Why the balance forum feels like a waste of my time

I would think it's a waste of time as the two balance devs already have decided on what type of game they are making so no point reading other peoples ideas.

Not saying I believe that and I won't hold you to something you said in a stream but it was said.

The only problem I have with your post, well-written as it was, is that you, as Uber, allowed the panic to happen. You never stated you were taking an existing unit to test a different unit and it's type of weaponry on the battlefield. People saw the change, saw no explanation, and proceeded to panic because we need an instruction manual. Something to explain what's going on when all hell breaks loose.

If there's anything to be learned about open development like this, it's that you can't share what you're doing without sharing the why you're doing it and not expect panic. I think if we had connectivity with the ideas and plans from you guys Uber, and had a bit more explanation with the test builds, there'd be way less panic to go around.

So TL;DR, Uber can take off the tinfoil hats, none of the forum can read minds?

Words are wind and Winter is coming.

Would you like to place a bet?

You can claim that it is Uber's fault for not informing us enough, and hence PANIC, if you like. Personally, as an adult, I sat there and thought "hm that's an interesting change, I will wait and see what happens." Not "ZOMG!!11!! DOX GONE FORVER, GAME FAIL".
Which is apparently what some people's responses were.
I feel like Uber are giving us enough insight for our initial investment as early backers.

One satisfied customer does not, a community, make.

Yoda detected.

Image source: http://www.cgarena.com/gallery/3d/details/characters/yodaodm082010.html​

Well, being said that the game is in the making while it was already playable so that devs can get feedback from the community while they are still making the game. Im not a gamedesigner but at that moment when they said that, it made a lot of sense to me and probably to everyone else. The main reason why everyone jumps onto it trying to give feedback on what they just experienced in games, with the obvious result of a lot of feedback from a lot of individuals. Maybe there is a way to put more structure in the way the feedback comes back, because i can understand its getting messy and unclear.

You're really, really new to Internet forums, aren't you?

I think he'd appreciate it if you didn't dismiss his post in the same manner that you're criticising him for doing to your (and other) post(s)

haha yeh, it's ironic to say that when it is pretty much exactly what happened with some of the community...

Agreed on the second point too, hypocrisy FTW.

Well we have the vanguards, they are pretty eager but are restricted I suppose by ubers schedule. 4 weeks of panic that clearly was annoying the devs and they didn't clarify it as simply as meta done in the op. Seems weird . Maybe they wanted to get rid of the dox as we know it, realised it was a bad idea because of all the panic and then decided to keep it. So panic away guys, panic away

you know, sadly metabolical was being lighthearted in a thread using a eyepopping title to get the forums attention to cooperate with balance instead of telling it how you expected it to conform and calling it names and making funny faces at it. I'm talking to you gorbles, I see your avatar... (kidding aside)

he brings up a good point. The dox was made into a grenadier. People panic kneejerk style. He actually, literally stated that it was to force players to use the unit via making it the only direct damage one. He apparently didn't say it loud enough because two more polls were made to #savethedox, AND IT IS ALWAYS POLLS TOO, at this point nobody takes them seriously even though I myself occasionally make one.

Basically, like what the second (?) reply says, the title says balance subforum was pointless, but the thread isn't about being useless, it is about being useful. My thread in this forum, trying to indicate op and up and balanced units in upcoming build, not to brag but it goes that way. Meta listed threads that don't, instead of recommending two attack bots and grenadier needs buff you get a mob together to protest for the dox, instead of recommending t1 and t2 balance you actually demand more tiers or less tiers or design of tiers which technically aren't balance if you think about it, instead of recommending a balance for levelers and peregrine which at least approaches a solution for the now you assert that those units ruin the game.

I don't think this thread is being discussed as intended. Generally, I am glad balance is at least a correspondence. Design is even a correspondence. Like what was said though, if someone doesn't get immediate results for their idea don't be the loudest to achieve results, being the loudest is just being the loudest, it isn't any merit of the magnitude of popular vote nor the proof of function for the idea. The forums and the 20 of us top post count members, is not the majority of players, and the ideas are not just one-correct-answer.

Heck, if you want anything to get anywhere anyway, we really should accept it won't be tomorrow, it will be one adjustment at a time.

I tend to avoid panic threads I guess. I never felt the dox was in big danger.

exactly. And again, a week into it, meta said in public, the dox was removed to incentivize, no, force, the use of the one they wanted tested, the grenadier.

like I said two posts up, and the second reply in this thread said, this thread isn't about balance forum being useless, it is about Meta imploring people to make content in these forums that help him out better. He literally cannot give the game no tiers and three tiers at the same time like crooked politicians try to campaign to democrats and republicans, he is just asking for less of that sort of speculation or take it to a different pa subforum like backers, and suggest unit strength and weakness adjustments here.

