Puisque tout le monde ne lit pas le devtracker anglais, je voulais vous faire partager ce message.

 

Pour résumer, il s'agit d'un message sur un topic discutant du besoin d'améliorer le chevalier Jedi et le guerrier Sith.

Il n'est pas prévu d'énorme hausse pour aucune classe, mais des petits réglages.

Pour les chevalier et guerrier, il devrait quand même y avoir une amélioration dans la mobilité et l'anti-kitting ainsi que dans la survivabilité dans sa specilisation DPS.

 

Pour le reste, je vous laisse lire, c'est très intéressant.

 

Source

Hi guys,

 

There are many different subjects discussed in this thread and I would like to take the opportunity to give you some information on the topics at hand.

 

First off, we currently have no indication that any class needs a huge buff. Class balance is defined by the interaction between classes and changes we make to one class will, inevitably, move the balance towards or from other classes. Our data and testing currently indicates that the Juggernaut and Guardian AC could use some buffing up in two areas where we see them underperforming against our expectations.

 

Here are some of the things we're planning to roll out in the short term specifically regarding Sith Warriors and Jedi Knights :

 

• Mobility/Anti Kiting (PvP) – We agree with the sentiment voiced by the community that some Guardians and Juggernauts have to work harder than other classes to stay within effective combat range, putting them at a disadvantage. We intend to address this in an upcoming patch where, as a first step, Force Push will clear the cooldown of Force Leap, granting for more reliable in combat pursuit capabilities to the Advanced Class. Further changes will be made if necessary.
   
  
• DPS spec survivability (PvP and PvE) – The DPS specs on Guardian and Juggernaut are performing to our expectations when it comes to the ability to create damage, especially of the burst variety. However their survivability is lagging behind our expectations, especially in the later game, and we are going to start addressing that particular issue in an upcoming patch.

Our attention to the class obviously won't stop here. Balancing MMOs is a never ending endeavor and we're in for the long haul. For example, we are certainly aware that the Marauder and Sentinel are very gameplay intensive classes with some of the most complex rotations in the game. While we are currently looking at quality of life and usability improvements to increase the class' playability without compromising the unique aspects of the class, we don't have anything specific to announce just yet. We do however anticipate that some of the combat responsiveness improvements (AKA 'ability delay' - more on that here) being worked on by our engineering team will specifically aid both Marauder and Sentinel.

 

In regards to PvE balance, any place in the game where our data shows significant issues with the balance tuning for one or more classes or specs are of course also being looked at.

 

For example, Jedi Knights will be pleased to hear that we are working on tuning the final mission in their class chain to provide a better, more fun and more reliably solvable challenge (see a post from another member of my team here). Currently a large percentage of players bring a friend to solve this mission, which, while social and often more fun, is not in line with our stated goal of allowing players to progress solo through their class arc if they desire to do so. We're also looking at some companions with a critical eye to improve their viability for certain role/companion combinations.

 

I would also like to give you some general understanding about approach to class balancing and how you can aid us with your feedback:

 

• Now that we're out of the first few weeks of launch madness, you will see class and combat balance issues addressed with increased frequency. Larger scale gameplay changes and features are more likely to coincide with major content releases, but smaller scale changes and improvements can be expected to become part of our regular update schedule.
   
  
• Statements that we hate a specific class or faction, or that we intentionally underbalance certain classes to make it less popular are conspiracy theory territory. We have nothing to gain from such an approach – we want players to pick the class and faction they want to play and have confidence that they are able to perform their chosen role in the game. Anything that comes in the way of that goal is considered a balance issue for us.
   
  
• We make our balancing decisions based on a combination of internal and external testing and metrics. We don't make decisions based on who is the loudest on the forums. Community feedback is valuable in bringing issues to our attention and even to highlight possible solutions, which means that well written, constructive posts are the most effective way to communicate your wishes and feedback to us, rather than petitions and calls to nerf specific classes.
   
  
• Please understand that balance issues during the leveling process are different than issues at level 50 and are handled in different ways. If you feel your class has issues during your journey to 50, especially communicate the level range and area of the game where you are experiencing issues to aid our investigations. Player versus Player situations in during the leveling process are not always balanced at every level (a mathematical impossibility), but we are always willing to investigate.
   
  
• Just because we haven't mentioned the specific issue close to your heart in a post (such as the one above) doesn't mean we are unaware of it or that we don't want to address it. It would be impractical for us to comment on all investigations currently in the pipeline. That said, we definitely want to take a more open approach in regards to upcoming class changes.

 

Finally, I'd like to acknowledge, again, that we do understand that there is a desire for players to get more detailed information what happens to their character in combat. We agree with those requests and are working on various ways to, optionally, get more detailed data on your combat performance.

 

Thanks for your feedback!

