IceIX or Devs, I want to call something out

Unknown

Demiurge_Will wrote:

We roll out changes in small batch sizes (as opposed to saving them up for a big update) whenever possible (it's possible for data changes and not for changes that require an app update). This reduces bugs and enables us to respond to issues and improve the game at a vastly faster rate. This also makes changes more difficult to precisely schedule very far in advance. The event schedule is subject to all kinds of factors that can affect events' start date, so coordinating those two things without creating a situation where a vital change is delayed or you're left without an event running means that sometimes changes relevant to events happen while the events are running (and as others have pointed out, for some changes, there's little/no time where the change isn't relevant to a currently running event).

It is still not hard to make sure you are not messing with people in and ongoing tournament. Ultimately you are the ones in control. Nobody wants their characters nerfed in the middle of a tourney that is featuring that character for use. Also nobody wants to get blindsided with and increase in costs in the middle of a tournament with no warning or have it crash you in the middle of a tournament game that gets them penalized. You could easily dictate a window for the update and make everyone update in that window before they can play again. There really is no excuse for this.

Unknown

IceIX wrote:

justaplayer wrote:

justaplayer wrote:

Lol I can't find it now looks like they deleted it Unreal

My error I found it:
http://www.d3pforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2747

I was gonna say, I don't delete threads unless they're 100% useless, dupes, or requested to be deleted by the author. That would have surprised me as much as you.

This was my fault. I missed it in my first search. My apologies I don't want to blame your for something you are not responsible for

Unknown

Demiurge_Will wrote:

We roll out changes in small batch sizes (as opposed to saving them up for a big update) whenever possible (it's possible for data changes and not for changes that require an app update). This reduces bugs and enables us to respond to issues and improve the game at a vastly faster rate. This also makes changes more difficult to precisely schedule very far in advance. The event schedule is subject to all kinds of factors that can affect events' start date, so coordinating those two things without creating a situation where a vital change is delayed or you're left without an event running means that sometimes changes relevant to events happen while the events are running (and as others have pointed out, for some changes, there's little/no time where the change isn't relevant to a currently running event).

Except you chose to nerf them in the middle of a pay-to-enter tournament. You chose to have Thor feature in two events on consecutive weekends. You chose to schedule a Wolverine tournament knowing these nerfs were coming up. I do not accept this. You knew the characters were about to be balance. Put up some other characters.

Unknown

IceIX wrote:

justaplayer wrote:

justaplayer wrote:

Lol I can't find it now looks like they deleted it Unreal

My error I found it:
http://www.d3pforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2747

I was gonna say, I don't delete threads unless they're 100% useless, dupes, or requested to be deleted by the author. That would have surprised me as much as you.

And I would like to give you props for that. I have played games before where any form of negativity on a post was deleted or edited.

An Internet gaming buddy of mine dropped $600 on an Rpg we played over the course of a couple weeks to get a top tier weapon. He actually had a negative result in game. He didn't get the item, lost all the gold required to buy the chests you use the in game currency to open. When he made a forum post about it, they banned his account and edited the post to make fun of him.

(Following isn't directed to you, ice)
If any1 thinks I can over react or be ridiculous about this game sometimes, you should have seen the onslaught of rage I brought into those forums for the next few weeks. Haha!

Remembering that situation actually cheers me up a tiny bit about this situation. Still not happy, but better now. Haha!!

Spoit

Ignoring the whole days timing, what about the pushing changes through a few hours before the end if tourneys? See: the juggernaut tourney, the crit change, and even some of these shield and mmr changes. Can't those server switches wait just a few hours until at least one tourney is over, and the others are days away?

Unknown

Demiurge_Will wrote:

We roll out changes in small batch sizes (as opposed to saving them up for a big update) whenever possible (it's possible for data changes and not for changes that require an app update). This reduces bugs and enables us to respond to issues and improve the game at a vastly faster rate. This also makes changes more difficult to precisely schedule very far in advance. The event schedule is subject to all kinds of factors that can affect events' start date, so coordinating those two things without creating a situation where a vital change is delayed or you're left without an event running means that sometimes changes relevant to events happen while the events are running (and as others have pointed out, for some changes, there's little/no time where the change isn't relevant to a currently running event).

I'll accept that there are very few times when you're not running a tournament, and you may have tournaments scheduled a fair while in advance. However, you've just admitted that character changes are fairly small and can be rolled out whenever possible. That still begs the question - why roll out the Thorverine changes during a week of tournaments that heavily feature them? It makes no sense. Why not wait another week? That would surely be the logical choice.

What's next for us? Do you have some Spidey and Mags tournaments set up for a couple of weeks away, and you'll introduce the character changes that week?

Unknown

DaveyPitch wrote:

What's next for us? Do you have some Spidey and Mags tournaments set up for a couple of weeks away, and you'll introduce the character changes that week?

This is why I refuse to put iso into my Spidey. I can't be sure they won't do that.

Unknown

Just to be clear it is awesome the amount of events you guys run. It would be fine to take a 15 30 minute breather for an update on a regular schedule much better than what is happening now.

IceIX

Psykopathic wrote:

And I would like to give you props for that. I have played games before where any form of negativity on a post was deleted or edited.

An Internet gaming buddy of mine dropped $600 on an Rpg we played over the course of a couple weeks to get a top tier weapon. He actually had a negative result in game. He didn't get the item, lost all the gold required to buy the chests you use the in game currency to open. When he made a forum post about it, they banned his account and edited the post to make fun of him.

While I hate reading negative threads, they serve a purpose in any case. And trying to stomp them out is (in my sole non-representing the company opinion) the dumbest thing you can do. People will complain about things, be they legitimate gripes or not. If you kill the official route to complain, the only thing they can do is either rage against the machine (unproductive for both parties) or go somewhere else and vent in an unofficial forum. That happens enough and and suddenly the people that are complaining but still loyal aren't spending time where official information, responses, and communication is happening. Again, it ends up bad for everyone. I'd rather let people push their vitriol out here in a somewhat controlled fashion than try to constantly squash it all and see the community slowly break up as this forum turns into a place where you have to watch what you say so closely you can't be even *thought* of as being negative.

Kelbris

IceIX wrote:

Derethus wrote:

So a couple days ago, IceIX posted this:

IceIX wrote:

Derethus wrote:

If you guys listen on the forums, could you please stop nerfing characters in the middle of tournaments featuring those characters? It's wonderful that you charge people for an avengers tournament and then nerf the two most played avengers in the middle of it.

Given that we run multiple events that feature different characters and many events often overlap, that's a really difficult one to abide by. Right now about the only characters we could probably hit would be a couple Dark Avengers and Bag-Man. The rest of the characters are pretty well featured in other Tourneys.

I want to say that, if the current PvP tournament didn't feature Wolverine, this would be the perfect time to patch. There's only one event going on. Tomorrow's Friday so devs can monitor any emergency. Why did the patch have to happen on tuesday, in the middle of a paid PvP tournament and in the middle of a very broken PvE?

And we're flipping from a Wolvy Tourney to a Thor Tourney. Which means that it's *still* not a good time since we're ending the Tourney for one character that was changed. Again, when is a good time?

Change the Thor Tourney to No Holds Barred? I don't really see the logic here. Did the next tournament NEED to be a Thor tournament?

Unknown

IceIX and Will, as much as I dislike the response I've been getting to this issue, please understand I really do appreciate you posting here and dealing with us (and me). Thanks for your hard work!

Unknown

IceIX wrote:

Psykopathic wrote:

And I would like to give you props for that. I have played games before where any form of negativity on a post was deleted or edited.

An Internet gaming buddy of mine dropped $600 on an Rpg we played over the course of a couple weeks to get a top tier weapon. He actually had a negative result in game. He didn't get the item, lost all the gold required to buy the chests you use the in game currency to open. When he made a forum post about it, they banned his account and edited the post to make fun of him.

While I hate reading negative threads, they serve a purpose in any case. And trying to stomp them out is (in my sole non-representing the company opinion) the dumbest thing you can do. People will complain about things, be they legitimate gripes or not. If you kill the official route to complain, the only thing they can do is either rage against the machine (unproductive for both parties) or go somewhere else and vent in an unofficial forum. That happens enough and and suddenly the people that are complaining but still loyal aren't spending time where official information, responses, and communication is happening. Again, it ends up bad for everyone. I'd rather let people push their vitriol out here in a somewhat controlled fashion than try to constantly squash it all and see the community slowly break up as this forum turns into a place where you have to watch what you say so closely you can't be even *thought* of as being negative.

No one likes negative criticism but it is that criticism you should be really paying attention to. Waiting to see how many people drop from your game to tell whether it is a good decision that was made in the last patch is kinda backwards. (You stated something to this effect in a thread somewhere and I'm paraphrasing)
Why let your most passionate players get angry and quit?. These are the folks who recommend your game to others when they love it.

IceIX

justaplayer wrote:

No one likes negative criticism but it is that criticism you should be really paying attention to. Waiting to see how many people drop from your game to tell whether it is a good decision that was made in the last patch is kinda backwards. (You stated something to this effect in a thread somewhere and I'm paraphrasing)
Why let your most passionate players get angry and quit?. These are the folks who recommend your game to others when they love it.

That's quite a paraphrase since I don't want anyone to drop from the game and that's not our intent when making changes. Some of our recent changes have been contentious and *could* cause that, yes. But what we want to monitor is player behavior over retention. If retention drops, that's a huge red flag and something we want to avoid (as should be obvious). But if player behavior changes, we can see why that was and if the change that we made did what we expected it to do.

Unknown

IceIX wrote:

justaplayer wrote:

No one likes negative criticism but it is that criticism you should be really paying attention to. Waiting to see how many people drop from your game to tell whether it is a good decision that was made in the last patch is kinda backwards. (You stated something to this effect in a thread somewhere and I'm paraphrasing)
Why let your most passionate players get angry and quit?. These are the folks who recommend your game to others when they love it.

That's quite a paraphrase since I don't want anyone to drop from the game and that's not our intent when making changes. Some of our recent changes have been contentious and *could* cause that, yes. But what we want to monitor is player behavior over retention. If retention drops, that's a huge red flag and something we want to avoid (as should be obvious). But if player behavior changes, we can see why that was and if the change that we made did what we expected it to do.

I had the gist of it right. You watch to see if retention drops after you made a change. The horse has left the stall, Elvis has left the building This product is one of the most polished games I have seen. People love it and they are upset at what are perceived as radical changes and the fact that money seems to be the motivating factor. As a developer I understand what it takes to bring software to market and get that you have bills to pay. However, the player has to enjoy playing and a lot of folks have been venting on the forums because that experience is being diminished. Why lose folks that are spending money when you could communicate more and find a way to change that sentiment? Even if you stand your ground on your decisions maybe you can find another way to smooth things over?

Unknown

Derethus wrote:

And why did these two tourneys HAVE to be a wolvy tourney and a thor one? Why didn't you instead have a Capatain America tourney followed by a No Holds Barred tourney? This way you can test the rebalance and not nerf characters in the middle of events that feature them.

Yep, the game has some 32-is characters, two gets the bat for the main reason being "overused", and right the next two tournaments are not about the other 30. On stuff like this I'm always wondering who swallowed the crazy pills we or the other side -- but there must be some inconsistency.

And if those tournaments just so must be with those heroes, why that was not announced earlier? Again such necessities hardly get born overnight -- all those plans must have been on display at the local planning department in Alpha Centauri for fifty of our Earth years or so.

Not anyone there give so much of a damn about players to disclose of those plans? Do they not deserve to know, to have time to prepare, to plan accordingly? Is dumping buckets of kitties the only possible way that can be deceived over there? And no should ever objects that they learned the 'respect for people' column in completely different way? Maybe we owe you an apology.

Unknown

Ben Grimm wrote:

I think the sensible thing would be to have a window every week then there isn't a tournament (maybe Thursday afternoon right after the Lightning rounds end) and consistently roll it out then. Plan a weekly events "blank spot" and use that as update time.

I don;t even get the idea of the general :update time". We have updates at least once a day lately. So what is so much special about any one of them? As the game is dependent on online connection they could be deployed even every 10 minutes, just use smart protocol to not waste bandwidth.

Unknown

Reposting an IceIX post:

IceIX wrote:

Derethus wrote:

Am I putting some words in their mouth? Maybe. But in response to "You put the nerf at a bad time" I was responded with "There's a wolvie and a thor tourney now! What's a better time?"

I'll say this about the recent character nerfs and associated planned Tournies. We put a few tacks up on the board of "What to avoid in the future if at all possible".

from: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2965&start=80#p46057

Well I feel a lot better now.

Unknown

Derethus wrote:

justaplayer wrote:

My error I found it:

http://www.d3pforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2747

Oh that thread. I'm fine with the nerfs and still think they're usable, I just think they timed it terribly. I guess I'll have to leave my boycott message here.

Yep. There is nothing inherently wrong about 'change' in general. Or particulatly change to characters, game organisation, consumables, prices, and many other things.

But there is a due procedure to it to keep fairness. And the fundamental elements of it is early warnings, then schedule announcement of the changes, leaving fair adjustment periods. This is not random sabacc.

Suppose a shop changed prices during your shopping and you realized it only when you already check out and pay. Or somewhat afterwards. Are you happy? Are you happier if the shopkeeper explains you how busy he is handling all his workers and goods, that they work 7/24 so there is no good time do do it -- and you can feel lucky for the privilege to just have it their way and smile on. (For the record, that is an actual practice time to time and the shop gets nontrivial fine if got caught.)

Unknown

IceIX wrote:

While I hate reading negative threads, they serve a purpose in any case. And trying to stomp them out is (in my sole non-representing the company opinion) the dumbest thing you can do. People will complain about things, be they legitimate gripes or not. If you kill the official route to complain, the only thing they can do is either rage against the machine (unproductive for both parties) or go somewhere else and vent in an unofficial forum. That happens enough and and suddenly the people that are complaining but still loyal aren't spending time where official information, responses, and communication is happening. Again, it ends up bad for everyone. I'd rather let people push their vitriol out here in a somewhat controlled fashion than try to constantly squash it all and see the community slowly break up as this forum turns into a place where you have to watch what you say so closely you can't be even *thought* of as being negative.

Now some words of wisdom.

Actually that's why this whole mess is so hard to swallow, I'm sure you understand all the concerns and objections written here 10 times over. I'm positive you know as much as we do how much messed these last weeks went. And how lame all those excuses are. And you know that we know that too. And that there's snowball's chance in hell anyone will not see through them.

Yet they are stated all the same.

Spoit

IceIX wrote:

justaplayer wrote:

No one likes negative criticism but it is that criticism you should be really paying attention to. Waiting to see how many people drop from your game to tell whether it is a good decision that was made in the last patch is kinda backwards. (You stated something to this effect in a thread somewhere and I'm paraphrasing)
Why let your most passionate players get angry and quit?. These are the folks who recommend your game to others when they love it.

That's quite a paraphrase since I don't want anyone to drop from the game and that's not our intent when making changes. Some of our recent changes have been contentious and *could* cause that, yes. But what we want to monitor is player behavior over retention. If retention drops, that's a huge red flag and something we want to avoid (as should be obvious). But if player behavior changes, we can see why that was and if the change that we made did what we expected it to do.

So if you want them to notice, instead of whining, you should put up and shut up and not play any more