Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

23/5 Operative Class Rep Questions

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Classes > Scoundrel / Operative
23/5 Operative Class Rep Questions
First BioWare Post First BioWare Post

snave's Avatar


snave
05.27.2014 , 01:58 PM | #141
Quote: Originally Posted by MillionsKNives View Post
Whether or not there was a TL;DR bolded question at the end, the rest of the wall of text was attempting to throw in multiple questions into a single question.


Good thing he didn't say that then, I guess.


Since you seem to be unable to actually read his post, still, even after I've quoted you the important parts, leads me to believe that you are just projecting with this part.
Let me try to explain his point for you seeing as simplifying already simple things seems to be my job today.

The point he's making is quite straight forward if you attempt to see it from his perspective rather than insist on yours. Musco said that THE QUESTIONS needed to be simplified. I don't not simplify the question at all, all I did was remove the community generated cause / effect that led to the questions themselves being selected. If you read the questions he took versus the original questions there is little to no difference in the two sets.

When I set out to write these questions my personal objective was very clear. I would write a question that was open yet based around a critical points, I would show the factors that led me to selecting this points and I would also come with potential solutions to them. The preface to the question did not contain other questions (you can argue the third one did but they were rhetorical in nature rather than probing) it simply served to educate the reader on the objective reality of playing an operative at the moment.

From Musco's response it's perfectly clear that what they really want the class rep to do is say "oh thanks bioware, your game is great I especially love all the new things coming soon! Could you guys please tell me why you think you're doing a good job and don't worry, no one here is going to criticise you because you're doing so great!". I firmly believe that if you want change you have to do something about it, that's why I wanted to do these questions, that's why I spent the time speaking with guilds and ranked teams from all over the world and that's why I tried to get input from as many sources as I possibly could. I did this to try and create a positive change to this class via the official medium bioware has given us.

Turns out I was right to begin with and this is simply another way for them to pat each other on the back and pretend that everything is fine. This is lip service and nothing more. I fully expect the answers to be as follows:

1 PvE: We listened to all you guys and we've decided to buff your survivibility! We feel these changes will be enough to get you in to a raid spot so we wont be looking to add anything else in the foreseeable future but don't worry! We pay close attention to all over our metrics and we'll do everything we can to balance the classes.

2 PvP: We believe that operatives are viable in ranked arena, in fact they make up a large number of the top players in the world. With these new changes other specs will become more prevalent and you can look forward to more exciting pvp content in 2019. We don't want to commit to any promises because we want to see how these changes play out first of all but don't worry! We pay close attention to all over our metrics and we'll do everything we can to balance the classes.

3 Wildcard: We're constantly working on bug fixes and we'll be sure to look in to these particular ones you mentioned. Set bonuses are only there to give flavour to a class rather than provide a substantial benefit but don't worry! We pay close attention to all over our metrics and we'll do everything we can to balance the classes.

KeyboardNinja's Avatar


KeyboardNinja
05.27.2014 , 02:48 PM | #142
Quote: Originally Posted by snave View Post
From Musco's response it's perfectly clear that what they really want the class rep to do is say "oh thanks bioware, your game is great I especially love all the new things coming soon! Could you guys please tell me why you think you're doing a good job and don't worry, no one here is going to criticise you because you're doing so great!". I firmly believe that if you want change you have to do something about it, that's why I wanted to do these questions, that's why I spent the time speaking with guilds and ranked teams from all over the world and that's why I tried to get input from as many sources as I possibly could. I did this to try and create a positive change to this class via the official medium bioware has given us.
I wouldn't get too discouraged. As someone who was a class rep of two different specs in the first round of questions, I didn't feel like our responses were in any way indicative of the dev team just wanting a "pat on the back". We got real changes to address legitimately serious problems in both classes, and while the changes were not necessarily completely to our liking, the devs did listen.