 

-- Georg

Ton message n'aura aucun succès.

Les gens ici préfèrent raler sans lire quoi que ce soit plutôt que d'émettre des avis avec des choses données.

En tout cas, pour ma part, ça me semble très positif.

 

Merci pour ce retour !

Edited January 11, 2012 by Nuizible

Arrête, laisse moi rêver encore un peu. Je suis un éternel naïf et j'aime ça

Arrête, laisse moi rêver encore un peu. Je suis un éternel naïf et j'aime ça

 

Je le suis aussi Esperons esperons !

Interessant ! Mais vu que je parle pas anglais j'ai rien compris ^^. Tu devrais traduire

Une traduction est en cours de rédaction.

 

Une traduction est en cours de rédaction.

 

 

Ouf, merci François, j'ai eu peur l'espace d'un instant

Ouf, merci François, j'ai eu peur l'espace d'un instant

 

Honnêtement pas moi !

Post Fleuve de Stephen Reid sur les textures.

Je le post ici, même si ça n'a pas vraiement de rapport avec le titre du topic (autant finalement faire un post référence avec tout les messages jaunes coté anglais).

 

On aura une trad aussi ?

 

Hey everyone, thanks for bearing with us as we investigated the concerns raised here.

 

After investigation, it seems that the confusion here is a combination of a UI issue that's been resolved and a feature that's working as intended, but the reason why it's 'working as intended' needs explanation.

 

First, the UI issue. The preferences menu as it is seen on the Public Test Server for version 1.1 of the game is correct - there are only supposed to be two texture choices, 'Low' and 'High'. This replaces the original three-choice preference of Low/Medium/High because in reality, there was never supposed to be a 'Medium' choice - that was a bug.

 

Here's where we need to explain. As many of you have noted, your character in the game world is rendered using lower resolution textures than inside of cinematic conversation scenes. This was a deliberate decision by the development team. To understand why this was done, I have to briefly talk about MMOs and their engines.

 

In comparison to single player games and other genres of multiplayer online games, MMOs have much higher variability in the number of characters that can be potentially rendered on-screen at the same time. In MMOs, even though most of the time you'll see a relatively small number of characters on screen, there are certain situations in which many more characters will be seen. Some examples of these situations include popular gathering places in-game (in our case, the two fleets), Operations with large teams, and Warzones. In those scenarios the client (and your PC) has to work hard to show off a lot of characters on-screen.

 

During development and testing of The Old Republic, our priorities were to ensure the game looked great and performed well. In testing, we discovered that using our 'maximum resolution' textures on in-game characters during normal gameplay could cause severe performance issues, even on powerful PCs. There were a variety of possible options to help improve performance, but one that was explored and ultimately implemented used what is known as a 'texture atlas'.

 

To understand that I've got to get technical for a minute. When a character in the game is 'seen' by another character - ie, gets close to your field of view - the client has to 'draw' that character for you to see. As the character is 'drawn' for you there are a number of what are known as 'draw calls' where the client pulls information from the repository it has on your hard disk, including textures, and then renders the character. Every draw call that is made is a demand on your PC, so keeping that number of draw calls low per character is important. With our 'maximum resolution' textures a large number of draw calls are made per character, but that wasn't practical for normal gameplay, especially when a large number of characters were in one place; the number of draw calls made on your client would multiply very quickly. The solution was to 'texture atlas' - essentially to put a number of smaller textures together into one larger texture. This reduces the number of draw calls dramatically and allows the client to render characters quicker, which improves performance dramatically.

 

When it comes to cinematic scenes, however, characters are rendered using the higher number of draw calls and maximum resolution textures. This is because in those scenes, we have control over exactly how many characters are rendered and can ensure that the game performs well. The transition between 'atlas textured' characters (out of cinematics) and 'maximum resolution' textures (in cinematics) is mostly hidden by the transition between those two states (when the screen goes black), but obviously it's clear if you pay close attention.

 

In summary; yes, we had a small UI bug that unfortunately caused confusion over how the game is intended to work. The textures you're seeing in the course of normal gameplay are optimized for that mode of play. The textures you're seeing during cinematics are also optimized for that mode of play. They are higher resolution, but that's because we're able to control cinematic scenes to ensure good performance in a way we can't during normal gameplay.

 

We understand the passion and desire for people to see the same textures you see in our cinematic scenes in the main game. Because of the performance issues that would cause for the client, that's not an immediate and easy fix; we need to ensure we're making choices that the majority of our players will be able to benefit from. Having 'atlassed textures' helps performance overall, and that's a very important goal for us.

 

With that said, we've heard your feedback here loud and clear. The development team is exploring options to improve the fidelity of the game, particularly for those of you with high-spec PCs. It will be a significant piece of development work and it won't be an overnight change, but we're listening and we're committed to reacting to your feedback.