I was in the beta and despite the number of fanboi's trying to do damage control here it doesn't change the fact that a lot of other testers like myself tried to warn CS the client wasn't ready for launch but obviously their publisher rushed them to launch at the chance of  losing their funding.  Time will tell if CO sinks or swims, but I believe STO will take the spotlight for CS, and CO will keep dwindling in subscribers until CS is forced to pull the plug within a few months.

Originally posted by elbowelbow

Originally posted by therain93

First, can we even call a day 1 change a nerf?  The changes here were the result of playtesting and feedback.  Next thing you know, people will be complaining about changes made to a game between alpha and beta....

Because it wasn't "day 1".  It was after 3 days of head start, which is the "start early" bonus given to customers who bought from certain retailers (or lifetime/6-month subs).

Instead of releasing the (sweeping) beta playtesting/feedback changes during beta and allowing them to be tested during beta, they were released 3 days after the first retail customers began playing.

Okay, I can see the head start people crying (although they do get their retcons now) but why is everyone else crying then?

Originally posted by elbowelbow

Originally posted by therain93

Third, I think people are unreasonable to think that every single change can be reported.  Difficulty and experience is not a straight-line algorithm where to-hit is calculated as "is 5x +2 > 10?".  As was stated, there is no master spreadsheet of every conceivable combination of powers and stating the developers do not know how their game works is a bit ridiculous -- it's a juvenile response.  The entire game is a complex statistical algorithm and changes made to it trickle down.

Because that's how it came across?  Because specific powers needed to be nerfed, and the changed ended up touching (and breaking some) powers across the board?  Yes it's complex, but it isn't unreasonable for customers to expect developers to understand the effects of their changes and how much testing is needed to verify that the unexpected doesn't happen.  If the algorithms are complex enough that the full results can only be determined by playtesting, then why were the changes released without playtesting?  And worse, they were released a few days after beta testing ended instead of during beta.

Shortly after the release of the changes, players were assembling their own (detailed) patch notes to make up for the lack.

See where the loss of customer confidence comes from?

Are you new to online gaming?  "Balance" is all about the swing of the pendulum. 

The decision to make the changes was made because clearly they felt the status quo was not acceptable.  Either most people will power through the content and then leave the game or Cryptic can maybe cause a little heartbreak in the first 2 weeks but straighten things out quickly and hope all will soon be forgiven and forgotten while prolonging subscription duration.

Frankly, I wrote that the game release should have been postponed another month, several times on their forums and even on here.  *shrug*  I fault Cryptic for that, but not for working on the balance.  If the game were a complete mess the entire time, then I could see people losing confidence but Cryptic did have things working relatively speaking and is capable of fixing things.  They've got a 30 day window to figure it out before the damage is done -- that's a sunk cost on your part.  Losing confidence on day 4 of that window seems unreasonable to me but it's still your time, perhaps take a 2 week break and then check in to see if progress is there.

Originally posted by Jester47

I still enjoy this game thoroughly before and after the patch and I have no intentions of cancelling my lifetime sub. If anything, this patch made the game MORE fun for me. Why exactly should I be plowing through enemies left and right? Yes, I'm aware this is a SUPER  HERO  MMO, but it's also a VIDEO  GAME. The people crying on the forums claiming they don't feel like superheroes anymore because they can't kill every non super-villain in the game at the same time without taking any damage are just being ridiculous. I literally read a post similar to "My character is made of steel, he shouldn't be killed by bullets." on the official forums. The sad thing is, there are a LOT of people saying the same thing. This community is worse than LOTRO in its constant crying.

People said the same thing after ED hit City of Heroes.  They don't seem to grasp the point that having an "I WIN" button defeats the purpose of a game.

Originally posted by therain93

Originally posted by Jester47

I still enjoy this game thoroughly before and after the patch and I have no intentions of cancelling my lifetime sub. If anything, this patch made the game MORE fun for me. Why exactly should I be plowing through enemies left and right? Yes, I'm aware this is a SUPER  HERO  MMO, but it's also a VIDEO  GAME. The people crying on the forums claiming they don't feel like superheroes anymore because they can't kill every non super-villain in the game at the same time without taking any damage are just being ridiculous. I literally read a post similar to "My character is made of steel, he shouldn't be killed by bullets." on the official forums. The sad thing is, there are a LOT of people saying the same thing. This community is worse than LOTRO in its constant crying.

 

People said the same thing after ED hit City of Heroes.  They don't seem to grasp the point that having an "I WIN" button defeats the purpose of a game.

