Hop on over to the beta server to test out some Page 5 power updates!

[Bionic_Flea]

"They're unpaid volunteers and we are just guests"

 

"We pay and play and should have some input"

 

I think both of those statements are accurate.  You may associate more with one position or the other, but they are not binary and, indeed are simultaneously true.

 

However, that does not mean that we get to dictate what they work on.  They are unpaid volunteers who get to decide how much time to dedicate to what projects. 

 

And, to be fair, we ARE consulted.  While they haven't done it in a while, there used to be weekly discussions on forums and Discord on a wide variety of game stuff.  (See link below).  They also have the current focused feedback threads, that they have with every issue, and there has not been an issue or page to my recollection that things were NOT changed based on player feedback.  There's an entire section of the Forum called "Suggestions and Feedback."

 

Before it ever gets on Beta, it's run on Alpha and discussed in the Gold Standard Testers Discord channel and the Alpha forums.  Go ahead and clutch your pearls and tell me about the secret cabal running the game.  Gold Standard Discord is an open place but you do need to be vetted to test on Alpha because they don't want leakers or drama llamas.  So if you want to be part of the Secret Cabal, just ask.  Send your favorite dev a DM and tell them you are interested.  If you are a reasonable person that is willing to actually test things by playing it and not a drama llama leaker you will be welcomed.  I will out myself as a member of both Alpha and Gold Standard Testers.  I have sometimes gotten stuff changed there, sometimes after it's on beta, by trying it out and then trying to explain why I think that their proposed change is undesirable.   Sometimes I initially, instinctively, and knee-jerkedly criticize a proposed change and then try it and have to admit it's not as bad as I thought.  Many times I have been convinced that it IS a better product with the change.  And other times I still disagree, the change goes through, and I learn to live with it.

 

Even better, if you have coding skills or are willing to learn you can even volunteer to become a Dev yourself.  I don't know if you have noticed, but sometimes certain devs are very active in the forums and sometimes they go radio silent, sometimes some new dev name appears.  To the best of my knowledge, ALL of the devs are current and former players that are willing to take their time to make this game grow and work.  When a certain dev goes radio silent it may be that their real life got complicated with work, health, or family issues, but it's also happened that they decided not to continue working on the game after their work was viciously and sometimes personally attacked.  You know that we can all be aggressive on these forums, some more than others, but we all sometimes go too far.

 

So please, test, dissect, discuss, and yes, even argue about the changes.  But remember there are human beings on the other side of this discussion.  A human being who, like you is passionate about a superhero game.  Be excellent to each other.

 

 

Edited October 6, 2022 by Bionic_Flea

[Bionic_Flea]

31 minutes ago, Glacier Peak said:

I'm still unsure why it is thought that anything is owed to the players.

Because it's their house, and they make the rules, but they invited us to this party and asked for donations to buy the booze and snacks.  It's not unreasonable to want to be asked what I like to eat and drink. 

 

Edit:  I also wanted to add that I think they have a long term vision that includes buffing under-performers, nerfing over-performers, and I have a sneaking suspicion that this is like ED where the OG devs had to reduce defense and enhancement values so that they could add IOs.  I have no inside knowledge other than a feeling based on reading dev posts over several years.

Edited October 6, 2022 by Bionic_Flea

[PeregrineFalcon]

27 minutes ago, Shadeknight said:

It is entitlement. We are not paying for a service.

Call it whatever you want, but I am paying for a service.

 

Sure, the devs don't have to write up a post with a bit of info on their thoughts, outlook and goals, but I also don't have to "donate" money either. Sure, they're volunteers who work for free. I get that. But do you know what I am when I go onto the test server and test changes and then post a report on that on the forums? A volunteer who's working for free.

 

So yeah. I don't think the devs posting something, even just quarterly, explaining their point of view and goals is too much to ask.

 

EDIT:

27 minutes ago, Shadeknight said:

The amount of feedback we are allowed seems fine enough to me...

Good for you. Other people feel differently. But you just keep on defending the devs and attacking players who have a different point of view than you. Maybe the developers will smile at you. Maybe they'll give you a brownie point or a junior forum cop badge. Have fun!

.

Edited October 6, 2022 by PeregrineFalcon
Added another thought.

[Ruin Mage]

Do not confuse donations for subscription pay or whatever else, it's what leads to entitlement and other issues.

We are not paying for anything. The game is entirely free to play. The optional money is going towards other services and does not go to anyone within the team.

