"
DirkAustin wrote:
How can they test the tree if the changes havent patched in yet? How do you expect GGG does things? Just dont take OP gems when theyre new but i guess thats too much to ask for, people love to repeat their mistakes after all. Its not GGG making mistakes, its the players. They give us new gems, see how they work and what we do with them, then they have to nerf the OP ones. So if you end up getting a build nerfed because you rely on that 1 OP new gem that got nerfed, its your mistake, dont blame GGG.
Do they need your opinion, let alone mine? In the bigger picture, yes, every feedback, good or bad has some way of helping GGG make the game better, but thinking the way you do, thats not right.
You think it would be so easy to introduce a tree and gems that dont ever have to get changed, i suggest you create an arpg yourself, tell me how balancing your game works out.
Maybe give more a4 stuff to alpha tester?
Maybe give more time to alpha tester to test the new stuff?
I believe GGG have a private machine to test new things, I expect them to try those things first on their private servers/alpha realm before putting them on public.
You don t understand what I am talking about, flame blast is an easy example:
Anyone can see the level 1 gem without link or special items can already clear full groups when it was introduced, making racing and low level a piece of cake. You don t need intensive testing to discover things like that. That is what I am talking about.
But from what I heard GGG seemed to have changed this for a4. I was just saying it would be awesome if this is true and disappointing if this is not.
Forum pvp
https://www.instagram.com/critterspencils/ Last edited by lolozori#1147 on Mar 11, 2015, 11:10:10 AM
|
Posted bylolozori#1147on Mar 11, 2015, 10:53:31 AM
|
"
lolozori wrote:
"
DirkAustin wrote:
How can they test the tree if the changes havent patched in yet? How do you expect GGG does things? Just dont take OP gems when theyre new but i guess thats too much to ask for, people love to repeat their mistakes after all. Its not GGG making mistakes, its the players. They give us new gems, see how they work and what we do with them, then they have to nerf the OP ones. So if you end up getting a build nerfed because you rely on that 1 OP new gem that got nerfed, its your mistake, dont blame GGG.
Do they need your opinion, let alone mine? In the bigger picture, yes, every feedback, good or bad has some way of helping GGG make the game better, but thinking the way you do, thats not right.
You think it would be so easy to introduce a tree and gems that dont ever have to get changed, i suggest you create an arpg yourself, tell me how balancing your game works out.
Maybe give more a4 stuff to alpha tester?
Maybe give more time to alpha tester to test the new stuff?
I believe GGG have a private machine to test new things, I expect them to try those things first on their private servers/alpha realm before putting them on public.
You don t understand what I am talking about, flame blast is an easy example:
Anyone can see the level 1 gem without link od special items can already clear full groups when it was introduced. You don t need intensive testing to discover things like that. That is what I am talking about.
Sure, but they rebalance stuff because its being overused and broken with other items and skills and support gems. Not everything can be tested on "private servers" and with alpha testers.
How can they give more act 4 stuff to the alpha testers than what they have?
How can they give more time to alpha testers to rest new stuff when players are already bitching about when act 4 will come out?
You speak only from the player perspective, not from the tester let alone dev perspective, so its not like i can blame you for your opinion.
|
Posted byDeletedon Mar 11, 2015, 10:56:13 AM
|
"
DirkAustin wrote:
Sure, but they rebalance stuff because its being overused and broken with other items and skills and support gems. Not everything can be tested on "private servers" and with alpha testers.
How can they give more act 4 stuff to the alpha testers than what they have?
How can they give more time to alpha testers to rest new stuff when players are already bitching about when act 4 will come out?
You speak only from the player perspective, not from the tester let alone dev perspective, so its not like i can blame you for your opinion.
Maybe I have been not clear but I am not talking about minor rebalancing , I am talking about putting thought behind something before introducing it.
If the idea before introducing FB was, "let s create a spell that can clear full area without sweating" then I have to admit it was a success. If it was not like that, maybe this gem or the idea behind it should have been tested a little longer before being introduced.
Again We don t know what A4 would look like, but I personally would give some money again if those rebalance and better testing would append.
Also I have fait in GGG that they could do it, because they are a great team.
Forum pvp
https://www.instagram.com/critterspencils/ Last edited by lolozori#1147 on Mar 11, 2015, 11:05:59 AM
|
Posted bylolozori#1147on Mar 11, 2015, 11:02:58 AM
|
"
lolozori wrote:
"
DirkAustin wrote:
Sure, but they rebalance stuff because its being overused and broken with other items and skills and support gems. Not everything can be tested on "private servers" and with alpha testers.
How can they give more act 4 stuff to the alpha testers than what they have?
