We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 265
  1. #151
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Khafar View Post
    No, but that's not what Sapience said. He said that PvMP was in the "single digits" as a percentage of players, not time, and that raiders were in the same ballpark. That might mean raiders are 10% or 12% or something, but it's not going to mean they're 30% or 50%.

    Khafar
    Are you really basing the information on a PR comment?

    Those digits are submitted to change, I think its more reasonable to say 30% or 40% of the population if not more have participated, will participate or are participating in Group Content.

    Like I said before you information is Old, not correct and not applicable.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,677
    Quote Originally Posted by Al. View Post
    Like I said before you information is Old, not correct and not applicable.
    Actually, it's from about May of this year. Then June. Then July. Sapience repeated and confirmed this information several times, including in response to one of my posts on the subject. He has direct access to this sort of data. In fact, it probably comes up fairly regularly at the meetings he attends, where they're trying to decide how they're going to slice and dice their resources for the coming year.

    As for "ever participated"... that's irrelevant. I've done raids. And instances. And PvMP. But by no stretch of the imagination am I a "regular" for any of those. In fact, it's been years now.

    Khafar

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    England
    Posts
    179
    Quote Originally Posted by Southpa View Post
    Yup, pretty sure.
    Of course you may pride yourself on being easy to please, I don't know.

    It's rather evident that since there are "no other games for you", you will eat whatever is served.
    Personally, I would rather be in Middle Earth than any other virtual world. I would rather be spending my time surrounded by Tolkien's lore than any other lore.
    Even that's no longer enough to keep me running the Turbine hamster wheel.
    This is something I don't understand, and I've seen it quite often on the fora of late.

    Just because you aren't happy with the current state of the game, doesn't mean that those that are - or, at least, only mildly miffed - will willingly bask at the foot of the great deity that is Turbine and eat, and I quote, 'whatever semblance of a bone' we are given. Even now, you say mjk47 is priding himself (or herself, relying upon the masculine henceforth for sake of brevity) on 'being easy to please'. We have no way to know how discerning his tastes are. For all we know, he could be very hard to please but have criteria that Turbine have fulfilled.

    I understand that you aren't happy, and I would absolutely support your ability to voice any critique or comment - we're all different, after all, and I cannot expect for everyone to share the same opinion. But that extends both ways. Critique and comment, yes, but it seems like the general assumption is you're either against Turbine or your a rabid fan. There's no middle ground; there's no room for someone that's happy with the game in general, but is concerned over a few matters. Or agrees that there's room for improvement but on the whole is having fun.

    This is a game. One that some people may be unhappy with at the moment, but a game all the same. Just because someone enjoys it, doesn't mean they are anything other than a content customer with differing desires to your own.

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by Khafar View Post
    Actually, it's from about May of this year. Then June. Then July. Sapience repeated and confirmed this information several times, including in response to one of my posts on the subject. He has direct access to this sort of data. In fact, it probably comes up fairly regularly at the meetings he attends, where they're trying to decide how they're going to slice and dice their resources for the coming year.

    As for "ever participated"... that's irrelevant. I've done raids. And instances. And PvMP. But by no stretch of the imagination am I a "regular" for any of those. In fact, it's been years now.

    Khafar
    Then why feel the need to remind us of this null and void percentage , which means nothing without a definition of the word raider, when ever group play is mentioned. Would you like these players to stop voicing their opinions about the content they would like to see? Since you continually post this in every group related thread I can only assume this is the case. If it is indeed to spread the truth then why not let the community manager handle that conversation.

    You could have easily avoided that subject by just simply saying "The developer has decided that they want to put their eggs in the epic battles basket rather than the traditional instance cluster" Which is what this threads about.

    I do feel the use of the word playstyle is shortsighted especially in a game like lotro that offers a multitude of features to utilize. Simply ignoring one aspect or all aspects other than the few you enjoy is not a playstyle. Playstyle isn't even a word.

    Playing an MMO every individual is going to have a different playstyle from player to player. Some may enjoys group play, festivals and PVP. While others may enjoy solo book quests solo dailies and grinding deeds. You may have a player who likes group play, book quests and crafting instances. It's going to differ from person to person. Please tell me how you would define each of those players playstyle. It's an MMO you can't.

