Update on the Finn/Threepio Raid Interaction: Resulting Finn Modifications [MEGA]

Replies

  • I believe they would be more apt to respond with, some mild rhetoric of "we are reviewing the feedback, but have no changes at this time" if as a collective we were more constructive. But that is just my opinion. I also believe comments like that are not as helpful because they seem to spark less constructive comments than "calm the masses", but it's hard to gauge that, and is just speculation on my part.

    And how do we go about proving we are capable of doing that if we’re never given the opportunity? Judging based on the response to this “drop bad news and run for cover” post isn’t necessarily indicative because we’re not given the opportunity for constructive dialogue, just left shouting into the void.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    I believe they would be more apt to respond with, some mild rhetoric of "we are reviewing the feedback, but have no changes at this time" if as a collective we were more constructive. But that is just my opinion. I also believe comments like that are not as helpful because they seem to spark less constructive comments than "calm the masses", but it's hard to gauge that, and is just speculation on my part.

    And how do we go about proving we are capable of doing that if we’re never given the opportunity? Judging based on the response to this “drop bad news and run for cover” post isn’t necessarily indicative because we’re not given the opportunity for constructive dialogue, just left shouting into the void.

    Again. I am just make an observation and not asking anyone to prove anything, its a suggestion, that is all.

    How have we not been given an opportunity? They asked for feedback and our general attitude can be seen here. Why shouldnt we as a collective try to be more civil, regardless of the frequency of response? " be the better person", "take the high road", or any other adage that may help convey the sentiment. Just a thought.
  • Ravens1113
    4634 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    I dont know why they dont post here as often as many would like, but I can make guesses, and my guess is it's pretty obvious when you look at the conversation that happened on reddit when Carrie posted, and the general attitude here.

    I mean, some of that’s a chicken and egg sort of thing. I think part of the reason people here can be so toxic when CG finally does post here has to do with the length of time that comes between communications. People have a lot of time to store up aggression that they end up taking out when they finally get an opportunity to. That’s on top of the fact that we’re apparently more likely to get an open dialogue on reddit than we are in the official forum, which boggles the mind (or news breaking on other partner sites). If communication occurred *here* and *more often* it would probably go a long way towards diffusing some of the tension. Would there still be some toxic and angry people? Sure, it’s the internet. But I think in general we’d see more rational discussion like we did in Carrie’s reddit thread.

    I dont see it as chicken and egg. I know it may sound surprising, but anyone can be thoughtful and constructive and not make a post that is just calling people names, questioning thier ability to do a job, or any other off topic comments, and still be upset about a topic or have very strong feeling one way or the other. It's not magic.

    Being rational in a conversation is a choice, not a reaction.

    I'm not saying people should have strong feelings, we have all sunk chunks of time and/or $$ into this and we all want things to be good/better. That doesnt mean we all can't speak intelligently and constructively about things we dont like or want to see changed (or not changed).

    I will get off my soap box now, sorry for my little rant. Flame on.

    You can’t neglect how history and a pattern of behaviors can affect other people. Most people, myself included, can only take so much of something (like poor communication) before developing an adverse reaction. We have sayings like “the straw that broke the camels back” for a reason. Normally gregarious and rational people can become irrational through repeated abuse. You may take issue with the use of the term abuse here, but “silent treatment” and “gaslighting” are textbook examples of psychological abuse, and I would definitely make the argument that those tactics have played out here, whether intentional or not.

    If you are doing something that you picked up as enjoyment or for fun, and are feeling that your only recourse is be "abusive" and "uncivilized" (for lack of better general terms) due to the feelings you are expressing, again, maybe its time to step back, take a breath and gain some perspective on the situation.

    IMO, to call those "tactics" means you are saying they are intentional. I wouldnt consider them "tactics" as they are more just the general outside view of a bureaucratic process, not everyone we interact with has the ability or authority to say things when we want them said.

    As always we can agree to disagree, I dont want to lead this thread off topic. Sorry.

    You’re right, tactics wasn’t the right word and I actually spent quite a bit of time deliberating over that word specifically and failed to come up with a better option. I thought “action”, but in this case it’s just as much about what you don’t do as it is what you do, so that didn’t seem to fit. Maybe “effect” would be better, but it didn’t come to me in the moment. So chalk that up to my limited vocabulary, but disregarding that specific word you seem to get my point.