No its not having an "I Win" button that they are complaining about.  The problem with what cyrptic has done is they made a classless system... this creates a big problem for those that want a "super hero" feel.  If I have invulnerability, it should work by making me somewhat invulnerable to certain things.  In most games a power like invulnerability would be reserved for tanks.  In CO it isn't reserved for anyone,  so in order to balance that,  they have to nerf it so that it doesn't seem over powered by those who take high damage powers and high defensive powers.

Thats really what the problem is,  trying to balance after the fact because the system is inherently flawed.  I'm all for classless games, but right now cryptic is trying to deal with this on a power-by-power basis when the actual problem is balancing the need for stances and specific power choices.  They should have kept the weakness system and worked that out.. it would have made for a more balanced game.

---

Originally posted by Thrawl
 I played the OB and the game seemed quite polished and actually quite fun. Nerfing a game on opening day is definitley epic stupid, but I think that once they get everything balanced they will have a solid game on their hands.

---

Champions Online is now officially Dead On Arrival.

Cryptic rolled out the EXP nerf and the Defense nerf untested and were not fully aware of the unexpected consequences they might cause. This has resulted in irrapable harm to Champions Online, first impressions are EVERYTHING to MMOs. Last day of Open Beta? First day of launch? Doesnt matter. The launch has been tarnished. The reputation Champions Online earned on its first day of launch will stick with it until it dies.

If you think I am being overly dramatic then ask EQ2, Vanguard and AoC about their launches.

As for the future of Champions Online, given Cryptic's penchant for overbearing wide sweeping nerfs in CoH I do not see a recovery for Champions Online.

Originally posted by maskedweasel

Originally posted by therain93

Originally posted by Jester47

I still enjoy this game thoroughly before and after the patch and I have no intentions of cancelling my lifetime sub. If anything, this patch made the game MORE fun for me. Why exactly should I be plowing through enemies left and right? Yes, I'm aware this is a SUPER  HERO  MMO, but it's also a VIDEO  GAME. The people crying on the forums claiming they don't feel like superheroes anymore because they can't kill every non super-villain in the game at the same time without taking any damage are just being ridiculous. I literally read a post similar to "My character is made of steel, he shouldn't be killed by bullets." on the official forums. The sad thing is, there are a LOT of people saying the same thing. This community is worse than LOTRO in its constant crying.

 

People said the same thing after ED hit City of Heroes.  They don't seem to grasp the point that having an "I WIN" button defeats the purpose of a game.

 

No its not having an "I Win" button that they are complaining about.  The problem with what cyrptic has done is they made a classless system... this creates a big problem for those that want a "super hero" feel.  If I have invulnerability, it should work by making me somewhat invulnerable to certain things.  In most games a power like invulnerability would be reserved for tanks.  In CO it isn't reserved for anyone,  so in order to balance that,  they have to nerf it so that it doesn't seem over powered by those who take high damage powers and high defensive powers.

The role system completely takes care of this (or it will when it gets balanced right.)

You'll still have "invulnerability" not making you completely invulnerable in Guardian (presumably intended to be the solo role,) but you'll never have the problem as you stated it: you'll never be invulnerable while dishing out the uber nukes, because either your nukes won't hit hard (without being in Avenger role) or your invulnerability won't protect you that great (without being in Protector.)

Originally posted by therain93

Originally posted by elbowelbow

Originally posted by therain93

Third, I think people are unreasonable to think that every single change can be reported.  Difficulty and experience is not a straight-line algorithm where to-hit is calculated as "is 5x +2 > 10?".  As was stated, there is no master spreadsheet of every conceivable combination of powers and stating the developers do not know how their game works is a bit ridiculous -- it's a juvenile response.  The entire game is a complex statistical algorithm and changes made to it trickle down.

Because that's how it came across?  Because specific powers needed to be nerfed, and the changed ended up touching (and breaking some) powers across the board?  Yes it's complex, but it isn't unreasonable for customers to expect developers to understand the effects of their changes and how much testing is needed to verify that the unexpected doesn't happen.  If the algorithms are complex enough that the full results can only be determined by playtesting, then why were the changes released without playtesting?  And worse, they were released a few days after beta testing ended instead of during beta.

Shortly after the release of the changes, players were assembling their own (detailed) patch notes to make up for the lack.

See where the loss of customer confidence comes from?

 

Are you new to online gaming?  "Balance" is all about the swing of the pendulum. 

The decision to make the changes was made because clearly they felt the status quo was not acceptable.  Either most people will power through the content and then leave the game or Cryptic can maybe cause a little heartbreak in the first 2 weeks but straighten things out quickly and hope all will soon be forgiven and forgotten while prolonging subscription duration.

