Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Vanguard // Powertechs Top 3 Answers!

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Classes > Vanguard / Powertech
Vanguard // Powertechs Top 3 Answers!
First BioWare Post First BioWare Post

Akuryu's Avatar


Akuryu
08.24.2013 , 11:44 AM | #111
I can't say much that hasn't already been said. Truly disgusting. Further proof these developers do not play their own game (maybe in a bubble, but not on a real-world server with real people). You people put as much care and thought into these responses as you have into the class itself, and it shows in every warzone that is filled with warriors, snipers and op healers.

Master-Nala's Avatar


Master-Nala
08.24.2013 , 11:50 AM | #112
Quote: Originally Posted by ScytheEleven View Post

In all honesty, our questions were terrible.
Then they should have asked the representative for clarification or further explanation. It's not really the answers they gave, but the dismissive tone that they used.

Let's take this quote from the Sorcerer answers:

Quote:
The fact is, Marauders and Snipers cannot heal themselves to full.
That reminds me of this famous Han Solo quote:

Quote: Originally Posted by The Empire Strikes Back
C-3PO: Sir, it's quite possible this asteroid is not entirely stable.
Han Solo: Not entirely stable. I'm glad you're here to tell us these things. Chewie! Take the Professor in back and plug him into the hyperdrive!
Players felt like Han Solo after that little quote. We are fully aware that Sorcerers can heal and that Vanguards have ranged attacks. We don't need the developers to tell us these things. What we needed was the developers to tell us why they believe these supposed advantages outweigh the disadvantages these classes' were saddled with.

For example, on the Vanguard survivability issue if they had said something like: "Well, we reviewed our metrics and Vanguards/PTs in pyro spec do not die significantly more often than other Vanguard specs or other players. While there are a lack of defensive options in the spec, we think that the 2.4 changes might help by increasing burst and kill times thereby giving Assault Vanguard defense through the 'best offense'. If this turns out not to be the case, we can monitor and make more changes as necessary."

That would have been a respectful, reasonable answer. It would have essentially said the same thing. That they don't see any disparity, but they are buffing damage and hope that will help players feel more comfortable with the class. But instead, they wrote the answers to basically tell the players that it was all in our minds. That's not a reasonable way to answer the posts and the developers deserve the drubbing they are getting.
Below this is my referral link. If you press it you get free stuff and I get free stuff. This makes you, me....and Bioware happy, but don't let that stop you!
Referral Link---> http://www.swtor.com/r/fDdy48 <---Referral Link

Skolops's Avatar


Skolops
08.24.2013 , 12:06 PM | #113
Quote: Originally Posted by ScytheEleven View Post
I know that by saying this, I am going to get flamed, called an idiot or probably other choice words...but:

Grow up guys.

I view myself as an active member of PT/VG community, and while I feel your pain, I also recognize that acting like children will get us nothing. Repeatedly posting "perception problem" in red/white/blue that takes up an entire page is not how we want to be viewed.

Am I frustrated with the combat team's responses? You bet. But if we want to be taken seriously, we need to act seriously. Ever wonder why Shadow/Sin tanks got the response from BioWare a few weeks back stating that their complaints about spike damage in NiM operations were under review? It's because they presented their thoughts/opinions with data/metrics, not just "I can't kill healers anymore in PVP and in PVE no one likes my class!"

In all honesty, our questions were terrible. Even mine, which was the 2nd question, was worded terribly. I couldn't read question 1 and 3 without getting lost. How can we expect rational answers when we give them irrational questions? I'm not solely blaming mrfourcustom here. In general, the VG/PT community was very poor at getting organized for this window of opportunity.

We still have our Powertech questions coming up in October. Let's learn from this, and come better prepared next time.
This is spot on.

Look, whoever is writing these answers is doing, in many ways, a terrible job of communicating ideas in a way which doesn't come across poorly. The same things could be said in much better ways.

That being said, the questions they got really weren't phrased in the most cogent or helpful way, either. Some of what the BW rep said was correct: comparing classes in the way that the question did is never going to produce useful results and is going to produce all kinds of unhelpful perceptions. Some of what was said in the response was incorrect, too, but the way to demonstrate that is with metrics and figures and numbers, not shouting and whining and crying.

Moreover, we have already seen that the changes to AP have been very good in the PTS. The most recent changes to the pyrotech tree is impossible to test now, because of the cylinder being broken on the PTS. My point is that, yes, the answers weren't great and were worded poorly, but calm down, take a step back, and look at the bigger picture.
El'Skan-Assassin /// Laetrie-Sniper /// Caelie-Slinger /// Fidaeria-Jugg
Armack -Chaetrie -Gaurex -Isdron -Skol'ompara /// Misericordiae -Elnar -Rujko -Sophiya
<I AM LEGEND>
Prophecy of the Five

af_raptura's Avatar


af_raptura
08.24.2013 , 12:09 PM | #114
Quote: Originally Posted by ScytheEleven View Post
I know that by saying this, I am going to get flamed, called an idiot or probably other choice words...but:

Grow up guys.

I view myself as an active member of PT/VG community, and while I feel your pain, I also recognize that acting like children will get us nothing. Repeatedly posting "perception problem" in red/white/blue that takes up an entire page is not how we want to be viewed.

Am I frustrated with the combat team's responses? You bet. But if we want to be taken seriously, we need to act seriously. Ever wonder why Shadow/Sin tanks got the response from BioWare a few weeks back stating that their complaints about spike damage in NiM operations were under review? It's because they presented their thoughts/opinions with data/metrics, not just "I can't kill healers anymore in PVP and in PVE no one likes my class!"

In all honesty, our questions were terrible. Even mine, which was the 2nd question, was worded terribly. I couldn't read question 1 and 3 without getting lost. How can we expect rational answers when we give them irrational questions? I'm not solely blaming mrfourcustom here. In general, the VG/PT community was very poor at getting organized for this window of opportunity.

We still have our Powertech questions coming up in October. Let's learn from this, and come better prepared next time.
You are probably right, Scythe. You seem pretty level headed. Its just that there are so many things wrong with the class, it's hard to know where to begin with the questions.

On the other hand, the Sorc questions were very eloquently stated and very specific and the combat team's response was more or less the same.
PvE theorycrafting has really loosened their standards.
Quote: Originally Posted by karlwaite View Post
As for the skill changes to benefit pvp likes of the fly by damage reduction they suffered and reducing focused defence by 200% is a joke they are affecting pve to benefit pvp.

Skolops's Avatar


Skolops
08.24.2013 , 12:12 PM | #115
Quote: Originally Posted by Master-Nala View Post
For example, on the Vanguard survivability issue if they had said something like: "Well, we reviewed our metrics and Vanguards/PTs in pyro spec do not die significantly more often than other Vanguard specs or other players. While there are a lack of defensive options in the spec, we think that the 2.4 changes might help by increasing burst and kill times thereby giving Assault Vanguard defense through the 'best offense'. If this turns out not to be the case, we can monitor and make more changes as necessary."

That would have been a respectful, reasonable answer. It would have essentially said the same thing. That they don't see any disparity, but they are buffing damage and hope that will help players feel more comfortable with the class. But instead, they wrote the answers to basically tell the players that it was all in our minds. That's not a reasonable way to answer the posts and the developers deserve the drubbing they are getting.
Precisely. The answer was not all that bad, really - I actually agree with it, in fact. Pre 2.0, Powertechs' lower survivability was offset by their tremendous offensive power. They were a glass cannon.

If by "perception problem," the developers mean that they are perceived to have poor defense because their offense is not currently where it ought to be, then that makes sense! I can buy into that. However, by just calling it a perception problem in the way they did, it comes across in a really terrible, awful way. They need to get someone to review these things before they go out and make sure it comes across far better.
El'Skan-Assassin /// Laetrie-Sniper /// Caelie-Slinger /// Fidaeria-Jugg
Armack -Chaetrie -Gaurex -Isdron -Skol'ompara /// Misericordiae -Elnar -Rujko -Sophiya
<I AM LEGEND>
Prophecy of the Five

Ottoattack's Avatar


Ottoattack
08.24.2013 , 12:16 PM | #116
Quote: Originally Posted by gunte View Post
Agree to 100%
I will be honest with, some of the questions were poorly worded; however, the message was delivered. The responses however:

First question:

DPS VG/PTs are in melee range but do not have the survivability that other melee classes have and do not have enough burst and sustained damage to have an impact. Question goes into a bit more detail but that is the summary.

Response summary: you have 30 meter atks. You have perception problems. L2P. Down right gave the community the middle finger.

Second Question:

Was regarding hybrids out performing singles trees and pyro dps sucking.

Response summary: It was not intended for the hybrids. Pyro has burn out that results in big damage in 30% phases that you do not see on dummies. I guess they assume no one ever set foot in an operation, looked at TORparse before or actually did the math of how much damage of how much damage the burn out period provides or the tree over all damage is. Ohh, we did some upgrades on PTS. You guys should check it! Except the nerfed pyro PvE damage potential and hybrids. So tactics is the only valid dps option, and still not all that great compared to other classes.

Response included incorrect information, poorly prepared and wrong logic. Also, why the **** mention training dummy?! Who gives a **** about training dummy parses when you have real ops bosses. Plan dumb.'

Third question:

All dps trees damage is not all that great. Sustained is mediocre and burst is not any better. TTK in PvP is very high and pyro tree specifically has terrible surivivability.

Response summary: You guys should check the changes on PTS!!! As if no one did. Did they realize there was 157 replies form in PTS regarding the changes class changes, pretty much bashing the changes and the nerf to pyro? They avoid the entire question, tell us there is an upgrade coming in 2.4, even through both the community and the devs know that the so called upgrade is not an upgrade at all (maybe for tactics). It just shows how out of touch they are with what's going on.

Conclusion is, they assumed the audience for the responses have been playing the class for 2-3 days and waiting for the devs to guide them, instead of elder game veterans who have been running RWZs and end game ops and know exactly how every single class performs. Responses the like 30 meter atks and burn out are just plan dumb.

But to be honest, its the "perception problem" is what threw me off. So the entire community has a perception problem? Are they try to insult our intelligence?! Or tell us **** you we do not give a ****. I am not sure. Never the less, I consider this unacceptable customer service.

Gullesvupper's Avatar


Gullesvupper
08.24.2013 , 12:23 PM | #117
Haha, if you're going to blame these horrid, horrid answers on the wording of the questions, you're most likely just trying to tell yourself that there's still hope because you can't handle the truth or because you're so addicted you can't handle the thought of unsubbing.

In all honesty, Bioware shouldn't need perfect questions to see what's wrong. And the sorc questions were fine btw, but ofc those noobs should just L2P.
Bioware insulted Sorcs and Vanguards only because of bad questions

Regards,
Juggs, Marauders and Snipers.

Skolops's Avatar


Skolops
08.24.2013 , 12:28 PM | #118
Quote: Originally Posted by Gullesvupper View Post
Haha, if you're going to blame these horrid, horrid answers on the wording of the questions, you're most likely just trying to tell yourself that there's still hope because you can't handle the truth or because you're so addicted you can't handle the thought of unsubbing.

In all honesty, Bioware shouldn't need questions to see what's wrong. And the sorc questions were fine btw, but ofc those noobs should just L2P.
I agree with the sorc replies, at least for DPS. I know its a tough thing for a lot of people to hear, but the class really does have a very high skill cap. Players at the very top of the chart can do very, very well because their kiting, LOS, and positioning are very good. Players who are average or even above average will not do as well. To me, this is fine. Sorcs really are glass cannons which do so much damage that they need to be extremely squishy otherwise.

For healers, the answers are not good enough.

But this is not the place to discuss that.
El'Skan-Assassin /// Laetrie-Sniper /// Caelie-Slinger /// Fidaeria-Jugg
Armack -Chaetrie -Gaurex -Isdron -Skol'ompara /// Misericordiae -Elnar -Rujko -Sophiya
<I AM LEGEND>
Prophecy of the Five

hallucigenocide's Avatar


hallucigenocide
08.24.2013 , 12:41 PM | #119
soo i see no point in playing my vg and pt anymore..and that kind of sucks since they are the only classes i enjoy.

judging by the changes they've made so far and by the response they've given.. it's clear to me that they do not know what they are doing.. heck just take a look at the assault/pyro skill tree.. *** is all that garbage doing in there? was that really the best they could come up with? there's just so much stuff in there that has abo****ely nothing to do with damage dealing at all.. and they dont have a defensive value either so why even put it in there?

paowee's Avatar


paowee
08.24.2013 , 01:06 PM | #120
Quote: Originally Posted by af_raptura View Post
The answers are kind of lack luster here, just like with the Sorc questions.

Sure 2.4 has an overall buff to tactics and an arguable buff to Assault, but the buffs are a bit too conservative whereas I feel they need to be more gamechanging so that Vanguards/Powertechs get taken more seriously in PvP and PvE.
Because the questions are more perceptive. These are really not very good questions imho...

Quoted on the thread for marauder questions discussion.
Quote:
Quote: Originally Posted by KeyboardNinja View Post
I think these are good questions. The overall strong PvP focus to all of them is quite welcome after my mostly PvE-justified questions. My only comment is that the phrasing should probably be made more compact. The Sorc and Vanguard questions this month were multiple paragraphs with stories, anecdotes, and more. I think that distracts from the main point of the question. Keep it simple and concise. Focus on the exact issue, give a bit of justification or exemplification, maybe make a suggestion, and ask (perhaps multiple) questions around that issue.
Sad truth... You want questions that address facts, not perception/opinion of a class :\ Check out the Sentinel and Sniper questions.
Republic < Intrepid > The Harbinger slinger sage vanguard dps
swtorboard.org dps blog.class guides.end-game stuff
16 man | 8 man DPS leaderboards | Galactic Starfighter Records