221 replies to this topic

[Sybreed]

Thontor, on 02 April 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

Yes, two patches a month is very frequent, even for beta.... I can't speak for Everquest, but WoW goes months between patches...

I think you need a reality check.

I could name Path of Exile or Smite as games with a lot more frequent patching.. but they're probably easier to modify.

[Shumabot]

Noth, on 02 April 2013 - 10:25 AM, said:

Even just bug fixes for other games can take months you role out. Even in other Betas, bugs can last for months and have patches that don't fix any bugs.

Sure, for terrible games that are actually in beta. This ones free to the public and holds weekly sales for real dollars.

[Khanublikhan]

Noth, on 02 April 2013 - 09:52 AM, said:

It should play some Elvis Presley just like in canon.

Elvis - "A Little Less Conversation" would be perfect.

[Tarrasque]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 02 April 2013 - 10:24 AM, said:

I'm not talking about content though.

I'm talking about balancing and bug fixing.

And lets be honest, this patch had crap for content too.

What I mean is...why don't they patch missiles 4 or 5 times in a week to try and figure out something to fix them?

Why don't they fiddle with ECM a few times? Instead of one giant end-all-be-all patch. Lower ranges, remove features, see how things go?

Did they really have no other bug fixes at all?

Yeah, my reading comprehension is garbage today. I was referring to the patch not the game. I'm very happy with this game, though I only play it a handful of hours every week now that I've sunk so much time into it.

My only answer to you on your questions (valid as they may be) is that the forums and 'hardcore' player base in general would likely spontaneously combust due to the QQ.

That, or it takes probably at least 2 weeks to really assess the value of what you're implementing (scientifically speaking), so you gotta know what you're patching is worth assessing.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

New Support Modules:

- Air Strike Accuracy
- Decreases the radius of the targeted area by 20%.

- Artillery Accuracy
- Decreases the length of the bombardment zone by 20%.

Are these mixed up? Should not Air Strike shorten the bombardment zone and Artillery decrease the radius?

[Dyson Ring]

hammerreborn, on 02 April 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:

READ the descriptions and figure out what would be backwards about that.

So doing less damage is more accurate?

[hammerreborn]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 02 April 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

New Support Modules:

- Air Strike Accuracy
- Decreases the radius of the targeted area by 20%.

- Artillery Accuracy
- Decreases the length of the bombardment zone by 20%.

Are these mixed up? Should not Air Strike shorten the bombardment zone and Artillery decrease the radius?

SOMEONE GETS IT!

[Shumabot]

Sybreed, on 02 April 2013 - 10:25 AM, said:

I could name Path of Exile or Smite as games with a lot more frequent patching.. but they're probably easier to modify.

World of warcraft is actually out and has a beta server that performs actual beta testing. They do balance testing and have vastly fewer common bugs and much better hardware support. When WoW was new it patched all the time. TF2 patches literally every day.

[hammerreborn]

Dyson Ring, on 02 April 2013 - 10:27 AM, said:

So doing less damage is more accurate?

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 02 April 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

New Support Modules:

- Air Strike Accuracy
- Decreases the radius of the targeted area by 20%.

- Artillery Accuracy
- Decreases the length of the bombardment zone by 20%.

Are these mixed up? Should not Air Strike shorten the bombardment zone and Artillery decrease the radius?

People like Dyson are why we have 3rd person rage posts about words that were never said because they can't read, clearly

Edited by hammerreborn, 02 April 2013 - 10:28 AM.

[Tarrasque]

Shumabot, on 02 April 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

Sure, for terrible games that are actually in beta. This ones free to the public and holds weekly sales for real dollars.

.....that you absolutely, 100% do not have to use to play relevantly.

[DaZur]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 02 April 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

Holy bad posts Batman, this guy might as well be dressed in green spandex!

I don't care if they had super duper maps or whatever, but they didn't even have 5 decent bug fixes in this.

And based on what we know, the next patch isn't shaping up to be much better.

Is this a beta or not?

...That you are aware of.

How many flipping patches have they tweaked stuff that is not announced in the patch notes? Right... every flipping one of them.

That said, expecting every patch to squelch every possible bug is over reaching, bordering on creating self-imposed expectations that are unattainable.

Do I wish every patch was a cornucopia of goodness? Well, hell yes!... Having said that, I am also not one to allow expectations to exceed reality....

The reality is there is a lot of decent stuff in this patch... It just doesn't contain everyone's personal wish and desire.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Tarrasque, on 02 April 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

Yeah, my reading comprehension is garbage today. I was referring to the patch not the game. I'm very happy with this game, though I only play it a handful of hours every week now that I've sunk so much time into it.