    My raid schedule was never set in stone or regular. I never raided 3 times a month continuously, I may have raided for 6 straight weeks at a time but then ignored it for a month or 2. And there were times where I went 6 straight months without joining a raid. So I'm not a raider by your definition. Yet I am here defending those folks since someday again I may want to participate in it. And having it not be there is discerning.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,677
    Quote Originally Posted by Minquinn View Post
    You could have easily avoided that subject by just simply saying "The developer has decided that they want to put their eggs in the epic battles basket rather than the traditional instance cluster" Which is what this threads about.
    If you'd like quotes of me saying pretty much exactly that in assorted threads around here, I could provide half a dozen. Easy.

    Playing an MMO every individual is going to have a different playstyle from player to player.
    Unless you think they're complete idiots, you have to assume they actually know how to count players in multiple "play style" columns. And that they know what the "norms" are for each one. And how to count, and average over periods longer than a month. And deal with "bursty" data. This stuff is their bread and butter, how they shape their priorities from one year to the next. Get it badly wrong, and some of them may very well be looking for new jobs next year. They have far more at stake than you or I do.

    Khafar

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Tamriel
    Posts
    4,457
    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    The item I usually cite is the addition (game-wide) of the targeting reticule to Heartseeker. It was done because creeps complained bitterly about being hit by it unawares, so they got a warning about what was coming. Totally unnecessary in PvE and provided a "warning" to others setting up on the same mob (before open tapping), and--thus--detrimental to PvE.

    Of course, since then between level cap increases and nerfing of the skill, HS is no longer what Turbine once described as the "OMFG attack".
    Sorry if I don't believe you, but I will have to ask for some confirmation on this, Dev diary will do. In all my years of playing this game, which entails a considerable amount of PvP time on both Freep and Creep, and having a Hunter as my main, I've never heard that the reticule was added at all, but has always been part of the skill.

    As you play Hunter a considerable amount of time you should realize that the nerfing of the damage combined with lessening of the skill cool down was a net increase in overall DPS, so it wasn't a nerf at all, but a buff.
    [center][color=red]Now roaming the earth searching for a fun, interesting game.......again.[/color][/center]

    [center][URL=http://s545.photobucket.com/user/fenderp61/media/ESO/Narcosys500_zpsaa2b6fce.jpg.html][IMG]http://i545.photobucket.com/albums/hh367/fenderp61/ESO/Narcosys500_zpsaa2b6fce.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/center]

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Khafar View Post
    If you'd like quotes of me saying pretty much exactly that in assorted threads around here, I could provide half a dozen. Easy.


    Khafar
    Please provide at least 3 that validate your point that raiders are 10%-15% exclusively.

  8. #158
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,647
    Quote Originally Posted by Elithandir View Post
    Just because you aren't happy with the current state of the game, doesn't mean that those that are - or, at least, only mildly miffed - will willingly bask at the foot of the great deity that is Turbine and eat, and I quote, 'whatever semblance of a bone' we are given.
    Some people's reputations precede them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Elithandir View Post
    Even now, you say mjk47 is priding himself (or herself, relying upon the masculine henceforth for sake of brevity) on 'being easy to please'. We have no way to know how discerning his tastes are. For all we know, he could be very hard to please but have criteria that Turbine have fulfilled.
    I believe I said "perhaps" as a way to try to reconcile his stalwart defense of Turbine in every way, shape and form. Historically speaking...

