We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 100
  1. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by Crell_1 View Post
    (snip) (re kinship housing chests)
    There was no way to enforce these permissions automatically before. No log to ensure that someone abided by the terms. The multiple sections (we now get 10!) can acomplish the same purpose in the same manner as was possible prior.
    Well it's been along time since I was an officer in a large kinship, but iirc you could have different permissions on each chest in the kin house. As, I am not an officer in a larger kinship, I have no direct knowledge of how the sections currently work. I based my comments on reports from other PC members who were experienced in this area.

    (I have two personal kinships so this is not an issue for me.)

    But it is a good example of why more players should apply for the 2015 PC because there are so many areas of the game that no one player knows them all or can keep up with every change, alteration, improvement that is added. Knowledge is useful and the players have a lot of it.
    Whoever says “I” creates the “you.” Such is the trap of every conscience. The “I” signifies both solitude and rejection of solitude. Words name things and then replace them. Whoever says tomorrow, denies it. Tomorrow exists only for him who does not seek it. And yesterday? Yesterday is Kolvillàg: a name to forget, a word already forgotten.

    The Oath: A Novel by Elie Wiesel

  2. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Schinderhannes View Post
    Did many of the original PC went inactive over time? One year seems very long when you have the possibility to work/read/write for hours every day.
    There were PC members that "dropped out" or "lurked" and did not post. Some dropped out for RL reasons, like job changes, moving etc. Others dropped out when their personal topic of interest was either covered or when that topic was "not on the table". Some just didn't never made any presence felt.

    Some members did not understand that "lurking" was not equivalent to "participation", even if their position had already been expressed by another councilor and they felt no need to post, it was still desired that they do so.

    It lead to the following change in the description for 2014:

    Selected players are expected to actively participate in the program for the duration of their tenure. Please consider your personal time constraints carefully when applying.
    It was a lot of work to read everything and to understand what the issues were/are and to learn about areas you have no direct knowledge of. Some members had never done PVMP, so rolled out to the moors to learn about it. The same with other topics, if they didn't know, they made the effort to educate themselves on the topic so that they could give their feedback.

    No one needed to be an expert in every field and noob questions, opinions or suggestions were just as valuable as expert opinions. Sometimes more so. When you are so familiar with an aspect of the game, you forget what it looks like new comers.

    Being respectful of all players, play styles, abilities and interests was a hallmark for the council. Noobs have just as much impact on the game as veterans and maybe more so, as those are the players of the future and they "no knowing John Snow" about what happened 7 years ago... If a councilor didn't know, they just had to work harder.
    Whoever says “I” creates the “you.” Such is the trap of every conscience. The “I” signifies both solitude and rejection of solitude. Words name things and then replace them. Whoever says tomorrow, denies it. Tomorrow exists only for him who does not seek it. And yesterday? Yesterday is Kolvillàg: a name to forget, a word already forgotten.

    The Oath: A Novel by Elie Wiesel

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,468
    Quote Originally Posted by SabrielofLorien View Post
    Well it's been along time since I was an officer in a large kinship, but iirc you could have different permissions on each chest in the kin house.
    Unfortunately not. The permissions applied to all chests equally. You could set access collectively for recruits, members and/or officers - but not on a per-chest basis.
    Last edited by Galuhad; Apr 27 2014 at 01:37 PM.
    Galuhad | Narvelan
    Lore Breakers of Evernight (formally of Eldar) | Plugins

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,262
    Quote Originally Posted by kickman77 View Post

    One thing to point out is we remianed as civil as possible even when we disagreed. Some were happy with things and others were dissapointed. We are all players from different walks of life that enjoy different areas of the game.
    This is one of the things we excelled at. Very rarely did any of the council let discussions get to the point of hurling insults at each other. Even with the extremely heated discussions around rank farming. For the most part, we kept things flowing and had some amazing discussions.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,146
    Was any time spent discussing what the core values of the game are?

    examples
    Superb and well-designed gear that matches the character game models and doesn't give too much clipping
    Fun quest content
    End game raid content that has a learning curve

    (from what I personally would hold to be core values above any others, as experienced up to and including cap 75)

    Also, I'm curious if any time was spent talking about the user experience in low level game - fun or struggle? Chat or concentrate at all points? Sufferable in quest gear? Scaling of buffs?