How can they give more time to alpha testers to rest new stuff when players are already bitching about when act 4 will come out?
You speak only from the player perspective, not from the tester let alone dev perspective, so its not like i can blame you for your opinion.
Maybe I have been not clear but I am not talking about minor rebalancing , I am talking about putting thought behind something before introducing it.
If the idea before introducing FB was, "let s create a spell that can clear full area without sweating" then I have to admit it was a success. If it was not like that, maybe this gem or the idea behind it should have been tested a little longer before being introduced.
Again We don t know what A4 would look like, but I personally would give some money again if those rebalance and better testing would append.
Youre entitled to your opinion, even if its wrong. Its ok, you will do the same mistakes as usual, use a newly introduced gem, then get the most out of it and after a month or less it gets nerfed because it was OP after all.
Thats how it always happens, and you cant test everything, there has to be life testing. There are cars being recalled that were already sold to the public, you think they could have tested the car even more than they did? Different medium, same thing.
|
Posted byDeletedon Mar 11, 2015, 11:07:09 AM
|
"
lolozori wrote:
You don t understand what I am talking about, flame blast is an easy example:
Anyone can see the level 1 gem without link or special items can already clear full groups when it was introduced, making racing and low level a peace of cake. You don t need intensive testing to discover things like that. That is what I am talking about.
But from what I heard GGG seemed to have changed this for a4. I was just saying it would be awesome if this is true and disappointing if this is not.
I don't particularly agree with dirk either, but this is a bad example. Very few people used flameblast when it first came out. They had to buff it significantly for people to pay attention to it and then they had to nerf it back down.
|
|
"
Vesuvius079 wrote:
I don't particularly agree with dirk either, but this is a bad example. Very few people used flameblast when it first came out. They had to buff it significantly for people to pay attention to it and then they had to nerf it back down.
From a pitiful racer like myself I can t agree.
When it been introduced, once the racers could get to level 10 they mostly used this in combination with other single shot skill until merveil and cruel to clear yellow and blues.
Same those days with lighting tendrils.
Those AOE skills made the game so easy it totally ruined the Hardcore idea of the game until merciless.
Hey but I wish the best for the dev and I am sure A4 will be great. My negativity is just made of fear, I heard from alphas that the game will be totally changed anyway .
Forum pvp
https://www.instagram.com/critterspencils/ Last edited by lolozori#1147 on Mar 11, 2015, 11:33:57 AM
|
Posted bylolozori#1147on Mar 11, 2015, 11:28:27 AM
|
"
lolozori wrote:
"
Vesuvius079 wrote:
I don't particularly agree with dirk either, but this is a bad example. Very few people used flameblast when it first came out. They had to buff it significantly for people to pay attention to it and then they had to nerf it back down.
From a pitiful racer like myself I can t agree.
When it been introduced, once the racers could get to level 10 they mostly used this in combination with other skill until merveil and cruel to clear yellow and blues.
Same those days with lighting tendrils.
Those AOE skills made the game so easy it totally ruined the Hardcore idea of the game until merciless.
Hey but I wish the best for the dev and I am sure A4 will be great. My negativity is just made of fear, I heard from alphas that the game will be totally changed anyway .
D3 changed a lot when that expansion came out, albeit it turned into the game it should have been at release but oh well. Why do you doubt, and even fear something bad could happen to POE? The worst that can happen to you is that you die IRL, in a game nothing should ever scare you. Thats silly thinking. I dont care what act 4 brings, i know i will play it but taking it so serious that i would be afraid of nerfs and such i simply cant do, i worry about my gf and about the people i love.
|
Posted byDeletedon Mar 11, 2015, 11:31:35 AM
|
"
lolozori wrote:
If the idea before introducing FB was, "let s create a spell that can clear full area without sweating" then I have to admit it was a success. If it was not like that, maybe this gem or the idea behind it should have been tested a little longer before being introduced.
I can tell you right now that never, ever, ever, ever has GGG told any alpha (or really anyone) what a new content addition is "used for"/"made for".
They act like artists that don't want to talk about the reason why they made a painting. They just show the painting and let people talk about it, despite there being obviously objective measurements to be made (such as "how does this skill compare to other similar skills?" or "why is this a L24 skill and not a L10 or L4 or L1 skill?" or "why is this skill drop-only?" or "is it intended that there's only one optimal way to support this skill?").
Even after many months have gone by and the beta population has been using the skill and everyone groks the best way to use it, they still won't say anything about their original intent and if the content met their expectations or not.
Rarely you get to glean that information off of their kneejerk changes, such as the BA/MA 80% life reduction. It was obvious that they didn't intend for that to be a thing without massive investment (read: 5L+ +3 bow, dedicated tree), but they would never say that directly.
