Discuss large scale changes first

[Undefined]

Hi,

I feel like this last patch and it's gilding situation could have been far better handled and so I'd like to offer a little constructive criticism. Rather than focusing on the content of the patch I want to talk about the way implementation was handled.
Shockingly doing such a drastic change overnight with no prior warning is a terrible idea in a community management sense. I strongly feel that if these changes had been bought up previously and discussed prior to being added things would have gone much more smoothly.

Right now you have people reacting based solely on their gut, anger, shock, surprise, unhappiness. Suddenly they've logged in and had major changes made to their ability to perform various things they enjoy doing. Had the concept been discussed first they would have at least had prior warning that this change was on the table and was likely going to happen, they could have prepared for it, in many cases I think they could even have been excited to see it happen and looking forward to it.
Constructive feedback could have been gathered and the system could have been tuned before it even happened.

When the day came that it was added the very same people you see right now hating the system, moaning and unhappy would have been anxious and excited to get logged in and play with it. They would have understood the idea better, had a chance to offer feedback and be forewarned that they would need to adapt to large changes and so able to formulate a solution and be ready to deal with it and likely actually enjoy it.

This isn't the first time it's happened. When it came to implementing siege changes I was happy to see a pre-discussion take place, you'll also notice that when it did happen there was far far less gut reaction complaining.

[jorb]

I don't want to dismiss the idea offhand, but if every issue has to be brought before a grand conclave before we can implement it, a lot less will be accomplished.

[Ukhata]

I don't want to dismiss the idea offhand, but if every issue has to be brought before a grand conclave before we can implement it, a lot less will be accomplished.

pick a few of the most active players in a sort of small insiders test group?
just a thought

[stya]

What you are doing would fit the agile dev:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agile_software_development

See point 3 and 4:
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers

We are talking about big changes here like this or siege, those changes do not happenevery week...

Tbh, not a grand conclave but having a quick idea of the weaknesses of the new systems and overall balance would save you some time in the end. You do not have to read 50 pages to know what people think. Also doing something, then going more or less backwards isn't helping you (I think).

And if not asking our opinion you could at least warn us with a quick 10 lines in an annoucement formajor changes.

[Archiplex]

I don't want to dismiss the idea offhand, but if every issue has to be brought before a grand conclave before we can implement it, a lot less will be accomplished.

On the other hand, you shock and awe a majority of players by nullifying lots of work, especially when reforming major gameplay pieces

The gilding system, intrinsically bad? Not at all. Needs fixing up? Sure. Good for the game? That's decided with time

But- you have people who spent countless hours and effort getting equipment they have now, some even spending real money to get certain high quality goods, and in and the timespan of (insert time needed to patch server and reboot), it's all gone for them and they have to do yet even more to re-earn where they were.

A warning, discussion of the system is definitely worth consideration- if a system causes controversy and there are clear sides to whether it's good for the game or not, then maybe a trial phase of implementation is worth calling for.

But, out-of-the-blue stuff like this might only serve to harm the game, even if the system itself is not bad.

It's not hard to disagree with this is it? I'm speaking as someone who was largely unaffected (or, even benefitted) from this system since I was a ranger and never used many stat-buffing gear, and am now able to raise my related scores incredibly so. I totally agree that this sort of change should have come at a world reset (although that does not mean it should have called for one NOW- but rather the change should have been slated for later.)

Speaking of, the base value on wool stuffing is pretty high for marksmanship.

[Undefined]

I think in general it's not usually necessary, but in cases like this which make grand sweeping changes to things that are foundational ways the game works it would be really beneficial.
Take for example the sometimes mentioned curio change, that would REALLY benefit from discussion rather than just being dropped by surprise, but the recent changes to satiation while a large and significant change didn't cause as much upset as this one because it didn't "break" the existing status Quo, had satiation been replaced with needing to season food with various condiments to add FEPs with each food type having a FEP affinity it would have really benefited from prior discussion which would have also served as fair warning and preparation time.

In this instance preparation time and discussion would have mitigated 90% of the complaints and hate of the system which currently only serve to cloud actual feedback and constructive discussion on the system. I also firmly believe it would have made some of those 90% actively excited about the system rather than bummed out by it.

[Amanda44]

You guys are spot on but I have tbh and say I can sort of understand why they don't, although I do agree changes that affect your progress to date so drastically should be discussed, more importantly I think they should be introduced at the end or start of a world, not mid-world. As Undefined points out it immediately throws up bias ... and understandably so, as I said in my post in the announcement thread I may have been happier to play around with it if I hadn't lost all my stats and items that are in short supply to me weren't now lost and wasted.

It's not enough to make me down tools and leave but with the added problems of the special resources, not just in this area, cutting off certain areas of game play for a lot off ppl it is enough for me to withdraw financial support. As things stand atm I probably would not return for W10 as it now seems a bit pointless to play a game I no longer have full access to without joining a large group. As I enjoy some element of control and decision making in my game this is never going to be an option for me personally.

Now that you have a section of paying customers I do think as Stya says the least that could be done is to give warning even if not discussion when implementing major changes at least a month in advance to tie in with the payment options and I still strongly believe that any changes that affect prior achievements should not be brought in mid-world.

[Robben_DuMarsch]

But- you have people who spent countless hours and effort getting equipment they have now, some even spending real money to get certain high quality goods, and in and the timespan of (insert time needed to patch server and reboot), it's all gone for them and they have to do yet even more to re-earn where they were.

Caveat emptor.

[Drakemoore]

To be quite honest. This is J&L's game, and as developers they get to choose which features 'they' want implemented in the game. Now, we as players do have a 'stake' in the game in the sense that some of us pay to support it and overall we invest a lot of time into the game. I could certainly see J&L posting 'future features' in a discussion thread on the forum prior to them working on it as they develop other stuff, but only on a few conditions: 1) I don't want J&L to be swayed by the mob in the sense of having a poll to vote on features, if they want a feature in, it should go in. 2) However, on large feature changes or additions, I think the community should at least get to hash out the pros / cons of the feature because it will help to balance the feature and help to work out various kinks it could have.

Overall, my only problem with the Gilding system so far is that armor values are not part of the gilding system yet, and it was an overnight addition without any prior announcement, so yes it did screw some people over who may have just completed some trades for high quality equipment recently.

[Ysh]

Eternal alpha.