    I ask because in the current game version, not one mob has missed applying a debuff or two on my latest alt levels 10-47. This means it feels like an uphill struggle all the way. Can do it - yes! - having fun - No!
    I just want to know that players with insight into the low level game were able to give feedback in a design process naturally run by people who do not spend 20 hours a week playing 1-85.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Decatur, AL
    Posts
    5,576
    Quote Originally Posted by SabrielofLorien View Post
    Pre The One Chest you could set permissions for a variety of options on each chest (there were up to 3 chests for a kinship house), add in and remove players access levels etc. After the one chest it was harder, well impossible, to open the chest in a generic way without getting the entire contents looted. This did happen to some kinships where the open-door policy became a shut-it-down one because they couldn't limit access:

    ex:
    crafting bits: open to anyone
    pre-made-reforged-first-agers: Officer Level
    emerald shards: Leader and Officer.
    Sadly this is untrue. The chests have never been on a per-chest basis when it comes to permissions. Either you had access to all the chests, or access to none.
    If you give away gold bars, someone will complain they're too heavy.
    .: Dannach, 113 WDN :.: Daire, 85 LMR :.: Gyrefalcon, 93 CHN :.: Brandon, 75 CPT :.: Honey, 72 GRD :.: Griffon, 70 HNT :.: Kaelenea, 73 RNK :.
    .: Iryth, 58 WDN :.: Baye, 61 WDN :.: Samtal, 65 WDN :.:Dunnock, 57 WDN :.: Sedgewald, 69 LMR :.: Breyon, 45 CHN :.: Totes, 113 HNT :.

    I am the master of my fate. I am the captain of my soul.
    Might as well face it, I'm addicted to WDN

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,262
    Quote Originally Posted by Macroscian View Post
    Was any time spent discussing what the core values of the game are?

    examples
    Superb and well-designed gear that matches the character game models and doesn't give too much clipping
    Fun quest content
    End game raid content that has a learning curve

    (from what I personally would hold to be core values above any others, as experienced up to and including cap 75)

    Also, I'm curious if any time was spent talking about the user experience in low level game - fun or struggle? Chat or concentrate at all points? Sufferable in quest gear? Scaling of buffs?

    I ask because in the current game version, not one mob has missed applying a debuff or two on my latest alt levels 10-47. This means it feels like an uphill struggle all the way. Can do it - yes! - having fun - No!
    I just want to know that players with insight into the low level game were able to give feedback in a design process naturally run by people who do not spend 20 hours a week playing 1-85.
    Yes, there was quite a lot. What we learned was that the problems stem from individual definitions of "fun" and "challenge". i.e. what is "fun" for some is not for others. This is where being more specific in your feedback helps. "Erebor is not a challenge." While that means something to you, because YOU know what you're talking about, it means little to me. What kind of challenge were you looking for?? "Tougher mobs" ok, mobs that hit harder? Mobs that resist better? Mobs that overwhelm you with numbers? Mobs that I have to use all my skills to beat? More puzzles in a raid??? See the problem yet? These are all discussions we had on the council, and they'll probably have similar discussions on the new one. One of the things I learned was just how many different types of players there are in this game that the devs are called upon to appease with every update. There truly is no way to do that, so it becomes a case of "which group(s) do we piss off this time?" to accomplish X-goal. Its not so much a question of "Core values to the game" and "Core values of the various players of the game".

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,146
    Quote Originally Posted by Palentian View Post
    Yes, there was quite a lot. What we learned was that the problems stem from individual definitions of "fun" and "challenge". i.e. what is "fun" for some is not for others. This is where being more specific in your feedback helps. "Erebor is not a challenge." While that means something to you, because YOU know what you're talking about, it means little to me. What kind of challenge were you looking for?? "Tougher mobs" ok, mobs that hit harder? Mobs that resist better? Mobs that overwhelm you with numbers? Mobs that I have to use all my skills to beat? More puzzles in a raid??? See the problem yet? These are all discussions we had on the council, and they'll probably have similar discussions on the new one. One of the things I learned was just how many different types of players there are in this game that the devs are called upon to appease with every update. There truly is no way to do that, so it becomes a case of "which group(s) do we piss off this time?" to accomplish X-goal. Its not so much a question of "Core values to the game" and "Core values of the various players of the game".
    That's great to see =)

    Like in the current game, the 'toughness' of every encounter was adjusted instead of adjusting the cap content or per-class. I can see where ease of passage and speedy delivery can be more useful than appeasing one group of players.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Posts
    115
    The huge amount of positivity here from ex-PC members is refreshing to hear and I want to believe it... but at the same time, I can't help feeling we're not getting the full story.

