A beta testing PSA

[Infinitum]

1 hour ago, siolfir said:

Oh, look @Bill Z Bubba, here's one of those now! 

 

No, it is purposely obtuse to list your opinion as the end-all and be-all of valid feedback. The whole point in such a post is to suppress feedback by claiming some "objective truth" on things that are almost entirely opinion-based. Even throwing key words such as how things should perform is a cute little red flag of "this is my opinion," which means that you don't get to tell someone else that says, "No, it should work this way," that they are wrong and purposely obtuse.

 

So let's go through your points:

1. This is an opinion, as is anything related to "feel." Others are allowed to disagree because that's what an opinion is.
2. Again, an opinion - however, it is objectively less simple than it was and anyone with two brain cells to run together can see that.
3. "Much" is open for interpretation on the pre-nerf version, which never saw the proc-happy builds. Better than the current live version takes little to no effort. Both of these goals could have been achieved without a mechanic. That said, this is the closest to a factual statement you made so far in your post. Good job.
4. It works with AT inherents - by itself only has significant changes for the Stalker version, where the increased recharge on PC helps for it being the only AoE, and the same changes every Stalker primary get with Build Up, Assassin's Strike, and Placate. The Brute, Tanker, and Scrapper versions are literally only different in how they deal with target caps (Tanker) or criticals (Scrapper). But hey, keep padding it so the list of points looks longer, good on you.
5. Is it, though? It's still down in AoE damage, which is made up for by paying hit points to use your best attack more often. You've already got the complains in the TW thread about how EM is the new TW from people who feel it's (apparently) not balanced, although those are mostly trying to preserve the status quo on Titan Weapons. But see where this whole opinion thing comes in?
6. Again, a matter of opinion. It's versatile at what, exactly? Punching things? It doesn't provide AoE crowd control like Stone Melee, Electric Melee, or Super Strength; it doesn't heal you like Dark or Rad Melee. The -special is nice and it's the only melee set to offer it, but you also give up the animation change for ET to use it.

So the long and the short of is you can say you're being objective, but you're only being hypocritical by doing so, and not being at all objective. Whether others like the changes or not.

You totally missed the point on everything I said.

[Bill Z Bubba]

Just now, Infinitum said:

Those were insults, yes, but they were also accurate.

Yes, yes, we know. Anything you say is objective truth and anyone that disagrees is just a sad, little, obtuse crybaby. We get it. The fact that you haven't been permanently banned from the forums for your never-ending insults and attacks on our fellow posters as per the forum rules is a matter of great amusement to me.

[Infinitum]

1 minute ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

Yes, yes, we know. Anything you say is objective truth and anyone that disagrees is just a sad, little, obtuse crybaby. We get it. The fact that you haven't been permanently banned from the forums for your never-ending insults and attacks on our fellow posters as per the forum rules is a matter of great amusement to me.

Yeah, ok there partner, have fun with that notion.  ;-)

[Widower]

Calm down. Gosh.

[ForeverLaxx]

24 minutes ago, GM Widower said:

Calm down. Gosh.

Considering this thread was always a thinly-veiled rant/vent location for people who got upset that their shouting down dissenters got pruned with the rest of the "negative" feedback, I'm surprised it's lasted this long.

[Kazgaroth]

Bill isn't wrong here, there are two individuals in this thread who feel it is their place to tell the rest of us that we are wrong if we don't 100% agree with the changes being made.

 

[Infinitum]

Just now, Kazgaroth said:

Bill isn't wrong here, there are two individuals in this thread who feel it is their place to tell the rest of us that we are wrong if we don't 100% agree with the changes being made.

 

And again You are incorrect, that isnt the only thing this thread is about first of all.

 

This thread is about if you arent testing major changes you cant possibly provide focused feedback about specific changes, or the impact of their functions.

 

Furthermore the last couple of I dont wanna-you are being mean posts arent grounded in reality either, because just not liking something for the sake of not liking it - when there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary - isnt a fair assessment and shouldn't be part of focused feedback - not over and over and over again anyway.

[Saikochoro]

While I do think that people should be testing changes they have a vested interest in, I trust the devs to be able to differentiate feedback based on testing versus feedback based on theory. 
 

