ScarecrowES, on 01 October 2016 - 04:39 PM, said:
Ugh... Blood, seriously. These questions. What is the point of either of them?
Your first question is so subjective and poorly thought-out that it can't be remotely useful. What's considered a high alpha? Do we count different sized alphas from different weapons? Because a 52-point SRM alpha is pretty high but receives no penalties, but a laser alpha of the same damage would be penalized severely. So technically, on that count alone, the answer is - both. You can achieve high alphas both with AND without penalties. You've got 2 answers that can both be true or false at the same time.
But what's the question trying to find out in the first place? Do people think alphas are objectively curbed in ED? Wouldn't that depend on their subjective view of how high alphas should be - and at this point what weapon system we're talking about? *shrug*
Your second question, as another player already said, is a question with a predetermined answer. Obviously ED "encompasses" all weapons. But is that a goal people actually support? Does ED do it in a way that feels fair to each weapon?
You might as well ask, "does ED penalize doing too much damage at once?" Why yes, yes it does.
Technically-speaking, GH "encompasses" all weapons too. It just doesn't penalize certain combinations. But every weapon has a limit as to how many of that type you can fire without penalties, and what other types can be fired at the same time penalty free. All weapons are "encompassed."
You've really got to think these things out better if you're going to keep doing this.
Indeed.
Whatever one's feelings on ED, the poll itself is so vague as to be completely useless.
Blood, if you want to post a poll, particularly one on a contentious issue like this, you need to rub them brain cells hard together and come up with a clear and specific poll; preferably one that isn't leading either way. Really, though, as I've seen the other poll posts you've made and either deleted or had deleted...
Just don't.
For example, while I'm generally fairly supportive of ED (with again the caveat that I don't feel it's the best way to go; I just prefer it to GH) the actual question is very important. If you asked, "Would you like the current state of the PTS to go live as is?" I'd
emphatically say no. Because the
specific set of changes in the current PTS really don't work well for me. That has nothing to do with ED as a system though.
And really, this is where it boils down. You
can't really ask a good question, given how mixed up the tests are. I mean, I love the global cooldown nerf to all the weapons on the PTS, but I think the laser nerfs were terrible. I love lower heat cap, but find the lower dissipation of the previous PTS to be absurdly limiting; and indeed I find the notion of the tightened heat capacity
and ED simultaneously to be overdoing things. But individually, there's lots of stuff on the various PTS's that I've really liked.
So, really, any question you ask is almost certainly going to get "No" as an answer, because it's a lot easier to just say "No" than get through the obstacle course.
Edited by Wintersdark, 01 October 2016 - 06:27 PM.