never forget

[Obtena.7952]

7 minutes ago, cryorion.9532 said:

Oh is that so? 

Yup, it' so. Just because Anet doesn't do what people want doesn't mean people haven't made good feedback threads and Anet didn't see them.  You realize that it's Anet prerogative to disagree or not implement player feedback, even if it's good right? Clearly you don't. Again, this is just you assuming that everything players want is better than what Anet has planned. Even if that assumption is true, it's not relevant. 

Edited June 6, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Obtena.7952]

14 minutes ago, Telgum.6071 said:

Because Anet balances not only around numbers but also around the use (or abuse) of trait lines, there are some good examples in the last patch, including Warrior, Discipline and Tactics. And based on what I see every time I click on both enemy and ally warriors, I doubt Defense fits their intentions and speeches about balancing classes and trait lines. 

Trust me, I would LOVE to talk with more knowledge about what they think, agree or disagree, but with the very little communication they provide is no use.

Well ... if Anet concludes Berserker is OK in all game modes, then we have to conclude they are ONLY taking about Berserker things (traitline, rage skills, torch) if what you are Saying about Defy Pain is true. 

 

I mean, let's take a step back. Berserker being OK in all game modes ... that's not related to Defy Pain. That's just using obviously deficient parts of warrior skillset to disagree about what Anet thinks of Berserker's 'greatness' in the game. 

 

See here again is the thing ... I think Berserker is still deficient in design, primarily because it plays like it only has two traits when you aren't in Berserker. Anet doesn't agree with that so instead they gave Rage skills more berserker uptime, which in a round about way does address the deficiency. It's still there, but if you play well, it's impacts you less. The point here .. how Anet thinks about how a class works, the assessment and how to fix things has nothing to do with what me (or any other player) thinks. The best we can do is make GOOD feedback threads to highlight a problem and hope we touch on an aspect of THEIR own criteria that will make them re-assess how it's implemented. 

 

Finally, I'm also convinced that these complaints about one trait here or some skill there are not on the radar because these are the kinds of things that ON THE AVERAGE do not prevent players from using the class, which is what appears to be part of how Anet is concluding 'Berserker is in a good place'. 

Edited June 6, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[crewthief.8649]

8 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

There is no semantics being played ... you said it was OBJECTIVELY not performing great in PvP. You can't say that unless you objectively measured it's performance and it didn't meet the criteria for great performance. So what are your objective criteria and how did you measure it? 

 

So again ... do you know what objective means? It appears you do not because I'm willing to bet my last dollar you haven't measured performance or defined what 'great' PVP performance is. 

Okay, how about this: 

 

Through an overwhelming consensus of Warrior player experience, it is agreed upon that the Berserker elite spec is not performing great in PvP. I have yet to read a single piece of feedback, from literally any Warrior main in this sub-forum, that the Berserker espec is performing great in PvP. This is mentioning nothing of my own anecdotal experience of playing power Berserker extensively in PvP.

 

 You can say allot of things about me; claiming that I do not understand the meaning of a word as commonly used as ‘objectively,’ is not one of them.
 

While analyzing the verbiage used by Anet (great), is it not logical to assume: worst<bad<average<good<great?

 

In doing so, would you not agree that great would  mean the spec lands somewhere in the A-tier? Is that the case? How does that compare to actual in-game performance? You’re right, I do not have access to the metrics that the devs have access to, but that does not mean I cannot draw certain conclusions based upon experience, consensus, and comparison to other class performance. 

Edited June 7, 2021 by crewthief.8649

[cryorion.9532]

2 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Yup, it' so. Just because Anet do what people want doesn't mean people haven't made good feedback threads and Anet didn't see them. 

Of course people make good feedback threads, it is just random whether the thread is in line with what Anet wants, because (as you wrote) no one knows what is Anet up to.

So what about the feedback you posted here like 1-2 years ago after Berserker rework, about that Berserker traits should be more useful/meaningful for warrior outside of Berserk mode? It was good feedback, but it seems it isn't in line with what Anet wants or it was simply ignored.

[Tails.9372]

2 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

What I CAN tell you that if people make good feedback threads instead of ... whatever this steaming loaf of a thread is ... Anet pays attention to that. 

 

1 hour ago, Obtena.7952 said:

TLDR: Seems to me Anet's biggest concern is that a class/espec met some threshold for being played to be 'in a good place'. If you want fixes to something, I guess the answer is to stop playing it to impact their measures of what is 'good'.

