|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
6
   |
Posted - 2015.07.18 07:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
TheD1CK wrote:Fox Gaden wrote:My voting list so far: Pokey DravonCross Atu Zaria Min Deir BreakinGÇÖ Stuff Kevall will probably be on there somewhere. I voted for him last time. I donGÇÖt know Talos, so will have to look out for some of his posts. Of course I am not sure who is all running yet. Yes there is still uncertainty about who will run, but the ones working hardest for it are noticable. I updated OP to set Pokey as a solid candidate, I think most of Dust will be hoping he can be the critic that can beat some sense into CCP  A lot of mercs thinking about CPM voting will browse this so feedback from candidates is very welcome
I like to think that Rattati and I both react well to a very analytical approach on topics. He's always been very responsive to my discussions with him because I approach things in a very factual manner. So when he comes up with an idea that just doesn't make sense, and I explain to him why it doesn't make sense, he's been very willing to change his position on the topic.
What he doesn't respond to well is emotionally driven rants and demands, which is something I always try to avoid in my conversations.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast & Blog
www.biomassed.net
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
6
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 19:46:00 -
[2] - Quote
Breakin is correct in that typically my issue with his designs are "Well it seems to check out mathematically, but we really need to to test it in the field to see how it plays and feels" and Breakin usually responds with "***** please my numbers are 1337 as ****" and I nod approvingly and insist we still need to test it in game, and he nods approvingly, and then we shake our fists at a lack of a proper testing environment.
I mean here's the deal for me. Numbers are great, I love working with them because they're very good at getting you close to the right answer. Unfortunately they really suck at fine tuning, simply because it is impossible to quantify every aspect of gameplay. So while you can get close to the right answer with a spreadsheet, you need to test that data in game and then make minor adjustments accordingly based on how it feels and performs.
What I don't react well to is feedback that calls for drastic changes and is based entirely off of how something feels. As an extreme example, players like spkr4thedead would try to argue "Tanks are underpowered, buff base hp to 12,000 so they're at least viable." Which doesn't even make sense.
I'm short, its fine to base minor changes off of how something feels and performs in the field. But for drastic changes, I'm always going to go the numbers first because they are more reliable in that particular application.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast & Blog
www.biomassed.net
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
6
|
Posted - 2015.07.19 06:29:00 -
[3] - Quote
Well that's not really an example of me not taking the feedback of someone's 'feel' because I'm focused on numerical data. In the example you're referring to, we were simply disagreeing on your qualitative opinion of myofibs vs my qualitative opinion on myofibs.
I'm not exactly sure how you thought I was supporting my position with numbers other that "I don't think people should be able to jump 30 feet in the air on a whim".
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast & Blog
www.biomassed.net
|
|
|
| |
|