Who Is In Charge Of Balance?

[DSpite]

"I think that if you guys started making small, continuous changes and integrating the plethora of community feedback you get, it would be less of a workload on you guys and of greater benefit overall to the entire community."

I think you need to reassess your understanding of the term "Feedback."

So when you're done with the ad hominem and aimless irritation, feel free to write back. Or are you seriously trying to tell me that suggesting small, frequent changes instead of 2.0 overhauls is somehow inappropriate? 

 

edit: That broken grammar. >_<

 

Yes, tell DE what to do, in point form, like they have no idea, and need you to run the entire operation.

 

Feedback is evaluating the game they have created, not giving them operational advice. If you can't actually see how arrogant you sound towards DE in your post - and I'm becoming an expert on the topic - you need to re read it again. You are basically skirting Innocent_Flower territory.

 

Also, constantly posting snappy "fallacy quotes" as retorts is getting old real fast.

 

"How many people is Scott working with? Is it just him? Why do simple changes take so long?"

"it should be clear that the balance aspect of Warframe is severely understaffed"

 

Really? You see nothing wrong with implying, to a company you know nothing about that "they are not efficient enough with their F2P game development" and "obviously they need to restructure their internal staff allocation".

 

Oh yea, and the topic name "Who is in charge of balance?" that sound exactly like "I demand to see the manager". Great work.

 

Right. I'm the one with the personal issues. If you walked in my computer store and told me that I should be able to build your computer one day faster by reorganizing my work schedule "just like this", what do you think I would tell you to do?

Edited November 22, 2014 by DSpite

[fadeinlight]

I think the OP's suggestion is a good one.  Balance is a difficult job, subject to endless debate and criticism.  A lot of players aren't necessarily looking for balance--they're looking to win, and make persuasive arguments that they need even more.  Case in point:  Rhino.  Players discuss him so much that he actually made the Community Hot Topics list...but does anyone here truly think that he needs the DE Love Stick any more than, say, Ember?

 

By establishing a progression scale and sticking to it, assigning stats to items becomes less of a personal, arbitrary decision and more of an exercise in "obeying the law."  Most importantly, it would give a sense of consistency--the lack of which is what opens the door for accusations of unfair treatment.  Perhaps that seems a bit constraining, but there's always room for creative interpretation ;) 

 

I'm not saying that it would make balancing easy...just a bit easier.  It's a thankless job, I'm sure...and I don't envy DE Scott at all.  (okay, that's a lie).

Edited November 23, 2014 by fadeinlight

[Azawarau]

 

 

The future ideas thread is the Design Council forums; but let it be known, before someone QQs, they dont share every aspect of the game.

 

Otherwise we have The Developer Workshop Forum

Ive poked around there and it still feels like shooting in the dark

[DiabolusUrsus]

Yes, tell DE what to do, in point form, like they have no idea, and need you to run the entire operation.

 

Feedback is evaluating the game they have created, not giving them operational advice. If you can't actually see how arrogant you sound towards DE in your post - and I'm becoming an expert on the topic - you need to re read it again. You are basically skirting Innocent_Flower territory.

 

Also, constantly posting snappy "fallacy quotes" as retorts is getting old real fast.

 

"How many people is Scott working with? Is it just him? Why do simple changes take so long?"

"it should be clear that the balance aspect of Warframe is severely understaffed"

 

Really? You see nothing wrong with implying, to a company you know nothing about that "they are not efficient enough with their F2P game development" and "obviously they need to restructure their internal staff allocation".

 

Oh yea, and the topic name "Who is in charge of balance?" that sound exactly like "I demand to see the manager". Great work.

 

Right. I'm the one with the personal issues. If you walked in my computer store and told me that I should be able to build your computer one day faster by reorganizing my work schedule "just like this", what do you think I would tell you to do?

 

That's a tone that you're projecting onto my suggestions, not the tone I applied to it myself.

 

It's not really my problem if you can't see the reality for yourself. Balance changes that should be simple and straightforward, things like reducing the max ammo count on launcher weapons take months upon months to put into effect. Is this a problem simply because I'm impatient? No. It's a problem because the longer things remain unchanged, the more people get used to them being that way. The more people get used to them being that way, the more they'll complain when those changes get made, even if the changes are needed. DE is making things harder on themselves by taking too long to make simple changes. I've seen how beleaguered Scott has been looking every time something balance-centered comes up in the livestreams. I've seen how stressed out he gets when the same question gets asked for the bazillionth time... because it's still relevant.

 

My feedback is "here is this problem I've noticed. Here is one way you might go about solving it." Not "my way, or the highway." So when you're done trying to nit-pick the semantics of my sentence structures and their rhetorical implications, you can simply stick to saying "I disagree." That two word sentence is more constructive than the bundles of insults you've been tossing my way because they boost your righteous ego. I'm not walking into a computer store and telling the owner how they should restructure their schedule. I'm giving feedback and suggestions where they have been indirectly requested - acknowledged as welcome. When it is made clear that feedback is unwelcome, well, then I'll stop giving it.

 

So while it's perfectly fine and witty to dismiss my fallacy quotes as "getting old," even when they're perfectly accurate, they're still not a direct violation of the forum rules. (See: Naming-and-shaming.)

 

Get out.

Edited November 24, 2014 by DiabolusUrsus

[TheDoctah]

That's a tone that you're projecting onto my suggestions, not the tone I applied to it myself. It's not really my problem if you can't see the reality for yourself. Balance changes that should be simple and straightforward, things like reducing the max ammo count on launcher weapons take months upon months to put into effect. Is this a problem simply because I'm impatient? No. It's a problem because the longer things remain unchanged, the more people get used to them being that way. The more people get used to them being that way, the more they'll complain when those changes get made, even if the changes are needed. DE is making things harder on themselves by taking too long to make simple changes. I've seen how beleaguered Scott has been looking every time something balance-centered comes up in the livestreams. I've seen how stressed out he gets when the same question gets asked for the bazillionth time... because it's still relevant.

 

My feedback is "here is this problem I've noticed. Here is one way you might go about solving it." Not "my way, or the highway." So when you're done trying to nit-pick the semantics of my sentence structures and their rhetorical implications, you can simply stick to saying "I disagree." That two word sentence is more constructive than the bundles of insults you've been tossing my way because they boost your righteous ego. I'm not walking into a computer store and telling the owner how they should restructure their schedule. I'm giving feedback and suggestions where they have been indirectly requested - acknowledged as welcome. When it is made clear that feedback is unwelcome, well, then I'll stop giving it.

 

So while it's perfectly fine and witty to dismiss my fallacy quotes as "getting old," even when they're perfectly accurate, that's still not a direct violation of the forum rules. (See: Naming-and-shaming.)

 

Get out.

Better off ignoring em, no sense in talking to a wall.