    I’m not suggesting that people are making a conscious decision to be abusive or uncivilized but rather that they’re ending up in a compromised mental state that makes it easier slip into actions like that without recognizing that they’re doing it. I don’t want to excuse it, just trying to point out that it’s an environment that’s been created through fault by both sides here.

    Telling someone to take a step back and re-evaluate their priorities is also not a full answer to the problem. Some people are passionate about the game, whether that’s appropriate or not is not for you to decide, and passion can manifest in different ways.

    Highlighting one more part from your and the following post:
    not everyone we interact with has the ability or authority to say things when we want them said.
    It would be really nice to have someone in charge come in here and say something, anything, really.

    Here’s the answer. If they had popped in once, twice, over the last however many days (17?) and just said “We hear you. We’re evaluating your feedback and will see what we can do to incorporate it. We expect to be able to provide more information in (x days).” Then I, and I’m sure many of the people here, would be in a much better place.

    I understand your point and yes it can be hard to find the right word to describe the interaction here.

    My point is that people can still choose to be decent, it is not the easy road, but shouldnt we all strive to take the high road, to be the example of how we feel we should be treated?

    Expressing your emotions no matter how invested and emotional about a situation doesnt need to be done in a "not nice" way. I am not asking or saying people shouldnt be passionate. I am in no way telling people how they should react, just suggesting that if you feel a situation leaves you with "no other option" then maybe you need to examine the situation with a breath of fresh air and a little perspective, because there are always options, and there are always better ways to handle just about any situation.

    Asking the dev team to " do better" but never striving to "do better" on our end is not a realistic goal. We cant always pass the buck that "they caused this", or it's all on thier end.
    I understand your point about them "checking in" but when they have done that in the last, most of those comments are written off as lip service and since they dont have content, if they are pointed out, most dont seem to think they are if any value.

    Also, how many days is ok or not, because not everyone will view that the same way, and it will always lead to problems more than it has done anything to solve them in the past.

    I'm not saying they couldn't communicate more and try to get us information more effectively, just pointing out that it hasn't always gone as well as some say it will.

    Passion aside, we should always strive to have the understanding that feedback and even just communication will always be better recieved when it is in a constructive manner. Name calling and other judgments of personal character tend to detract from the point and negate things rather than help.

    Here’s the issue Kyno, they’ve responded to other areas of the forums about the game, as well as on other platforms of communication.
    I agree that for the most part the we hear you, blah blah blah” rarely works. But if they said, we’ve heard your feedback and are evaluating how best to handle this still, we need a few more days” flames would be extinguished. The fact that it’s been 17 days without anything, much less an answer from them is a bit lame. There’s no reason it’s taken 3 weeks to make a decision about this zeta refund. Either “we understand your frustration but stand by our decision”, which would set the thread ablaze again but would be a flash fire. Or “we’ve reconsidered our stance and will refund the zeta so you can make the decision on whether to use this new leader ability”
    That’s all. Deafening silence is the worst they can do

    From what you said, saying they stand by thier decision would be the worst thing they could do.

    Whose to say they have anything to say? They informed us of the decision, I understand people would like them to change thier mind, but why would they "light the fire" again, just to say, we are sticking with thier decision. <<<that would be worse then just leaving it as, the decision they already stated.

    Because then at least the community knows far more than they do now. Look at the questions we have.

    1.) In the past when reworks to characters have been done that severely affect the character and how it works, Zeta were refunded. The only two I can think of that happened like this were Daka (paper zombie) and Zarris. Both zetas returned.
    Why now are they refusing to refund zeta materials when they’ve done so in the past when a character was drastically reworked? Paper zombie getting buffed was actually a good addition but changed how Daka zeta interacted in battle. So they did the right thing. Why change it?

    2.) Why is Finn getting a total rework when the only issue is P3. I’ve seen several ideas tossed around to fix the phase itself while leaving Finn untouched. Immunity to expose while toppled? TM gain while toppled per hit with stacking speed? Why change a long standing skill when the only issue is the Sith Raid as they’ve said.

    3.) Why a statement, request for feedback, then absolute silence? For almost 3 weeks. Why ask for something when you won’t even take it into account or even acknowledge it.