    What I'm saying is I have no confidence that differing views will be fairly represented in view of the fairly aggressive 'censorship' happening on the forums of late. Every time I've read a critical post about Turbine which gains momentum and agreement it's turned to dust. Some 2013 PC members' views won't be allowed and find this extremely concerning.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,262
    Quote Originally Posted by Ilhsul View Post
    The huge amount of positivity here from ex-PC members is refreshing to hear and I want to believe it... but at the same time, I can't help feeling we're not getting the full story.

    What I'm saying is I have no confidence that differing views will be fairly represented in view of the fairly aggressive 'censorship' happening on the forums of late. Every time I've read a critical post about Turbine which gains momentum and agreement it's turned to dust. Some 2013 PC members' views won't be allowed and find this extremely concerning.
    Yeah, I keep seeing this "censorship" thing. I guess that depends on your idea of censorship. (Which today seems to have a very loose meaning online). There is a difference between a critical post and one that has devolved into name calling, and other violations of the CoC. There are a number of threads currently on the forums that are "critical" of Turbine and the game in general, but as they haven't devolved into CoC violations (more or less) they're still there and active. We (2013 council) are always free to express our views. But there are and have always been things that are under NDA. Even during Beta for HD I expressed my views, both there and on the council forums.

  11. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by Ilhsul View Post
    The huge amount of positivity here from ex-PC members is refreshing to hear and I want to believe it... but at the same time, I can't help feeling we're not getting the full story.

    What I'm saying is I have no confidence that differing views will be fairly represented in view of the fairly aggressive 'censorship' happening on the forums of late. Every time I've read a critical post about Turbine which gains momentum and agreement it's turned to dust. Some 2013 PC members' views won't be allowed and find this extremely concerning.
    Well, I am certainly not holding back here, so you are getting the full story from me.

    About criticism:

    There are a variety of ways to give feedback and pointing out deficits is one of the important aspects of feedback. How you say this, makes a great deal of difference in how it's received. Sometimes the manner is not "appreciated" and you are going to cross over one of the lines in the CoC.

    Even though the PC gave positive feedback we also gave negative ones too. However, we learned that there are just some things that are not changing or changeable and no matter how vociferous the opposition, nothing would be altered.

    When you look at locked threads, often the discourse has collapsed into a less-than-pleasant exchanges of views or the exchange no longer contains useful details and descends into even more unpleasant territory.

    Turbine is the company that makes the game. They are the ultimate arbiters of what will and will not happen. The people who work for Turbine are just that: people. They have feelings and aspirations and desires just like everyone else. Sometimes this gets forgotten and hurtful words get tossed into a set of comments.

    Constructive criticism takes time to write and takes time to explain and takes even more time to craft in a way that removes "blaming" or "epithets" and other unpleasantness. When the commentary is not constructive then the conversation ends. In RL and in the Game and in the Forums.

    Additionally, there are just some things Turbine's gonna do because they've decided that's what they want to do and no amount of suggestion, constructive exchanges or pressure will change it. When you come across one of these "OMG" moments you have basically 2 choices: go with the flow or opt-out. If Turbine's cast something in concrete, racking up infractions will not change anything.

    Sometimes you have to decide which hill you will die on, and this is a game, not my whole life. I'm not dying on this hill over a game mechanic. I did it once, I'm not doing it again.
    Whoever says “I” creates the “you.” Such is the trap of every conscience. The “I” signifies both solitude and rejection of solitude. Words name things and then replace them. Whoever says tomorrow, denies it. Tomorrow exists only for him who does not seek it. And yesterday? Yesterday is Kolvillàg: a name to forget, a word already forgotten.

    The Oath: A Novel by Elie Wiesel

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by Palentian View Post
    Yeah, I keep seeing this "censorship" thing. I guess that depends on your idea of censorship. (Which today seems to have a very loose meaning online). There is a difference between a critical post and one that has devolved into name calling, and other violations of the CoC. There are a number of threads currently on the forums that are "critical" of Turbine and the game in general, but as they haven't devolved into CoC violations (more or less) they're still there and active. We (2013 council) are always free to express our views. But there are and have always been things that are under NDA. Even during Beta for HD I expressed my views, both there and on the council forums.
    I assure you that none I read were name calling or had any CoC violations that any reasonable person would consider a forum violation.

