Jump to content

Balancing Communication Line With The Dev's

Answered

61 replies to this topic

Poll: Balancing communication line with the dev's (36 member(s) have cast votes)

Worth while idea?

  1. Yes (13 votes [36.11%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 36.11%

  2. No (22 votes [61.11%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 61.11%

  3. Abstain (1 votes [2.78%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 2.78%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 zraven7

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,207 posts
  • LocationDuluth, Georgia

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:07 AM

They already have this. It's called, "The Forums".

The vast majority of players are entirely inactive in the forums, or are rarely active in the forums. The people active in the forums are the interested and vocal crowd. And they already listen to us, because they made and read the forum. They may not act on what they hear, but they read it.

You think your profile keeps tracks of your "likes" for your ego? No, it helps to keep track of people putting forth popular opinions, and likely flags them for future observation.

We ARE the council. It may not be as small as you want it, but it's here.

#22 El Bandito

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 26,735 posts
  • LocationStill doing ungodly amount of damage, but with more accuracy.

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:08 AM

I nominate myself as one of the com guys and also nominate my latest balancing thread. :rolleyes:

http://mwomercs.com/...the-next-patch/




From what I have seen in the forums, if anyone has good balance ideas as well as less personal bias than most, it is Mustrum, IMO.

Edited by El Bandito, 10 July 2013 - 11:11 AM.


#23 Unbound Inferno

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,168 posts

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:10 AM

View Postzraven7, on 10 July 2013 - 11:07 AM, said:

They already have this. It's called, "The Forums".

The vast majority of players are entirely inactive in the forums, or are rarely active in the forums. The people active in the forums are the interested and vocal crowd. And they already listen to us, because they made and read the forum. They may not act on what they hear, but they read it.

You think your profile keeps tracks of your "likes" for your ego? No, it helps to keep track of people putting forth popular opinions, and likely flags them for future observation.

We ARE the council. It may not be as small as you want it, but it's here.

That's funny. You are implying they listen to us.

#24 Taemien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,576 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:11 AM

I voted no. These forums are plenty, and people abuse them enough as it is.

PGI knows what the issues are. They just spend their time coding rather than posting to every little thing. The real issue is when they give an inch the community takes a mile. For example they acknowledged the current problems and the community is still grilling them on it.

Therein lies the problem. The community is an utter piece of crap. They are so entitled by their parents, peers, governments, ect that when they don't get what they want right then from a game developer, they utter out bits of vitriol that poison the whole thing for the rest of us.

The community could fix its own issue, but they won't. They could stop with the insults and the conspiracy theories. And then allow room for constructive posts and then maybe, just maybe the devs would be more open about chiming in. I've see it, when posts remain cool and calm, they will come out and give some input. But then you get the few but loud disgruntled players just launch attacks and more vitriol. And I know what that dev is thinking, "f--- that..." Its too bad they are part of a traded company. If it weren't he could tell those players how they really feel and then lock up the thread.

A sort of closed door discussion wouldn't be any different. They could moderate it a little easier, but why waste the time? Personally I think they should keep to what they are doing now. Take suggestions as they come in, refine them, implement them, and then tweak the numbers. Let the masses whine, b---, and complain. You can't change that. So why bother? Let the numbers at the end of the month speak for themselves.

Forum posters lie. Numbers ($$$) never do.

#25 zazz0000

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 232 posts

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:15 AM

@zraven7

It's more of a matter of sheer volume of activity on the forum.
There are 14 new threads on the balancing forum as of midnight, with roughly 200 replies, and these are the "off" hours i think.

And out of many threads about, say, SRM balancing, I'd guess about 80% of 100's of replies convey a very similar point, ie "buff damage to 2.0-2.5". It'd be great if someone, possibly even someone impartial, could compile such data into a single statement.

#26 El Bandito

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 26,735 posts
  • LocationStill doing ungodly amount of damage, but with more accuracy.

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:17 AM

View PostTaemien, on 10 July 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

I voted no. These forums are plenty, and people abuse them enough as it is. PGI knows what the issues are. They just spend their time coding rather than posting to every little thing. The real issue is when they give an inch the community takes a mile. For example they acknowledged the current problems and the community is still grilling them on it. Therein lies the problem. The community is an utter piece of crap. They are so entitled by their parents, peers, governments, ect that when they don't get what they want right then from a game developer, they utter out bits of vitriol that poison the whole thing for the rest of us. The community could fix its own issue, but they won't. They could stop with the insults and the conspiracy theories. And then allow room for constructive posts and then maybe, just maybe the devs would be more open about chiming in. I've see it, when posts remain cool and calm, they will come out and give some input. But then you get the few but loud disgruntled players just launch attacks and more vitriol. And I know what that dev is thinking, "f--- that..." Its too bad they are part of a traded company. If it weren't he could tell those players how they really feel and then lock up the thread. A sort of closed door discussion wouldn't be any different. They could moderate it a little easier, but why waste the time? Personally I think they should keep to what they are doing now. Take suggestions as they come in, refine them, implement them, and then tweak the numbers. Let the masses whine, b---, and complain. You can't change that. So why bother? Let the numbers at the end of the month speak for themselves. Forum posters lie. Numbers ($$$) never do.