    And as for reaffirming their decision, it lets us know that they’ve at least read these posts, thought about it and actually gave a rats behind about our feedback. Is it what we want to hear? No but at least we got some answer. The fire isn’t out. It’s still burning consistently and will be until something is said. It has to be put out one way or the other. Either through a flash burn to turn it to ash and let it be done (reaffirming their decision), or extinguishing it by doing the morally right thing and refunding the zeta and let the community make the choice on if they want to invest hard earned materials on a brand new leadership.

    Either way, they’re acting like Nero and simply watching Rome burn.
  • They've repeatedly acted in a dishonourable/deceitful manner. Calling them unreasonable does not seem "mean" to me, just reflective of their behaviour.
  • StarSon
    6156 posts Member
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    I dont know why they dont post here as often as many would like, but I can make guesses, and my guess is it's pretty obvious when you look at the conversation that happened on reddit when Carrie posted, and the general attitude here.

    I mean, some of that’s a chicken and egg sort of thing. I think part of the reason people here can be so toxic when CG finally does post here has to do with the length of time that comes between communications. People have a lot of time to store up aggression that they end up taking out when they finally get an opportunity to. That’s on top of the fact that we’re apparently more likely to get an open dialogue on reddit than we are in the official forum, which boggles the mind (or news breaking on other partner sites). If communication occurred *here* and *more often* it would probably go a long way towards diffusing some of the tension. Would there still be some toxic and angry people? Sure, it’s the internet. But I think in general we’d see more rational discussion like we did in Carrie’s reddit thread.

    I dont see it as chicken and egg. I know it may sound surprising, but anyone can be thoughtful and constructive and not make a post that is just calling people names, questioning thier ability to do a job, or any other off topic comments, and still be upset about a topic or have very strong feeling one way or the other. It's not magic.

    Being rational in a conversation is a choice, not a reaction.

    I'm not saying people should have strong feelings, we have all sunk chunks of time and/or $$ into this and we all want things to be good/better. That doesnt mean we all can't speak intelligently and constructively about things we dont like or want to see changed (or not changed).

    I will get off my soap box now, sorry for my little rant. Flame on.

    You can’t neglect how history and a pattern of behaviors can affect other people. Most people, myself included, can only take so much of something (like poor communication) before developing an adverse reaction. We have sayings like “the straw that broke the camels back” for a reason. Normally gregarious and rational people can become irrational through repeated abuse. You may take issue with the use of the term abuse here, but “silent treatment” and “gaslighting” are textbook examples of psychological abuse, and I would definitely make the argument that those tactics have played out here, whether intentional or not.

    If you are doing something that you picked up as enjoyment or for fun, and are feeling that your only recourse is be "abusive" and "uncivilized" (for lack of better general terms) due to the feelings you are expressing, again, maybe its time to step back, take a breath and gain some perspective on the situation.

    IMO, to call those "tactics" means you are saying they are intentional. I wouldnt consider them "tactics" as they are more just the general outside view of a bureaucratic process, not everyone we interact with has the ability or authority to say things when we want them said.

    As always we can agree to disagree, I dont want to lead this thread off topic. Sorry.

    You’re right, tactics wasn’t the right word and I actually spent quite a bit of time deliberating over that word specifically and failed to come up with a better option. I thought “action”, but in this case it’s just as much about what you don’t do as it is what you do, so that didn’t seem to fit. Maybe “effect” would be better, but it didn’t come to me in the moment. So chalk that up to my limited vocabulary, but disregarding that specific word you seem to get my point.

    I’m not suggesting that people are making a conscious decision to be abusive or uncivilized but rather that they’re ending up in a compromised mental state that makes it easier slip into actions like that without recognizing that they’re doing it. I don’t want to excuse it, just trying to point out that it’s an environment that’s been created through fault by both sides here.

    Telling someone to take a step back and re-evaluate their priorities is also not a full answer to the problem. Some people are passionate about the game, whether that’s appropriate or not is not for you to decide, and passion can manifest in different ways.

    Highlighting one more part from your and the following post:
    not everyone we interact with has the ability or authority to say things when we want them said.
    It would be really nice to have someone in charge come in here and say something, anything, really.