Which is entirely intended given its a private server.

[Aracknight]

Attention:  purchasing a Big Mac does NOT make you CEO of McDonalds.

[Ruin Mage]

15 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Good for you. Other people feel differently. But you just keep on defending the devs and attacking players who have a different point of view than you. Maybe the developers will smile at you. Maybe they'll give you a brownie point or a junior forum cop badge. Have fun!

How other people feel is entirely fair to them, but I have been otherwise rather polite towards most folks during this Page's testing. Last page? Sure, I went hard at particular people - who were Patch Note Reactors and not testers. I would wonder why you're suddenly being so hostile with me, PeregrineFalcon.

My signature about being a forum cop is a shitpost. I do what I do not because I agree with the developers, but because I disagree with the approach and/or mentalities offered by other posters. The idea that we are owed anything is non-sensical at best and childish at worst - given prior points uttered in this thread many times over by now.

 

15 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

So yeah. I don't think the devs posting something, even just quarterly, explaining their point of view and goals is too much to ask.

Not too much to ask, but neither required nor needed especially given certain posters. Given that there are stories out there of the harassment and threats devs receive? I would not, in their shoes, blame them for being only marginally interactive. Cobalt being as active and chatty as he is across Discords is a god-send for example, but is not a requirement of being a developer.
 

 

15 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

but I also don't have to "donate" money either.

Correct, and they do not have to run these servers either. Donations only go so far, and are not the pathway to letting people see more under the hood/behind closed doors.
 

Edited October 6, 2022 by Shadeknight

[Glacier Peak]

Passionate discussion is important. It shows that players care about this community. Let's put that passion to good use and build up each other instead of tearing down one another.

 

And, as I alluded to in an earlier post, beta testing isn't the only method players can use to help the community out. But it is arguably (in my opinion at least) the most fun part! 😆 

Edited October 6, 2022 by Glacier Peak

[Wavicle]

I don’t consider AFK farming a valid form of gameplay. So nerfs that basically only hurt AFK farming are irrelevant, or simply good.

[Oklahoman]

42 minutes ago, Glacier Peak said:

Passionate discussion is important. It shows that players care about this community.

 

Does it feel to anyone else like we have a community of players, and a community of devs, and they overlap just a bit but not completely?

[Wavicle]

Just now, Oklahoman said:

 

Does it feel to anyone else like we have a community of players, and a community of devs, and they overlap just a bit but not completely?

maybe, but possibly not in the way you mean.

 

 We have a community of players and devs that are completely overlapped…and then we also have a bunch of players that just peak their heads in from time to time to whine that the latest changes Still aren’t bringing them back to the game.

[High_Beam]

5 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

I don’t consider AFK farming a valid form of gameplay. So nerfs that basically only hurt AFK farming are irrelevant, or simply good.

Here sir or ma'am is the Gasoline you ordered.  I was told you already have your own matches. 

[Wavicle]

7 hours ago, Ukase said:

You cannot see the forest with the trees in the way. 
My FA/Ice tank is durable NOW. It didn't need to be improved in that regard. Fiery Aura is not the most durable of tanks, sure. and the debuffs may be helpful in a small, unnoticeable way. But to reduce burn from a base of 25 to 45 is entirely too long. I now have 5 seconds where I'm literally sitting in this mob of npcs able to do nothing because of the slower recharge. This was an unnecessary change. Not desired, nor required. 

They want us to test - but they don't tell us what it's supposed to be like, what we're testing for. It's not like I can see the combat log stats after the session is over in a text file for easy reading.

I went on test - and I was disappointed. I saw nothing that said I got anything in return for the slower recharge. I didn't notice any more damage. I didn't notice any more survivability. All I noticed was slower recharge. If they're going to do that, they need to do something for that tradeoff. Make burn do more damage. Something noticeable. But there's nothing. The patch change for Fiery Aura is a complete slap in the face to anyone who routinely plays Fiery Aura. It will require a respec for anyone who cares about their characters. That's a lot of damned time they would have us WASTE on top of their time that they already wasted with this needless nerf. 

If they want us to go along with this, they NEED to explain what they're trying to do, and why they're trying to do it. Then we can read that and let them know if it's something we can get behind. Maybe they just want to go back to playing all by themselves again. I've no idea. But changing things that aren't broken isn't the way. 

Nobody ever said "I want to do less damage!" 
Instead, what we hear/read are comments from people who do not play those powersets that chime in "They do too much damage!".  They are jealous because we play them, and are happy enough on our own, and they are mad because they play something that isn't doing much damage. They don't say, "Hey, we should be doing more damage". Instead, they cry out, "Fire is too OP!".  
We tell them the reason it does all the damage it does is because it doesn't have kb protection, and 1 pt that it will now have is not enough. Try 12 pts, just for a start. Then add in some defense debuff resistance, then we can handle the 45 second recharge. 

But this pissant defense debuff is unnoticeable. 1 pt of kb protection is all but useless. Nemesis, yellow mitos and certain other NPCs are still going to toss us around like popcorn unless we specifically devote slots to it that other tanks don't have to spend on it. 

This is poorly thought out. We are not presented with any rationale behind this change. These Power Devs must not be playing this game. If they are, they aren't playing a fire tank or a fire brute. And if they are, what is it that they are trying to do? They need to explain where this 45 second number comes from. What is making that the perfect number over 25? Over 30? Who decided on this value and why? 

And why didn't they bring this up before they waste time coding it? Because they KNEW most of us wouldn't like it. And they don't give a shit. They have literally told us all to leave if we don't like it. Me, I'd rather try to hold them accountable. I want answers. I keep hearing "They're not getting paid". The hell they're not. They get donations every month. It may not go in their pockets, but some of us ARE paying to keep the game going. So it is completely fair for us to ask for this kind of information. They do OWE us the answers. If not, they can pay that money out of their own pocket and do whatever they like. Until then, time to stop with these damned changes until you present the proposed changes before you code them. With the rationale behind the changes. 

I can accept nerfs to my characters that will cause me to waste hours, even if I'd rather not, if there's a reason. And just because some fans of the HC Devs or the HC devs think burn is "broken" or "overpowered" isn't a good enough reason. Burn is the way it is because the armor is so weak compared to the other armors. You muck with that, then the Fire Shield needs to protect against Toxic, and against Negative Energy as well. There also needs to be some DDR thrown in for good measure. 

Hell, there's millions of different ways to improve FA without mucking with burn. But they don't ask us. They just do what they want to do. Until they stop taking money, they need to explain what they're doing and why. 
 

 

I don't know what your build looks like. Maybe on a Purpled Out t4 Incarnate build these changes don't make you any more durable.

On a normal levelling build these changes make you SIGNIFICANTLY more durable.

[Sovera]

While people complain about the devs I look instead at the community. Forum PvP has become a thing with pet peeves between players who snipe at each other whatever is being said, purposefully looking for malice in what is being said, aiming to one upmanship. Others will simply post gloom with petty passive aggressive comments literally adding nothing other than  jibes aimed at the devs despite being worded in vague terms. Others yet will spend pages arguing back and forth about their feels and how their feels are important (which, I grant, they are, but time and place) and how numbers don't matter if their feels are not appeased. The inevitable arguing that devs are bad, changes are bad, server is dying because of them, fewer players, bad devs, when it's a fricking 17 year old game that has been back for a couple years. Fuck sake I play a new WoW expansion for 3-6 months and then vamoose to a new game but somehow HC devs bad, HC changes bad, because two years later the game/server does not have the same numbers of when it opened to the public.

 

As much as I do dislike the purging of the feedback threads (and it is not actually purged, the devs can see it and read it, but by being hidden it stops the feels crowd to argue about it) we need not look much further than the last patch, and the patch before, and the one before, where people don't even test the MFing changes and cry out how nerfed they have been, AFTER GLOSSING OVER THE TESTS SHOWING THAT THEY WERE NOT. Pages of it! 20+ pages! Arguing back and forth! Attack type changes? Fie, even the travel power changes with TESTS BEING DONE AND NUMBERS SHOWN are still derided.

 

The devs tried to keep a gentle hand and it did not work out so now we are under more draconian rules. Pleased I am not since as much as feedback talking about the experiences while testing things were important as much as I am above deriding the feels these remain important when driving a character which is testing changes.

 

 

So yeah. am I happy with the Fire Armor? As the appointed 'fire armor guru', no, no I'm not. Of course Burn was bugged and had more power than it should. So it should be fixed, and now it does less damage as it was always meant to be doing. Or it should not be fixed and instead it has more recharge added to it so that it does biggo damage but more spaced. Instead we get a damage nerf and then on top of it a recharge addition. I don't expect this to go live as is but verily as others said above it smells of planned compromise.