Again, I think people should be testing when they really care about something, but I can also understand some initial “thoughts” on changes based on the patch notes. For example, I provided my initial thoughts on the SOs/enhancement upgrade function before actually testing it. I have subsequently tested it and provided a little more feedback. 
 

Also, it is perfectly fine for people to dislike a change even if the set as a whole is just plain better. People may understand and totally agree that a change may be functionally superior than what is current on live. However, it is perfectly reasonable to still dislike the change for one reason or another and to share that opinion.

 

What I don’t think is reasonable is to then say that the devs are being lazy or thoughtless in what they chose to change. Or to say that they don’t have any good reason for doing things and are not listening to feedback. Obviously a lot of hard work, thought, and testing went into this update even before the open beta. They have also engaged the community during the entire testing processes and even chose to forgo certain changes based on feedback. 
 

In summary, although we should be testing to provide solid feedback expressing some initial thoughts isnt necessarily a bad thing. Especially if those thoughts are then followed up with actual testing results. Disliking a change is also completely fine. Expressing dislike of a change is also completely fine. Stating the devs are lazy, thoughtless, and not listening to feedback because you don’t like said change is not okay. 

Edited November 18, 2020 by Saikochoro

[Kazgaroth]

17 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

And again You are incorrect, that isnt the only thing this thread is about first of all.

 

This thread is about if you arent testing major changes you cant possibly provide focused feedback about specific changes, or the impact of their functions.

 

Furthermore the last couple of I dont wanna-you are being mean posts arent grounded in reality either, because just not liking something for the sake of not liking it - when there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary - isnt a fair assessment and shouldn't be part of focused feedback - not over and over and over again anyway.

And it is not your place to tell anyone one way or the other but it has not stopped you has it??

[Seed22]

Personally I enjoy the new EM. I think, honestly, preference towards it is going to be subjective. The faster animation times, and subsequent increase in damage, are numerically objectively better for the set. Plain and simple, though. GB has evaluated it in the melee spreadsheet(which isn't gospel at all but a good test indicator for the intended improvements), and has shown as much. It IS better than live, from again, a numbers perspective. That doesn't mean BZB is wrong though in their feelings.

Edited November 18, 2020 by Seed22

[Infinitum]

23 minutes ago, Kazgaroth said:

And it is not your place to tell anyone one way or the other but it has not stopped you has it??

You are projecting a different scenario to what I am actually saying.  And that's fine but not an accurate portrayal of my point.

 

Saying you dislike something is fine.

 

Saying something sucks over and over and over again, without anything to back it up other than your opinion isnt contributing anything past the first time.

 

Im not even saying dont do that, but I am saying I will point out how that contributes nothing to a focused feedback thread moving forward like I am here.

 

Post all you like in fact, it won't make your point any more constructive.

[PeregrineFalcon]

3 hours ago, GM Widower said:

Calm down. Gosh.

With all due respect.

 

Could you please at least consider the possibility that the real problem here is NOT the people who actually tested the changes and expressed a disagreement of them for one reason or another but that it might actually be the die-hard dev-yes-men forum warriors who are attacking said beta testers for saying anything that remotely criticizes these changes?

[siolfir]

3 hours ago, Infinitum said:

You totally missed the point on everything I said.

Then explain it without blatantly false statements such as "There just simply isnt any good reason to not like this set aside from being difficult for the sake of being difficult."

 

Not everyone thinks the set feels the same (or better) compared to old EM. Not everyone wants variable speed animations, even if they come with higher performance. Several people complained about the loss of Stun - which I still don't understand given how terrible a power it is on live - but that doesn't make their feedback irrelevant and you aren't the one who gets to decide that.

 

I agree that they should try it, but if they have and still don't like it, they get to not like it.

[Saikochoro]

I think it is important to once again state that there is a difference between not liking an change and providing negative feedback with possible alternative and outright insulting the dev team. 
 

There has been plenty of negative feedback about various changes that has been good and done without insults. However, there has also been a lot of “feedback” that has devolved into basically, “the devs aren’t doing what I want and therefore they don’t listen to feedback, are lazy, and have no good reasons for changing things.” 
 