The questions as they stand do cover some important issues. I'm really worried about the wildcard question though, given how much…stuff…is in there. But what's done is done, and it's clear that you put in a ton of work and effort into this (for which we're all grateful).
Computer Programmer. Theory Crafter. Dilettante on The Ebon Hawk.
Tam (shadow tank) Tov-ren (commando healer) Aveo (retired sentinel) Nimri (ruffian scoundrel)
Averith (marksman sniper) Alish (lightning sorcerer) Aresham (vengeance jugg) Effek (pyro pt)

December 13, 2011 to January 30, 2017

Adovir's Avatar


Adovir
05.27.2014 , 02:53 PM | #143
Quote: Originally Posted by snave View Post
Let me try to explain his point for you seeing as simplifying already simple things seems to be my job today.

The point he's making is quite straight forward if you attempt to see it from his perspective rather than insist on yours. Musco said that THE QUESTIONS needed to be simplified. I don't not simplify the question at all, all I did was remove the community generated cause / effect that led to the questions themselves being selected. If you read the questions he took versus the original questions there is little to no difference in the two sets.

When I set out to write these questions my personal objective was very clear. I would write a question that was open yet based around a critical points, I would show the factors that led me to selecting this points and I would also come with potential solutions to them. The preface to the question did not contain other questions (you can argue the third one did but they were rhetorical in nature rather than probing) it simply served to educate the reader on the objective reality of playing an operative at the moment.

From Musco's response it's perfectly clear that what they really want the class rep to do is say "oh thanks bioware, your game is great I especially love all the new things coming soon! Could you guys please tell me why you think you're doing a good job and don't worry, no one here is going to criticise you because you're doing so great!". I firmly believe that if you want change you have to do something about it, that's why I wanted to do these questions, that's why I spent the time speaking with guilds and ranked teams from all over the world and that's why I tried to get input from as many sources as I possibly could. I did this to try and create a positive change to this class via the official medium bioware has given us.

Turns out I was right to begin with and this is simply another way for them to pat each other on the back and pretend that everything is fine. This is lip service and nothing more. I fully expect the answers to be as follows:

1 PvE: We listened to all you guys and we've decided to buff your survivibility! We feel these changes will be enough to get you in to a raid spot so we wont be looking to add anything else in the foreseeable future but don't worry! We pay close attention to all over our metrics and we'll do everything we can to balance the classes.

2 PvP: We believe that operatives are viable in ranked arena, in fact they make up a large number of the top players in the world. With these new changes other specs will become more prevalent and you can look forward to more exciting pvp content in 2019. We don't want to commit to any promises because we want to see how these changes play out first of all but don't worry! We pay close attention to all over our metrics and we'll do everything we can to balance the classes.

3 Wildcard: We're constantly working on bug fixes and we'll be sure to look in to these particular ones you mentioned. Set bonuses are only there to give flavour to a class rather than provide a substantial benefit but don't worry! We pay close attention to all over our metrics and we'll do everything we can to balance the classes.
This, and thank you snave, not only for explaining my self in a more objective and less frusterated view and for everything youve done for our community.

The thing that i was pissed at was how eric didnt seem to read the whole post because he said that we had too many questions, when there werent really any questions said in the context, just that context. when snave reposted what he said at the very end of each segment Eric said that those were what he wanted, even though they were already there so it seemed like he didnt read anything. Lastly the fact that we are not the only class to give contextual information and player opinions, but we are the only ones being called out on it, granted that we had a very large amount of context and player opinion do to how our community feels BW has treated us.
you know you want to
Quote:
speak not to that which you do not know lest you look a fool
ToFN's resident regstar scoundrel

Adovir's Avatar


Adovir
05.27.2014 , 03:18 PM | #144
Quote: Originally Posted by KeyboardNinja View Post
I wouldn't get too discouraged. As someone who was a class rep of two different specs in the first round of questions, I didn't feel like our responses were in any way indicative of the dev team just wanting a "pat on the back". We got real changes to address legitimately serious problems in both classes, and while the changes were not necessarily completely to our liking, the devs did listen.