 

Lots of the patch is good. I could hardly point at much I would call bad. Some will definitely need and have tweaks, I've seen enough testing cycles to get a grasp of how things are run.

 

 

Also, people need to stop confusing donations with payment. Payment is obligatory to have product. Donations are given out of the goodness of one's heart. Don't donate and then dangle it over someone's head, devs or RL people.

[golstat2003]

1 hour ago, Shadeknight said:

Do not confuse donations for subscription pay or whatever else, it's what leads to entitlement and other issues.

We are not paying for anything. The game is entirely free to play. The optional money is going towards other services and does not go to anyone within the team.

Which is entirely intended given its a private server.

 

With that said our time to test things is also volunteer time. If folks don't feel (and I have various disagreement on this idea) their feedback is worth it, then they won't test, as some have said. Also I've always taken issue with calling something a Feedback thread.

 

They are more "test this and let us know if it's broken" threads. Which is fine.

 

Also let's keep in mind not all feedback (even for those who heavily test things and leave pages of testing data) will lead to a change. Which is also fine.

 

I think if folks really want to have a say then they join the options laid about by Flea above BEFORE things hit test. As he explained folks have the option to join at a time when ideas are still in alpha. Maybe that's a better place to try to affect change for those who feel the "Feedback" threads, well aren't.

 

[Aracknight]

8 minutes ago, Sovera said:

 

Also, people need to stop confusing donations with payment. Payment is obligatory to have product. Donations are given out of the goodness of one's heart. Don't donate and then dangle it over someone's head, devs or RL people.

 

I owe all of you an apology.  What I should have said instead was:  Donations made to the Ronald McDonald House do not make you the CEO of McDonald's.

 

I hope you accept my mea culpa.

[PeregrineFalcon]

27 minutes ago, Oklahoman said:

Does it feel to anyone else like we have a community of players, and a community of devs, and they overlap just a bit but not completely?

Yes.

 

In addition to the fact that many of the more vocal forum posters are also forum moderators on their alternate account, some of the forum posters are also developers.

 

And in many cases we all have different ideas and goals for this game. Which is exactly why a post, which by the way a developer did tell us was coming but never showed up, outlining their general ideas and goals would be a good thing.

 

Sure some people will freak out about it. That always happens. Welcome to the internet.

[Glacier Peak]

4 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Yes.

 

In addition to the fact that many of the more vocal forum posters are also forum moderators on their alternate account, some of the forum posters are also developers.

 

And in many cases we all have different ideas and goals for this game. Which is exactly why a post, which by the way a developer did tell us was coming but never showed up, outlining their general ideas and goals would be a good thing.

 

Sure some people will freak out about it. That always happens. Welcome to the internet.

I'm not responding to your post so much as to say that the community is stronger together than it is apart. 

 

Using the "us" versus "them" argument (players and the Homecoming staff, respectively) is an easy way to drum up drama or make a simple point, but it is divisive and ends up creating a mentally among the community that we aren't all players who enjoy the game. As you point out in your post, players are developers and developers are players.

[PeregrineFalcon]

11 minutes ago, Glacier Peak said:

Using the "us" versus "them" argument (players and the Homecoming staff, respectively) is an easy way to drum up drama or make a simple point, but it is divisive and ends up creating a mentally among the community that we aren't all players who enjoy the game. As you point out in your post, players are developers and developers are players.

Agreed.

 

However, two groups of people have created this "Us vs Them" situation. When anything critical of an in-game change gets posted other players attack that player and defend the devs as if the devs were their girlfriend or something. (Or are perhaps undercover devs themselves.)

 

And the moderators will frequently delete posts and hand out warning points or suspensions to those people who are critical of the devs, but those people who are being horribly insulting, and flagrantly violating the forum rules, while also defending the devs? Their posts don't get deleted and they don't get suspended from the forums.

 

So yeah. If you guys don't want it to be an "Us vs Them" situation, then you'll need to stop attacking us and stop using the moderators in such a biased manner.

[Ruin Mage]

Hide, not delete.

I think deletion is like last resort or reserved for the once-in-a-blue-moon spambot.

Also I'm secretly the entire Dev Team in disguise.

[Glacier Peak]

13 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

Agreed.

 

However, two groups of people have created this "Us vs Them" situation. When anything critical of an in-game change gets posted other players attack that player and defend the devs as if the devs were their girlfriend or something. (Or are perhaps undercover devs themselves.)