My only answer to you on your questions (valid as they may be) is that the forums and 'hardcore' player base in general would likely spontaneously combust due to the QQ.

That, or it takes probably at least 2 weeks to really assess the value of what you're implementing (scientifically speaking), so you gotta know what you're patching is worth assessing.

I understand assessing something that you think might be a long term fix.

But change the damage in the morning, let people play, look at the 1000+ matches for that night and see if it's looking better. Then go again.

See the problem is what I'm talking about is a lot of work and long hours. Which is not something PGI seems to like doing.

And really, I could care less about the "hardcore" players QQ'ing. It's a beta. We are suppose to be testing to fix things.

Or are we just going to stop calling it beta?

[Dyson Ring]

hammerreborn, on 02 April 2013 - 10:27 AM, said:

People like Dyson are why we have 3rd person rage posts about words that were never said because they can't read, clearly

Eh, I took the descriptions of the module effects as the typo's that they are, and thought you were talking about the correct descriptions.

Sorry about that.

[Training Instructor]

heh, I'll refrain from buying the hero mech because 1) it's too expensive and 2) Almost all of the firepower is in the left torso/left arm, so you'll be twisting your gauss rifle into incoming fire to protect your left side, which will leave you with a blown up gauss rifle pretty quickly.

Maybe the right arm can hold an ac20? Either way, terrible hardpoint layout in the current meta game where people can and will reduce an assault's torso to scrap in seconds.

[Tarrasque]

Shumabot, on 02 April 2013 - 10:27 AM, said:

World of warcraft is actually out and has a beta server that performs actual beta testing. They do balance testing and have vastly fewer common bugs and much better hardware support. When WoW was new it patched all the time. TF2 patches literally every day.

I'd personally hate this game if it patched every day, even in beta. That's too much garbage, no efficiency, too much change. I never want this game to become 'play whatever the developers made really good this week'.

This is a game with a massive backdrop to draw from, and PGI appears to be far more focused on staying faithful to the myriad forms of entertainment that outline the IP, rather than turning it into the next huge PvP F2P online FPS-whatever, you get it.

[Ransack]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 02 April 2013 - 10:01 AM, said:

End result...might as well have just removed river city night

This would have made me happy

[Yiazmat]

Yokaiko, on 02 April 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

So how about BAP carrying ravens that can lock from 1000m out?

It requires LOS of the target area, not the mech you're targeting. So, say you have a friendly that's 1000 meters out and has Line of Sight (los) on the mech on your cap and is locked, but you're 1500m out behind a mountain and have an Airstrike/Atry ready to rock. You can't fire it on your lock. It fires where your Crosshairs are. If you don't have direct LOS of the target area, you'll only end up bombarding whatever it is you're looking at.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

DaZur, on 02 April 2013 - 10:28 AM, said:

...That you are aware of.

How many flipping patches have they tweaked stuff that is not announced in the patch notes? Right... every flipping one of them.

That said, expecting every patch to squelch every possible bug is over reaching, bordering on creating self-imposed expectations that are unattainable.

Do I wish every patch was a cornucopia of goodness? Well, hell yes!... Having said that, I am also not one to allow expectations to exceed reality....

The reality is there is a lot of decent stuff in this patch... It just doesn't contain everyone's personal wish and desire.

So you are basically saying their inability to release proper patch notes, and the hope that this patch has more fixes than they listed is a good thing?

I can't really debate with someone who is ok with that sort of stuff. I want better communication.

If you've noticed I'm not advocating any particular thing, do you see me asking for new maps? New mechs? All I'm asking is that they spend more time fixing the current problems. Which they are not doing.

[jakucha]

New vision modes are probably a huge thing. Not being able to rely on heat vision for everything will change stuff.

[Shumabot]

Tarrasque, on 02 April 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

I'd personally hate this game if it patched every day, even in beta. That's too much garbage, no efficiency, too much change. I never want this game to become 'play whatever the developers made really good this week'.

This is a game with a massive backdrop to draw from, and PGI appears to be far more focused on staying faithful to the myriad forms of entertainment that outline the IP, rather than turning it into the next huge PvP F2P online FPS-whatever, you get it.

I just want patches to address actual issues. MGs have always been worthless, the flamer still doesn't heat enemy mechs, most pulse weapons are useless, at least four players are missing elements of their hud in every single game, and the games balance is currently being destroyed by teams of poptarters (who just got a poptart capable assault).

Instead patches fix nothing, introduce content people aren't clamoring for, and come exceptionally slowly and without any sort of forewarning as to their contents.