 

This has been proven not to work time and time again, for some things there has been more than enough constructive criticism with a stark decline in usage over almost the entirety of the last decade and ANET has done nothing to address the issues. Unless the vast majority of the playerbase gets outraged about something (which is never going to happen in regards to things only a minority cares about) there is nothing anyone can do about it. Either someday out of the blue ANET feels like adressing the problem in question or it's never going to get addressed and this isn't just limited to balancing but to issues in general.

Edited June 6, 2021 by Tails.9372

[felix.2386]

2 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

That doesn't make sense. What I think does not affect Anet concluding berserker is in a great place. In fact, you didn't actually READ my post because I don't believe that's the case. Maybe you should take a breath and try harder to comprehend things people post, assuming you read them at all. 

you know what doesnt make sense?

 

"this is not prime evidence that Anet doesn't know their game state"

you disagreeing the statement means you agrees with Anet's conclusion.

"It is prime evidence that players think they know better than Anet does on how the game should work when they don't. "

this statement means that you disagree with players' statement of berserker isn't great in all builds in all game mode.

 

it's basically saying

"i dont think 1+1=3, but i dont think there's a problem with saying 1+1=3 and there's actually a problem with people who think 1+1=2 think they know better than people who think 1+1=3."

do i really have to render your statement to elementary level for you to understand your own words?

i know you trying to sound smart and trying to be different and special, but what you said is a joke.

 

Edited June 6, 2021 by felix.2386

[crewthief.8649]

1 minute ago, felix.2386 said:

you know what doesnt make sense?

 

"this is not prime evidence that Anet doesn't know their game state"

you disagreeing the statement means you agrees with Anet's conclusion.

"It is prime evidence that players think they know better than Anet does on how the game should work when they don't. "

this statement means that you disagree with players' statement of berserker isn't great in all builds in all game mode.

 

it's basically saying

"i dont think 1+1=3, but i dont think there's a problem with saying 1+1=3 and there's actually a problem with people saying 1+1 isnt 3."

 

 

This is why I think this dude just likes to argue, to be honest. 

[Obtena.7952]

Just now, cryorion.9532 said:

Of course people make good feedback threads, it is just random whether the thread is in line with what Anet wants, because (as you wrote) no one knows what is Anet up to.

So what about the feedback you posted here like 1-2 years ago after Berserker rework, about that Berserker traits should be more useful/meaningful for warrior outside of Berserk mode? It was good feedback, but it seems it isn't in line with what Anet wants or it was simply ignored.

Yeah ... OK. That's exactly my point. No one should say "we make good feedback threads and Anet doesn't listen" and that's the reason why we get threads like this one. We don't know if they are listening or not, or how they are, so if we are going to make a feedback thread and you WANT it to have a chance to get attention .. THIS isn't how to do it now is it?

[cryorion.9532]

1 minute ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Yeah ... OK. That's exactly my point. No one should say "we make good feedback threads and Anet doesn't listen" and that's the reason why we get threads like this one. We don't know if they are listening or not, or how they are, so if we are going to make a feedback thread and you WANT it to have a chance to get attention .. THIS isn't how to do it now is it?

Of course, but this thread is more like rant thread, not really feedback thread. 

[Obtena.7952]

9 minutes ago, Tails.9372 said:

 

 

This has been proven not to work time and time again, for some things there has been more than enough constructive criticism with a stark decline in usage over almost the entirety of the last decade and ANET has done nothing to address the issues. Unless the vast majority of the playerbase gets outraged about something (which is never going to happen in regards to things only a minority cares about) there is nothing anyone can do about it. Either someday out of the blue ANET feels like adressing the problem in question or it's never going to get addressed and this isn't just limited to balancing but to issues in general.

That's easy to say, but again, you don't know how Anet is measuring or assessing this so whatever 'proof' you believe exists maybe isn't relevant to how Anet is looking at this. It should be clear by now ... if you aren't speaking their language, then of course you aren't going to be understood. We are playing in their house ... so it's house rules. 

Edited June 6, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Obtena.7952]

8 minutes ago, felix.2386 said:

but what you said is a joke.

It might be a joke ... but it's not too far of the mark. Anet knows better than any player how they want the game to work and if it's working that way. Bad joke, but true nonetheless. 

Edited June 6, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[crewthief.8649]

1 minute ago, Obtena.7952 said:

It might be a joke ... but it's not too far of the mark. Anet knows better than any player how they want the game to work and if it's working that way. Bad joke, but true nonetheless. 

