Really enjoy the way you showed the results and discussed them, the transparency we get from EHG is always appreciated.
4 Likes
Honestly, when I looked at those 2 graphs, I noticed that a) a significant amount of players would be reluctant to ‘punish’ legitimate builds with an entry removal just because another class was bugged, and b) being able to exclude pre-fix entries seems to satisfy a decent amount of players.
Their current solution would also solve the issue of perspective, as mentioned in the “what is a mild bug” part, so if you happen to disagree with a bug fix being done mid-cycle, you can still look at the older entries as valid. If the partial reset was completely up to EHG to chose, someone else would probably complain that it wasn’t consistent with the acknowledgement that “mild bug” is a subjective thing.
2 Likes
I feel that would punish anyone enable to play in the last 2 weeks of a cycle, because that’s when all the competition will be.
And your solution also wouldn’t fix the broken builds getting higher ranks, those people would just log their char once a week to maintain the position. Unless you meant each entry decays, but again, no point in competing untill the last 10% of the cycle duration.
The level of indignation you have over this is wildly out of proportion.
You haven’t been harmed in any way. They fixed the bug. They’re showing you who abused the bug and who didn’t. They’re going to give you everything you want, just not all of it right now, because their dev schedule doesn’t revolve around a made up leaderboard that some people take too seriously. Quit manufacturing reasons to justify jumping down their throat when everything they’re doing here is the right thing.
9 Likes
Great communication and feedback, and seems common sense on most issues here.
I just wanted to ask.
What if a particular feature or mechanic is under/over performing? Lets says a boss becomes a wet noodle to kill, or the opposite, and is too much of a bullet sponge.
CoF for example is very poorly tuned and unrewarding, Is this something that would or could be reworked mid cycle?
I just wondered as it’s not always the character player that needs attention, sometimes its a game feature or mechanic.
1 Like
We will continue to make changes and bug-fixes which result in a buff.
5 Likes
a comment I saw on a youtube video on this subject and with which I agree: “This is a great direction but bugs causing skills to underperform needs equal attention.”
4 Likes
The problem is that 46 of the 50 runs shown (in the 1 player softcore ladder, also the 1 player softcore acolyte ladder), are from bugs. Adding information to them doesnt do anything, theres a limit of 50 being shown.
Viewing ‘i dont mind either way’ as the opposite of wanting it, means you have to view it as the opposite of not wanting it as well, otherwise it’s just including bias into how you analyse them. Either those results are taken seperately and as a third part, or ignored entirely.
1 Like
Sorry, are you saying you believe making changes/bug-fixes which result in a buff mid-cycle would be controversial and should be surveyed?
(this wasn’t covered in the survey because as mentioned, our stance is to continue making changes/bug-fixes mid-cycle which result in a buff, and we didn’t think that would have much opposition)
8 Likes
While I don’t know how Dammit gets his data, this thing goes to well over 9000.
He also already has ability filters and historic data, so an actual exclusion of specific bugged skills pre-fix is within the realm of data available.
If your issue is purely wanting to see the top 50 post-fix, then that is a data gathering issue, not a data removal one, imho.
What I mean is that I fully agree that both underperforming and overperforming skills due to bugs need to be fixed mid-cycle.
1 Like
Yes, if you read what ive said, I think a filter system in game based on patch would work fine. Sadly like you point out, we’ll just have to rely on 3rd party stuff for it.
And its less about wanting to see top 50, and more that in game, thats all you can see. Which makes comments of ‘you can manually ignore them’ come off a bit confusing when 46 of those are ones you’d manually ignore.
Since i have the chance to adress one of the developers personally i have one question for you and i hope you will hear me out:
Did you guys have different opinions on the matter of mid-cycle balancing after the survey or were you all pretty much on board once you got the results?
I am asking because your statements and forum posts from the start of the cycle regarding this topic gave me the impression that you are very strongly against mid-cycle adjustements, or at least were at that time.
EDIT: By you i mean EHG in general and not you personally of course, sorry.
Who cares if something does 100m DPS because of a bug, or because of a poorly thought out and poorly tested skill/item interaction?
If you read the survey, you’ll find out that the majority of people care about the difference. I think you just care too much about OP builds for some reason when in reality, the majority of people enjoy them.
3 Likes
Yeah I don’t really understand commenting “who cares” on a survey whose express purpose is to show whether people care, with the objective outcome being that people care
2 Likes
Please allow us to make a one time transfer of characters from online to offline only. No going form offline to online. Just online to offline, no going back. As ask because many people make a online character and sink huge hours into it to keep getting killed unjustly bag horible lag, lag spikes, rubberbanding. All of which makes you lose awards (monolith and dungeons) and time.
I would rather be able to decide after playing online to make the decision to stick with it or not because the choice and hours sunk in.
To uphold integrity of the game and help provent cheaters, i submit that only an online character can be moved to offline as a permanent choice for said character. That way if servers are bad or a player moves to where internet is bad they do not lose every thing. Please consider and thank you for truly delivering an amazing game.
I dunno, personally the takeaway that displaying dates implies having dates available which in turn implies further future possibilities to work with them seemed fair and straightforward enough to me, don’t mean to invalidate your experience but just adding mine to the sample 
1 Like
Fire/Remove all your community testers in the future unless its open to everyone
Clearly shown it doesnt work and they are only in it for themself
Thank you for sharing the results and for communicating with the playerbase.