|
Post by pangurban on Apr 29, 2017 7:18:16 GMT
I haven't been apart of the CID very long, but it seems like a joke so far. PP is going to do whatever they want to do. The community was only invited to point out glaring oversights. Honestly, if that's all the community is supposed and allowed to do that's fine by me. Mass playtesting on a scale PP can't do by themselves but little or no say in the decisions made based on those playtest results? Sounds exactly like it should be. PP occasionally makes design decisions that have me shaking my head too, but the things I've seen players suggest have sometimes been completely beyond the pale.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Apr 29, 2017 9:54:04 GMT
I haven't been apart of the CID very long, but it seems like a joke so far. PP is going to do whatever they want to do. The community was only invited to point out glaring oversights. No, PP have been pretty responsive to good changes in general. When it gets bad is when PP releases an idea that seems counter-intuitive or non-functional. Things like the Wanderer in Grymkin, who was just a guy filled with defensive tech and fluff that doesn't quite suit it. Even then they tried to make some things different. Their basic ideas are, in general, good. Adding seperate sub roles to battle engines is a good way to frame design and give some more of a life to a concept that doesn't really do anything. I will be curious what happens next week.
|
|
Lanz
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Lanz on Apr 29, 2017 10:02:53 GMT
I think players have some unrealistic notions with CID. You're playtesters, not co-developers. At the same time, however, PP hasn't exactly been organizing CID testing into a coherent test case, so it's not surprising that players feel that their opinions and experiences are the only meaningful feedback. PP hasn't exactly given anything better to work with.
|
|
|
Post by HereComesTomorrow on Apr 29, 2017 11:53:22 GMT
Their basic ideas are, in general, good. Adding seperate sub roles to battle engines is a good way to frame design and give some more of a life to a concept that doesn't really do anything. I will be curious what happens next week. I think the battle engines could have benefitted from an individual concept thing like the Grymkin models did. The sub roles are a bit all over the place. The Meat Thresher and Gun Carriage are both listed as tanks but the Thresher is clearly meant for melee infantry murder whereas the GC is made for control and support.
|
|
unded
Junior Strategist
Posts: 760
|
Post by unded on Apr 30, 2017 19:28:07 GMT
I have been really impressed by the CiD process.
The design team has been responsive to criticism, has been open about design intentions, and firm about not jumping to appease every single complaint while also responding to genuine problems when highlighted and verified.
They've even put out certain things to let everybody play amateur game designer in focused ways when something isn't quite doing what it's supposed to (prime example was the dreamer's phantasms) in the Dev talks.
They may not have agreed with every comment I've made, but I honestly couldn't ask for more than they've done. I love it, wouldn't want it any other way.
-und_ed
|
|
|
Post by whiskeydave on May 1, 2017 16:10:02 GMT
I haven't been apart of the CID very long, but it seems like a joke so far. PP is going to do whatever they want to do. The community was only invited to point out glaring oversights. Yay... More hyperbole. I've been following CID since it started and well-tailored, detail oriented feedback has been well received. Knee jerk criticism has not. It is NOT the community building models, but it is far from a joke. Grymkin will be BETTER for their inclusion in the process. Battleengines, banes and steam roller will be BETTER for their inclusion. Will they be what you would have wrote for them? Probably not. But they will be BETTER and that is no joke. The problem, IMO, is your expectations for what you thought CID was competing with what it is and you deciding that the difference makes it a joke. Our experiences differ...
|
|
|
Post by moberg on May 1, 2017 16:52:07 GMT
IMO, it's a great place. There's lots of positive feedback and even if the devs don't comment on everything, they still feel involved in the important discussions. It's also one hell of a difference if compared to the old forums. There's just loads and loads of good content, feedback, discussion and batreps. It's quite incredible really, and I like it.
|
|
|
Post by HereComesTomorrow on May 1, 2017 17:29:25 GMT
I haven't been apart of the CID very long, but it seems like a joke so far. PP is going to do whatever they want to do. The community was only invited to point out glaring oversights. Grymkin will be BETTER for their inclusion in the process. This is undeniable. If Grymkin had been released as they were at the start of the CID they would have been awful.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on May 4, 2017 20:40:59 GMT
I do wish the devs communicated in a clearer manner.