Personally, I did the same thing you did, and didn't jump on my massive panic button on the floor of my other room. I do think most of the panic is uncalled for, but I definitely don't blame anyone whatsoever for having concern for the game's current general direction given the feedback given so far.

It's snowballed in such a way that Uber can't really damage control because they don't have the manpower to explain where they're going on top of coding the game at the same time. I think it's partially because they haven't had to explain the whole picture of their internal tests to their forum community at large before, and they've never experienced this kind of instantaneous reaction to the extreme changes most players never see in the first place.

Obviously big changes are going to be cited by many people, and no matter what way you look, someone will have a different opinion, devs included. This truly is the beast called open development, and Uber has their hands full working on everything at once.

To be fair, Uber can explain *this* reasoning behind one change, or *that* reasoning behind another change, and people will understand, but if it's a massively touchy subject like T2 eco that affects the entire game, that's a totally different story. For example, If it so happens that Uber is currently testing game results by going from one extreme to the other to have massive changes to gameplay on purpose, it's definitely not being stated, or if it was, it wasn't a noticeable post. I think this kind of philosophy post at a grand scale is of the utmost importance. Information like that is crucial to how the population of the forums react to the changes in-game.

There are always those who link to forum posts where Uber has made clear and concise statements, but those statements are far and few between. We need more of that. Not just for for the background functions of the game, but for the foreground functions as well. Player-viewed aspect, the entire balancing philosophy Uber uses from the ground up, unit changes, and anything else players can press the panic button on.

That said, I don't mind when Uber has surprises for us. Fire was an excellent example. When Uber's surprises require them to hide their ideals and concepts, though, it sometimes creates a wall for other situations we can't see past. Thus, panic ensues.

We have to remember that this is a two way street. Even if Uber explains everything, there may still be panic. The userbase should be more constructive as a whole, though I think it's easier to ask Uber to be more open than it is to ask the userbase to be more constructive.. heh. That'll be the day.

Edit'd for better wording

There is actually a simple solution to that last point - maintain a FAQ in the Balance forum giving the dev perspective on commonly raised points, then update it as your views change. Then, if the points get raised, either you can refer them to the FAQ, or the poster will have been responding to the FAQ (so it won't be something you've been hearing over and over, hopefully).

That, my friend is what we call the "design by comittee" management anti-pattern. And I really hope they won't listen to the community because it's crowdfunded, but listen to community whenever an idea will fit their game.

The "panic" occurred because very few people invented a conspiracy where the grenadier was a temporary addition instead of the Dox. It's not ironic to say that. That's the way it happened. People took the change at face value. Because unless Uber say "oh hey, we made this change to do this", players have no idea why they made the change. That change in fact occur behind closed doors.

Four weeks with no further description is a lifetime for a creature of pure text. It's equivalent to 80 human years

Sorry but to dismiss it as "panic" is misleading. It would have been panic if it had lasted 4 hours. The gift of hindsight could easily have shown it was well justified concern.

Gorbles, I'm not devaluing his post by describing it as semantic nitpicking, or theorycrafting, or any of the negative terms the devs use. However, it is saying "I don't want to participate in the discussion because of other posters". Generally a rule on forums is that you don't comment on the behaviour of other posters. You discuss the topic at hand.

Pretty much all of my posts in this forum are discussing the balance of the game in the manner described by this topic. Except for point 4. The ideas for how to balance T2 and T1 with diversification of roles are present and buried. So what, do I disregard point 4 in order to continue discussion about actual balance? Because apparently that isn't welcome.

What I don't do is have a bitch and a moan about how other people aren't engaging me in discussion.

This forum is one that needs modifications to the game. It's all very well everyone talking about changes they would like to see, but words are wind. People get fixated on those changes.

1. The number of people is irrelevant; the issue is that panic occurred.

There's no point in dismissing the number of people making a particular argument, as that could quite easily be applied to every single balance argument involving Tiers or resource generation, with respects to certain groups of people repeatedly pushing a particular argument. It's a lame way to counterargue, in my opinion.

2. I agree that four weeks is a long time. That doesn't change the fact that overreactions happened (as they are wont).

Dismissing it as panic is entirely relevant. It could be panic because Uber haven't clarified the situation. It could be panic because Uber don't want to clarify something the userbase will try to pick yet more holes in. It could be panic because people feel they don't get to decide what the game is going to play like, despite not being the developers.

Don't get me wrong, on a number of levels these can be valid concerns, and indicative of patterns people would not want to attribute to Uber. But it's premature at best, and scaremongering at worst. All in all, it is still panic.

3. I was remarking on the hypocritical nature of that parting shot. I don't particularly mind how justified you think it is, I was doing what I always do on any web forum or real life chat, and I point out the hypocrisy.

It's what I do. Take it or leave it, report it, do what you want. That doesn't change the fact that your comment was hypocritical, and rather immature. Opinion again, etc.