Then PGI devs are scaredy cats who need to grow thicker skin.

League of Legends is the most popular PVP game in the world and naturally its forums are flooded with 100 times more griefers and trolls. However, you don't see RiotGames' community and balance guys running away from the community. In fact, I have never seen any balance director take more heat than Morello--but the guy remained cool and had maintained good connection with the community. IMO, it led to more balanced game.

Edited by El Bandito, 10 July 2013 - 11:26 AM.


#27 zraven7

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,207 posts
  • LocationDuluth, Georgia

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:17 AM

View PostUnbound Inferno, on 10 July 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

That's funny. You are implying they listen to us.

I kinda know they do. The Sarah Mech went through, is just waiting on some legal clearance. LRMs have been nerfed, de-nerfed, and re-nerfed several times because of forum outcry. Just because they don't act every time, or don't listen to everything, don't think they don't hear us.

#28 Unbound Inferno

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,168 posts

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:23 AM

View Postzraven7, on 10 July 2013 - 11:17 AM, said:

I kinda know they do. The Sarah Mech went through, is just waiting on some legal clearance. LRMs have been nerfed, de-nerfed, and re-nerfed several times because of forum outcry. Just because they don't act every time, or don't listen to everything, don't think they don't hear us.

Its not every thing I'm talking about. its long-standing problems.

ECM on/off switch
LRMS missile spread (that's like since forever I think)
Lacking balanced damage over time related to armor on almost all weapons - it doesn't match BT if you add the time factor.
convergence screwing up that damage over time balance, alphastrikes and the segmented headshot/CT kills
The PPC/ERPPC/Gauss thing that's been around for months
The Heat system.

These are not simple or slight problems - its long standing balance issues within the game - and they've been there for a long time. AFIK they (PGI) has not done anything on just about any of it since its been pointed out.

#29 zraven7

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,207 posts
  • LocationDuluth, Georgia

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:25 AM

View Postzazz0000, on 10 July 2013 - 11:15 AM, said:

@zraven7

It's more of a matter of sheer volume of activity on the forum.
There are 14 new threads on the balancing forum as of midnight, with roughly 200 replies, and these are the "off" hours i think.

And out of many threads about, say, SRM balancing, I'd guess about 80% of 100's of replies convey a very similar point, ie "buff damage to 2.0-2.5". It'd be great if someone, possibly even someone impartial, could compile such data into a single statement.


This is actually a pretty small forum community compared to most online games. Also, likes are a good meter if something needs to be seriously looked at.

View PostEl Bandito, on 10 July 2013 - 11:17 AM, said:


Then PGI devs are scaredy cats who needs to grow thicker skin.

League of Legends is the most popular PVP game in the world and naturally its forums are flooded with 100 times more griefers and trolls. However, you don't see RiotGames' community and balance guys running away from the community. In fact, I have never seen any balance director take more heat than Morello--but the guy remained cool and had maintained good connection with the community.


Yeah, you are right there. While I can fault LoL for a lot of things, their forums weren't one of them. Especially considering how toxic that player community could be, the devs and mods had not only excellent control of the forums, but very good rapport with the players. They would commonly jump into a thread and break out into full-blown theory discussion on hot topics, and it always improved the conversation.

#30 Caviel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 637 posts

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:30 AM

View PostUnbound Inferno, on 10 July 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

That's funny. You are implying they listen to us.


They do listen, they read over a lot of these posts (Hi Garth/IGP folks!), you're just confusing reading feedback, responding to feedback, and implementing feedback.

If they didn't listen to us at all, we would have had the massively imbalanced coolant flush/consumable system.

On the flip side, we had been crying for ECM nerfs with how much it drastically altered the meta when it was introduced. This was before PPC disruption, BAP, UAVs, and seismic sensor as hard counters to the ECM system. Notice people don't complain about ECM being broken anymore? Turns out we just didn't see the whole picture yet of what PGI was planning all along.

It would be nice if PGI was more forthcoming with information, some would say "more transparent", especially when we have the same information on major aspects of the game like community warfare and clan integration that we've had for the last 2+ months, more or less. Getting more specifics on the "aggressive weapon balancing" would also be nice. Had we known these specific things were coming early on, it would have calmed a lot of the anti-ECM noise.

My problem is I'm starting to run out of patience. We have no real glimpse of what the future holds, and the current game is less and less palatable to play as the high-alpha meta has grown very stale. Very bad combination, and I'm sure I'm not the only one feeling this way.