    Any time a consensus started to build it was wiped from the forums. Especially after the layoffs were announced it was almost comical how quickly things were being removed. We're not in an environment where honest conversations about the success of the PC can be discussed without intervention to be honest.

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,262
    Quote Originally Posted by Ilhsul View Post
    I assure you that none I read were name calling or had any CoC violations that any reasonable person would consider a forum violation.

    Any time a consensus started to build it was wiped from the forums. Especially after the layoffs were announced it was almost comical how quickly things were being removed. We're not in an environment where honest conversations about the success of the PC can be discussed without intervention to be honest.
    I'd hazard that these threads contained violations of one sort or another. Generally the entire thread is locked rather than deleted. Have you asked Sapience about them?

  14. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by Ilhsul View Post
    I assure you that none I read were name calling or had any CoC violations that any reasonable person would consider a forum violation.
    Every infraction comes with a pointer to the part of the CoC that triggered the notice. There is a process described in the CoC for players to question such actions. This is where the rubber meets the road. Only the person getting the infraction knows what was exchange was about as those messages are private.

    It's easy to make assumptions about what happened, but what really happened is between Turbine and the player. Often and more than often, it's not what you think or why you think it happened.

    In the CoC section: Understanding Warnings, Infractions, and Bans. There is a table that shows what happens at each level of Infraction Points. If you cross a boundary, you get the that result no matter what. If you catch 9 infractions points, the 10th has an automatic penalty.

    Assumptions about why a certain result happened in a particular situation often leaves out this aspect of the CoC, and often the trigger is not what you think it is.

    It was an area the PC worked on to make sure it was clear about the boundaries.

    As to what's "reasonable" that's specified in the CoC too.

    https://www.lotro.com/en/content/community-guidelines
    Whoever says “I” creates the “you.” Such is the trap of every conscience. The “I” signifies both solitude and rejection of solitude. Words name things and then replace them. Whoever says tomorrow, denies it. Tomorrow exists only for him who does not seek it. And yesterday? Yesterday is Kolvillàg: a name to forget, a word already forgotten.

    The Oath: A Novel by Elie Wiesel

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,262
    Quote Originally Posted by SabrielofLorien View Post
    Every infraction comes with a pointer to the part of the CoC that triggered the notice. There is a process described in the CoC for players to question such actions. This is where the rubber meets the road. Only the person getting the infraction knows what was exchange was about as those messages are private.

    It's easy to make assumptions about what happened, but what really happened is between Turbine and the player. Often and more than often, it's not what you think or why you think it happened.

    In the CoC section: Understanding Warnings, Infractions, and Bans. There is a table that shows what happens at each level of Infraction Points. If you cross a boundary, you get the that result no matter what. If you catch 9 infractions points, the 10th has an automatic penalty.

    Assumptions about why a certain result happened in a particular situation often leaves out this aspect of the CoC, and often the trigger is not what you think it is.

    It was an area the PC worked on to make sure it was clear about the boundaries.

    As to what's "reasonable" that's specified in the CoC too.

    https://www.lotro.com/en/content/community-guidelines
    I think he's talking about threads being deleted, rather than individuals being banned. At least I hope so. For a thread to have been deleted, I would think that it would have to be such a major violation (as in a violated NDA) that simply locking the thread was deemed insufficient. Individuals being banned is an entirely different matter.

  16. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by Ilhsul View Post
    I assure you that none I read were name calling or had any CoC violations that any reasonable person would consider a forum violation.

    Any time a consensus started to build it was wiped from the forums. Especially after the layoffs were announced it was almost comical how quickly things were being removed. We're not in an environment where honest conversations about the success of the PC can be discussed without intervention to be honest.

    This has nothing to do with the topic of this thread, if you want to bring up moderation go start your own topic instead of hijacking this one.

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Watertown, MA
    Posts
    2,926
    Usually, Sapience/Cordovan will lock a thread and only delete the offending posts within it. But if the original post inherently violates the CoC (e.g., starting a thread to discuss moderation actions against another player), or if deleting the offending posts would result in the thread being essentially empty, then simply deleting the thread might be the best course of action. It is, ultimately, up to the moderation team's judgment.