There is a very big difference. One is is expected and GOOD for testing feedback. One is not good and has no feedback value.  When insults are thrown out it is reasonable to expect people to defend the dev team that has put in a lot of volunteer effort into making i27. 

[Infinitum]

17 minutes ago, siolfir said:

Then explain it without blatantly false statements such as "There just simply isnt any good reason to not like this set aside from being difficult for the sake of being difficult."

 

Not everyone thinks the set feels the same (or better) compared to old EM. Not everyone wants variable speed animations, even if they come with higher performance. Several people complained about the loss of Stun - which I still don't understand given how terrible a power it is on live - but that doesn't make their feedback irrelevant and you aren't the one who gets to decide that.

 

I agree that they should try it, but if they have and still don't like it, they get to not like it.

In a fair assessment thats not blatantly false.  

 

1. The set does everything original EM can do.

 

2. The set is improved over original EM.

- added AOE in PC

- buffed EP, WH

- 0 cost Et and lowered recharge

- lowered animation time of TF

 

3. The set never has to use slow ET

- all you have to do is switch TF before ET - this is for those that hate slow ET

 

4. Its not complicated, to those saying it is - its just really... Not.... Complicated.

 

5. The original feel is there - in fact maybe a little faster.  Theres not much to add any other stance really doesnt remember original EM too well.

 

6. Numbers even out of focus still competes with original EM - under focus it blows them out of the water.

 

Yes people are allowed to not like it, but statistically, thematically, and functionally - not liking it based on those points I'm just not buying it.

 

Sorry, that's being obtuse for the sake of proving a point or trying to get your way just to get your way.

Edited November 19, 2020 by Infinitum

[Infinitum]

4 minutes ago, Saikochoro said:

I think it is important to once again state that there is a difference between not liking an change and providing negative feedback with possible alternative and outright insulting the dev team. 
 

There has been plenty of negative feedback about various changes that has been good and done without insults. However, there has also been a lot of “feedback” that has devolved into basically, “the devs aren’t doing what I want and therefore they don’t listen to feedback, are lazy, and have no good reasons for changing things.” 
 

There is a very big difference. One is is expected and GOOD for testing feedback. One is not good and has no feedback value.  When insults are thrown out it is reasonable to expect people to defend the dev team that has put in a lot of volunteer effort into making i27. 

Agree 100%

[Haijinx]

You are never going to make everyone happy.  

 

 

[Monos King]

49 minutes ago, Infinitum said:

5. The original feel is there - in fact maybe a little faster.  Theres not much to add any other stance really doesnt remember original EM too well.

This one is subjective, so you'll probably want to relent a little on that perspective - otherwise it'll just be fuel for a debate that could probably be avoided. I didn't play EM back on NCSoft, but I can see the auto fast ET giving a different panel of options than now - it's to be expected when it acted that way all the time. For those of you that were already playing ET optimally, it's more likely the new changes seem familiar, or capture the spirit of old ET more effectively.

The below is more aimed at everyone, including me.

 

---

People are allowed to feel differently about the sets changes. What's clear for anyone to see are the vast performance improvements as opposed to live, and if there are concerns in between those improvements then they are still valid. It's clear performance alone isn't everyone's priority, and in being more tolerant of that position we should be a bit more sparing in how vehemently we choose to address/counter those claims. It's because some don't feel like they've been acknowledged that they continue to reiterate themselves. 

 

The dissonance here lies in that testing and feedback is oriented on mechanical or performance variety, which leaves little space for thematic or sensate conversation with highly anticipated changes. And then people respond to sensate feedback with performance feedback and vice versa, and we end up in a cauldron of contention. I don't think there should be separate threads for those aspects, just that we should be mindful of where the concerns are stemming from.

 

I want to say this before departing. Maybe we should leave a little more to the devs. We're not gonna see eye to eye on everything. Sometimes, when only argument is in sight, we should just put in our feedback (complaints, commendations), give justifications, and let the devs evaluate as is going to be the inevitability anyway. After all, they read this all of this...and have their own preferences too. There's a point where enough has been said.

 

And I need not remind, but even if you tactically depart from one topic the concern doesn't end. Eventually a new point is brought up by you or someone else, and then we get to discuss that perspective as well. But that's the goal. Devolving into debate is natural, even productive, but in my opinion, this one is getting out of hand.