    Quote Originally Posted by Elithandir View Post
    I understand that you aren't happy, and I would absolutely support your ability to voice any critique or comment - we're all different, after all, and I cannot expect for everyone to share the same opinion. But that extends both ways. Critique and comment, yes, but it seems like the general assumption is you're either against Turbine or your a rabid fan. There's no middle ground; there's no room for someone that's happy with the game in general, but is concerned over a few matters. Or agrees that there's room for improvement but on the whole is having fun.
    First, I'm not unhappy - I'm mostly apathetic, as this game has lost me. While some may consider such parties no longer relevant here, I feel they are certainly relevant. After all, I bought a Lifetime subscription to something that no longer provides the level of entertainment it provided me when I purchased it. I don't want my money back, but I'm sure gonna offer my 2c when I feel like it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Elithandir View Post
    This is a game. One that some people may be unhappy with at the moment, but a game all the same. Just because someone enjoys it, doesn't mean they are anything other than a content customer with differing desires to your own.
    One must look at it objectively, which one can't really do when they talk as if the game is even a pale shadow of its former self. All one must do is compare the game they are playing now to the game it used to be. I'm not even speaking to types of content, but just the overall quality of the content and associated necessities (amount of lag, amount of unexpected downtime, number of billing-related snafus, and on and on and on). There is no way anyone can say they are still producing the same quality (or quantity) of material and be taken seriously. That's not my unhappiness in the moment or any other such nonsense - it's just fact.
    [CENTER]
    [SIZE=1][COLOR=White]The [/COLOR][/SIZE][URL="http://thenoldor.guildlaunch.com"][SIZE=3][B]NOLDOR[/B][/SIZE][/URL][SIZE=1][COLOR=White] of Arkenstone[/COLOR][/SIZE]
    [/CENTER]

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,677
    Quote Originally Posted by Al. View Post
    Please provide at least 3 that validate your point that raiders are 10%-15% exclusively.
    That wasn't what he was asking for. As for that specific range, I don't have to (nor can I possibly) prove anything. I can give some data from a different game (WoW), but that's irrelevant to this game. If 40% of players in SWG were into crafting, does that mean 40% of WoW or LOTRO players are? No, of course not. Different games, different numbers. Turbine's the only possible source for that data for this game, and they've said what it was in rough terms. Do you really need me to link you to those comments by Sapience? The statements were that PvMP accounts for "single digits" as a percentage of their players, and that raiders were in the same general ballpark. I take that to mean they might be a tad higher, but I suppose it could mean they're actually a tad lower...

    If I were "misrepresenting" his words about PvMP and raiding in some way, don't you think he'd have "clarified" them by now? Instead, we have posts like this.

    Khafar
    Last edited by Khafar; Oct 06 2013 at 01:09 AM.

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Windsor Locks, CT
    Posts
    386
    [QUOTE=Gladgilrian;6949855]Sorry if I don't believe you, but I will have to ask for some confirmation on this, Dev diary will do. In all my years of playing this game, which entails a considerable amount of PvP time on both Freep and Creep, and having a Hunter as my main, I've never heard that the reticule was added at all, but has always been part of the skill./QUOTE]

    Can't give you any quote - since those posts are long gone, and I can't recall exactly when ... BUT ... for sure in the pre-Moria dyas when level cap was 50, there was no "stars wars" reticule on Heartseeker - and I don't think it was there when Moria first came out - regardless, I distinctly remember the first time it appeared on my Hunter because I had no clue what it was. I was not in the moors, but had been a few days before.

    Luinmiriel-Magellin
    Elven Huntress of Lorien
    [COLOR=#3399ff]Luinmiriel [L100 Hunter], Marisibelle [L100 Burglar], Rosilyn [L100 Captain], Carafindriel [L100 Minstrel], Melissabelle [L85 Burglar], Vornmiriel [L81 Hunter], Lorindriel [L40 Warden], Katellin [L50 Beorning][/COLOR]
    [COLOR=#ffff00][I]"One is truly rich who has friends."[/I][/COLOR]
    [COLOR=#ffff00][I]A proud member of the first LOTRO Players' Council.[/I][/COLOR]

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Tamriel
    Posts
    4,457
    Quote Originally Posted by CharlesRollinsWare View Post
    Can't give you any quote - since those posts are long gone, and I can't recall exactly when ... BUT ... for sure in the pre-Moria dyas when level cap was 50, there was no "stars wars" reticule on Heartseeker - and I don't think it was there when Moria first came out - regardless, I distinctly remember the first time it appeared on my Hunter because I had no clue what it was. I was not in the moors, but had been a few days before.