    As Sabriel says, the infraction notices are extremely clear. They quote "chapter and verse" exactly what part of the Code of Conduct was violated by the infracting post. The infraction PM also includes a link to and quote from the infracting post, as well as a note from the moderation who issued the infraction. There's no excuse for saying "OMG I got an infraction for no reason!" None whatsoever. If you have any, you can see all the active ones in your User Control Panel to see what I'm talking about: https://www.lotro.com/forums/usercp.php

    Considering the number of critical threads and posts that don't get deleted, I don't know how anybody can claim censorship. A lot of what gets through this alleged "Great Firewall of Turbine" are posts that I would consider extremely rude and unproductive. Just imagine how bad a post has to be in order to actually get removed.
    Cainwen Ciaphas, Captain of Crickhollow, HERO OF MIDDLE EARTH!!!
    I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered! My opinions are my own!

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    7,583
    Quote Originally Posted by SabrielofLorien View Post
    It was an area the PC worked on to make sure it was clear about the boundaries.

    As to what's "reasonable" that's specified in the CoC too.

    https://www.lotro.com/en/content/community-guidelines
    The difficulty here is evident in the following Community Guideline quotes:

    They are by no means all inclusive. We reserve the right to take appropriate actions if we feel any post, thread, or comment is, in the sole discretion of the Turbine Community team, inappropriate for our forums or sites, even if it is not specifically called out in these guidelines.
    Because every situation is different, all enforcement and application of the community guidelines are at the discretion of the Turbine Community Team. These rules are subject to change without notice; please review them regularly.
    The Community Team reserves the right to assign temporary and permanent bans at will based upon the severity of an infraction.
    Some days I'm a huge fan of the team having discretionary power. Other times, it just makes me want to pull my hair out when I see a post that I think is way over the line left days there after I reported it. Sometimes the post goes away a few days later, which I attribute to a report backlog for the team to go through. Other times its there forever. Whether or not I'm thrilled with discretionary power has very little to do with to whom it's being applied. I've gotten dings for posts that make absolutely no sense to me based on what they cite [at best, it feels like it would have fallen into another guideline category]. .Other times, I wonder how I didn't get dinged for stepping over a line re-reading my post in retrospect. No one's perfect after all. Obviously, I have no way of knowing exactly what happens to other players. I can only see what remains and what is no longer there if I saw it in the first place. But by and large, most of the posters seem to remain, suggesting that overall the discretionary power is used wisely Overall, I'm glad that they have the power, even if I want to cringe with how the execution comes across from this side of the veil.

    When it came to Rank Farming, the line was drawn exceptionally clearly, and I thank the 2013PC for that.

    Quote Originally Posted by furtim View Post
    Considering the number of critical threads and posts that don't get deleted, I don't know how anybody can claim censorship. A lot of what gets through this alleged "Great Firewall of Turbine" are posts that I would consider extremely rude and unproductive. Just imagine how bad a post has to be in order to actually get removed.
    I would encourage players who don't feel they can express themselves by the spirit of rules, and not just the letter of them, to consider blogging about their thoughts. Perhaps also trying Twitter. You may not have as wide an audience, but that is the price of being able to say what you want to say, how you want to say it, all the time.

    I would also like players who can abide by the spirit of the rules to consider applying to Palantir. Sure, the material you work with likely wont be nearly as raw as the Player Council gets to see, but it's something you could do before 2015, and if you get in, it'd probably be great experience if you decide to try for the council in 2015.
    https://www.lotro.com/forums/showthr...review-Program
    Last edited by Crell_1; Apr 27 2014 at 06:11 PM.
    Crell-L85-Champion - Riddermark ; Swego-L85-Burglar ; Kotvi-L95-Runekeeper
    Delego-L85 Hunter ; Stodden-L51-Captain ; Edhul-L61-Loremaster
    Deglorion - SoA XP Disabler

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Central Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    1,883
    My question is more about the process, paraphrasing some PC comments here-
    A former PC member said they weren't sure how valid their contributions were due to their casual play style. But said they were told to continue contributing to the discussion anyway-even if others had said the same thing. PC members also tried new-to-them areas of the game so they could contribute.