#31 El Bandito

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 26,735 posts
  • LocationStill doing ungodly amount of damage, but with more accuracy.

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:39 AM

View PostCaviel, on 10 July 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

They do listen, they read over a lot of these posts (Hi Garth/IGP folks!), you're just confusing reading feedback, responding to feedback, and implementing feedback. If they didn't listen to us at all, we would have had the massively imbalanced coolant flush/consumable system. On the flip side, we had been crying for ECM nerfs with how much it drastically altered the meta when it was introduced. This was before PPC disruption, BAP, UAVs, and seismic sensor as hard counters to the ECM system. Notice people don't complain about ECM being broken anymore? Turns out we just didn't see the whole picture yet of what PGI was planning all along. It would be nice if PGI was more forthcoming with information, some would say "more transparent", especially when we have the same information on major aspects of the game like community warfare and clan integration that we've had for the last 2+ months, more or less. Getting more specifics on the "aggressive weapon balancing" would also be nice. Had we known these specific things were coming early on, it would have calmed a lot of the anti-ECM noise. My problem is I'm starting to run out of patience. We have no real glimpse of what the future holds, and the current game is less and less palatable to play as the high-alpha meta has grown very stale. Very bad combination, and I'm sure I'm not the only one feeling this way.


I am still complaining about ECM because it is still a hard counter, an on-and-off switch, a cockblock to an entire weapon system.

PGI had done goofed in their implementation of Guardian ECM and their stubborn refusal to admit their mistake and using band-aid fix had not resulted in anything resembling good balance in this regard.

Edited by El Bandito, 10 July 2013 - 11:41 AM.


#32 Monky

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 3,218 posts
  • LocationHypothetical Warrior

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:40 AM

View PostVictor Morson, on 10 July 2013 - 10:57 AM, said:


I entirely disagree. Competitive players want a balanced and deep game and every pushed change would reflect that end, benefiting everyone.

Versus those with the agenda of wanting this to be a 1:1 TableTop recreation, who really want to see MW:O as something other than well balanced for what it is. That is the difference.

Much of the reason the OP won't work is a lot of the guys with high post counts = massive TT fanatics that have been busy posting dice-rolling charts up since closed beta.


Story time;

I have lived it, and it doesn't work. I did a lot of community assistance for DoD, Day of Defeat if you never played it. I trawled through endless server stats on weapon usage (since devs didn't have this streamlined to them) and found one weapon made up 50% of the axis kills while allied weaponry was a pretty even split, further, axis had about a 5% higher win rate and access to similar weaponry as the allies aside from one item; the K98 Rifle (which happened to be the one with about 50% of the axis' kills). Essentially, the K98 rifle had one shot kill capability in a twitch based reflex game on any part of the body and the allied competetor the Garand only had this capability on the chest. Clearly, the one shot kill capability was providing an edge as the Axis had the K43 - a rifle nearly identical to the Garand, but where opting for the K98. Yet, despite this, the competitive community screamed the game was balanced and had no issues.

Basically, you can't trust people to be self policing or regulate their opinion for what is actually best for the game just because they're good at the game. All being good at the game indicates is that you are capable of exploiting the current meta and do so.

Edited by Monky, 10 July 2013 - 11:41 AM.


#33 Bunko

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 140 posts
  • LocationJapan

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:41 AM

PGI has it all right here in the forums and game data... it's not clean but if PGI thought they should listen to the player that plays the most they can look in the highest gaming hours, get the name, and look up posts... if they thought this was a good way to do it.

Problem is if PGI only looked at "hardcore gamers" they will get ideas on how to balance and such but will not hear issues like how hard the learning curve is and is the game enjoyable to someone that only plays 1-2 hours a week.

#34 Unbound Inferno

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,168 posts

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:48 AM

View PostCaviel, on 10 July 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:


They do listen, they read over a lot of these posts (Hi Garth/IGP folks!), you're just confusing reading feedback, responding to feedback, and implementing feedback.

If they didn't listen to us at all, we would have had the massively imbalanced coolant flush/consumable system.

On the flip side, we had been crying for ECM nerfs with how much it drastically altered the meta when it was introduced. This was before PPC disruption, BAP, UAVs, and seismic sensor as hard counters to the ECM system. Notice people don't complain about ECM being broken anymore? Turns out we just didn't see the whole picture yet of what PGI was planning all along.

It would be nice if PGI was more forthcoming with information, some would say "more transparent", especially when we have the same information on major aspects of the game like community warfare and clan integration that we've had for the last 2+ months, more or less. Getting more specifics on the "aggressive weapon balancing" would also be nice. Had we known these specific things were coming early on, it would have calmed a lot of the anti-ECM noise.

My problem is I'm starting to run out of patience. We have no real glimpse of what the future holds, and the current game is less and less palatable to play as the high-alpha meta has grown very stale. Very bad combination, and I'm sure I'm not the only one feeling this way.

