Forums
-
English
-
Developer Tracker (849,959 visits to this link)
-
- 165.7k
- posts
-
- 3.6m
- posts
-
- 791.5k
- posts
-
- LTB cleanse
- By AdjeYo,
-
- 3.8k
- posts
-
- 293.8k
- posts
-
- 168.3k
- posts
-
- 1.2m
- posts
-
- 172.4k
- posts
-
- 137.4k
- posts
-
- 13.4k
- posts
-
- 67.3k
- posts
-
- 153.8k
- posts
-
- 194.8k
- posts
-
- 22.7k
- posts
-
-
Français (French)
-
Fil du développeur (7,204 visits to this link)
-
- 5.1k
- posts
-
- 134.9k
- posts
-
- 31.2k
- posts
-
- 453
- posts
-
- 10.2k
- posts
-
- 2.7k
- posts
-
- 56k
- posts
-
- Records PvP 4.X
- By lras,
-
- 6.5k
- posts
-
- 5.9k
- posts
-
- 1
- post
-
- 1.2k
- posts
-
- 7.2k
- posts
-
- 4.2k
- posts
-
-
Deutsch (German)
-
Entwicklernews (10,325 visits to this link)
-
- 19.7k
- posts
-
- 298.6k
- posts
-
- 53.9k
- posts
-
- 1.9k
- posts
-
- 39.8k
- posts
-
- 90.5k
- posts
-
- Low LVL PVP
- By Fynnlagh,
-
- 19.1k
- posts
-
- 12k
- posts
-
- 3.1k
- posts
-
- 2
- posts
-
- 1.7k
- posts
-
- 19.9k
- posts
-
- 8.4k
- posts
-
-
Who's Online 2 Members, 9 Anonymous, 162 Guests (See full list)
Announcements
-
Posts
-
By ShadowyKai · Posted
I disagree, and I am not the only one. By saying that they were working on a plan to compensate players for the lost time, they told the player community that it was their intent to compensate. The player community took that as a promise to do it. There is no way that the developers didn't know that the community would see it as a promise. This isn't a courtroom. Expecting disappointed customers to let you off on a technicality of language is not a good way to do business. If the developers were not confident that they could deliver compensation for the lost time, then they should have just said nothing at all, like they usually do. That way, they would still have been able to say "Good news!" if they succeeded in delivering the compensation, and also avoid a lot of complaints about broken promises if they failed to. That's the thing - Being disappointed is worse than having no hope in the first place. They told the players that they were going to try to compensate for the lost time.. That was weeks ago. By now, they should have either provided the compensation or offered some kind of explanation or apology for why they haven't. They have done neither. -
It is too bad this hard limit for clickable companions is there still. I had such a fun plan to drop each alliance companion to some appropriate corner of my Alderaan SH, reached the cap like halfway through the project. -
How so? Not sure why you think that ? Because i haven't seen ANY info ( officially ) that mentions anything remotely similar to Ghost Recon type complex TEAM ( ai teammates SQUAD control ) dynamics; other than her one "pet" companion or whatever. Which reminds me: As mentioned earlier in this thread, how do you feel about the whole being locked into "female" protagonist thing? ( re: no options to customize character ) -- Do you think it's just sorta like an "equal" substitution purposely trying to make up for all the mostly "male" protagonists in SW games over the years? ( like Jedi Survivor/Fallen Order , for example ) Or do you think it's just much ado about nothing? ( as in, the "gender" is inconsequential and shouldn't affect immersion if the story & gameplay are enjoyable ) -
By DeannaVoyager · Posted
All they had to do was to change default sorting to lowest item first. By doing that there was no need to browse 10 pages of the same item. One or two maybe, but not 10. You don't destroy a perfectly functioning system because people can't use the sort button. I've opted out from using the new GTN. So that's yet another -1 of things to do in game, which means less time in this game, more time playing other games. -
While there are two threads with multiple suggestions specific to 'fixing 8x8' and many threads on specific suggestions such as the pvp early leaving penalty this thread is a brief survey on the 8x8 results. Granted this is not an unbiased survey as I have been in all the matches. the survey consisted on 40 pvp 8x8 matches over multiple servers which is a very narrow survey in the context of total matches played on these servers. While I would like to see the stats on all games played in a month over each server is is just a narrow look based on kill ratios. Noting that a kill can be assigned to more than one person as can be seen in kills from healers in particular. One takeaway as can be seen from the results is it not a good idea to post these kill results. This leads to teams trying to run up kill scores. One game where hacking was suspected was excluded from the survey. My perception is hacking has been significantly reduced over the years and is continually being seriously investigated in the more rare times it is suspected. kill ratio winner to loser 1-5+ 1-4 1-3 1-2 1-1 2-1 3-1 4-1 5+-1 2 0 2 6 4 7 4 4 11 5% 0% 5% 15% 10% 17.5% 10% 10% 27.5% The 1-9 and 1-16 scores were the losing team basically ignoring objectives and are thus tactical wipeouts. The 1-3 and 1-2 indicate a 20% chance of pulling an underdog victory. While a 4+-1 shows no chance of winning if the other side is seriously wiping you out but cares about objectives which accounts for 37.5 % of the battles. How much a wipeout can be seen in the ratios of 5+-1. These were 454-0, 154-0, 38-1, 22-1, 21-1, 18-1, 15-1, 8-1, 7-1, 7-1, and 6-1. That is wipeouts occur 42.5% of the time as you need to include the 1-9 and 1-16 fights. Close games are then 57.5% with a 27.5% to 20% of the overkilling side winning. A close game for example a 2-1 kill ratio did lead to a 6 to 0 score huttball objective blow out. The two 1- 1 Huttball game scores were 4-0 and 5-2 objective scores. The perception to players these games are close may vary. The bottom line is you better be prepared for being wipeout in 8x8. I think the consensus is the wipeouts are particularly due to premades however this study did not and could not easily identify premades vs. non-premades. I hope data on pvp is being closely gathered and that actions such as those in the fixing 8x8 threads and other threads will be examined to better balance the teams. Players tend to remember the wipeouts and the games pulled from the clutches of defeat or barely staving off defeat. The close games are what we want the game designed to promote occurring more often.
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