 

We're here to have conversations. Let's not forget that.

[Infinitum]

50 minutes ago, Monos King said:

This one is subjective, so you'll probably want to relent a little on that perspective - otherwise it'll just be fuel for a debate that could probably be avoided. I didn't play EM back on NCSoft, but I can see the auto fast ET giving a different panel of options than now - it's to be expected when it acted that way all the time. For those of you that were already playing ET optimally, it's more likely the new changes seem familiar, or capture the spirit of old ET more effectively.

I have to respectfully disagree.

 

The only limiter to fast ET now as you know is using TF before it.  It's merely an order change.  The rest falls into place however your imagination would allow.

 

Is there a possibility you could mess up and allow for a slow ET - sure but remember the recharge is way lower than it was on live and the endurance cost is null.  So that ends up being a penalty in name only.

 

I exclusively mained EM on live pre nerf.  And there really is no other fair opinion that can be had other than it recaptures it based on all the performance features this redesign has.  It does not duplicate it but I never said that. I only stated its a little faster which again is demonstrable.

 

I havent posted anything that isnt able to be backed up, because I played countless hours pre nerf, and I have played countless hours testing this re design.

 

While not a duplicate, it is simply the best compromise for a fast balanced set that captures what pre nerf EM could do and then expands on that as well.

 

And to the last point, again... Yes, anyone has any right to not like any thing and have as many conversations that could be had.

 

However, 

 

That breaks down the instant that dislike goes into calling the works crap, or BS, or any other number of names I have seen this called - that just isnt grounded in any reality from any honest fair perspective that could be had on the performance of this redesign and honestly is disrespectful to the volunteer group spending so much time to give this to us.

 

Dislike and disagreements are fine, but that will never be ok in my book.

[Troo]

On 11/11/2020 at 7:57 PM, Troo said:

Yeeaahh maybe I should have used the train wreck gif instead.

 

@ScarySai Look buddy. There are no prerequisites to providing feedback.

Sure you could have stated a preference, or proposed that feedback without test might be discounted. The whole premise of your 'PSA' is highly subjective.

 

There are plenty of folks who could provide some feedback just based on experience or simply based on the numbers presented.

 

I'm not saying you are completely wrong but it is sad to see anyone be such a butt hole about it. It is also disappointing to see so many folks trying to bully people for having a different opinion or not understanding some aspect of the game as well those who participated in closed beta. Even folks that did try things on beta were badgered if they dare voice a different opinion or question anything.

 

With the number of posts deleted and threads locked,.. there's plenty of irony in this one persisting.

 

Edited November 19, 2020 by Troo

[ScarySai]

1 minute ago, Troo said:

@ScarySai Look buddy. There are no prerequisites to providing feedback.

There are if you want your feedback to be taken seriously. 

 

If you have no idea what you are talking about, yet decide to open your mouth anyway, then you shouldn't be surprised when people don't take you seriously.

 

3 minutes ago, Troo said:

Yeeaahh maybe I should have used the train wreck gif instead.

Like your performance in the PVP threads? 😛

[Troo]

Odd & again, ironic.

 

My feedback seems to be taken as just one person's opinion. As it should.

[Infinitum]

18 minutes ago, Troo said:

It is also disappointing to see so many folks trying to bully people for having a different opinion or not understanding some aspect of the game as well those who participated in closed beta. Even folks that did try things on beta were badgered if they dare voice a different opinion or question anything.

Let me attempt to simplify it.

 

TF before ET unless needing more AOE, and sometimes regen is key for any random AV.

 

There I rhymed it.  :-)

[Haijinx]

Keep in mind that the best Energy Melee set, for Blasters. ALSO got the new faster total focus. 

 

 

[golstat2003]

6 hours ago, Infinitum said:

Let me attempt to simplify it.

 

TF before ET unless needing more AOE, and sometimes regen is key for any random AV.

 

There I rhymed it.  🙂

Ehhhhhh, arguable. I don't think it needed more AOE or special mechanics. But the change has been made. It's fine for certain sets to be single target (or AOE) specialists.

Edited November 19, 2020 by golstat2003