    Luinmiriel-Magellin
    Elven Huntress of Lorien
    My Hunter was 50 well before Moria launched and IIRC I had the reticule back then. Now if you turn off a certain feature in the advanced video options, you won't see it. It certainly wasn't changed because some Creeps whined about it, that's just ridiculous. Not when you have Wargs and Burgs operating out of stealth.
    Last edited by Gladgilrian; Oct 06 2013 at 01:42 AM.
    [center][color=red]Now roaming the earth searching for a fun, interesting game.......again.[/color][/center]

    [center][URL=http://s545.photobucket.com/user/fenderp61/media/ESO/Narcosys500_zpsaa2b6fce.jpg.html][IMG]http://i545.photobucket.com/albums/hh367/fenderp61/ESO/Narcosys500_zpsaa2b6fce.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/center]

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,510
    Quote Originally Posted by Gladgilrian View Post
    Sorry if I don't believe you, but I will have to ask for some confirmation on this, Dev diary will do. In all my years of playing this game, which entails a considerable amount of PvP time on both Freep and Creep, and having a Hunter as my main, I've never heard that the reticule was added at all, but has always been part of the skill.
    I quite distinctly remember it being without the reticule when it was added.

    As you play Hunter a considerable amount of time you should realize that the nerfing of the damage combined with lessening of the skill cool down was a net increase in overall DPS, so it wasn't a nerf at all, but a buff.
    As a time average, yes, as an instant attack, no.

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Tamriel
    Posts
    4,457
    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    I quite distinctly remember it being without the reticule when it was added.



    As a time average, yes, as an instant attack, no.
    Wasn't Heart Seeker always a Hunter skill? Once earned, of course. I quite distinctly remember it always being a part of the skill, so we are at an impasse.

    DPS is measured as a time average, Damage per Second, and HS has NEVER been an instant attack, like say, Epic Conclusion. Now that is a skill that Creeps have whined about ad nauseam, yet no change has ever been made to it regarding PvP and you can never "see it coming." Using deductive reasoning one can assume if the reticule was added, it wasn't for PvP reasons. I have had the misfortune of being 1 shot by an EC, but never a HS.
    [center][color=red]Now roaming the earth searching for a fun, interesting game.......again.[/color][/center]

    [center][URL=http://s545.photobucket.com/user/fenderp61/media/ESO/Narcosys500_zpsaa2b6fce.jpg.html][IMG]http://i545.photobucket.com/albums/hh367/fenderp61/ESO/Narcosys500_zpsaa2b6fce.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/center]

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,677
    Thanks to whheydt for the reminder.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gladgilrian View Post
    Wasn't Heart Seeker always a Hunter skill?
    No. It arrived for Volume I Book 10 in August, 2007... the first "Month of the Hunter" (here). I'm pretty sure it did not have a reticle visible to other players when it arrived, but that's hard to prove.

    Using deductive reasoning one can assume if the reticule was added, it wasn't for PvP reasons
    No... it's far easier to use "deductive reasoning" on HS itself. There's no conceivable explanation for why adding a player-visible reticle would be of benefit in PvE. Certainly not for Hunters. In PvE it's like putting up a flag which says "Hey, some hunter is about to tag that rare spawn - better use an instant skill to grab it before he does!". The only players it benefits are A) creeps, and B) kill-stealers. I'm thinking that "kill-stealers" weren't the intended benefactors.

    As for the damage changes... that's most certainly a bit of a "nerf" for my Hunter (who solos almost entirely). When it comes to HS, I care more about the the damage I can apply to this fight than I do about the damage I can apply to a series of fights. I rarely use HS for anything but leading off with a "bang", so it's the size of the "bang" that counts much more than how often I can use it. Of course, that's not a PvP/PvE balancing issue - more of a group/solo one.

    It's certainly possible that the reticle change was inadvertent on the PvE side... perhaps they just didn't think through the consequences carefully. But any skill change made for PvP is likely to have some impact on PvE, unintended or not. That's why it's important to separate those entirely. Always. Turbine got better at it as they went along.

