If you’re gonna stalk and hate on me do better please. I’m assuming your referring to my post in suggestions thread about adding buff/debuff to different weather based in Emerson mindset. That thread I believe is significantly handle in a more civil manner by all. And as far as I’m concerned is in a positive light. Referring to how people are talking to each other in it now not the everyone likes the suggestion mindset. And I forget my other point so 
What area/language is this, and does it just loosely translate to graduate? I ask area because as I’m sure you know just because you speak Arabic (random pick) does not mean your living in an Arabic area or even of Arabic decent. And I’ve never seen the word if I had to guess it’s Dutch German or slavonic. Am I close?
Also there’s so much here that I have no idea if anyone wanted me to answer something so if someone did please ask what u wanted me to reply again.
Macknum’s German & according to google that word translates to vocational training.
Assuming google is correct, berufsausbildung is what you would graduate from.
I’d translate it with apprenticeship in the context of what he was describing.
Yeah, that works too. Vocational training is a term that was more common in the 90s in the UK while apprenticeships are more used now (I have one sitting next to me at the moment). I think that vocational training is more used for careers which are/were traditionally less academic (eg, mechanic, plumber, electrician) though I don’t think it matters much at all anymore.
Everyone, please remember to be civil in communication.
We actually did a whole big survey and discussion with the community regarding this, and the community decided that only if a build is greatly overperforming as the result of a bug should it be fixed (nerfed) mid-season. Mid-Cycle Balance Survey Recap
For mid-season patches in general, we can only efficiently release patches part way into a season. This is because our internal codebase changes so much, that any bugfixes would need to be done in duplicate. One for the old code, one for the new code. However the real factor here is that these need to go through QA, and QA takes a fair amount of time.
This means that the the further we get into a development cycle/season, the more the codebases diverge, the more and more time a bugfix would take. Increasing to the point that it starts to significantly impact work towards a new season. Though we are looking at ways we might be able to get around this, as we understand how important bug fixes are, and how big of a topic this is for us.
1 Like
No need to nerf anything, OP.
Fixing bugs with broken skills/interactions/items that are not working as intended is what is needed, that’s all.
Someone playing a stronger or as everyone says OP class than you doesn’t mean jack. But there are an absolute ton of builds capable of running very high corruption and killing UA comfortably.
Game balance is the goal everyone would like to see but it’s highly likely to not be achieved I don’t think I’ve played an ARPG where there hasn’t been “OP” classes/builds.
Fix bugs
Don’t nerf
Put that on a T shirt
Kinda?
Graduating is from a school environment.
Finsihing learning a trade… what’s the term there for when you do? You’re in a work environment already as a apprentice, but you pass apprentice stage. I actually don’t know if there is a term specifically for that.
10 times Ward hence which outperformed everything in existence survival-wise and had quite extreme offensive abilities on top?
Or the ‘I need no investment’ Erasing Strike build?
Or the ‘I do millions of DPS by standing around’ Wraithlord build which could kill every boss in seconds?
Those? 
You never defined what is ‘greatly overperforming’, so it’s all relative and now you can say ‘that wasn’t overperfoming enough’ when the community asks ‘why didn’t it happen’.
I understand where you’re coming from though, it’s harsh to decide how much exactly is the point to step in. You guys went a bit beyond the stage in my opinion, and seemingly the opinion of many others. It’s a mess of a situation and hard to handle, so no worries about getting it wrong, I just hope you guys learned for the future when such a extreme example comes up again (also in the underperfoming side) to try out the alternative option and actually compare rather then leaning back and stating ‘but you guys told us so!’.
The community forgives experiments, but you guys gotta actively make a system to base your decisions on rather then trying to avoid as many as possible.
So your argument is reduced to the baseline ‘We cannot achieve it so it’s fine to do absolutely nothing’? Sounds counterproductive.
1 Like
The qualifier here was as the result of a bug. These were not the results of bugs, so didn’t qualify. There was a separate selection for if it wasn’t the result of a bug, which the community didn’t support.
Nope, mostly because that’s up to the community. We listen to what you all are saying about builds and skills and weigh that extremely heavily with the data we refer to. If something feels bad, it doesn’t matter if it’s technically right.