Frankly, I wrote that the game release should have been postponed another month, several times on their forums and even on here.  *shrug*  I fault Cryptic for that, but not for working on the balance.  If the game were a complete mess the entire time, then I could see people losing confidence but Cryptic did have things working relatively speaking and is capable of fixing things.  They've got a 30 day window to figure it out before the damage is done -- that's a sunk cost on your part.  Losing confidence on day 4 of that window seems unreasonable to me but it's still your time, perhaps take a 2 week break and then check in to see if progress is there.

Whether "Balance" was needed wasn't the topic of the quote (yours) that I was replying to.

My point was that releasing sweeping changes without playtesting on launch day, and doing so with very vague patch notes, was a terrible idea.  It isn't surprising that people are upset, or that they're canceling subs this soon.  Sure, it hasn't been long, but a move like that says a lot about how much trust customers can put in the developer going forward.

Originally posted by elbowelbow

Whether "Balance" was needed wasn't the topic of the quote (yours) that I was replying to.

My point was that releasing sweeping changes without playtesting on launch day, and doing so with very vague patch notes, was a terrible idea.  It isn't surprising that people are upset, or that they're canceling subs this soon.  Sure, it hasn't been long, but a move like that says a lot about how much trust customers can put in the developer going forward.

Personally I think this whole thing is tragic for Cryptic.  Not out of them genuinely making real mistakes, but of how their customers have blown things out of proportion.

I mean c'mon...patch notes being vague for a single patch on release day (with the vast majority of the playerbase never having seen the game) is completely reasonable.  Not something I'd do if I were in charge of the game perhaps, but not something to whine about.  Certainly not worth canceling over.

Especially given that the primary target for ire (Passive Defenses) seems completely fine nowadays.  Obviously things were really broken before, if the current passives are "nerfed".  I'm glad they didn't wait on the change (and therefore piss off the much larger bunch of customers who would take the powers on launch day only to have them nerfed a few days later.)

Really out of all your "arguments" against Cryptic, only the weak patch notes point has any weight at all...and even that's iffy.

If you don't have fun with the game, say so and cancel.  Otherwise get over yourself and enjoy the game.

You've conveniently ignored the point that the changes were massive and released on launch day without playtesting and that they affected much more than the passive defenses.  They also introduced bugs (field surge, etc.) that would have been found in playtesting.  They were certainly found very quickly after the patch went live.  The fact that the documentation was poor and had to be figured out and detailed by players after it was released is just icing on the cake.

You asked what they could have done differently.  It was pointed out that they could have extended beta (and delayed launch), since they knew huge changes were coming.  Failing that, they could have put the changes on a test server.  They could have introduced them incrementally.

I honestly don't see why you're bent on making any of this personal.  It's a discussion about what happened and why people think it happened.  If some people argue that they don't understand why others are canceling, then of course other people are going to point out why they think people feel the need to cancel.  It has nothing to do with my subscription or yours, or whether either of us even has a subscription.  There's nothing personal about it.  It's just a discussion (that fits the forum).  There's not really anything to "get over".

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by maskedweasel

Originally posted by therain93

Originally posted by Jester47

I still enjoy this game thoroughly before and after the patch and I have no intentions of cancelling my lifetime sub. If anything, this patch made the game MORE fun for me. Why exactly should I be plowing through enemies left and right? Yes, I'm aware this is a SUPER  HERO  MMO, but it's also a VIDEO  GAME. The people crying on the forums claiming they don't feel like superheroes anymore because they can't kill every non super-villain in the game at the same time without taking any damage are just being ridiculous. I literally read a post similar to "My character is made of steel, he shouldn't be killed by bullets." on the official forums. The sad thing is, there are a LOT of people saying the same thing. This community is worse than LOTRO in its constant crying.

 

People said the same thing after ED hit City of Heroes.  They don't seem to grasp the point that having an "I WIN" button defeats the purpose of a game.

 

No its not having an "I Win" button that they are complaining about.  The problem with what cyrptic has done is they made a classless system... this creates a big problem for those that want a "super hero" feel.  If I have invulnerability, it should work by making me somewhat invulnerable to certain things.  In most games a power like invulnerability would be reserved for tanks.  In CO it isn't reserved for anyone,  so in order to balance that,  they have to nerf it so that it doesn't seem over powered by those who take high damage powers and high defensive powers.

The role system completely takes care of this (or it will when it gets balanced right.)

You'll still have "invulnerability" not making you completely invulnerable in Guardian (presumably intended to be the solo role,) but you'll never have the problem as you stated it: you'll never be invulnerable while dishing out the uber nukes, because either your nukes won't hit hard (without being in Avenger role) or your invulnerability won't protect you that great (without being in Protector.)