    Khafar

  15. #165
    Quote Originally Posted by Gladgilrian View Post
    I have had the misfortune of being 1 shot by an EC, but never a HS.
    On Meneldor we had multi boxing Hunter groups. It was very possible to have 2-6 Heartseekers locking on for a one shot alpha strike. We could not kill these groups because Desperate Flight worked in the Moors. The only time I remember killing a Hunter was with a stealth warg pack operation. We have to stun the Hunter. Kill her before she woke and teleported away.

    First change was the reticle. Later on the disable on Desperate Flight.

    EC was a non problem because Rune Keepers did not exist yet. Guardians were ignored until everything else was dead because they could not force aggro. The damage output was so low that they were not dangerous.
    Unless stated otherwise, all content in this post is My Personal Opinion.

  16. #166
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Khafar View Post
    That wasn't what he was asking for. As for that specific range, I don't have to (nor can I possibly) prove anything. I can give some data from a different game (WoW), but that's irrelevant to this game. If 40% of players in SWG were into crafting, does that mean 40% of WoW or LOTRO players are? No, of course not. Different games, different numbers. Turbine's the only possible source for that data for this game, and they've said what it was in rough terms. Do you really need me to link you to those comments by Sapience? The statements were that PvMP accounts for "single digits" as a percentage of their players, and that raiders were in the same general ballpark. I take that to mean they might be a tad higher, but I suppose it could mean they're actually a tad lower...

    If I were "misrepresenting" his words about PvMP and raiding in some way, don't you think he'd have "clarified" them by now? Instead, we have posts like this.

    Khafar
    My point is how can you tell who is "regular" and who isn't, most people fall in between by common sense. So even if Sapience doesn't have the courtesey of saying his wrong at times, he is human afterall. We must stick by common sense.

    Khafar, stop been polarized its unrealistic you even said once in other thread that a "Middle Ground" would be best. I hope turbine notes most people want a Middle Ground while aslo options for Challenging Solo or Raids.

  17. #167
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,677
    Quote Originally Posted by Al. View Post
    My point is how can you tell who is "regular" and who isn't...
    They have all the data they need to make exactly that sort of judgement, and please remember that most game developers are gamers themselves. Many are PvPers or raiders. They know this stuff cold, and have built professional careers around it. Further, they have far more at stake here than any player does.

    The problem isn't that they don't know who raiders are, how often they play, etc... it's just economics. If you're spending (say) 40% of your resources on 40% of your customers, things are Good. If you're spending 40% of your resources trying desperately to retain 10% of your customers, that's untenable (unless the vast majority of the others are locked in to your product long-term, or else the 10% are providing 40% of your revenues).

    I think Epic Battles is an attempt to bridge that gap, spending on the game's most compelling content in a more proportional way to the manner in which it's actually consumed. As jwbarry's comments in the 40 Questions thread show, they aren't going to abandon doing any raids forevermore. But it might be an Epic Battle instead sometimes. I'd imagine that when they get to the Battle of Pelennor Fields, that will be another of these Epic Battles.

    Khafar

  18. #168
    Quote Originally Posted by Khafar View Post
    They have all the data they need to make exactly that sort of judgement, and please remember that most game developers are gamers themselves. Many are PvPers or raiders. They know this stuff cold, and have built professional careers around it. Further, they have far more at stake here than any player does.

    The problem isn't that they don't know who raiders are, how often they play, etc... it's just economics. If you're spending (say) 40% of your resources on 40% of your customers, things are Good. If you're spending 40% of your resources trying desperately to retain 10% of your customers

    Khafar
    turbine is gonna find out what % of their playerbase is raiders when they get the sales totals for HD.....

  19. #169
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Khafar View Post
    They have all the data they need to make exactly that sort of judgement, and please remember that most game developers are gamers themselves. Many are PvPers or raiders. They know this stuff cold, and have built professional careers around it. Further, they have far more at stake here than any player does.
    They have the data, judgement can be flawed, Ill explain below

    The problem isn't that they don't know who raiders are, how often they play, etc... it's just economics. If you're spending (say) 40% of your resources on 40% of your customers, things are Good. If you're spending 40% of your resources trying desperately to retain 10% of your customers, that's untenable (unless the vast majority of the others are locked in to your product long-term, or else the 10% are providing 40% of your revenues).
    Not really, Turbine knows this that is why they implemented F2P. expending 40% of resources on 40% population will render 0 balance. People like different things more or less depending on what you are showing, if you spend 40% on a small underused thing like Instance Finder for example it will make people Group More making Raids happen more often, if you Consider IF as a tool only for 10% and discard it you will loose interest.

