rsclark

And that would be relevant why?

One problem with this - Zwil was asking for confirmation of unfixed bugs reported in beta because he was not aware of them. Several of the biggest bugs were NOT on the known bugs list (although they may have been added since it originally came out). So, your righteous devs vs evil, suit wearing marketing types theory seems to be a bit of a fantasy.

There are certainly failings in either how information on bugs in transmitted within the company and/or how they are handled, but it is not limited to some faceless overlords. There are some pretty bad failings on the part of the nice, friendly gamer devs as well.

Yet it still needed to be tested. Even in the case of the survival pack, they changed an in-game power to allow charges to stack between purchased and earned versions. That needed to be tested. That information needs to be stored on the character, and who knows how many different places in the DB it is stored and what restrictions have been placed on it.

Look at something like the doggie coming soon. Someone needs to be in the game walking that dog over every type of terrain in the game trying to get him to fall through holes, looking for anything that might clip the wrong way and cause a server meltdown.

It's amazing the amount of testing that needs to occur on even the most minor of things. The severity of the bug often has little to do with the importance of the feature. The problem is they don't appear to be doing that needed testing on any of it - small or large.

None that I pay for... OH wait, that's right! I don't give any of them money.

While the first part is true, I'm not so sure about the second. No matter who makes the content, it still need to go through QA, and I doubt each group has their own QA department.

The current bottleneck does seem to be in testing, so that's what is being skimped on to the detriment of the game. That doesn't mean that they can pull people off of doing new costume pieces and let them code fixes as they wouldn't have the correct skills, but it does mean that the more trivial stuff with strong deadlines that is put out (that also needs to be tested), the less time is available to test things like bug fixes and patches.

That was a stealth nerf that was stealth added to the notes after people complained about them not being there originally.

Well, the buff still requires that they be within range, and they can still be killed, so the only real effect of them being toggles is it takes longer to resummon, since the recharge doesn't start until they get detoggled (usually by death).

An odd nerf to something that was only minimally useful before.

Honestly, is that sentence meant to be in English? I have absolutely no clue what you are trying to say. "The West"? What?

"Require a new build"? Huh? Did you just imply a non-released bug could not be fixed?

You need to explain yourself better.

And when you log on or zone, there is a chance those nicely set up trays will be all over the place.

You don't understand what this bug does, do you? The number of characters you have does not matter.

That only means you can spend time re-arranging the same character again and again instead of different ones.

I don't think you quite understand the process by which he loses weight in that situation.

Hahahaha. Unless there are some crazy local laws involved, no one who would be doing this kind of work would get a penny of overtime.

That's a big if.

And also that it is unique in this regard. In the rest of the game, only healing sets have +heal, and only hold sets have +hold duration. All other set bonuses for all sets are things that are useful to all characters potentially - def/res/acc/damage/recovery/regen. Even immobilize resist is useful for when your toggles drop, but the +heal is something you might literally have zero use for.

The other problem is more symbolic in that they stuck the +heal and a heal proc on the defender specific set when most defenders do not like the idea of being thought of as "healzor LOL".

They're afraid that without the carrot/stick to pull everyone else in, they won't be able to get a large group to do it.

Inconvenience the many to appease the few.

The entire thing is about defending the Earth in one way or another. Sure you can excuse it by saying "well, where are the villains going to live if there is no Earth", but on a fundamental level, "saving the world" is a heroic act.

I haven't actually tested that yet, but I believe it is possible. I was mainly addressing the whole "I can't buy it until I make the character" mistake.

Would make it up a lot better going for S/L than for Melee/Ranged.

That's not broken. That is working as intended. It is an unintentional side effect of the devs sucking at basic planning and thinking ahead.

That might be a good comparison if I gave my mom a paycheck. At a restaurant, I do expect the crusts cut off if I ask.

But that wasn't JayBoh's complaint about them. His complaint was that they don't go up to 50. And the non-attuned ones also don't go up to 50, so he (presumably) would not use those either.

I'm questioning his automatic rejection of sets that cap at lower than 50 by point out that one of the most powerful and in demand sets does not go up to 50.

Also, the main benefit isn't the scaling, it's not paying a half billion for 4 pieces.

It's all one question. What character fulfills 3 different requirements. Your example gets one of 3.

My point is that the only people who would tend to need melee def (and ToD) are SD and /Ninj, but neither of them would need 5 of either. Maybe a blapper who goes melee over s/l, but they are unlikely to have 5 ST melee attacks.

And as for ranged def, you have the same sd and /ninj with the same level of not needing it, and those blaster/def/controllers who decide to specialize in range, but they are both unlikely to have 5 melee attacks AND even if they have them available are not going to have the slots to 6 slot them.