They would really have to work a mass rebalance on the roles , or "stances" as I called them in CB.  When I played all the way through OB you could sufficiently stay in balanced mode the entire time in PvE.  In fact, it was better that way.. although few powers actually required the correct "role".   If cryptic wanted to really balance it right using that type of system.. when you choose a powerset they should close you off to a role and only allow access to the powers that role can use.  Currently the system could probably be confusing for new comers who might now know about roles, certain powers, and things of that nature, and instead just cherry pick and stay in balanced all the time.

Originally posted by maskedweasel

They would really have to work a mass rebalance on the roles , or "stances" as I called them in CB.  When I played all the way through OB you could sufficiently stay in balanced mode the entire time in PvE.  In fact, it was better that way.. although few powers actually required the correct "role".   If cryptic wanted to really balance it right using that type of system.. when you choose a powerset they should close you off to a role and only allow access to the powers that role can use.  Currently the system could probably be confusing for new comers who might now know about roles, certain powers, and things of that nature, and instead just cherry pick and stay in balanced all the time.

Really don't get the impression they'd have to rebalance it that much.  Although part of the problem seems to be your lack of understanding that Guardian is clearly designed to be the "solo" Role, with the other Roles only used when teaming.   Furthermore if you're calling them "stances" it's no surprise why you felt the system worked that well, since they clearly seem to be something you're not supposed to change except when you switch between grouping/soloing.

Presumably the game does a "WOW Switch" at some point to instanced group content?  If it does and you're still using Guardian all the time, then yeah things need to get rebalanced. 

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by maskedweasel

They would really have to work a mass rebalance on the roles , or "stances" as I called them in CB.  When I played all the way through OB you could sufficiently stay in balanced mode the entire time in PvE.  In fact, it was better that way.. although few powers actually required the correct "role".   If cryptic wanted to really balance it right using that type of system.. when you choose a powerset they should close you off to a role and only allow access to the powers that role can use.  Currently the system could probably be confusing for new comers who might now know about roles, certain powers, and things of that nature, and instead just cherry pick and stay in balanced all the time.

 

Really don't get the impression they'd have to rebalance it that much.  Although part of the problem seems to be your lack of understanding that Guardian is clearly designed to be the "solo" Role, with the other Roles only used when teaming.   Furthermore if you're calling them "stances" it's no surprise why you felt the system worked that well, since they clearly seem to be something you're not supposed to change except when you switch between grouping/soloing.

Presumably the game does a "WOW Switch" at some point to instanced group content?  If it does and you're still using Guardian all the time, then yeah things need to get rebalanced. 

I apologize if my terminology is off, but in closed beta, they didn't give the "roles" fancy names.  They were Balanced, Offensive, Defensive and Support. I understand the "roles" quite well actually, or at least what they were when I played the game all the way up to the end of Open beta when they changed the names.  As for instanced group content,  there happens to be a number of instanced group content in the later levels and for some end game content.  As said previously with the way the CO system is setup you could create countless builds using a plethora of different matches at level 40 and test them all in the powerhouse if you wanted to... but that would be for the majority of players that "get" it...   

:Edit:  If you take a look at my profile you can see an umber of pictures.. my swordsman (the silver guy with the scarf) was always always... ALWAYS... used in an offensive role.  At that time the offensive role was actually useful, you could see a stark difference between being in balanced and offensive.. you would literally kill much faster, and my attacks that gained END on momentum generated much more END.....  That worked pretty well for me.  When I played in OB in offensive role with a fire based character.. I saw very little differences, but mainly I just died a large number of times.  That didn't seem to me to be the correct way to balance the "roles" but then again, it looks like they're still in the middle of trying to get everything balanced. :end edit:

Now I don't know how much things have changed since Closed Beta and then Open Beta.... both of which I was able to level to max level through, but from what I saw they were trying to push people more towards making the "right" decisions with a few sets already.  Trying to dice the sets up by "role" is a fancy way to try and keep the game balanced, but to be honest, its really done half ass.   You can say things will get better when the balance the "roles" but that only takes you so far. 

Originally posted by elbowelbow

You've conveniently ignored the point that the changes were massive and released on launch day without playtesting and that they affected much more than the passive defenses.  They also introduced bugs (field surge, etc.) that would have been found in playtesting. 

You asked what they could have done differently.  It was pointed out that they could have extended beta (and delayed launch), since they knew huge changes were coming.  Failing that, they could have put the changes on a test server.  They could have introduced them incrementally.