I am not arguing that the espec isn’t performing the way they want it to, I am arguing that it is not performing GREAT in all game modes. Because it isn’t, and anyone that has spent any time with the spec will know that without needing access to an excel spreadsheet.

[Obtena.7952]

3 minutes ago, crewthief.8649 said:

I am not arguing that the espec isn’t performing the way they want it to, I am arguing that it is not performing GREAT in all game modes. Because it isn’t, and anyone that has spent any time with the spec will know that without needing access to an excel spreadsheet.

Yeah, for you it isn't. Maybe for some other players as well. I don't see how that's relevant here. What's relevant here is how Anet measures how a class is doing in the game modes. If Anet concludes Berserker is in a good place in all game modes, the correct approach here isn't just to tell them they are wrong and what we think is more important. That's nonsense. Anet isn't just going to completely rejig how they assess classes because people disagree with one of the conclusions they make from it. 

Edited June 6, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Obtena.7952]

13 minutes ago, cryorion.9532 said:

Of course, but this thread is more like rant thread, not really feedback thread. 

Sure ... it's a rant thread and like EVERY rant thread, they fall into the 'garbage feedback' bucket. Again, people want Anet to listen to them? how are they going to do that if there are 10 rant threads for every good feedback one? It's absurd and anyone interested in making this class better by providing good feedback should concerned every time one of these surfaces. 

Edited June 6, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[crewthief.8649]

7 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Yeah, for you it isn't. Maybe for some other players as well. I don't see how that's relevant here. What's relevant here is how Anet measures how a class is doing in the game modes. 

Okay, and the fact that is ambiguous is 100% their fault. What metric would they use to determine it is performing great in PvP? Number of players playing it? Sustain as compared to other classes? It’s provided value to a team? Perhaps they’re using a totally obscure metric that has no real relevance to actual performance?

 

 You know (and this is something you’ll eventually learn) it is possible that their spreadsheet doesn’t actually capture the conditions within the game. 
 

You can tout the performance of your car based off of its specs and classify it as great, but if it will not start when I turn the key in the ignition, it is objectively not a great car.

Edited June 6, 2021 by crewthief.8649

[Obtena.7952]

12 minutes ago, crewthief.8649 said:

Okay, and the fact that is ambiguous is 100% their fault. What metric would they use to determine it is performing great in PvP? Number of players playing it? Sustain as compared to other classes? It’s provided value to a team? Perhaps they’re using a totally obscure metric that has no real relevance to actual performance?

 

 You know (and this is something you’ll eventually learn) it is possible that their spreadsheet doesn’t actually capture the conditions within the actual game. 

I already know all that. I think the fact is that measuring performance is a fool's errand, especially in competitive game modes because how does one segregate the player factor from the overall performance measurement of the class? You can't.

 

So honestly, how I think it works; Anet have a VERY high level assessment of builds/classes based on played time ... and for PVP, MAYBE categorized by PVP ranks. If a class/build meets some threshold of 'enough' play, they think it's OK. Why? Because it LOGICALLY follows that people don't play classes they don't like ... and bad performance is a reason people won't play a class, especially in Competitive modes. 

 

So the fact is this ... assuming people don't play things they don't like, it will show in Anet's measures. So the real answer ... if Berserker is in a terrible spot, Anet would see it and would act on it ... and it's probably not hard to see this. That's why I have such a hard time with people justifying class changes because of 'balance' ... because if balance was THAT important to people, it would affect how much people play it and it would show up in Anet's metric.

 

I think the flaw is that even if Anet sees a drop for a class below the 'played' threshold, they have to make a guess as to why ... and THAT is why it's MASSIVELY important for us to continue to make GOOD feedback threads instead of ... whatever steaming hot pile this thread is. 

Edited June 6, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Tails.9372]

34 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

That's easy to say, but again, you don't know how Anet is measuring or assessing this so whatever 'proof' you believe exists maybe isn't relevant to how Anet is looking at this. It should be clear by now ... if you aren't speaking their language, then of course you aren't going to be understood.