    Here’s the answer. If they had popped in once, twice, over the last however many days (17?) and just said “We hear you. We’re evaluating your feedback and will see what we can do to incorporate it. We expect to be able to provide more information in (x days).” Then I, and I’m sure many of the people here, would be in a much better place.

    I understand your point and yes it can be hard to find the right word to describe the interaction here.

    My point is that people can still choose to be decent, it is not the easy road, but shouldnt we all strive to take the high road, to be the example of how we feel we should be treated?

    Expressing your emotions no matter how invested and emotional about a situation doesnt need to be done in a "not nice" way. I am not asking or saying people shouldnt be passionate. I am in no way telling people how they should react, just suggesting that if you feel a situation leaves you with "no other option" then maybe you need to examine the situation with a breath of fresh air and a little perspective, because there are always options, and there are always better ways to handle just about any situation.

    Asking the dev team to " do better" but never striving to "do better" on our end is not a realistic goal. We cant always pass the buck that "they caused this", or it's all on thier end.
    I understand your point about them "checking in" but when they have done that in the last, most of those comments are written off as lip service and since they dont have content, if they are pointed out, most dont seem to think they are if any value.

    Also, how many days is ok or not, because not everyone will view that the same way, and it will always lead to problems more than it has done anything to solve them in the past.

    I'm not saying they couldn't communicate more and try to get us information more effectively, just pointing out that it hasn't always gone as well as some say it will.

    Passion aside, we should always strive to have the understanding that feedback and even just communication will always be better recieved when it is in a constructive manner. Name calling and other judgments of personal character tend to detract from the point and negate things rather than help.

    Here’s the issue Kyno, they’ve responded to other areas of the forums about the game, as well as on other platforms of communication.
    I agree that for the most part the we hear you, blah blah blah” rarely works. But if they said, we’ve heard your feedback and are evaluating how best to handle this still, we need a few more days” flames would be extinguished. The fact that it’s been 17 days without anything, much less an answer from them is a bit lame. There’s no reason it’s taken 3 weeks to make a decision about this zeta refund. Either “we understand your frustration but stand by our decision”, which would set the thread ablaze again but would be a flash fire. Or “we’ve reconsidered our stance and will refund the zeta so you can make the decision on whether to use this new leader ability”
    That’s all. Deafening silence is the worst they can do

    From what you said, saying they stand by thier decision would be the worst thing they could do.

    Whose to say they have anything to say? They informed us of the decision, I understand people would like them to change thier mind, but why would they "light the fire" again, just to say, we are sticking with thier decision. <<<that would be worse then just leaving it as, the decision they already stated.
    2.) Why is Finn getting a total rework when the only issue is P3. I’ve seen several ideas tossed around to fix the phase itself while leaving Finn untouched. Immunity to expose while toppled? TM gain while toppled per hit with stacking speed? Why change a long standing skill when the only issue is the Sith Raid as they’ve said.

    This one is easy. Currently zFinn can easily enter an infinite loop in any game mode, including arena. While this lets that team beat Revan on offense, it also can use the same mechanic on defense. As a result, they would need to build every new OP character with bonus turn mechanics or anti-expose mechanics to shut this down. By changing Finn they leave him viable in all game modes without allowing the infinite loop anywhere.
  • SmurfLAX28 wrote: »
    Feel like it should be said... I for one am excited to try out Finns new kit in my JTR squad. Seems like if he can last long enough, he might be quite the heavy hitter. Sounds fun.

    So you want to try him out as an ally and not a leader, even though you used the zeta on his leader? That shows exactly why people are complaining that his kit was reworked but his zeta was nerfed to oblivion

    Never gave him the zeta. Always preferred JTR as my resistance leader.
  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    Lol... If you don't like the zFinn rework, it's entirely OK to say, "I don't like it". No one is say you can't express your opinions!

    CG asked us for our opinion, in fact. A poll is very incomplete, in terms of data gathering.
    Kyno wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    You know this goes both ways, right?

    Of course, all I am saying is that IMO, maybe we as a community could tone it down a little to see if we can stear things a different way.

    It would be a community if we had a dialogue, perhaps? As of now, if feels like a church and we are waiting for the return of the deity to speak back to us.

