So FC

[Technogen]

Are you guys going to address the player base complaints about the nanos or just ignore them? I'm sure it wouldn't kill you to take the 5 seconds to make a public post saying "The items are just test items and we had copied stats from other nanos for these."

PS please don't give us that crap about "items on test need to be talked about on the test forums" unless you're willing to grant everyone access to the test forums we will talk about it here. These effect the whole playerbase not just the people on test.

[Sterva]

The items are just test items and we had copied stats from other nanos for these!

Happy? FC has always had pretty much exactly that stance and has said so a million times, why do you want them to say it again? lol

[Warhead]

Are you guys going to address the player base complaints about the nanos or just ignore them?

The player base complained? I dont think so, because we here on the forums (still) do not represent the player base as a whole.

You should have worded it like this:

"Are you guys going to address the whines of us forum monkeys about the nanos or just ignore them?"

[Technogen]

The player base complained? I dont think so, because we here on the forums (still) do not represent the player base as a whole.

You should have worded it like this:

"Are you guys going to address the whines of us forum monkeys about the nanos or just ignore them?"

Ha that's great, I bet that's what the us gov uses to get away with things. "The voters don't represent the whole population so we're ok." we are still the vocial part of the population that is what matters since this is player/dev feedback. Those that don't speak up for or aginst are not part of the equasion.

[Harios]

The player base complained? I dont think so, because we here on the forums (still) do not represent the player base as a whole.

You should have worded it like this:

"Are you guys going to address the whines of us forum monkeys about the nanos or just ignore them?"

Agreed

[gergiskoo]

Actually the new nanos all seem pretty good to me.

[Stillian]

They have their issues and some, clearly, will need some work still, but I do not have any great grief with them myself. I'm thinking mostly of the Doc Nuke and the Agent debuff, both of which I hear complaints about. If anything is to be reworked, I see it being those two.

[Farlath]

Actually the new nanos all seem pretty good to me.

I would pay good money to see what the world looks like to you for 10 minutes....

[Doctorhyde]

I would pay good money to see what the world looks like to you for 10 minutes....

It just means he's not a Shade nor a Fixer. Or if he is ... well ... he just doesn't pay attention.

[Mastablasta]

Ha that's great, I bet that's what the us gov uses to get away with things. "The voters don't represent the whole population so we're ok." we are still the vocial part of the population that is what matters since this is player/dev feedback. Those that don't speak up for or aginst are not part of the equasion.

I really am glad that you're not a politician. Or a developer on an MMO.

[Technogen]

1st part is right, 2nd is not.

When seeking feedback on dev of items for a game you have to listen to your paying customers about the item. This is true for any point of sales item. Now natually those whom are aginst the change will be more vocial then those for it, however when you have a great majority of the people speaking complaint against the change with very litt prase you know your change is wrong. Ignoring the negitive because you don't want to hear it will result in another swg mishap. Sil has a very very high tenticy to say "No, were right and your wrong."

[Mastablasta]

1st part is right, 2nd is not.

When seeking feedback on dev of items for a game you have to listen to your paying customers about the item. This is true for any point of sales item. Now natually those whom are aginst the change will be more vocial then those for it, however when you have a great majority of the people speaking complaint against the change with very litt prase you know your change is wrong. Ignoring the negitive because you don't want to hear it will result in another swg mishap. Sil has a very very high tenticy to say "No, were right and your wrong."

Well, a somewhat twisted and biased viewpoint you have here, some of it is right, some of it is just silly.

A lot of people might speak up about something being "wrong", but there are different ways to perceive right and wrong. One way is the egocentric way, which is what you are most likely to see here on the forum. Then there's the way where you look at the overall status of the society you are changing. If that society at length will benefit more from the change, that some believe is "wrong" because on the short term it might not directly benefit them, then that doesn't make that decission wrong. In fact, one might argue that it makes it more right, because the good of the whole is more important.
Especially so in an online world where pleasing everyone will only end up in a pile of garbage. A.e. Star Wars Galaxies, where they attempt to please everyone turned the game into a game that is pleasing to everyone, but in the process alienating the original audience. No doubt that SWG is easier and more accessible to play today, but it's not what the people who used to play it played it for. In the end, you don't want that happening to AO either, which is why it makes sense to speak one's mind on the forum. But at the same time, you should consider the impact on the entire picture of things that you speak out on, not just how they benefit you and your kind the next 7 days.

[Technogen]

Right

[Mastablasta]

Right

Any system that processes inputs value the extremist directions as well, since they provide the picture for what you do not want to go towards.

[Uaintseenme]

ok, so looking at the WHOLE community, my pets having 100 points lower req to cast effects NO ONE but engies and every engie (apart from one) says these reqs are not suitable for todays BS environment.

Maybe im just wrong and my Nano reqs are fine, well in that case please add 300 points to the req of everyone else's nano's so its fair.