 

Wrong, I don't know which "other" factors ANET uses to decide what gets addressed and what not but the factors you laid out here are easily verifiable. But ofc. with the approach of "make good feedback threads and Anet pays attention" + "if you people aren't speaking their language, then of course they aren't going to listen" one can easily be dismissive of anything by simply claiming that people, over the course of the last decade, just never spoke "the right language". ANET was quick to make some rather generous handouts when many people were outraged about some major RBs (needless to say that the "language" many of them used was anything but polite), this isn't about "using the right language" or them not understanding the issues. People can be as polite as they want if ANET doesn't feel like solving the issues than they're not going to get solved.

Edited June 6, 2021 by Tails.9372

[crewthief.8649]

35 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

I already know all that. I think the fact is that measuring performance is a fool's errand, especially in competitive game modes because how does one segregate the player factor from the overall performance measurement of the class? You can't.

 

So honestly, how I think it works; Anet have a VERY high level assessment of builds/classes based on played time ... and for PVP, MAYBE categorized by PVP ranks. If a class/build meets some threshold of 'enough' play, they think it's OK. Why? Because it LOGICALLY follows that people don't play classes they don't like ... and bad performance is a reason people won't play a class, especially in Competitive modes. 

 

So the fact is this ... assuming people don't play things they don't like, it will show in Anet's measures. So the real answer ... if Berserker is in a terrible spot, Anet would see it and would act on it ... and it's probably hard to see it. 

In competitive modes, performance is the number one determination of frequency. In other words, you can always tell which classes are over-performing based off of their frequency of use. Currently, it is very common to see two Necros per team in PvP. That isn’t an accident. If Necro was trash-tier, I can promise you that you wouldn’t see them that frequently. Know which espec you’ll see maybe once every 5-10 matches? Berserker. There is a reason for that. 
 

Yes, Anet ultimately gets to determine what great performance means as it pertains to their game, but wouldn’t it stand to reason that that definition should be at least somewhat similar to general player experience? I mean, they could say that all classes perform equally as well in all modes, but that doesn’t make the statement true. Regardless of what their metrics tell them.

 

 And as for the, “this thread is a steaming pile of…” statement, he’s venting. It is a completely normal reaction by most humans in response to frustration. Lack of communication is the source of that, which is, again, 100% Anet’s fault. There are a number of good, constructive posts in this sub-forum that are seemingly completely ignored.

Edited June 6, 2021 by crewthief.8649

[Obtena.7952]

26 minutes ago, crewthief.8649 said:

In competitive modes, performance is the number one determination of frequency. In other words, you can always tell which classes are over-performing based off of their frequency of use.

EXACTLY ... so when Anet concludes berserker is in a good place in all game modes including competitive ones, then why is it completely absurd to conclude they are wrong if it's not unreasonable they don't have a decent approach to determining frequency of play?

 

Honestly, I don't think the player experience is a broad as necessary to reflect the overall frequency of play of all classes in PVP to come to ANY conclusion if a specific class is in a good or bad place. People are biased and so EVEN IF IT'S NOT TRUE, they will say things to get what they want. 

 

If we have 'good feedback', it's NOT based on the assumption that Anet has no clue what they are doing. That's the WRONG first step. 

Edited June 6, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[crewthief.8649]

8 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

EXACTLY ... so when Anet concludes berserker is in a good place in all game modes including competitive ones, then why is it completely absurd to conclude they are wrong? Is it unreasonable to think they don't have a decent approach to determining frequency of play?

But… it isn’t frequently used. Are you suggesting that they determine the quality of their product through internal measures and pay no attention to customer feedback? I mean, that certainly is what it feels like… which could definitely lead a person to believe that they’re incompetent. I mean, what other business can possibly be successful without taking into account the customer experience? And this circles back to what started our back-and-forth to begin with, which was your disagreement with me that their balance philosophy is incompetent. 

 

 There is a reason MMOs have been steadily declining in popularity, and this sort of thinking probably doesn’t help. 

Edited June 6, 2021 by crewthief.8649

[Obtena.7952]

43 minutes ago, Tails.9372 said:

 

Wrong, I don't know which "other" factors ANET uses to decide what gets addressed and what not but the factors you laid out here are easily verifiable. 

You can't determine how a class performs without including the player ability. They aren't separable. Sure, you can verify performance, but you can't separate how much of that performance is due to the class or the player.  Again, even if you had a clever way to do that, what makes you think Anet isn't? Again, we come back to this idea that players think they have the answers and Anet has no clue ... "BUFFS PLZ". That's just absurd. 