The questions as they stand do cover some important issues. I'm really worried about the wildcard question though, given how much…stuff…is in there. But what's done is done, and it's clear that you put in a ton of work and effort into this (for which we're all grateful).
KBN whats wrong with showing them the issues that we see as improvements to our QoL? Its impossible to make everyone in our community happy(how ever small it may be) we saw it fit to let them know all those things that we see as frusterating and little nuisances so that everyone's thoughts could be heard and that way BW would know atleast the things that we see as frusterating so in a serires of patches they may impliment the changes more organically instead of all in one patch or get one thing fixed per round of class questions or PT servers. I speak only for my self when i say i would rather let someone know all my problems out right so they can go to work to try and fix them, not tell them one problem at a time and hope that they fix them, because especially in a video game we arent the only ones on their plate and if we ask for the "wrong" QoL change they may not give it to use where as if we show them multiple ones that we could use they can pick and chose slowly how to fix it. As a bonus too if they were planing to do something to our class in the next patch that they didnt tell us about and we brought it up here it would seem like theyre listening to us more than they actually are and make their image look better.
you know you want to
Quote:
speak not to that which you do not know lest you look a fool
ToFN's resident regstar scoundrel

KeyboardNinja's Avatar


KeyboardNinja
05.27.2014 , 03:28 PM | #145
Quote: Originally Posted by Adovir View Post
KBN whats wrong with showing them the issues that we see as improvements to our QoL? Its impossible to make everyone in our community happy(how ever small it may be) we saw it fit to let them know all those things that we see as frusterating and little nuisances so that everyone's thoughts could be heard and that way BW would know atleast the things that we see as frusterating so in a serires of patches they may impliment the changes more organically instead of all in one patch or get one thing fixed per round of class questions or PT servers. I speak only for my self when i say i would rather let someone know all my problems out right so they can go to work to try and fix them, not tell them one problem at a time and hope that they fix them, because especially in a video game we arent the only ones on their plate and if we ask for the "wrong" QoL change they may not give it to use where as if we show them multiple ones that we could use they can pick and chose slowly how to fix it. As a bonus too if they were planing to do something to our class in the next patch that they didnt tell us about and we brought it up here it would seem like theyre listening to us more than they actually are and make their image look better.
They asked for three questions. They did this because they want to avoid allocating an enormous amount of time to sifting through and responding to every last thing. Three. That is a far cry from "all".

Nothing is accomplished by annoying those who we want to answer our questions. Having to sift through a giant wall of text to ferret out the ultimate point is very time consuming and can lead to severe miscommunication issues. The Vanguard class rep questions were awful. Really, really awful. The answers were pretty bad too, but honestly I can't blame the devs. I don't think I would have been able to come up with better answers myself, simply because I'm not sure I could have done a better job of understanding the questions!

Simple, concise, to the point. Trim off all the fat. The developers aren't idiots. While they do miss some very obvious things sometimes (such as the incredibly long-standing "body invisible and/or relocated to anyone freshly zoning into an instance" bug), they are generally aware of what's going down in the class balance area. The purpose of the class rep program is to take the developer's list of "all 80 things that are suboptimal or wrong with operatives" and move three of those things to the top of the pile. The secondary purpose is to allow the community to get some explanations on the reasoning behind certain design tradeoffs.

None of the above is accomplished by throwing an enormous "ask all the things" question. It doesn't prioritize. It isn't clear, and therefore does not facilitate pointed explanation. It's just…venting.

Not that I'm criticizing snave in any way. I have an enormous amount of respect for anyone who is willing to take on the burden of being a class rep, especially given that at least half the community will hate you by the time it's done. What I'm trying to illustrate is the purpose of the class rep program and why it is that Eric asked for the questions to be trimmed.
Computer Programmer. Theory Crafter. Dilettante on The Ebon Hawk.
Tam (shadow tank) Tov-ren (commando healer) Aveo (retired sentinel) Nimri (ruffian scoundrel)
Averith (marksman sniper) Alish (lightning sorcerer) Aresham (vengeance jugg) Effek (pyro pt)

December 13, 2011 to January 30, 2017

Adovir's Avatar


Adovir
05.27.2014 , 03:34 PM | #146
Quote: Originally Posted by KeyboardNinja View Post
They asked for three questions. They did this because they want to avoid allocating an enormous amount of time to sifting through and responding to every last thing. Three. That is a far cry from "all".

