Before, there were no Logistics specialization. That was a greater variety.

Before, assault suits and commandos didn't have a 'You use this weapon because you get the bonus'

Right now, there is a right way and a wrong way to fit every single suit. If you can't see that, you're an idiot. Sorry, but you are.

Yes, look at the Bolt Pistol. Where CCP Rattati almost immediately deployed tweaks to bring it back in line after it turned out to be more powerful than intended. And of course, that's even prior to running a sidearm event where valuable balance data on sidearms can be collected for use in further tweaks.

Greater suit variety than ever before.

Greater weapon variety than ever before.

Such a crappy meta Rattati and Logibro have put together...

Look, you are just a whiny brat not getting his way.

Lots of players have lots of different fits and play styles.

If you can't see that, YOU are the idiot.

If you have legit complaints, perhaps stating them with a little more logically and rationally will be more productive than this sense of entitlement you seem to have.

I they did internal testing, they wouldn't have had to have nerfed the bolt pistiol AFTER THE PATCH.

Like... nothing internally tested ever compares to how it performs on live servers. From way back in my earlier MMO days back in 2007 this was apparent. You could even see as a build that was totally playable on the WoW test server explode fantastically the moment it was applied to the live servers. Also, players tend to be more varied in skill and playstyle than the devs, and will often be more likely to discover "unintended" abilities that the devs would not think to test.

Internal testing is good, and CCP could definitely afford to do a lot more of it. But it's really not a conclusive answer.

Most console games had test servers.

I'd certainly love some links and proof on this. From my personal understanding, it's near impossible to deploy test code to PlayStations via Sony's QA requirements. As far as I'm aware, that's why DUST doesn't have a test server. Would love to know if I'm wrong.

If you're referring to beta before game release, we had that. For a long time.

But like, if these games had a whole second copy of the game you could test out updates before they went to the main game, that I don't think has ever been possible on PS3.

You're missing the very essence of my question.

just read the title

On top of taking away active reps in 1.7 and the armor and shield hardener nerf and the armor rep nerf. I'm sorry, but when I did fly ADS, I stopped when the AB nerf hit, not to mention the HUUUUUUGE nerf to rate of fire for Pythons.

Apparently you're not good at context clues.

Are you saying that the python rate of fire wasn't a bit much? Seriously? I swarm, and I'm telling you now that you swarm a number of ways, and non of that works on the ADS of old?!


You can swarm with a scout suit, but what you gain in speed to chase tanks you lose in armor as the ADS one shots you into oblivion?!

You can swarm in an assault or commando, but you're too slow for evrything?! You can take a licking from the tank, but the ADS of old would fire so fast that there was no running and no survival?! You'd usually die before you locked on?!

Have you ever ran proto swarms, with proto AV nades, in a proto suit, and with all proto mods? Any true AVer would slap you for stupidity. It's financial suicide! Most ADS of old would go 30+/0! Who do you think they were killing? So the whole "go proto" argument is lacking in the experiment department. You obviously have never ran AV. A cheap suit with an abundance of high slots, complex dmg mods, and a proto swarm still will break 30,000 isk. Die 10 times, and that match was a waste?!

You should study the weaponry built to take you out to better understand it's strengths, limits, and abilities. That will teach you what you can and can't do, and if a nerf or buff is needed. I run tanks on an alt, and my knowledge of swarming helps me know where not to be when they start flying.

Rami, you use proper spelling and grammar, and your actual concern is fair discussion, so you seem an intelligent dude. Your OP lacks tact or any evidence of your claims. DEVs don't need to go any further than the title of your post to safely decide to move onto something else. This thread is just one of hundreds, if not thousands, just like it. Yet you legitimately feel a DEV should respond to you. If you want a blue tag, write something with more substance, more content, and you know, do a little investigation first. Come up with a better title. You want effort from CCP, put a little into your post. And apologies to you from me, for coming off too strongly previously. +1 for not overreacting.

On top of taking away active reps in 1.7 and the armor and shield hardener nerf and the armor rep nerf. I'm sorry, but when I did fly ADS, I stopped when the AB nerf hit, not to mention the HUUUUUUGE nerf to rate of fire for Pythons.

why did you need a high ROF for a missile that 1-3 shots ppl?

are you talking about the AB nerf a year ago or the one now?

I know we aren't supposed to swear, but that statement is bullshit. Do you actually listen to the community? I've listened to non pilots that say that the ADS nerf was a bit too much. ADS could always be handled with decent AV. Always. I sometimes fly dropships and this nerf was kind of ridiculous. Now they are wanting to change the whole ADS meta by changing the Python and Incubus bonuses? Where do they get off on that?

I'd have to ask you "Do you even Forum"? The ADS could not be killed by AV in any practical manner. There was as close to a consensus on that as any issue ever raised. The data supported that consensus. The changes in AV and ADS don't seem to have greatly altered things from my perspective. If I didn't read the forums I wouldn't know anything changed. The QQ frim pilots on the other hand is impressive.

Wow, some actual constructive comments. Thank you. Unfortunately I'm unable to cite my own personal experiences with the game, since I used my own experiences as examples.

I'm pleased to see that the CPM that responded has provided some decent dialog, at least. Honestly, once Borderlands the Pre Sequel comes out and Shadow of Mordor comes to PS3, I won't be playing this game anymore. I just made this thread to hopefully start some sort of meaningful questioning inthe community for how CCP takes care of buffing/nerfing.

It really seems like they just look at raw numbers and then fix the firestorm of their tweaking later. Some of the things they change in response to a patch are things that could have been easily caught and fixed in internal testing. They need better QA with players instead of just saying 'hey, surprise! Here's this stuff that you weren't expecting'.

Do you go to forums and ideas? Did you post your thoughts on the dozens of pages and interactions with Rattati there before the changes? I don't remember seeing you there and it seems a little spoiled to complain about not having a say when you were given plenty of opportunity to have a say but didn't take it.

this build is still easier than when large rail range wasn't yet nerfed a few months back.. sorry for those pilots who just hit AB and flew straight to cieling.. maybe they consider a different tactic now.. there's other ways to take evasive from AV than just face rolling the DS3.

Flying a dropship back then was way easier than now, in my opinion. AV wasn't ridiculously OP or too weak. In face, back in the beta, that was the best AV and vehichles have been balanced, in my opinion. Either way, I don't drive vehicles on this character and the character that does, doesn't anymore because they are killed too easily.

When I came back, I was floored when a forge gun hit me even at the flight ceiling. I was overly surprised when swarms caught up to me and even almost killed me.

because they have basically nerfed the high flying pilot (which was about 90% of the pilot community). you have to fly contour and have good prediction of where/when AV will come from. yea you will still be shot down it happens. but most AV expects you to AB to flight cieling and they predict your motion, when you do the opposite and dive low instead of ascend to evade it throws them off.

When you fly low, you have the chance of getting pushed into buildings. Flying high prevents that and caused you to keep your 800k ISK dropship. They didn't like it becaus epeople cried about the tactic and they nerfed it to force people to stop doing it. The game has gone a far way away from the freedom they had initially intended. It's really sad. This game had the potential to beat Battlefield, if only the devs actually listened to the community instead of makign changes they thought would be good for the game.

So, in my long career of gaming, almost every game I've played, the Devs actually played their own game. They even let the players beta test their patches before coming out. I know that Sony won't let CCP let us beta test patches, or maybe that's a CCP policy. I don't know and I don't care. The point of this thread is to ask the Devs, specifically, if they even play their own game before they release a patch that is, in their eyes, good and balancing.

So, I am heavily invested in this game and am always disappointed when you come out with a patch that completely ruin the meta and gameplay of the game. I don't know why you thought it was a good idea to nerf the dropships the way you did. I don't know why you took away the precision bonus from Caldari Scouts and gave it to the Galente and the Amarr. That is, as far as I can tell from the lore, that is completely contrary to what those races are - statwise, at least.

So, Devs, do you actually play your own game while coming up with these 'balances' or do you just look at raw numbers and say 'oh, well, that number clearly shouldn't be like that, so we'll change it' or 'Well, we don't like how people are using that feature, so we'll nerf the crap out of it' or do you just listen and actually change things when enough people cry about something?