    I think Epic Battles is an attempt to bridge that gap, spending on the game's most compelling content in a more proportional way to the manner in which it's actually consumed. As jwbarry's comments in the 40 Questions thread show, they aren't going to abandon doing any raids forevermore. But it might be an Epic Battle instead sometimes. I'd imagine that when they get to the Battle of Pelennor Fields, that will be another of these Epic Battles.

    Khafar
    BB might look promising, true. But from that to saying no more raids forever, its a big gap by Jwbarry that will bite him back eventually but bet he already knows this....its cycles the developers go through at turbine.

    Raids were asked with fervour when Isegard was launched without them, I bet we will see same effect even if we have Big Battles now.

  20. #170
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,677
    Quote Originally Posted by Al. View Post
    They have the data, judgement can be flawed, Ill explain below...
    You're living in "theoretical land". They don't get to do that. "If you build it, they will come" is a high-risk strategy, particularly for an old game. This is particularly true if you're attempting that at the expense of a lot of your current players (who would naturally like you to do a more proportional amount of development on content and features they might enjoy).

    But from that to saying no more raids forever, its a big gap by Jwbarry that will bite him back eventually
    What are you talking about? That's not what he said. As I pointed out, he did NOT say "no more raids forever". Just that they were going to use whichever mechanic best fit the needs of each major content release. Do you really think they should make the Battle of the Pelennor Fields a raid, locking out anyone who doesn't like (or rarely participates in) raids? That's a very poor choice for one of the great iconic battles of the game. That's why I think that'll be another set of Epic Battles. But that doesn't mean other raids aren't going to be done. Perhaps they'll start releasing those mid-year, in an update.

    Khafar
    Last edited by Khafar; Oct 06 2013 at 06:54 PM.

  21. #171
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Khafar View Post
    You're living in "theoretical land". They don't get to do that. "If you build it, they will come" is a high-risk strategy, particularly for an old game.
    Its called reality, people like different things and some things are Universal.


    What are you talking about? That's not what he said. As I pointed out, he did NOT say "no more raids forever". Just that they were going to use whichever mechanic best fit the needs of each major content release. Do you really think they should make the Battle of the Pelennor Fields a raid, locking out anyone who doesn't like raids? That's a very poor choice for one of the great iconic battles of the game. That's why I think that'll be another set of Epic Battles. But that doesn't mean other raids aren't going to be done. Perhaps they'll start releasing those mid-year, in an update.

    Khafar
    Maybe you missed the info regarding Big Battles and how they work, they are essentially working like Raids with Objectives, also it would have been a mistake to say no raids forever whoever said it, raids are mid-content between BB and solo instances.

  22. #172
    Quote Originally Posted by Khafar View Post
    You're living in "theoretical land". They don't get to do that. "If you build it, they will come" is a high-risk strategy, particularly for an old game. This is particularly true if you're attempting that at the expense of a lot of your current players (who would naturally like you to do a more proportional amount of development on content and features they might enjoy).

    What are you talking about? That's not what he said. As I pointed out, he did NOT say "no more raids forever". Just that they were going to use whichever mechanic best fit the needs of each major content release. Do you really think they should make the Battle of the Pelennor Fields a raid, locking out anyone who doesn't like raids? That's a very poor choice for one of the great iconic battles of the game. That's why I think that'll be another set of Epic Battles. But that doesn't mean other raids aren't going to be done. Perhaps they'll start releasing those mid-year, in an update.

    Khafar
    The problem is, they're now doing the exact opposite of that. You're all fooling yourselves if you actually think that that isn't going to have a tangible impact on population and revenue.