I honestly don't see why you're bent on making any of this personal.  It's a discussion about what happened and why people think it happened.  If some people argue that they don't understand why others are canceling, then of course other people are going to point out why they think people feel the need to cancel.  It has nothing to do with my subscription or yours, or whether either of us even has a subscription.  There's nothing personal about it.  It's just a discussion (that fits the forum).  There's not really anything to "get over".

I'm not trying to make it personal, I'm merely trying to get you to actually explain why people are making such a fuss.  Thus far it just seems people are being overly sensitive about decisions which not only failed to ruin the game for retail customers like myself, they clearly made it better-balanced.

That might be why there's so much discussion on the topic: nothing is actually wrong, yet a subset of players is crying bloody murder over the whole affair (prompting the normal players to keep discussing the issue to try to track down what's actually wrong.)

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by elbowelbow

You've conveniently ignored the point that the changes were massive and released on launch day without playtesting and that they affected much more than the passive defenses.  They also introduced bugs (field surge, etc.) that would have been found in playtesting. 

You asked what they could have done differently.  It was pointed out that they could have extended beta (and delayed launch), since they knew huge changes were coming.  Failing that, they could have put the changes on a test server.  They could have introduced them incrementally.

I honestly don't see why you're bent on making any of this personal.  It's a discussion about what happened and why people think it happened.  If some people argue that they don't understand why others are canceling, then of course other people are going to point out why they think people feel the need to cancel.  It has nothing to do with my subscription or yours, or whether either of us even has a subscription.  There's nothing personal about it.  It's just a discussion (that fits the forum).  There's not really anything to "get over".

 

I'm not trying to make it personal, I'm merely trying to get you to actually explain why people are making such a fuss.  Thus far it just seems people are being overly sensitive about decisions which not only failed to ruin the game for retail customers like myself, they clearly made it better-balanced.

That might be why there's so much discussion on the topic: nothing is actually wrong, yet a subset of players is crying bloody murder over the whole affair (prompting the normal players to keep discussing the issue to try to track down what's actually wrong.)

It depends on what you mean by "nothing being wrong."    Its obvious Cryptic acknowledged something was wrong.  The "balance"  and "launch bugs" everyone happens to be complaining about were not nearly as prevalent in OB and headstart.  It was after the fact -- on launch day, that the build became severely unstable and they changed up the way the game plays without ever testing the patch.  Rationalizing it any other way then saying cryptic was careless is exactly that -- rationalizing.  Some people purchased the game, I know how it feels to purchase an MMO and have it not live up to your standards... I was in beta and launch for games like MxO and Vanguard as being some of the worst.  

All the way through Closed Beta, I never had a single qualm with Cryptic, and I envisioned a fairly flawless launch.... I was very surprised with the outcome.     Patches in the name of balancing  -- thats okay -- untested patches in the name of balancing and changing for the sake of change.... thats NGE stuff... leave that out on launch day.

 Out of curiosity, did these guys even have or have now a "test realm"?

Originally posted by Lansid

 Out of curiosity, did these guys even have or have now a "test realm"?

They did not implement a test server until after the launch fiasco.

I sent in a ticket yesterday stating I would not be purchasing the game, and to refund me my 6-month subscription as I am now no longer interested in play testing STO. CO was great for the first 3 days, but once I got into PvP and saw the imbalance, and came to the realization that everyone sucks at making characters, I lost interest. Here's hoping I get refunded. Here's hoping they lose the Star Trek license(unlikely, I know).

Originally posted by Czanrei

I was in the beta and despite the number of fanboi's trying to do damage control here it doesn't change the fact that a lot of other testers like myself tried to warn CS the client wasn't ready for launch but obviously their publisher rushed them to launch at the chance of  losing their funding.  Time will tell if CO sinks or swims, but I believe STO will take the spotlight for CS, and CO will keep dwindling in subscribers until CS is forced to pull the plug within a few months.

Agree 100%. We told them the game was not ready yet they ignored us and the Cryptic fanboys just tried to drown us out. Now, their paying for it. It gives me a chuckle when i see Daeke on twitter freaking out or see people going apeshiz on the champions boards. They could have saved themselves a lot of trouble had they slowed down, fixed things, listened to experienced testers, and put out a quality game.

Someone was too busy thinking of a deadline.

The only thing that truly bugged the ever-loving crap out of me was the nerfs on launch day. They really tore us a new asshole with that one. Many of my friends had to reroll well-established characters because of this. Not that it's hard to level (even with the xp nerf you can max out in a week of solid play) but it's a pain in the ass having to go through ALL that shit again. The tutorial itself gets boring after doing it a few times and really becomes a chore when you're into the whole alt thing, and you WILL get alt-itis in CO I can assure you...