Its so confusing chasing after thier intentions sometimes
|
|
|
Post by svirfneblin on May 5, 2017 2:22:17 GMT
I haven't been apart of the CID very long, but it seems like a joke so far. PP is going to do whatever they want to do. The community was only invited to point out glaring oversights. I agree. It feels like all PP is doing is blowing smoke with the CID. Whatever testing the players do feels more like its there to quell dissent and dissatisfaction and whatever changes come about as a result of player testing will be incidental at best.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on May 5, 2017 2:49:10 GMT
I agree. It feels like all PP is doing is blowing smoke with the CID. Whatever testing the players do feels more like its there to quell dissent and dissatisfaction and whatever changes come about as a result of player testing will be incidental at best. Sorta. Were there to point out glaring oversights: But PP does not want to be questioned. So much of my goodwill is gone with the direction of the Salt Wheeler and the unwillingness to explain themselves about its new direction at all. They seem to fight every step of the way. And I'm not saying they should buckle to every trend, but it almost feels like every change is met with a "Well we love it, you REALLY need to argue to prove to us otherwise". The problem being is that it feels more frustrating then anything, and they rarely explain their thought processes. Just about every model in the army collects corpses, but adding the ability to another one, well: Suddenly its too complex! Selecting Different ammo types is too complex, but not a Billion different rules to make the Salt Engine good in melee? FINE
|
|
|
Post by Swampmist on May 5, 2017 3:05:59 GMT
I agree. It feels like all PP is doing is blowing smoke with the CID. Whatever testing the players do feels more like its there to quell dissent and dissatisfaction and whatever changes come about as a result of player testing will be incidental at best. Sorta. Were there to point out glaring oversights: But PP does not want to be questioned. So much of my goodwill is gone with the direction of the Salt Wheeler and the unwillingness to explain themselves about its new direction at all. They seem to fight every step of the way. And I'm not saying they should buckle to every trend, but it almost feels like every change is met with a "Well we love it, you REALLY need to argue to prove to us otherwise". The problem being is that it feels more frustrating then anything, and they rarely explain their thought processes. Just about every model in the army collects corpses, but adding the ability to another one, well: Suddenly its too complex! Selecting Different ammo types is too complex, but not a Billion different rules to make the Salt Engine good in melee? FINE See, the GC is my example for something entirely different: PP want you to comment, post ideas and suggestions for SPECIFICS. They already have their intended designs for every model we are testing, and that is very unlikely to change because of us. The GC for example, isn't getting new ammo because they want it to be a melee BE, to act like a Tank in an MMO. The melee rules rather than ranged stuff is because of their design goal, not because of complexity. My feelings on the VoJ are also in with this; it is a support be that no-one takes to support their army but because it has a long-ranged boostable gun. So, my requests and suggestions have been targeted not at its current use, which it is good enough at to be taken under a caster or 2, but in its intended use (which it isn't very good at.) That's the big sticking point of CID. I enjoy and am incredibly happy with the process because I understand that the community cannot change the designer's design goals of a model. However, the community has time and again affected the ways in which that model reaches its intended goal, which (for me anyway) is incredibly rewarding and leaves me with few doubts that PP is listening to us .
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on May 5, 2017 3:16:05 GMT
The melee rules rather than ranged stuff is because of their design goal, not because of complexity. No, they say they don't want multiple ammo types because of complexity as well. This is what I mean about communication. And again if its the MMO tank why does soles shield it with winterguards? And if they want it as a MMO tank could they explain why? Like Khador has so many Tanks...I think it could be defined as the Tank Faction. Why do they want this tank to be this specific kind of tank. If they think "Well Khador gets too much lenience on in faction roles" FINE. Tell me that. Not [DELETED] . You're a good moderator Swampist. You always try to explain yourself. But I guess you don't have contractual mumbo jumbo holding you back. Which is why this CID is frusturating...Amongst other things.
|
|
princeraven
Junior Strategist
Shredder spam is best spam
Posts: 256
|
Post by princeraven on May 5, 2017 4:16:21 GMT
I think if they unplug Soles' keyboard they can build up a fair bit of good will.
|
|
|
Post by Swampmist on May 5, 2017 4:26:10 GMT
I think if they unplug Soles' keyboard they can build up a fair bit of good will. I get this is a joke, but for the last bloody time guys stop with the personal attacks against PP an\or staff members.
|
|