    I don't mean to say how people should do their jobs, but it must be someone's job and someone gets paid to do this, right? I can assure you there are much worse jobs around, than answering to mobs that frow angry on internet forums. Also, it's very reasonable, on our end, to expect some sort of "back and forth", when our opinion was asked to be expressed.

    As we all can see, this has become a metadiscussion and, 42 pages later, we are stilk waiting for someone to talk back to us.

    Who is unreasonable, at this point??

    I understand, but how many pages of those 42 are just trash talking rather than any constructive comments to the point of what the community wants/is talking about.

    Uhh early on people stated clearly and reasonably why they felt a refund was in order then silence.... then outrage....

    (I dont want the zeta back im not rooting for anyone).

    Also she brought up the “big meeting” for

    A) excuse to get out of thread ASAP... (fine)

    B) to let us know about a big meeting for no reason (what purpose could that serve)

    So prob A

    Anyway is this thread mostly garbage...yeah but in it are clear concise reasons for a refund based on logic.... yeah

    So its all there.

    Again i dont care about the zeta i would rather all this time wasted on x or y non issues like not setting GA defense. And get us some fun pve content for ships
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    edited March 2019
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    I dont know why they dont post here as often as many would like, but I can make guesses, and my guess is it's pretty obvious when you look at the conversation that happened on reddit when Carrie posted, and the general attitude here.

    I mean, some of that’s a chicken and egg sort of thing. I think part of the reason people here can be so toxic when CG finally does post here has to do with the length of time that comes between communications. People have a lot of time to store up aggression that they end up taking out when they finally get an opportunity to. That’s on top of the fact that we’re apparently more likely to get an open dialogue on reddit than we are in the official forum, which boggles the mind (or news breaking on other partner sites). If communication occurred *here* and *more often* it would probably go a long way towards diffusing some of the tension. Would there still be some toxic and angry people? Sure, it’s the internet. But I think in general we’d see more rational discussion like we did in Carrie’s reddit thread.

    I dont see it as chicken and egg. I know it may sound surprising, but anyone can be thoughtful and constructive and not make a post that is just calling people names, questioning thier ability to do a job, or any other off topic comments, and still be upset about a topic or have very strong feeling one way or the other. It's not magic.

    Being rational in a conversation is a choice, not a reaction.

    I'm not saying people should have strong feelings, we have all sunk chunks of time and/or $$ into this and we all want things to be good/better. That doesnt mean we all can't speak intelligently and constructively about things we dont like or want to see changed (or not changed).

    I will get off my soap box now, sorry for my little rant. Flame on.

    You can’t neglect how history and a pattern of behaviors can affect other people. Most people, myself included, can only take so much of something (like poor communication) before developing an adverse reaction. We have sayings like “the straw that broke the camels back” for a reason. Normally gregarious and rational people can become irrational through repeated abuse. You may take issue with the use of the term abuse here, but “silent treatment” and “gaslighting” are textbook examples of psychological abuse, and I would definitely make the argument that those tactics have played out here, whether intentional or not.

    If you are doing something that you picked up as enjoyment or for fun, and are feeling that your only recourse is be "abusive" and "uncivilized" (for lack of better general terms) due to the feelings you are expressing, again, maybe its time to step back, take a breath and gain some perspective on the situation.

    IMO, to call those "tactics" means you are saying they are intentional. I wouldnt consider them "tactics" as they are more just the general outside view of a bureaucratic process, not everyone we interact with has the ability or authority to say things when we want them said.

    As always we can agree to disagree, I dont want to lead this thread off topic. Sorry.

    You’re right, tactics wasn’t the right word and I actually spent quite a bit of time deliberating over that word specifically and failed to come up with a better option. I thought “action”, but in this case it’s just as much about what you don’t do as it is what you do, so that didn’t seem to fit. Maybe “effect” would be better, but it didn’t come to me in the moment. So chalk that up to my limited vocabulary, but disregarding that specific word you seem to get my point.

    I’m not suggesting that people are making a conscious decision to be abusive or uncivilized but rather that they’re ending up in a compromised mental state that makes it easier slip into actions like that without recognizing that they’re doing it. I don’t want to excuse it, just trying to point out that it’s an environment that’s been created through fault by both sides here.

