Skip to Content
2-29-2008 @ 5:22AM
At #8, showing a plan would make people expect the plan to be followed, and if it had the items you said it would make people even angrier if they move onto the next phase when the first phase (ie lifetap nerf) is still wrong (as in, stat breaking).But having a progress on each item would be handy, having a designer give a bit more detail on the reasoning and aim would also be handy.The problem is, we can assume that they have internal testing, we can assume that they think hard on these changes. So when a nerf appears that goes against the class design, or nerf an area that the class is already weak in, you can't help but wonder what the hell they are doing, since they obviously thought about it before putting it in, and did some internal testing first, shouldn't they already know it's a bad idea?Not to mention that it gives the feeling that the PTR is the "final acceptance criteria", so if you don't complain loudly enough it *will* go live in that form.These assumptions might be wrong, but then they should be honest and tell us that they are currently putting in new ideas on short notice and do their internal testing on the PTR so we know. Marking changes as "Nearly complete" would also help, then we know if they are still just playing or if they think it's good as is.
First time? A confirmation email will be sent to you after submitting.
Members enter your username and password.
Enter your AOL or AIM screenname and password.
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.