    Another PC member said that PvP discussions got very heated due to strong opinions held by regular PvPers.

    So my question is, Do you think this feedback-from passionate 'experts' on play styles and classes and from the tried it once 'novices' in those playstyles or classes, was weighted according to experience? Or was it all considered equally valid on the basis that everyone is new at some point? Or did it vary from Dev to Dev? The class changes (not trees, per se-but the implementation thereof) prompted this question, if you would like some spoecific context.

    Just a comment on the below

    Quote Originally Posted by Palentian View Post
    Thank you! Finally! LOL

    It was also a bit odd for me personally to "hear" people complain that we didn't listen to feedback, when I never had a single person PM me a suggestion or idea. I know that other council members had their inboxes blowing up, so ideas were coming from people, but some of us heard crickets. Even in game attempts to solicit ideas and suggestions went unanswered. It kind of feeds that feeling that players really don't want fact muddying up their rhetoric.
    I suspect many people may have thought it was futile. The 'like it or leave' responses in Beta from some PC members certainly put me off contributing to the general discussion after a while. This was not true of all PC members, of course, but it may have contributed to the 'us' (critcal players) versus 'them' (PC members as public defenders of all changes) feelings that permeated Beta. Add to this the 'noise' created in class forum hijacks by some people who had never played the class calling critics change resistant, or implying critics were simply too dumb to understand the trees, or defending removal of vital skills (later returned by the Devs) or calling 'wrong' those of us identifying issues in classes and BBs, that were later recognised as bugs, all that gave me no desire to converse with those people in PMs or in forums. While none of these staunch defenders of bugs and broken skills ever apparently broke the CoC, the sense I had that any critical feedback and suggestions about changes, tarred me with the 'whining vocal minority' brush and therefore was easily dismissed, was palpable. As for some PC members being called 'shills'-yeah that was nasty and unwarranted. So was me being called an 'old bitter change resistant elitist vet'. Some posters in Beta on both 'sides' of the many debates behaved very badly. That was sad for all of us affected, players and PC members alike.

    I hope the new PC and the next wave of Beta testers start afresh, baggage free, bring fewer blanket judgements, and more open communication and understanding, from everyone involved passionately in this game we all love. Here's to a positive constructive 2014! ./toast

    edit: and thanks 2013 PC members for the option to turn off crit naming, the option to turn off confirmation boxes, the clear definition of rank farming, and the other noticable improvements to the game you contributed to. Now 2014 PC, go finish fixing class bugs and those side quests in BBs, you lazy lot! (joking )
    Last edited by Calta; Apr 28 2014 at 12:58 AM.

    And the minstrel sang to them……”and they passed in thought out to regions where pain and delight flow together and tears are the very wine of blessedness.”

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,262
    Quote Originally Posted by Calta View Post
    My question is more about the process, paraphrasing some PC comments here-
    A former PC member said they weren't sure how valid their contributions were due to their casual play style. But said they were told to continue contributing to the discussion anyway-even if others had said the same thing. PC members also tried new-to-them areas of the game so they could contribute.

    Another PC member said that PvP discussions got very heated due to strong opinions held by regular PvPers.

    So my question is, Do you think this feedback-from passionate 'experts' on play styles and classes and from the tried it once 'novices' in those playstyles or classes, was weighted according to experience? Or was it all considered equally valid on the basis that everyone is new at some point? Or did it vary from Dev to Dev? The class changes (not trees, per se-but the implementation thereof) prompted this question, if you would like some spoecific context.
    Actually, I think the devs regarded it all as important feedback. They used the council as a smaller mirror for the reactions of the players at large. The "valid contributions" comment was no doubt a bit of feeling their opinion wouldn't weigh well because of their style. That's a shame. Most of us welcomed all discussion. I even learned a few things about raids. Which, as I've never done one, was a lot.

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    In the Ninky Nonk
    Posts
    5,375
    Thanks Kickman77 for filling in my little questionnaire - much appreciated

    Are there any other PC13 members willing to fill this in and give us some overall feedback on PC13?


    Q1 - Name three things that the PC13 as a whole or you the individual PC member did well:



    Q2 - Name three things that the PC13 as a whole or you the individual PC member could have done better:



    Q3 - Name one aspect of your involvement in PC13 which had the greatest impact overall on the game:



    As mentioned before, there are no right or wrong answers. This all helps us outside of PC13 build up a picture of how you saw both yours and the wider PC13's work during the year.

