unbalanced in the eyes of the designers of the game.
Have you ever written software code for a living? I ask becuase I have written hundreds of applications for my company over the years and almost every single one of them was used in a way I never intended. I assure you that I used every single one of those applications myself for the purpose I created them for. It didn't once enter my mind that they would do some of the things they did.
A Dev playing the game doesn't give them magical insight into what your brain will do with their creation once they let you have it. THey try to guess. Sometimes they are right sometimes they are wrong. Sometimes their design works for a long time and then something happens that causes it to break. I'm not saying they shouldn't have forseen the issues with cloak. I'm saying that the fact that they didn't doesn't prove they don't play the game at all.
yes..I have...I also test my creations and look for unintended uses...I also incorporate UAT and make changes based up that...(User Acceptance Testing for the non computer nerds)...hmmm...UAT...what a novel concept...
DocSavag wrote:
Have you ever written software code for a living? I ask becuase I have written hundreds of applications for my company over the years and almost every single one of them was used in a way I never intended. I assure you that I used every single one of those applications myself for the purpose I created them for. It didn't once enter my mind that they would do some of the things they did.
A Dev playing the game doesn't give them magical insight into what your brain will do with their creation once they let you have it. THey try to guess. Sometimes they are right sometimes they are wrong. Sometimes their design works for a long time and then something happens that causes it to break. I'm not saying they shouldn't have forseen the issues with cloak. I'm saying that the fact that they didn't doesn't prove they don't play the game at all.
TheCapn2000 wrote:
see..I would rather they just come out and say its all about cost...and maximizing profits...I would have much more respect than the half @ssed way it is being done now...
DocSavag wrote:
TheCapn2000 wrote:
DocSavag wrote:
Nope. I'm extremely critical of their QA departments effectiveness and their complete lack of ability to use the massive marketing research tool (the forums) they have. I suspect its a financial issue though and not a lack of desire to make the game better.yeah...my thinkingas well thatit is purely financial...
My point was that using your own product does NOT ensure that you know all the uses that product will have once it is in someone elses hands. And someone coming up with something you didn't think of is not proff you didn't use it yourself.Not disagreeing with you there...but as you said above they have a very large forum andtest center server that should be serving that purpose...but they do not use it efficiently or at all....
No they are not but I suspect that is a corporate decision and not a local one. Ever developer I have ever talked to with SWG has been knowledgeable and passionate about this game. The desire is there. They are bright folks. The disconnect is in the execution and I think there is a cost factor being applied above the judgement of the professionals involved.
I would too but no one wants to say that and players already expect game companies to be philanthropic enterprises.
TBH...I expect more from them...
DocSavag wrote:
TheCapn2000 wrote:
see..I would rather they just come out and say its all about cost...and maximizing profits...I would have much more respect than the half @ssed way it is being done now...
DocSavag wrote:
TheCapn2000 wrote:
DocSavag wrote:
Nope. I'm extremely critical of their QA departments effectiveness and their complete lack of ability to use the massive marketing research tool (the forums) they have. I suspect its a financial issue though and not a lack of desire to make the game better.
yeah...my thinkingas well thatit is purely financial...
My point was that using your own product does NOT ensure that you know all the uses that product will have once it is in someone elses hands. And someone coming up with something you didn't think of is not proff you didn't use it yourself.
Not disagreeing with you there...but as you said above they have a very large forum andtest center server that should be serving that purpose...but they do not use it efficiently or at all....
No they are not but I suspect that is a corporate decision and not a local one. Ever developer I have ever talked to with SWG has been knowledgeable and passionate about this game. The desire is there. They are bright folks. The disconnect is in the execution and I think there is a cost factor being applied above the judgement of the professionals involved.
I would too but no one wants to say that and players already expect game companies to be philanthropic enterprises.
DocSavag wrote:
I don't think you have it exactly right either but I Think we are confusing terms.
An alpha strike is just the first strike. That can be anything.
An alpha strike ability is some skill that allows you to get in the first strike against an opponenet.
There is a difference. Cover is an alpha strike ability because the design is for you to go invisiblie, creep up on an unsuspecting enemy and hit them before they know they have been hit.
Cloak is supposed to be the same thing for Jedi (though I acknowledge that its got some issues along those lines)
BH have a first strike ability via the TEF system for Jedi bounty missions.
As far as I know right now there are no other first strike abilities in the game though Rangers sound like they are getting the next ones.
Am I missing something?
Calling Paralyze a first strike ability because a BH can use it is wrong. They could lead off with ranged attack too or headshot or sprayshot or antyhing else. Their ability to strike first flows from the TEF they have against us.
TheCapn2000 wrote:
yes..I have...I also test my creations and look for unintended uses...I also incorporate UAT and make changes based up that...(User Acceptance Testing for the non computer nerds)...hmmm...UAT...what a novel concept...
DocSavag wrote:
Have you ever written software code for a living? I ask becuase I have written hundreds of applications for my company over the years and almost every single one of them was used in a way I never intended. I assure you that I used every single one of those applications myself for the purpose I created them for. It didn't once enter my mind that they would do some of the things they did.