 

And the moderators will frequently delete posts and hand out warning points or suspensions to those people who are critical of the devs, but those people who are being horribly insulting, and flagrantly violating the forum rules, while also defending the devs? Their posts don't get deleted and they don't get suspended from the forums.

 

So yeah. If you guys don't want it to be an "Us vs Them" situation, then you'll need to stop attacking us and stop using the moderators in such a biased manner.

Again, it's not "you guys" or "us." All the same members of this community. 

 

I'm sensing you may have experienced what you're describing first hand. I'm not in a position to say what is right or wrong, since I'm not a GM. But I'm going to trust the mods when it comes to enforcing the code of conduct here and in game. 

 

Finally, "attacking" is a bit of a stretch in semantics for my taste. Perhaps "strongly worded disagreements" would be more appropriate? I mean nobody is getting punched in the face here. Nobody is flanking an enemy fighting position here. It's a video game forum. Again, that's my view. 

[Glacier Peak]

17 minutes ago, Shadeknight said:

Hide, not delete.

I think deletion is like last resort or reserved for the once-in-a-blue-moon spambot.

Also I'm secretly the entire Dev Team in disguise.

I knew it! Jimmy has been gone all these months because you've been busy being every other member of the team! 😆 

[Ruin Mage]

I have a collection of knives waiting for you, Glacier.

[Glacier Peak]

Just now, Shadeknight said:

I have a collection of knives waiting for you, Glacier.

I used to have that emote too before they switched off the forum funsies. I think there was forum badges too, but they were taken away because... actually I don't remember what or why lol

[Without_Pause]

7 hours ago, Glacier Peak said:

You missed the point. They don't need to explain it to you, it's THEIR server. They can do whatever they want. And whether a player pays or not, that has no impact on the value of their feedback. 

Generally speaking.

 

1. This is not a normal situation. A normal situation is where we are playing on an actively licensed product paying whatever the cost the publisher is asking for.

 

2. What happens in a normal situation by no means says it needs to happens here. Doing things for the sake of tradition can be and certainly has been bad practice. More so in the current era. At some point it helps to read the room. The internet in general, social media, etc has greatly altered what is expected interaction.

 

3. Correct, this is their server. If they wish to do something to the server, then by all means, they don't need to keep me up to date with their changes. This is not, however, their game. 

 

4. HC at this point is far more by the fans for the fans. Doing a dev's log isn't exactly radical. Neither is doing a AMA, Any interaction with the devs here get huge positive reactions. I mean, see the link for what Path of Exile did for power changes. Is that asking that much really? I also backed a KS for a board game. The publisher did numerous polls asking the backers what they wanted in the final product.

https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/3228807

 

5. I'm fine with not agreeing to the reasoning of a change. I sort of don't get removing AE from Atlas although it should have never been there in the first place, so bygones. What irks some of us is simply making changes without telling us why. Again, Burn was bugged. We know this. But why the recharge change? Was it still a bit too uber even after the bugs were fixed? (shakes Magic 8-Ball) "Try again later."

 

[Glacier Peak]

1 minute ago, Without_Pause said:

Generally speaking.

 

1. This is not a normal situation. A normal situation is where we are playing on an actively licensed product paying whatever the cost the publisher is asking for.

 

2. What happens in a normal situation by no means says it needs to happens here. Doing things for the sake of tradition can be and certainly has been bad practice. More so in the current era. At some point it helps to read the room. The internet in general, social media, etc has greatly altered what is expected interaction.

 

3. Correct, this is their server. If they wish to do something to the server, then by all means, they don't need to keep me up to date with their changes. This is not, however, their game. 

 

4. HC at this point is far more by the fans for the fans. Doing a dev's log isn't exactly radical. Neither is doing a AMA, Any interaction with the devs here get huge positive reactions. I mean, see the link for what Path of Exile did for power changes. Is that asking that much really? I also backed a KS for a board game. The publisher did numerous polls asking the backers what they wanted in the final product.

https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/3228807

 

5. I'm fine with not agreeing to the reasoning of a change. I sort of don't get removing AE from Atlas although it should have never been there in the first place, so bygones. What irks some of us is simply making changes without telling us why. Again, Burn was bugged. We know this. But why the recharge change? Was it still a bit too uber even after the bugs were fixed? (shakes Magic 8-Ball) "Try again later."

 

We are in agreement. Perhaps based on testing the Burn recharge change will be modified in the next patch update on the Beta shard.