---
FB when it came out was okay. It was strong at v0, and I personally thought it was in a nice place. Then it came to beta and I was called crazy for claiming it to be in a pretty decent/balanced place. It was "obviously" terrible and "obviously" needed buffs.
1) Then they increased the damage by 48% based on people liking a bugged version (lol).
2) Then they decreased the crit from 6->5, and decreased the damage by 15%.
3) Then they decreased the damage by 20%.
So for those following along at home, it went from:
0) 1 damage/6crit, to
1) 1.48 damage/6crit, to
2) 1.258 damage/5crit, to
3) 1.0064 damage/5crit.
In total, what it needed all along was a 1 point crit reduction. :P
Of course, as secondary concerns, Spell Echo was introduced between 1 and 2, so even after the nerf, SEcho made it even stronger that it was at v1.
It wouldn't surprise me at all to see it (or prolif, or both) receive some kind of damage nerf in the future to counteract how ungodly efficient it is with burn damage included and accounting for other strong additions like Spell Echo.
Through all of that, GGG never said if things were going "according to design" on the skill. Literally nothing in that direction. A buff here, a nerf there, but never exposing what their intent actually is.
|
Posted bypneuma#0134on Mar 11, 2015, 11:33:34 AMAlpha Member
|
"
pneuma wrote:
I can tell you right now that never, ever, ever, ever has GGG told any alpha (or really anyone) what a new content addition is "used for"/"made for".
They act like artists that don't want to talk about the reason why they made a painting. They just show the painting and let people talk about it, despite there being obviously objective measurements to be made (such as "how does this skill compare to other similar skills?" or "why is this a L24 skill and not a L10 or L4 or L1 skill?" or "why is this skill drop-only?" or "is it intended that there's only one optimal way to support this skill?").
Even after many months have gone by and the beta population has been using the skill and everyone groks the best way to use it, they still won't say anything about their original intent and if the content met their expectations or not.
Rarely you get to glean that information off of their kneejerk changes, such as the BA/MA 80% life reduction. It was obvious that they didn't intend for that to be a thing without massive investment (read: 5L+ +3 bow, dedicated tree), but they would never say that directly.
---
FB when it came out was okay. It was strong at v0, and I personally thought it was in a nice place. Then it came to beta and I was called crazy for claiming it to be in a pretty decent/balanced place. It was "obviously" terrible and "obviously" needed buffs.
1) Then they increased the damage by 48% based on people liking a bugged version (lol).
2) Then they decreased the crit from 6->5, and decreased the damage by 15%.
3) Then they decreased the damage by 20%.
So for those following along at home, it went from:
0) 1 damage/6crit, to
1) 1.48 damage/6crit, to
2) 1.258 damage/5crit, to
3) 1.0064 damage/5crit.
In total, what it needed all along was a 1 point crit reduction. :P
Of course, as secondary concerns, Spell Echo was introduced between 1 and 2, so even after the nerf, SEcho made it even stronger that it was at v1.
It wouldn't surprise me at all to see it (or prolif, or both) receive some kind of damage nerf in the future to counteract how ungodly efficient it is with burn damage included and accounting for other strong additions like Spell Echo.
Through all of that, GGG never said if things were going "according to design" on the skill. Literally nothing in that direction. A buff here, a nerf there, but never exposing what their intent actually is.
thks for your insight.
Before the bug it was still a very strong spell for low level and races as I remember.
The fact they kept the buffed version to please people without thinking how it would make lowlevel even more easy is what grumpy me a little.
Those implications should have been visualized and like tornado shot it just seemed to me sometime they try to push people to try gems instead of pushing for a balanced game.
About telling Alpha what the goal of a gem is, it was not really what I wanted to say. It seem to me that sometime even GGG don t know the idea behind the gem and what they will do to the game balance when introduced.
All in all I would love if Alpha testers have more things from future act to test, if you could have access to more content. I find you are doing great deeds for the game and you should test more things or even new tree .
After all, the alpha are the ones who where there when this game was about being an Hc experience.
Forum pvp
https://www.instagram.com/critterspencils/ Last edited by lolozori#1147 on Mar 11, 2015, 11:55:34 AM
|
Posted bylolozori#1147on Mar 11, 2015, 11:51:44 AM
|
|
PoE is kinda like a perpetual beta, its always growing, changing and it will never be perfectly balanced
personally I like it that way
if you dont I like it thats fine by me but dont expect the game to every fully stabilize
I dont see any any key!
|
Posted byk1rage#5701on Mar 11, 2015, 12:49:19 PM
|