A Dev playing the game doesn't give them magical insight into what your brain will do with their creation once they let you have it. THey try to guess. Sometimes they are right sometimes they are wrong. Sometimes their design works for a long time and then something happens that causes it to break. I'm not saying they shouldn't have forseen the issues with cloak. I'm saying that the fact that they didn't doesn't prove they don't play the game at all.
Yea so do I. And if you are telling me that even with all that you've never had in unintended use of your software I suspect they just don't tell you about it
DocSavag wrote:
TheCapn2000 wrote:
yes..I have...I also test my creations and look for unintended uses...I also incorporate UAT and make changes based up that...(User Acceptance Testing for the non computer nerds)...hmmm...UAT...what a novel concept...
DocSavag wrote:
Have you ever written software code for a living? I ask becuase I have written hundreds of applications for my company over the years and almost every single one of them was used in a way I never intended. I assure you that I used every single one of those applications myself for the purpose I created them for. It didn't once enter my mind that they would do some of the things they did.
A Dev playing the game doesn't give them magical insight into what your brain will do with their creation once they let you have it. THey try to guess. Sometimes they are right sometimes they are wrong. Sometimes their design works for a long time and then something happens that causes it to break. I'm not saying they shouldn't have forseen the issues with cloak. I'm saying that the fact that they didn't doesn't prove they don't play the game at all.
Yea so do I. And if you are telling me that even with all that you've never had in unintended use of your software I suspect they just don't tell you about it
no...sometimes things pop up...but we spend alot of time and resourcestesting our applications to mitigate those types of things...I also have "documentation" which outlines the clear intent of what the application is supposed to do...
you cannot honestly say with a straight face that SOE utilizes its full potential on testing and communicating the intent to its user base...
DocSavag wrote:
Have you ever written software code for a living? I ask becuase I have written hundreds of applications for my company over the years and almost every single one of them was used in a way I never intended. I assure you that I used every single one of those applications myself for the purpose I created them for. It didn't once enter my mind that they would do some of the things they did.
A Dev playing the game doesn't give them magical insight into what your brain will do with their creation once they let you have it. THey try to guess. Sometimes they are right sometimes they are wrong. Sometimes their design works for a long time and then something happens that causes it to break. I'm not saying they shouldn't have forseen the issues with cloak. I'm saying that the fact that they didn't doesn't prove they don't play the game at all.
TheCapn2000 wrote:
DocSavag wrote:
TheCapn2000 wrote:
yes..I have...I also test my creations and look for unintended uses...I also incorporate UAT and make changes based up that...(User Acceptance Testing for the non computer nerds)...hmmm...UAT...what a novel concept...
DocSavag wrote:
Have you ever written software code for a living? I ask becuase I have written hundreds of applications for my company over the years and almost every single one of them was used in a way I never intended. I assure you that I used every single one of those applications myself for the purpose I created them for. It didn't once enter my mind that they would do some of the things they did.
A Dev playing the game doesn't give them magical insight into what your brain will do with their creation once they let you have it. THey try to guess. Sometimes they are right sometimes they are wrong. Sometimes their design works for a long time and then something happens that causes it to break. I'm not saying they shouldn't have forseen the issues with cloak. I'm saying that the fact that they didn't doesn't prove they don't play the game at all.
Yea so do I. And if you are telling me that even with all that you've never had in unintended use of your software I suspect they just don't tell you about it
no...sometimes things pop up...but we spend alot of time and resourcestesting our applications to mitigate those types of things...I also have "documentation" which outlines the clear intent of what the application is supposed to do...
you cannot honestly say with a straight face that SOE utilizes its full potential on testing and communicating the intent to its user base...
Nope. I'm extremely critical of their QA departments effectiveness and their complete lack of ability to use the massive marketing research tool (the forums) they have. I suspect its a financial issue though and not a lack of desire to make the game better.
My point was that using your own product does NOT ensure that you know all the uses that product will have once it is in someone elses hands. And someone coming up with something you didn't think of is not proff you didn't use it yourself.
DocSavag wrote:
Nope. I'm extremely critical of their QA departments effectiveness and their complete lack of ability to use the massive marketing research tool (the forums) they have. I suspect its a financial issue though and not a lack of desire to make the game better.
yeah...my thinkingas well thatit is purely financial...
My point was that using your own product does NOT ensure that you know all the uses that product will have once it is in someone elses hands. And someone coming up with something you didn't think of is not proff you didn't use it yourself.
Not disagreeing with you there...but as you said above they have a very large forum andtest center server that should be serving that purpose...but they do not use it efficiently or at all....
TheCapn2000 wrote:
DocSavag wrote:
Nope. I'm extremely critical of their QA departments effectiveness and their complete lack of ability to use the massive marketing research tool (the forums) they have. I suspect its a financial issue though and not a lack of desire to make the game better.yeah...my thinkingas well thatit is purely financial...
My point was that using your own product does NOT ensure that you know all the uses that product will have once it is in someone elses hands. And someone coming up with something you didn't think of is not proff you didn't use it yourself.Not disagreeing with you there...but as you said above they have a very large forum andtest center server that should be serving that purpose...but they do not use it efficiently or at all....
No they are not but I suspect that is a corporate decision and not a local one. Ever developer I have ever talked to with SWG has been knowledgeable and passionate about this game. The desire is there. They are bright folks. The disconnect is in the execution and I think there is a cost factor being applied above the judgement of the professionals involved.