Must Every Thread Be Turned into the Complaint Department on Balance?

Until I see the results of their collected feedback I'm reserving judgment. However I will say that their reluctance to share what these tests and/or ideas are doesn't fill me with confidence, nor does it make what I have said untrue. There are no results that prove that anything has changed.

Surely we could have had a dedicated balance PTE by this point; something that has been requested since the ability to have different game streams was possible, and yet we don't.

I can't say that I agree.

On the higher levels of play there are some balance concerns that don't include the unstarted naval and unfinished orbital.


But there always are and always will be balance concerns from the competitive community.

On the other side of the spectrum, there is very little in the air/bot/tank balance that is concerning at all.

Most PTE versions are mainly about balance?

How stuff gets pushed to vanilla.

1: Whoever is working on balance makes a change.
2: Internal play tests (sometimes streamed)
3: Balance is pushed to PTE.
4: Balance is possibly tweaked, then pushed to vanilla.

I think Uber has done much more than I've seen the vast majority of companies (even crowdfunded) do with their playerbases.

And the issue with that is? I can see you are unhappy about it, but why do you think Uber has not actually considered your thoughts and dismissed them? Uber are making a game. Not you or me or everyone else. We are all just little voices that tell them what we personally want. I think they have a good right to dismiss such a voice if they completely don't agree with it.
Would you accept Uber's decision if they wrote a text stating their reasons for deciding against your concepts?
How can Uber dismiss the ideas of a single community member without disgruntling them and without having to spent month of work on hour long discussions with every community member that decides to design his own ideal balance?

That is your personal opinion and you are entitled to it. I disagree. I do not believe that the potential for a second PTE that is purely there to test balance has been recognised.

disregarding that you're singling me out as a "single community member" as though I am alone in my views regarding the gameplay and balance paradigm that Uber have chosen...

All I can say is that, Uber are making the game, yes. However, they would not be making this game without the community that enabled it. I feel that they have undervalued their community and broken the promise that they made in the Kickstarter that said they would be building it with us.

That's my opinion;

I think the community is not as involved in the design of the game
as was indicated it would be, by the Kickstarter.​

Do you think more than the people who are very active in this forums would use that? I mean where is the difference to a balance mod in that case?

I feel like the pain problem here is that even when faced with our opinions and recommendation.

We should al remember that uber has the right to disagree with us right?

A whole bunch of drama has been started over the fact that in this games development the devs can actually decide that their own idea is better for one reason or another.


But whenever they do, its more 'evidence' that uber doesn't care about our opinions, and that they should be some how ashamed that they are spending their business money how they best feel it should be.

But of course if Nanolathe disagrees, uber are Satan.


Which I feel is the bigger picture, nano doesn't like it when people disagree with him, it's his way or the highway......

Uber has the final decision, and so the protests begin about uber not communicating enough, because obviously his ideas must have been displayed wrong if anyone would ever dare disagree with his holy vision. There is no way a business of software developers could actually decide that they would prefer to go their own route rather then his.



It melodramatic at it's finest.

I don't think either of us are qualified to judge the merit of it, since it hasn't been tested and there are no results to base a conclusion on.

where's the uber balance mod then?

Just because something has not tested a lot does not mean we can't make theories how it works out. Uber is doing that as well after all and they have to even decide based on those theories. Their resources are limited, so they can't test everything.

???

@igncom1
come on now lets not go and start to entirely redicule people even when some of the views seem to be extreme .. that doesn't help any of us ...

Then I would like to see the presumptions that Uber are working under to make such decisions, as I do not understand their perspective on this matter.

I'm sorry to point this out, but it is precisely this kind of statement that makes drama. Representing others opinions in overblown melodramatic ways, whether agreed with or not, stifles rational discourse and results in the kind of needless polarisation that makes this kind of scenario so unpleasant to me.

I can understand and agree with points on both sides of this debate, but if they are argued in a disruptive manner, then they poison the debate. There is a reason why the forum seems to be so much less vibrant than it used to.

Gentlemen, I have little more to say on this debate. The only mildly contrite remark I have to say is that if people do not believe that the community (and I use the widest possible definition of community here) is capable of providing valid feedback then what are they doing here.

Of course the community can and does provide feedback. There is lots and lots of feedback around here. The good ideas get considered and sometimes even make it into the game. The bad ideas get ignored and then the supporters of those start making threads about how bad Uber is at listening to the community.

That isn't how it goes down and you know it.
Captain, I am fed up with your bullshit.

Myself, Nanolathe, and LocalMadSci have all made balance mods that define what we either think the balance should be, or how Uber could fix the balance in the future. We did not stand in a corner and whine at them. We wrote documents. We crafted the code. We made it work. We showed that we are DOERS, not complainers. We have our opinion, and we acted on it. On the other hand, all you do is work in Exodus Esports, spouting praise for Uber left, right, and center. Were I a moron, I'd say you were a fanboy. But I know you aren't, Cap. You're a good guy. Stop beating us over the head for having a different opinion.

I have never seen Nanolathe lie to anyone on the subject of what happened pre- and post-Vanguard. He has embellished. He has overdrawn. He has never lied. What he says is what happened, in general. And if you have listened to MadSci at all, you would know how brilliant he can be. These guys are people you should be listening to, not berating. They were SHUNNED by Uber. The reason? They were 'toxic' members of the community because they thought the way Uber was doing it was wrong. Someone got mad, and now, here we stand. People of the community they helped create are trying to keep them away.

No.

That's wrong. That is morally wrong.

Tolerance is a word I hate to use because (in reality), it's a symbol of oppression. But someone needs to accept that these people are here to help and discuss their points with them (because there is a reason they said those things). They didn't pull this out of their ***. Believe me, I've had long Teamspeak discussions with them. There's a lot of thought behind their opinions.

I've also had a few conversations with a few separate devs individually. Every single one of their reactions in those conversations proved every point Nanolathe and MadSci made to the letter.

TL;DR

Why don't you take them seriously instead of treating them like entitled five year olds? They have a good point. It may not be entirely correct, but they are on the right track.

In lieu of the Uber taking their sweet time, I made it for them.
https://forums.uberent.com/threads/fixing-the-balance.65408

Stay classy, Mered. We can't wait to see what new low you have in store for us all tomorrow.

So, again you're claiming indepth secret knowledge of things that no-one else knows about - this isn't the first time you've done this. How do you know Uber hasn't infact been considering feedback and discarding that which they feel doesn't fit into their design vision?

It's time to start ponying up either your sources or the secret spy documents saying,

I scathis hereby do swear that I did not at all consider the feedback contributions of nanolathe, mered, and madsci in particular (only everyone else). I ignored them not because i thought their mods did not fit our design, not because they didn't get alot of players which was our stated acid test, but because I am a malevolent God who hates these 3 people, and only these for some particular reason,

signed Scathis

Otherwise, it's time to stop talking fairy nonsense.

Attacks aren't going to accomplish anything here. Conundrum, Mered, take it to PMs.


@elodea Sigh...

Do I have to explain the problems with your post?

Jables announced that they are in fact going to do work on balance, bugfixes of unit function and design and stupid silly things they malfunction in doing, as well as specifically naval and eventually longterm plans for subs.

So let's stick to the fact that, they are working on something balance wise. Hopefully, it is balance we can all agree on, not too extreme but effectually fixing unused units and very-one-strategy gameplay.