That running out of patience? That's your patience telling you they aren't listening.

I'm all for trying to believe they read and consider - but without either an answer or a solution I have a hard time believing.

#35 Taemien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,576 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:51 AM

View PostEl Bandito, on 10 July 2013 - 11:17 AM, said:


Then PGI devs are scaredy cats who need to grow thicker skin.

League of Legends is the most popular PVP game in the world and naturally its forums are flooded with 100 times more griefers and trolls. However, you don't see RiotGames' community and balance guys running away from the community. In fact, I have never seen any balance director take more heat than Morello--but the guy remained cool and had maintained good connection with the community. IMO, it led to more balanced game.


Never said they run from the community. In fact I've had several questions or concerns of mine answered by a Dev here... AFTER Open Beta. Its all in the presentation and attitude of the poster.

I don't address people who hate veterans from the military, why should PGI address people who claim to hate their game or attack them personally? Its pretty much the same thing. Act civil and get a response. Act like a {Richard Cameron}, and get nothing.

#36 Garth Erlam

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,756 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • YouTube: Link
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 10 July 2013 - 12:00 PM

View PostVictor Morson, on 10 July 2013 - 10:57 AM, said:

I entirely disagree. Competitive players want a balanced and deep game and every pushed change would reflect that end, benefiting everyone. Versus those with the agenda of wanting this to be a 1:1 TableTop recreation, who really want to see MW:O as something other than well balanced for what it is. That is the difference. Much of the reason the OP won't work is a lot of the guys with high post counts = massive TT fanatics that have been busy posting dice-rolling charts up since closed beta.

I make sure my forwards (and suggestions) to design are a balance of VIGILANTE COP WHO PLAYS BY HIS OWN RULES (with nothing to lose) and ALPHA FLANK C4 LRMS ON B5 FORM A LINE ON C2 MOVE AS ONE guy.

It's a tough line to walk, but we're trying, so thanks for the ideas!

#37 Tennex

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 6,619 posts

Posted 10 July 2013 - 12:01 PM

View PostGarth Erlam, on 10 July 2013 - 12:00 PM, said:

I make sure my forwards (and suggestions) to design are a balance of VIGILANTE COP WHO PLAYS BY HIS OWN RULES (with nothing to lose) and ALPHA FLANK C4 LRMS ON B5 FORM A LINE ON C2 MOVE AS ONE guy.

It's a tough line to walk, but we're trying, so thanks for the ideas!


balance is really important in these types of games...

i think you guys are severely underestimating the amount of work that needs to go into balance in a competitive online game.

Balance is an issue at all levels. But any balance problem is multiplied at higher levels of play as players try to gain any advantage they can over their opponents. As we saw in the Dev twitch http://www.twitch.tv...mes/b/426363372

Edited by Tennex, 10 July 2013 - 12:04 PM.


#38 zraven7

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,207 posts
  • LocationDuluth, Georgia

Posted 10 July 2013 - 12:02 PM

View PostGarth Erlam, on 10 July 2013 - 12:00 PM, said:

I make sure my forwards (and suggestions) to design are a balance of VIGILANTE COP WHO PLAYS BY HIS OWN RULES (with nothing to lose) and ALPHA FLANK C4 LRMS ON B5 FORM A LINE ON C2 MOVE AS ONE guy.

It's a tough line to walk, but we're trying, so thanks for the ideas!

So, what was that about them not listening? :-)

#39 Tennex

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 6,619 posts

Posted 10 July 2013 - 12:06 PM

View PostTennex, on 10 July 2013 - 12:01 PM, said:


balance is really important in these types of games...

i think you guys are severely underestimating the amount of work that needs to go into balance in a competitive online game.


Not only underestimating the amount of work that goes into balance issues. but straight up denying there are any balance issues.

Its ironic. i checked a subforum in jettisoned communications and they all happen to be balance suggestions.

this is no way for a company to direct itself.

Edited by Tennex, 10 July 2013 - 12:06 PM.


#40 MustrumRidcully

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 10,643 posts

Posted 10 July 2013 - 12:07 PM

View PostTennex, on 10 July 2013 - 12:01 PM, said:


balance is really important in these types of games...

i think you guys are severely underestimating the amount of work that needs to go into balance in a competitive online game.

Balance is an issue at all levels. But any balance problem is multiplied at higher levels of play as players try to gain any advantage they can over their opponents. As we saw in the Dev twitch http://www.twitch.tv...mes/b/426363372

I don't know if they underestimate it. But even if they correctly estimate it, doesn't mean they can handle it in the speed we want and it might need.

I don't know. I have no idea what issues are all plaguing them over there. I can only see the results, and I am not happy with the results, and absent of any insights, what else can I count on and judge on?





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users