1 Like
That’s fair.
So it only applies to the first example of ‘10 times the ward amount’ because that was a bug, a decimal error.
Which was also postponed though. So that’s not quite in-line with what was stated. But outside of that I agree.
Sorry, a correction: I believe the “10 times the amount of ward” was actually one of the issues that spawned the survey conversation in the first place.
1 Like
Fair, and I remember this happening.
Which brings me to a follow-up question, and that one is a loaded and quite unfair one as we cannot change the past, so I’ll state right away ‘I’m unfair here now’.
Why was this even a thing to be done? The general expectation is ‘Unless it’s a game enhancing bug which has mistakenly improved the situation bugs are to be removed’, where the first part is not something many people even take into consideration.
So why was a poll for that aspect even held? It’s a necessity and given thing that bugs have to be fixed, mid-Cycle or not, and even your biggest competitor GGG is actively doing that despite at times heavily interfering with long-term established builds, because a code error is a code error, no matter what. A bad balance is not the fundamental building block of a game, it’s above that.
My statement is ‘This topic shouldn’t even have become a poll-issue in the first place’ as that is one of the responsibilities of your company to do that in a tamely and qualitative manner, and - to be unfair again - it plays for us as customers no role for the reason or the magnitude, for us the only decision is ‘are we affected’.
The poll was held because there was a large amount of conversation in the community about it sparked by previous patches that had resulted in nerfs with bugfixes. The main argument made against it was “nerfing fun”. It was quite a divisive, and heated topic. We had originally had our own rules for what gets patched or not, but when there was the large outcry, we responded by having a discussion with the community about it.
And this is the case. If it’s a bug, it qualifies to get fixed ASAP. If it’s not a bug, such as an unintentional interaction (original bhuldar’s wrath wearbear), or something that wasn’t accounted for (ice claw ward generation) those don’t get fixed mid-cycle. The main purpose of the survey was for overperforming skills and items that were not ‘bugs’.
It was 71.9% of the voting community, withover 69,000 individuals participating, that said not to nerf overperforming skills or items mid-season when it’s not a bug - It wasn’t a small margin. It’s very well possible this is something we can revisit in the future as the community wants and needs change, but it wasn’t held that long ago. So unless something major happens, it would likely be a while before a review.
However, I believe there’s still confusion here regarding “bug” and “not bug”. Bugs, which is something not working the way it says it’s supposed to, get fixed. Not bugs, which is something that works the way it says it’s supposed to, but is overperforming, wait until the next season. This is also unrelated to the ability (or lack thereof) to release patches later into a season. Further, this is only referring to bugs and balance issues that result in nerfs mid-season. Bug fixes and balance changes that result in a buff are always qualified to go out ASAP. I recommend reading through the survey results post, and see if it helps clarify some more points for you: Mid-Cycle Balance Survey Recap
2 Likes
Thanks for the comprehensive answer there.
1 Like
Where is the poll about paying for a game that was told to never cost any more later on after you intialy payed once? Was heated as well and largely discussed.
2 Likes
Yeah this is most likely the best thing to use.
The same place as the poll about whether we want EHG to go titsup & the servers to shut down & not be able to play LE again.
1 Like
In the same place as the poll for having polls that we have no intention of acting on =p. Based on that bit of tongue in cheek, you might correctly guess that we don’t put out polls we have no intention of acting on – In this case, because we can’t. The change in model wasn’t a choice, but a necessity to continue operating. It was both needed and going to happen regardless of any acquisition or not.
1 Like
You can’t? Why not?
Oh so little money left?
From what I quoted I guess much more will be needed in the future… right?
I think we’ve been pretty clear the decision was made for financial viability reasons, yes. I’m not positive why you’re presenting this question, if you could please clarify.
This is a bit of a leap. If the feedback that we need more and better MTX is correct, then as we continue to build our MXT library and improve our systems to create better MTX the opposite would happen. I’m not sure where you’re inferring from this that we would need to continue making our model more aggressive just because a past model failed. The closest analogy I could think of is assuming that a fire is going to burn hotter in the future because it was on fire in the past and was extinguished. Again, could you please clarify your reasoning behind this? I may be able to provide a better answer to help clarify any misunderstandings.