Nothing is accomplished by annoying those who we want to answer our questions. Having to sift through a giant wall of text to ferret out the ultimate point is very time consuming and can lead to severe miscommunication issues. The Vanguard class rep questions were awful. Really, really awful. The answers were pretty bad too, but honestly I can't blame the devs. I don't think I would have been able to come up with better answers myself, simply because I'm not sure I could have done a better job of understanding the questions!

Simple, concise, to the point. Trim off all the fat. The developers aren't idiots. While they do miss some very obvious things sometimes (such as the incredibly long-standing "body invisible and/or relocated to anyone freshly zoning into an instance" bug), they are generally aware of what's going down in the class balance area. The purpose of the class rep program is to take the developer's list of "all 80 things that are suboptimal or wrong with operatives" and move three of those things to the top of the pile. The secondary purpose is to allow the community to get some explanations on the reasoning behind certain design tradeoffs.

None of the above is accomplished by throwing an enormous "ask all the things" question. It doesn't prioritize. It isn't clear, and therefore does not facilitate pointed explanation. It's just…venting.

Not that I'm criticizing snave in any way. I have an enormous amount of respect for anyone who is willing to take on the burden of being a class rep, especially given that at least half the community will hate you by the time it's done. What I'm trying to illustrate is the purpose of the class rep program and why it is that Eric asked for the questions to be trimmed.
the thing is is that the giant wall of text for the first 2 segments were all fact justification and explanation of our situation while some could be trimmed off alot was needed to accurately portray our classes situation, and in no way are you dissing snave youre just stating an opinion
you know you want to
Quote:
speak not to that which you do not know lest you look a fool
ToFN's resident regstar scoundrel

MillionsKNives's Avatar


MillionsKNives
05.27.2014 , 04:03 PM | #147
Quote: Originally Posted by snave View Post
Let me try to explain his point for you seeing as simplifying already simple things seems to be my job today.

The point he's making is quite straight forward if you attempt to see it from his perspective rather than insist on yours. Musco said that THE QUESTIONS needed to be simplified. I don't not simplify the question at all, all I did was remove the community generated cause / effect that led to the questions themselves being selected. If you read the questions he took versus the original questions there is little to no difference in the two sets.

When I set out to write these questions my personal objective was very clear. I would write a question that was open yet based around a critical points, I would show the factors that led me to selecting this points and I would also come with potential solutions to them. The preface to the question did not contain other questions (you can argue the third one did but they were rhetorical in nature rather than probing) it simply served to educate the reader on the objective reality of playing an operative at the moment.
I won't go over the first two, but I have to say that the original form of the 3rd question was pretty much 10 questions with a wrapper around it saying "answer the above". I get that you have a lot of stuff you want fixed, but putting a list of questions inside your question doesn't really make it not a list of questions.

Also, it was your choice to remove everything except for the end. It's very possible that you could have simplified your questions in a way that retained much of the context while still sufficiently simplifying it to their/his satisfaction.

Quote:
From Musco's response it's perfectly clear that what they really want the class rep to do is say "oh thanks bioware, your game is great I especially love all the new things coming soon! Could you guys please tell me why you think you're doing a good job and don't worry, no one here is going to criticise you because you're doing so great!". I firmly believe that if you want change you have to do something about it, that's why I wanted to do these questions, that's why I spent the time speaking with guilds and ranked teams from all over the world and that's why I tried to get input from as many sources as I possibly could. I did this to try and create a positive change to this class via the official medium bioware has given us.

Turns out I was right to begin with and this is simply another way for them to pat each other on the back and pretend that everything is fine. This is lip service and nothing more.
The point he's making is quite straight forward if you attempt to see it from his perspective rather than insist on yours. He said: "Part of the issue though in having all of that information is that each question then becomes multiple questions rolled into one." and "Please try to simplify the questions so that they are a bit more simplified and singular." Each question had a lot of information with a final summarized question at the bottom, and to properly address them they would end up basically having to answer a lot of the separate sections brought up in the rest of the question. While not bad in itself, it just adds to what they need to respond to. So, he asked you to simplify it.

How that equates to "we're only looking for a pat on the back" completely eludes me.

snave's Avatar


snave
05.27.2014 , 04:03 PM | #148
Quote: Originally Posted by KeyboardNinja View Post

Not that I'm criticizing snave in any way. I have an enormous amount of respect for anyone who is willing to take on the burden of being a class rep, especially given that at least half the community will hate you by the time it's done. What I'm trying to illustrate is the purpose of the class rep program and why it is that Eric asked for the questions to be trimmed.
Don't worry I'm not taking offense to any posts that may be unhappy about the questions asked , this thread was open for a long time and if people wanted to address the questions they had ample chance to raise their concern .

One thing I want to address quickly again Is the trimming of the questions . Read the questions, they weren't trimmed . The context was trimmed, the potential fixes we're trimmed and the objective feedback from guilds / ranked teams we're trimmed. Questions remain the same .

A large part of my professional job Is problem solving and I can assure you when collecting data and gathering opinion It's almost pointless to do so without context to provide an objective foundation to build upon. Under the original format all opinions, problems, solutions and evidence was laid out, if I was trying to understand a situation and someone gave me all of that I'd more than likely have a full solution for the issues mapped out by the end of the day assuming the sources were trustworthy.

Just to reiterate before someone else says it, the questions were not trimmed, They are the same.

KeyboardNinja's Avatar


KeyboardNinja
05.27.2014 , 04:14 PM | #149
Quote: Originally Posted by Adovir View Post
the thing is is that the giant wall of text for the first 2 segments were all fact justification and explanation of our situation while some could be trimmed off alot was needed to accurately portray our classes situation, and in no way are you dissing snave youre just stating an opinion
If you start with the assumption that the developers already know the situation, do you still need the justification?
Computer Programmer. Theory Crafter. Dilettante on The Ebon Hawk.
Tam (shadow tank) Tov-ren (commando healer) Aveo (retired sentinel) Nimri (ruffian scoundrel)
Averith (marksman sniper) Alish (lightning sorcerer) Aresham (vengeance jugg) Effek (pyro pt)

December 13, 2011 to January 30, 2017

MillionsKNives's Avatar


MillionsKNives
05.27.2014 , 04:15 PM | #150
Quote: Originally Posted by snave View Post
Don't worry I'm not taking offense to any posts that may be unhappy about the questions asked , this thread was open for a long time and if people wanted to address the questions they had ample chance to raise their concern .

One thing I want to address quickly again Is the trimming of the questions . Read the questions, they weren't trimmed . The context was trimmed, the potential fixes we're trimmed and the objective feedback from guilds / ranked teams we're trimmed. Questions remain the same .

A large part of my professional job Is problem solving and I can assure you when collecting data and gathering opinion It's almost pointless to do so without context to provide an objective foundation to build upon. Under the original format all opinions, problems, solutions and evidence was laid out, if I was trying to understand a situation and someone gave me all of that I'd more than likely have a full solution for the issues mapped out by the end of the day assuming the sources were trustworthy.

Just to reiterate before someone else says it, the questions were not trimmed, They are the same.
You think they only gather information on the state of the class from your post? They have plenty of context, some of it from the very thread(s) you've used to gather the information you yourself posted.

If you want to assert that the only part that was the question was the end, then the rest did not matter to begin with, and was rightfully removed. Truthfully though, all of what you originally wrote for each question was a part of the question, the end was just the summary.