Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
fuxinos
Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 15:00:00 -
[1]
This is a serious question, I dont understand why it takes so long for CCP to fix things that for me, appear to be easy to fix.
The list of broken things is already so long, I cant even remember everything that needs fixing, but apperantly makes a huge thing out of everything.
Whats so hard about giving Rockets more DPS and more Explosion velocity? Whats so hard about fixing the CPU requirment of Shield Transporters?
These 2 things for example dont require any input from players to see that they require fixing and I dont think its soooo hard to just lower the CPU of ST or higher the Explo velo of Rockets.
I would realy like to know because I cant understand that a companie like CCP works that unefficent on such small things.
Do they prioritize their things to fix that badly? Do they think that fixing some simple numbers requiers ages of thought before doing it?
Even if this appears to some people as rant, its not, I realy just want to be able to understand CCP's way of fixing things.
|
Pantorus Necraliss
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 15:12:00 -
[2]
Same problem with Hail (advanced autocannon ammo) :
Description : "(...)be prepared to trade optimal range and capacitor energy for increased tracking speed and a devastating amount of damage."
Tracking multiplier is : x0.5 ( = /2 )
The right number to use is x1.5, cause with actual tracking "bonus" this ammo are completely useless cause we can't shoot anyone with this.
|
JuicyCakes
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 15:51:00 -
[3]
I take it you're being sarcastic (your corp name )
If you're not:
CCP can't just change a variable and call it a day. They have to model extensively the balancing implications (stats, vs other ships, vs bigger ships, vs smaller ships, vs neut ships, ...), the market implications of each change. After all this has been modeled and deemed feasiable, they have a whole list of Q&A & player testing to make sure they didn't cause any new issues/bugs.
|
fuxinos
Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 00:16:00 -
[4]
Edited by: fuxinos on 18/09/2009 00:17:41
Originally by: JuicyCakes I take it you're being sarcastic (your corp name )
If you're not:
CCP can't just change a variable and call it a day. They have to model extensively the balancing implications (stats, vs other ships, vs bigger ships, vs smaller ships, vs neut ships, ...), the market implications of each change. After all this has been modeled and deemed feasiable, they have a whole list of Q&A & player testing to make sure they didn't cause any new issues/bugs.
Are you serious?
What needs to be modeled if they change, for example, CPU requirments? Why is there so much testing needed for changing CPU requirments? What bug could possibly occur if you change a simple number to another number, they even show up as numbers ingame.
Dont act like its a big deal to fix modules.
|
Darth Skorpius
Crystalline INC Dead End Society
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 00:34:00 -
[5]
Originally by: fuxinos This is a serious question, I dont understand why it takes so long for CCP to fix things that for me, appear to be easy to fix.
because they have ot be able to fully reproduce the problem every time they try it, then they have ot find out whats causing the issue, then they have to find a wauy to fix it without breaking other things. and often the simple things are the hardest to fix. a dev for anthoer mmo i play once gave the perfect answer ot this very question, ill have to find the quote for you ______________________________________________ Waiting for some random to make me a new sig |
Bestofworst
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 02:03:00 -
[6]
Originally by: fuxinos Edited by: fuxinos on 18/09/2009 00:17:41
Originally by: JuicyCakes I take it you're being sarcastic (your corp name )
If you're not:
CCP can't just change a variable and call it a day. They have to model extensively the balancing implications (stats, vs other ships, vs bigger ships, vs smaller ships, vs neut ships, ...), the market implications of each change. After all this has been modeled and deemed feasiable, they have a whole list of Q&A & player testing to make sure they didn't cause any new issues/bugs.
What bug could possibly occur if you change a simple number to another number, they even show up as numbers ingame.
Dont act like its a big deal to fix modules.
---- My Music
Anything I say is only what I think. If you have a problem with me, take it up with me. |
Blane Xero
Amarr The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 02:08:00 -
[7]
Dem der numbers can be frisky things dem can be. _____________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
Originally by: CCP Fallout :facepalm:
|
Sith LordX
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 02:28:00 -
[8]
They haven't fixed small electron blasters in 6 months, I still can't see the models on my ships so I don't use electron blasters anymore until they fix it.
I just simply can't use a ship with broken models. So I use ions and neutrons.
|
fuxinos
Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 02:29:00 -
[9]
Edited by: fuxinos on 18/09/2009 02:29:48 Oh yea, a number that only occurs as number ingame could have a graphical bug and show up as another number.
|
Alt Tabbed
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 02:53:00 -
[10]
Originally by: fuxinos Edited by: fuxinos on 18/09/2009 00:17:41
Are you serious?
What needs to be modeled if they change, for example, CPU requirments? Why is there so much testing needed for changing CPU requirments? What bug could possibly occur if you change a simple number to another number, they even show up as numbers ingame.
Dont act like its a big deal to fix modules.
Are you serious?
If so....
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |