The Safe Rant Thread for Letting Off Steam.

Kinesia

Peace through the acceptance of the inevitability of failure... That's my motto for life...

I can't let the insults to the dev team stand though... D3 management is the problem, forcing things before they are ready. If Oktagon had time and resources they'd do fine, they've proven they have the ability, pretty much every problem is just a lack of time and personnel. Nothing else at all.

Brakkis

Kinesia said:

Peace through the acceptance of the inevitability of failure... That's my motto for life...

I can't let the insults to the dev team stand though... D3 management is the problem, forcing things before they are ready. If Oktagon had time and resources they'd do fine, they've proven they have the ability, pretty much every problem is just a lack of time and personnel. Nothing else at all.

That's pure speculation without a single fact to back it up in order to blindly defend Oktagon. Unless you work for either company, you have no ground to take your stand on.

As such, the blame currently lies on both parties for the tinykitty state this game is in. Whether it's due to D3 enforcing strict deadlines regardless of the programming quality, or Oktagon not possessing the capability to restructure Hibernum's old coding, or a lack of personnel at Okatgon to handle the game better, none of us know. What we do know is the game is tinykitty nine ways from Sunday and it's the responsibility of both parties to fix that.

Mburn7

I just spend 45 minutes grinding out a win against a 3-Lich Bolas.

When I finally pop the last one and win, I get a "Something Went Wrong" error and no points.

Its tinykitty like this that makes me really close to quitting this game.  Oktagon need to get its tinykitty together.

Kinesia

Brakkis said:

Kinesia said:

Peace through the acceptance of the inevitability of failure... That's my motto for life...

I can't let the insults to the dev team stand though... D3 management is the problem, forcing things before they are ready. If Oktagon had time and resources they'd do fine, they've proven they have the ability, pretty much every problem is just a lack of time and personnel. Nothing else at all.

That's pure speculation without a single fact to back it up in order to blindly defend Oktagon. Unless you work for either company, you have no ground to take your stand on.

As such, the blame currently lies on both parties for the tinykitty state this game is in. Whether it's due to D3 enforcing strict deadlines regardless of the programming quality, or Oktagon not possessing the capability to restructure Hibernum's old coding, or a lack of personnel at Okatgon to handle the game better, none of us know. What we do know is the game is tinykitty nine ways from Sunday and it's the responsibility of both parties to fix that.

It's speculation, but not pure.

With lifetime experience in different dev teams in different roles I've NEVER met a developer that happily released something that had known severe problems without severe pressure from management. Every single failure in every company I've ever worked in or talked to people about was ALWAYS from management.

Dev's might go, "Ok, this is a problem but it's a smaller problem than the current one and we need a fix for that fast...", but the rest of the time it's handringing and pushing back to management with "We need more time, more people, this _isn't_ ready!"

But regardless of that it's _still_ managements responsibility because they are on the top of the heap anyway! If there _is_ a problem with Oktagon then it's managements job to fix that in the first place. The buck stops with them 100%, not 99, and D3Go's management have made years worth of bad decisions on an ongoing basis, I've attempted to contact them over and over for years to discuss various things that our other direct contacts don't have the authority to talk about, but they aren't willing to disguise themselves as a beggar and walk among their subjects even though it would help them make more money longterm.

It drives me crazy when people attack the devs who are poor downtrodden working folk like the rest of us. Attack the aristocracy instead.

Mburn7

I miss @FindingHeart8

madwren

To all of you who kept asking for pauper, I hope you're happy with Bo4t.

To Oktagon, when people ask for pauper, I suspec it's not because they want to play PVE events with bad cards, it's because they're tired of running into the same collection of masterpieces and mythics in PVP every week.

Mburn7

madwren said:

To all of you who kept asking for pauper, I hope you're happy with Bo4t.

To Oktagon, when people ask for pauper, I suspec it's not because they want to play PVE events with bad cards, it's because they're tired of running into the same collection of masterpieces and mythics in PVP every week.

I actually don't mind the challenge.  I just don't like how it carried over to the Merfolk node.  That's where the event starts getting kind of hard, and I don't like using janky junky decks against actual opponents.

Brakkis

madwren said:

To all of you who kept asking for pauper, I hope you're happy with Bo4t.

To Oktagon, when people ask for pauper, I suspec it's not because they want to play PVE events with bad cards, it's because they're tired of running into the same collection of masterpieces and mythics in PVP every week.

Without a method to enforce the pauper limitations outside of a secondary, pauper simply will not work in PvP.

Tremayne

madwren said:

To all of you who kept asking for pauper, I hope you're happy with Bo4t.

To Oktagon, when people ask for pauper, I suspec it's not because they want to play PVE events with bad cards, it's because they're tired of running into the same collection of masterpieces and mythics in PVP every week.

Not all opponents requires pauper. 

jimpark

madwren said:

To all of you who kept asking for pauper, I hope you're happy with Bo4t.

To Oktagon, when people ask for pauper, I suspec it's not because they want to play PVE events with bad cards, it's because they're tired of running into the same collection of masterpieces and mythics in PVP every week.

I feel you. And i am super duper uber glad 1.1 is pauper cause that makes winning in 6 turns so much more pleasant. 

starfall

Brakkis said:

madwren said:

To all of you who kept asking for pauper, I hope you're happy with Bo4t.

To Oktagon, when people ask for pauper, I suspec it's not because they want to play PVE events with bad cards, it's because they're tired of running into the same collection of masterpieces and mythics in PVP every week.

Without a method to enforce the pauper limitations outside of a secondary, pauper simply will not work in PvP.

I very much dislike the way that Oktagon, and Hibernum before them, have taught everyone to think that minor modifications in the code are somehow beyond the wit of mortal man.

Kinesia

I really really liked that there was a bunch of pauper, the 6 turns was especially a nice challenge.

The annoying part was that the progression rewards were sooooo close to needing perfect and I had a crash...

In a game without crashes it would all be so much more acceptable!

FindingHeart8

So I'm guessing nobody got their victory rare eh?

starfall

FindingHeart8 said:

So I'm guessing nobody got their victory rare eh?

Doesn't look like it. There's a rumor that you got a 5pack instead? But I'm not sure how many packs I already had so I can't be sure myself.

jtwood

madwren said:

To all of you who kept asking for pauper, I hope you're happy with Bo4t.

To Oktagon, when people ask for pauper, I suspec it's not because they want to play PVE events with bad cards, it's because they're tired of running into the same collection of masterpieces and mythics in PVP every week.

I enjoyed solving the problem of beating good PVE decks with bad pauper builds, but I did hate how it dragged out some of the matches. Consider that an unintended consequence of the format that I did not expect when asking for it. I like using weak cards for the fun of it, but when you have to slot through 150+ damage to get the win, it sort of saps the fun out of it.

Brakkis

starfall said:

Brakkis said:

madwren said:

To all of you who kept asking for pauper, I hope you're happy with Bo4t.

To Oktagon, when people ask for pauper, I suspec it's not because they want to play PVE events with bad cards, it's because they're tired of running into the same collection of masterpieces and mythics in PVP every week.

Without a method to enforce the pauper limitations outside of a secondary, pauper simply will not work in PvP.

I very much dislike the way that Oktagon, and Hibernum before them, have taught everyone to think that minor modifications in the code are somehow beyond the wit of mortal man.

Less beyond the wit, more... beyond the willingness and/or capabilities of Oktagon.

Mburn7

I've pulled like 5 Suncleanser's this week (2 of which from free daily packs).  I know the orbs are nice, but its really frustrating to get the same junk rare every time I see a shakey-shake

Boogeyman

NOP is THE worst event.  I put together some "creaturless" green decks to comply with the challenges and get hit with HUF, Deploy, Piggy decks with 100 creatures deploying...  They need to make a support that penalizes people to compliment the challenges. 

For instance, for every creature you cast/summon, you lose 5 live or something...

madwren

jtwood said:

madwren said:

To all of you who kept asking for pauper, I hope you're happy with Bo4t.

To Oktagon, when people ask for pauper, I suspec it's not because they want to play PVE events with bad cards, it's because they're tired of running into the same collection of masterpieces and mythics in PVP every week.

I enjoyed solving the problem of beating good PVE decks with bad pauper builds, but I did hate how it dragged out some of the matches. Consider that an unintended consequence of the format that I did not expect when asking for it. I like using weak cards for the fun of it, but when you have to slot through 150+ damage to get the win, it sort of saps the fun out of it.

Indeed.  It makes a grindy, tedious event even more grindy and tedious.

LeafHedger

I don’t know if I can muster a rant, all I can say is that BoFT part 2 is god awful. I really do genuinely hate it. It’s grindy, the objectives are matched terribly to the nodes, and most of the matches feel like you would need access to almost every card in the game, and have to spend a half hour building the perfect deck, just to have a chance. Azor’s Gateway somehow got City’s Blessing turn five, despite only having one creature with one reinforcement on the board. Instakilled me.

I don’t know what keeps drawing me back to this game to be honest. The events are insanely unbalanced, the bugs are out of control, and the developers seem to either not care, or just are in way over their heads. The thread that tracks known bugs currently has 71 bugs being investigated, 2 that they “need more information on” and 0 that are set to be fixed with the next update. There’s something very fundamentally wrong with how they built this game but I can’t figure out what it is. All I know is that if they could fix it, this would probably be the most enjoyable strategy game app on the market.

my current theory is there’s something wrong with their fundamental architecture, as in, they haven’t made a rigorous enough set of definitions for the game. There’s SO MANY moving pieces to this game, that if you don’t define every fundamental element of the game mechanics in a PERFECTLY rigorous way (ie. how cards can enter the board, how cards can leave the board, the order of implementation of different effects, general class/effect precedents, etc.) that every time you add a new elements to the system (ex. rule change, new spell or effect in an event, and NEW CARDS) you run the risk of said new element interfering with some 10,000 other elements in any number of ways. That’s why there’s so many glitches and bugs. That’s why when they fix the bugs it just seems to make more. They’re over complicating the system when they really need to go back to square one and take a look at how they would build it in a more rigorous way.