    Thanks in advance!
    It must be your PC...

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Hobbiton
    Posts
    1,161
    I'm sure I remember seeing a 4th question before Bango? Oh well, guess I was wrong.

    Things we did well:
    I think we did everything that was asked of us. We gave considered feedback when it was asked for and I believe we made some good and well thought out suggestions.

    Things we could have done better:
    I would have liked an earlier look at the trait trees than we saw on Bullroarer and to have got more involved in EBs. They are areas I believe still need some improvement and I hope the next PC can carry on looking into that.

    The greatest impact:
    I'm not sure you would be seeing as much or any PvMP development beyond a level cap rise without the passion and commitment shown by some PC members to push for change. It's of course possible I may be wrong and there were plans all along but that is the impression I got.
    Council Of The West On Evernight

    Runesi

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    In the Ninky Nonk
    Posts
    5,375
    Quote Originally Posted by Runesi_EU View Post
    I'm sure I remember seeing a 4th question before Bango? Oh well, guess I was wrong.

    Things we did well:
    I think we did everything that was asked of us. We gave considered feedback when it was asked for and I believe we made some good and well thought out suggestions.

    Things we could have done better:
    I would have liked an earlier look at the trait trees than we saw on Bullroarer and to have got more involved in EBs. They are areas I believe still need some improvement and I hope the next PC can carry on looking into that.

    The greatest impact:
    I'm not sure you would be seeing as much or any PvMP development beyond a level cap rise without the passion and commitment shown by some PC members to push for change. It's of course possible I may be wrong and there were plans all along but that is the impression I got.
    Thanks Rusesi_EU for the answers! Much appreciated. Is indeed encouraging to see PVMP getting attention and if the PC13 were responsible for this then they should be blowing their own trumpet so to speak

    Not sure what this 4th question is - you must be confusing this with another survey somewhere else (looks all innocent)
    It must be your PC...

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,468
    Were there any discussions about changes to the crafting system? Most importantly, the ability to buy additional craft slots to allow more than just three professions per character.
    Galuhad | Narvelan
    Lore Breakers of Evernight (formally of Eldar) | Plugins

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    2,469
    All right, I'm a bit late here (and other 2013 Council members have been writing great answers) but anyway...

    Yes, I enjoyed my time on the Council. It was great to be "part of the team" so to speak. I also felt our feedback was valued, in fact we were told so several times. Personally I enjoyed a lot of those new ideas by some developer who started a new thread on PC forums that started with words something like "Here's an idea I got, what do you think, would players like this?". That started a discussion and the council gave a lot of different points of view which more or less affected the outcome of that idea.

    Did some posts made by "council haters" get to me? No, not personally. But what was very frustrating at times was that I *knew* how wrong some poster was, and I could have told that person why he was wrong, but I couldn't do that because of NDA. So, it was easier to just keep silent. Still, it was surprising to see how easily *any* post made by any Council member meant that very soon someone replied something like "Turbine has bought you/ you are Turbine fanboy, so your opinion does not matter".

    Two major things we got with Helm's Deep expansion was trait trees and epic battles. With trait trees we got drafts of the trait trees for each class very early, in text form basically. At that point many council members (myself included) thought that it was a bit hard to get the idea how these trait trees would work in practice, because although we had war-steed trees in our minds, we didn't know at that point how many trait points one would get, and how many trait points each skill would cost. And because all the "trees" were in text format, it was pretty hard to imagine if a tree would work or not, especially hybrid builds. We saw the trait trees "properly" when we got logged in HD Beta (we had access to beta server one round before official closed beta started, with Palantiri testers), so it was quite late. But at that point beta forums started to fill with comments and a lot of adjustments were made.

    As for Epic Battles, I recall that we did not see the actual implementation until maybe 3rd beta round or so when Epic Battles (or at least one battle) were added in. Again, beta forums were busy about Epic Battles / Big Battles.

    All in all, I can say that PC forums were very busy! Personally for me though it felt that raiding and PvMP were the topics discussed mostly, and since I don't do either of those activities, I didn't participate in those discussions much. But oh how much I felt urge to tell about that when I saw people on general forums complaining how "Raiding community/ PvMP community is not represented in Player's Council!"

 

 
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 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