Im honestly starting to think that gaining improvements for engineers is a lost cause, i think we should focus more on screwing everyone else over so they are in the same boat as us.
So lets get all our very vocal engies posting complaints on the other threads that all those requirements are too easy.

If we cant get our nano reqs dropped, maybe we should be focusing on getting everyone else's raised?
Since everyone is capable of casting higher reqs IF they dont mind swapping items around for the first 10 mins of each BS.

[Mastablasta]

ok, so looking at the WHOLE community, my pets having 100 points lower req to cast effects NO ONE but engies and every engie (apart from one) says these reqs are not suitable for todays BS environment.

Maybe im just wrong and my Nano reqs are fine, well in that case please add 300 points to the req of everyone else's nano's so its fair.

Im honestly starting to think that gaining improvements for engineers is a lost cause, i think we should focus more on screwing everyone else over so they are in the same boat as us.
So lets get all our very vocal engies posting complaints on the other threads that all those requirements are too easy.

If we cant get our nano reqs dropped, maybe we should be focusing on getting everyone else's raised?
Since everyone is capable of casting higher reqs IF they dont mind swapping items around for the first 10 mins of each BS.

The power level of a fully equipped and buffed up engineer with pets is very high. Higher than most. High DD, high utility, high defence. There are issues with pets in pvp, but who doesn't have issues of some kind or other? Consider that power and you see why the reqs are that high. Also there's this obsession with always being at the most extreme best that it's possible to achieve. That's more of you wanting to blow while holding flour in your mouth... Sure, some others have an easier time getting to the absolute best their profession is capable of, but there are differences between professions and all that needs to be taken into consideration as well.
Some things might be considered unfair, and of course there are some issues that just can't really be explained readily, and some things are in the works, other things just don't work because of mechanics. All in a nice big tangle so it gets difficult to figure when something is intended and when something is a problem that needs solving. However, acting like an egocentric idiot will definitely not get anything done anywhere.

[Technogen]

Oh no, I agreed with you, but my point is that on a lot of topics they are not listening to the playerbase at all because it means more work for them. Example, the 00 guns. I will speak from an engineer perspective because thats the profession I know the best, but a very high majority of the content added for us since LE launch has not supported us in the current game play environment.

I would also like to directly apologize for you for the short post, I should have stated that I agreed with the "Good of many out weights the good of few." However those "few" need to be taken into account on things that will not directly effect the many, like wise the many need to be taken in on the few. Naturally my examples will be based on the engineer profession; these last nanos that we have gotten since the Nanodecks were added have been on the very extreme of our capable nano skills. Now, I completely understand the "not for everyone" look at things when offering choices, however these "Choices" are fixes for major bugs inside the profession that everyone will need to use, there by making it so they aren't a "choice". Time and again lately the dev's have made content and when told the content does not balance out the "choice" they refuse to correct it or even talk about it. Now, I don't mean they should answer every little question brought up to them about content, but when it's a major addition for the profession they should answer concerns on it publicly with the people chosen to communicate concerns between the playerbase and the dev team.

In the end I believe that is 100% my dissatisfaction with the content being added, not that it's being added but that the dev team refuses to compromise with the playerbase about items and publicly address why they refuse to.

[Mastablasta]

Oh no, I agreed with you, but my point is that on a lot of topics they are not listening to the playerbase at all because it means more work for them. Example, the 00 guns. I will speak from an engineer perspective because thats the profession I know the best, but a very high majority of the content added for us since LE launch has not supported us in the current game play environment.

I would also like to directly apologize for you for the short post, I should have stated that I agreed with the "Good of many out weights the good of few." However those "few" need to be taken into account on things that will not directly effect the many, like wise the many need to be taken in on the few. Naturally my examples will be based on the engineer profession; these last nanos that we have gotten since the Nanodecks were added have been on the very extreme of our capable nano skills. Now, I completely understand the "not for everyone" look at things when offering choices, however these "Choices" are fixes for major bugs inside the profession that everyone will need to use, there by making it so they aren't a "choice". Time and again lately the dev's have made content and when told the content does not balance out the "choice" they refuse to correct it or even talk about it. Now, I don't mean they should answer every little question brought up to them about content, but when it's a major addition for the profession they should answer concerns on it publicly with the people chosen to communicate concerns between the playerbase and the dev team.

In the end I believe that is 100% my dissatisfaction with the content being added, not that it's being added but that the dev team refuses to compromise with the playerbase about items and publicly address why they refuse to.

In that case I would also like to apologize for flaming you; I figured your short post was a provocative response.

[megabrawlman]

I want to apologize too

[Technogen]

Nah it was from my cellphone just before I left work, I should have waited until I got home to respond.

Brawl I WILL NEVER FOR GIVE YOU!



(ok I forgive you.)