    And as previously noted, Turbine could be gathering and/or interpreting their data in ways that would not bring them to the the "correct" conclusions. That's something that has happened countless times in both business marketing and in politics, even though huge amounts of money and effort are routinely expended on polling and market research.

    Quote Originally Posted by Whiperandwake View Post
    turbine is gonna find out what % of their playerbase is raiders when they get the sales totals for HD.....
    Agreed.

  23. #173
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,510
    Quote Originally Posted by Gladgilrian View Post
    DPS is measured as a time average, Damage per Second, and HS has NEVER been an instant attack, like say, Epic Conclusion. Now that is a skill that Creeps have whined about ad nauseam, yet no change has ever been made to it regarding PvP and you can never "see it coming." Using deductive reasoning one can assume if the reticule was added, it wasn't for PvP reasons. I have had the misfortune of being 1 shot by an EC, but never a HS.
    HS has a set amount of damage, which you get after the induction completes. In order to get a DPS "time average" you have to be in a fight that permits it to be used multiple times. If you only get to use it once if a fight, you now get less damage from that single use than you used to. The average over time is irrelevant. In that sense, it's been nerfed. How many fights are you in that permit HS to be used more than once?

  24. #174
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,677
    Quote Originally Posted by Dordain View Post
    You're all fooling yourselves if you actually think that that isn't going to have a tangible impact on population and revenue.
    Of course, but retention of non-raiders will be hurt if they overspend there. I think the bigger risk for them isn't "no classic raids"... it's "class rework". Two reasons for that:


    1. Class rework impacts every single player, not 15% (or whatever) of them.
    2. Long-time players tend to react negatively to changes (and some will react negatively enough to quit), yet "skill trees" isn't a feature which will attract more new ones. Most of the games out there have skill trees.


    Epic Battles, on the other hand, do have some potential upside in terms of expansion sales... it's compelling content that anyone of several different playing styles and nearly any level can participate in.

    Khafar
    Last edited by Khafar; Oct 06 2013 at 07:47 PM.

  25. #175
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Tamriel
    Posts
    4,457
    Quote Originally Posted by Khafar View Post
    Thanks to whheydt for the reminder.
    No... it's far easier to use "deductive reasoning" on HS itself. There's no conceivable explanation for why adding a player-visible reticle would be of benefit in PvE. Certainly not for Hunters. In PvE it's like putting up a flag which says "Hey, some hunter is about to tag that rare spawn - better use an instant skill to grab it before he does!". The only players it benefits are A) creeps, and B) kill-stealers. I'm thinking that "kill-stealers" weren't the intended benefactors.
    C) It was a completely cosmetic addition, but it hasn't yet been established that the reticule wasn't a part of the skill at the start, so we are both just guessing.

    As for the damage changes... that's most certainly a bit of a "nerf" for my Hunter (who solos almost entirely). When it comes to HS, I care more about the the damage I can apply to this fight than I do about the damage I can apply to a series of fights. I rarely use HS for anything but leading off with a "bang", so it's the size of the "bang" that counts much more than how often I can use it. Of course, that's not a PvP/PvE balancing issue - more of a group/solo one.
    If you can get off 3 Heart Seekers in the time it would take for the old HS to get off of cool down, it's still an increase in DPS, for say a mob with a huge amount of hit points. On normal mobs I 1 shot 50% of the time with dev crit.

    It's certainly possible that the reticle change was inadvertent on the PvE side... perhaps they just didn't think through the consequences carefully. But any skill change made for PvP is likely to have some impact on PvE, unintended or not. That's why it's important to separate those entirely. Always. Turbine got better at it as they went along.
    It still hasn't been established that the reticule was added at all, and it absolutely hasn't been established it was added for PvP reasons.
    [center][color=red]Now roaming the earth searching for a fun, interesting game.......again.[/color][/center]

    [center][URL=http://s545.photobucket.com/user/fenderp61/media/ESO/Narcosys500_zpsaa2b6fce.jpg.html][IMG]http://i545.photobucket.com/albums/hh367/fenderp61/ESO/Narcosys500_zpsaa2b6fce.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/center]

 

 
Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload