No matter how good of a sales they are if its bad to for the community its bad despite sales and gives CCP the very wrong idea of how to go forward on their microtransactions. For example the flaylock contact grenade sale at the height of their imbalanced perception and the dropship sales at their lowest perception (which still hasn't really bounded back up.)

Also any team well versed in the 'stance dance' will have invalid fits pre-saved and equipment pre-stocked and skill layout pre-charted so they can easily swap over in the normal 5 minute gap.

Seymour, with all due respect I could use this same line to argue for the changing and non-refund of Aurum items you argued against? How is this any different? If I pay for boosters than invest that SP into skills that are changed how am I less affected?

The fact is this is a consumer product and a live service that has to be responsive and fair to its customer base. So far below average reviews and a limited concurrent user base of only roughly 4K means they arenGÇÖt doing something right.

I am all for choices having consequences. There is value in that and players can respect it. However, that is a lie if that choice is false and the only real choice is CCPGÇÖs.

Do not punish players for CCPGÇÖs errors and donGÇÖt blame players for them either.

Note: I do not use any of the items in question.

To all of you that say that respecs are bad, do you have a reason or are you just stating your opinion? I see nothing wrong with respecs, with all the changes they are making to this game.

But there is blame to be spread here in a way regarding the reason for the ops complaint. Fact is he used a suit for it's capabilities outside of it's role. We can and are saying that the balance of the suit is CCP's fault, but it's the individual players who trained for it and used it outside of it's intended place. They chose to make large SP allocations to something clearly broken. And those that got there prior to the nerf got what they paid for, a temporary combat advantage which likely translated into additional rewards for that increased performance.

Trials and errors is the only way you can get through DUST 514, no-one can tell you what is good or not, but by testing it yourself.
.

One word

Crosstrain

CCP themselves released a promotional video showing how Dust 514 was different from other FPS games. As an example they showed how one could use a heavy frame to snipe. In this they showed that you could turn the tables on your foes whom expected a GÇ£typicalGÇ¥ glass cannon. How is it that CCP themselves can point to this great adaptability and custom ability and yet we as players cannot?

The fact is that all items are a set of slot placements, CPU and PG, and certain other variables that may shift it towards a role. Anything else is fluff. If you want to armor tank a Scout suit than that is your right regardless of what the GÇ£optimalGÇ¥ intended role should be. It is part of what CCP they use to promote the great sandbox that is Eve. It is CCPGÇÖs job to provide balance GÇô not the players. In this game related to the other often dubbed GÇ£Spreadsheets in spaceGÇ¥ how am I to blame the player for looking at numbers and picking the best option? CCP themselves advertise this as a GÇ£featureGÇ¥

Sadly, we again blame and punish players vs. developers for the use of unbalanced items.

"Here is your sandbox, but, don't play with that, or that, or that, because I in my glorious opinion deem it to be overpowered and the great nerf bat cometh."

The fact is that CCP dropped the ball. It happens and IGÇÖm not going to beat them up for it. They are going to make changes to bring things in line with the lessons learned. However, it is simply in my mind not a situation were you say HTFU to the player for doing exactly what your supposed to do. The accountability is CCPGÇÖs an punishing players as if they are accountable for balancing mistakes as CCP works via trial and error to get things right is not smart business.

And what I am particularly saying is that training for FOTM wasn't inherently wrong, but that it's a weighed decision. Be OP now at the risk of nerfs later, or take a different route and wait for your turn in the sun.

It's just like all the other choices.

And please stop talking about EvE as if it helps your point.

It's almost as if when I sign onto my GAME, I expect to play my GAME and enjoy the GAME that I'm playing specifically because it's a GAME and not real life.

In real life you rarely buy a new car only to drive it home and when it gets in the driveway, it magically becomes a broken down beater that no one likes.

Seymour, with all due respect I could use this same line to argue for the changing and non-refund of Aurum items you argued against? How is this any different? If I pay for boosters than invest that SP into skills that are changed how am I less affected?

The fact is this is a consumer product and a live service that has to be responsive and fair to its customer base. So far below average reviews and a limited concurrent user base of only roughly 4K means they arenGÇÖt doing something right.

I am all for choices having consequences. There is value in that and players can respect it. However, that is a lie if that choice is false and the only real choice is CCPGÇÖs.

Do not punish players for CCPGÇÖs errors and donGÇÖt blame players for them either.

Note: I do not use any of the items in question.

sick of having 5Mil SP wasted because my suit build got nerfed.

EDIT: If my decisions have permanence why do I get nerfed?

Call me a douche if you want but here is how I go about this game.

Step 1: train all of your core skills up, shields, armor, engineering, electronics, equipment, etc..

Step 2: find a suit you like to run and what works best for you and skill into it

Step 3: find out what weapon is fotm or "OP" and skill into it to at least proficiency lvl2

Step 4: don't spend any skill points from here on out till your fotm or "op" weapon gets nerfed

Step 5: repeat steps 3 and 4

One word

Crosstrain

Sadly, I was only trying to point to the fact that looking at numbers and making decisions based on that is not a bad thing.

This is why I say invoking the idea that "In Eve people do x" doesn't work. They won't be on the forums asking for a respec when a ship gets yanked out from under them. They will be scrambling to find, get their coalitions training and supplied with, then deploy the newest set of "best numbers" ASAP. The fact that we have these threads shows that part of that is here as well. They just lack the follow through to keep the chase going.

sick of having 5Mil SP wasted because my suit build got nerfed.

EDIT: If my decisions have permanence why do I get nerfed?

One word

Crosstrain

sick of having 5Mil SP wasted because my suit build got nerfed.

EDIT: If my decisions have permanence why do I get nerfed?

Wouldn't nerfs to classes in WoW be similar cases where people paid money to get **** and then they nerfed abilities or skills of the class? Whats the difference?

You're suit was op and you had an unfair advantage, now you're suit is balanced and you are on the same playing field as everyone else, therefore you're sp is not wasted. PS: when selecting into logistics did you ever stop to think what logistics means?

One word

Crosstrain

Right cross train in a game that only rewards those who specialize. Genius

sick of having 5Mil SP wasted because my suit build got nerfed.

EDIT: If my decisions have permanence why do I get nerfed?

It's boring. That's the problem. [/b]

Letting people swap out their hard earned SP from time to time only hurts ego's.

Right cross train in a game that only rewards those who specialize. Genius