Edited June 6, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Obtena.7952]

8 minutes ago, crewthief.8649 said:

But… it isn’t frequently used. Are you suggesting that they determine the quality of their product through internal measures and pay no attention to customer feedback? That there should be no objective measure of what “great” looks like? There is a reason MMOs have been steadily declining in popularity, and this sort of thinking probably doesn’t help. 

I don't know what's being used. I can only say that based on the last patch notes, we have hints that Anet is making changes based on how much something is played. That sure seems like a 'frequency' assessment to me. 

 

What I'm saying here is that if we want Anet to pay MORE attention to customer feedback, we need to be much more sensitive (and perhaps more strict) to threads like this one and how they impact Anet's ability to easily go through any good feedback that does exist. There CAN be no objective measure of what great looks like ... unless you have some approach to separate how great something is WITHOUT having a player using it. How can we assess if a tool is good if it's not used by someone?

Edited June 6, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[crewthief.8649]

11 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

I don't know what's being used. I can only say that based on the last patch notes, we have hints that Anet is making changes based on how much something is played. That sure seems like a 'frequency' assessment to me. 

 

What I'm saying here is that if we want Anet to pay MORE attention to customer feedback, we need to be muc more sensitive to threads like this and how they impact Anet's ability to easily use that feedback. There CAN be no objective measure of what great looks like ... unless you have some approach to separate how great something is WITHOUT having a player using it. 

There are quite a few good, constructive threads in this sub-forum, without a single suggestion from any of them having been implemented by Anet (or even a reply from a developer).

 

Take for example the resistance changes from a few weeks ago. That change neutered a number of sustain traits and utility skills on Warrior. Yet, there was no mention of them (Anet) feeling that Warrior was over-performing as it pertains to condi-sustain. So, was it simply oversight? Do they not care? Was it intentional? There have been multiple threads bringing this to the attention of Anet, yet not a single response. Naturally, if my being reasonable with you is resulting in your ignoring me, I’m probably going to turn up the volume a bit. Right?

Edited June 6, 2021 by crewthief.8649

[Obtena.7952]

5 minutes ago, crewthief.8649 said:

There are quite a few good, constructive threads in this sub-forum, without a single suggestion from any of them having been implemented by Anet.

 

Take for example the resistance changes from a few weeks ago. That change neutered a number of sustain traits and utility skills on Warrior. Yet, there was no mention of them (Anet) feeling that Warrior was over-performing as it pertains to condi-sustain. So, was it simply oversight? Do they not care? Was it intentional? There have been multiple threads bringing this to the attention of Anet, yet not a single response. Naturally, of my being reasonable with you is resulting in your ignoring me, I’m probably going to turn up the volume a bit. Right?

I think players need to temper their expectations properly to understand the difficulties involved with shifting through the the trash to get to the gold. Making threads like THIS one certainly doesn't help matters. Also, Anet has rarely made it a habit to respond to ANY feedback threads. If they do it's the exception, so we shouldn't conclude their silence = ignore. I think having open discussions about class design has LOTS of jeopardy associated with it so I'm not surprised we don't see it ... and it's not uncommon either. 

 

I believe that if the changes from a few weeks ago have neutered warrior so badly that it impacts numbers, Anet will see that. If warrior falls out of whatever metrics they are using to assess 'good place', that will result in changes to the class to get them into 'good place'. That's not a week or two. It's probably months. 

 

 

Edited June 6, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[crewthief.8649]

4 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

I think players need to temper their expectations properly to understand the difficulties involved with shifting through the the trash to get to the gold. Making threads like THIS one certainly doesn't help matters. Also, Anet has rarely made it a habit to respond to ANY feedback threads. If they do it's the exception, so we shouldn't conclude their silence = ignore. I think having open discussions about class design has LOTS of jeopardy associated with it so I'm not surprised we don't see it ... and it's not uncommon either. 

 

I believe that if the changes from a few weeks ago have neutered warrior so badly that it impacts numbers, Anet will see that. If warrior falls out of whatever metrics they are using to assess 'good place', that will result in changes to the class to get them into 'good place'. That's not a week or two. It's probably months. 

 

 

They could alleviate so much of the anxiety with better communication, honestly. Obviously, there is a variety of player that is going to complain no matter what, but a fair amount of the moaning could be addressed with better customer relations. You know, what’s the harm in letting players know which metrics they’re looking at? At least then we’d have some context. This is one of the only industries where a business can get away with such poor customer service. Of course, this is also an industry (MMOs) that has seen significant decline over the past decade or so.

Edited June 6, 2021 by crewthief.8649