|
|
| Author |
Topic |
McTard
    |
Posted - 2008.07.10 18:00:00 -
[1]
Edited by: McTard on 10/07/2008 18:02:51
 Quote:
I have to say that I am disappointed (like many) about the prioritization of some items
No kidding...
UI, Skill Queue, Suicide gankage/Insurance and Industry fall short of some of that top crap??
Speed tanking tweaks is not even there at all.
The only Factional Warfare isssue you could see a problem with is pimping that same old tired Alliance thing? Do you people even play FW? Do you care how n00bs and casuals experience this?
Looks to me like the 0.0 chowderheads are lockstepping all over this one. Not supprised though, bout how I figured it would be.
|
McTard
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 18:17:00 -
[2]
Edited by: McTard on 10/07/2008 18:23:34
0004 Black Ops Improvements
X Jump Bridges and Cynojammers
0029 Eve-Mail Issues
0019 Contract Improvements
0018 0.0 Sovereignty Issues
0013 Skill Page Tweaks
0007 Double Click function on avatars
Tell me why Black Ops or frickin Avatar clicking is higher in priority to the largest portion of the playerbase than say...Nannos, Skill Queue, UI, lag, Suicide gank/Insurance and any number of other things.
And I stand by my query: Quote:
The only Factional Warfare isssue you could see a problem with is pimping that same old tired Alliance thing?
|
McTard
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 18:40:00 -
[3]
Edited by: McTard on 10/07/2008 18:41:47
Quote:
Aside from 0.0 sov issues(which is exactly the kind of big-picture thing you want them to call high-priority),
I see, that sounds sensible.
Quote:
When extremists on both sides are screaming
So I'm an extremist for wanting to know: Out of curiosity what about my other questions? Nannos/speed tanking arent an issue to anyone at ALL? No tweaks needed??
FW has NO problems other than letting Alliances mix it up?
|
McTard
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 18:49:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
Originally by: McTard
Quote:
Aside from 0.0 sov issues(which is exactly the kind of big-picture thing you want them to call high-priority),
I see, that sounds sensible.
Out of curiosity what about my other questions? Nannos/speed tanking arent an issue to anyone at ALL? No tweaks needed??
FW has NO problems other than letting Alliances mix it up?
Nobody has yet posted a nano thread on these forums with anything like a real solution(or perhaps any nano thread at all, I certainly can't think of one). As such, it couldn't have been discussed in Iceland. Also, given the delay times on the submission process, I don't think anyone had a handle on what the issues with FW were as of the deadline for this process(which would have required the post to be on the forums about a month ago). Both of these will presumably be dealt with in the next round of submissions to CCP - stick a thread on here, and see where it goes from there.
Fair enough.
|
McTard
|
Posted - 2008.07.14 00:06:00 -
[5]
Edited by: McTard on 14/07/2008 00:10:15
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
Originally by: McTard
Fair enough.
You're being surprisingly reasonable for a character named McTard. What's the catch? 
I dunno, off day maybe?
Quote:
The question is, where is Wranglers post-meeting thread to follow up discussion on this feature.
Ok, back on track now:
Yeah, and if I see the usual "we are looking into that/this/the other, kktxbye!" usual bs I'll puke.
|
|