    Telling someone to take a step back and re-evaluate their priorities is also not a full answer to the problem. Some people are passionate about the game, whether that’s appropriate or not is not for you to decide, and passion can manifest in different ways.

    Highlighting one more part from your and the following post:
    not everyone we interact with has the ability or authority to say things when we want them said.
    It would be really nice to have someone in charge come in here and say something, anything, really.

    Here’s the answer. If they had popped in once, twice, over the last however many days (17?) and just said “We hear you. We’re evaluating your feedback and will see what we can do to incorporate it. We expect to be able to provide more information in (x days).” Then I, and I’m sure many of the people here, would be in a much better place.

    I understand your point and yes it can be hard to find the right word to describe the interaction here.

    My point is that people can still choose to be decent, it is not the easy road, but shouldnt we all strive to take the high road, to be the example of how we feel we should be treated?

    Expressing your emotions no matter how invested and emotional about a situation doesnt need to be done in a "not nice" way. I am not asking or saying people shouldnt be passionate. I am in no way telling people how they should react, just suggesting that if you feel a situation leaves you with "no other option" then maybe you need to examine the situation with a breath of fresh air and a little perspective, because there are always options, and there are always better ways to handle just about any situation.

    Asking the dev team to " do better" but never striving to "do better" on our end is not a realistic goal. We cant always pass the buck that "they caused this", or it's all on thier end.
    I understand your point about them "checking in" but when they have done that in the last, most of those comments are written off as lip service and since they dont have content, if they are pointed out, most dont seem to think they are if any value.

    Also, how many days is ok or not, because not everyone will view that the same way, and it will always lead to problems more than it has done anything to solve them in the past.

    I'm not saying they couldn't communicate more and try to get us information more effectively, just pointing out that it hasn't always gone as well as some say it will.

    Passion aside, we should always strive to have the understanding that feedback and even just communication will always be better recieved when it is in a constructive manner. Name calling and other judgments of personal character tend to detract from the point and negate things rather than help.

    Here’s the issue Kyno, they’ve responded to other areas of the forums about the game, as well as on other platforms of communication.
    I agree that for the most part the we hear you, blah blah blah” rarely works. But if they said, we’ve heard your feedback and are evaluating how best to handle this still, we need a few more days” flames would be extinguished. The fact that it’s been 17 days without anything, much less an answer from them is a bit lame. There’s no reason it’s taken 3 weeks to make a decision about this zeta refund. Either “we understand your frustration but stand by our decision”, which would set the thread ablaze again but would be a flash fire. Or “we’ve reconsidered our stance and will refund the zeta so you can make the decision on whether to use this new leader ability”
    That’s all. Deafening silence is the worst they can do

    From what you said, saying they stand by thier decision would be the worst thing they could do.

    Whose to say they have anything to say? They informed us of the decision, I understand people would like them to change thier mind, but why would they "light the fire" again, just to say, we are sticking with thier decision. <<<that would be worse then just leaving it as, the decision they already stated.

    Because then at least the community knows far more than they do now. Look at the questions we have.

    1.) In the past when reworks to characters have been done that severely affect the character and how it works, Zeta were refunded. The only two I can think of that happened like this were Daka (paper zombie) and Zarris. Both zetas returned.
    Why now are they refusing to refund zeta materials when they’ve done so in the past when a character was drastically reworked? Paper zombie getting buffed was actually a good addition but changed how Daka zeta interacted in battle. So they did the right thing. Why change it?

    2.) Why is Finn getting a total rework when the only issue is P3. I’ve seen several ideas tossed around to fix the phase itself while leaving Finn untouched. Immunity to expose while toppled? TM gain while toppled per hit with stacking speed? Why change a long standing skill when the only issue is the Sith Raid as they’ve said.

    3.) Why a statement, request for feedback, then absolute silence? For almost 3 weeks. Why ask for something when you won’t even take it into account or even acknowledge it.

    And as for reaffirming their decision, it lets us know that they’ve at least read these posts, thought about it and actually gave a rats behind about our feedback. Is it what we want to hear? No but at least we got some answer. The fire isn’t out. It’s still burning consistently and will be until something is said. It has to be put out one way or the other. Either through a flash burn to turn it to ash and let it be done (reaffirming their decision), or extinguishing it by doing the morally right thing and refunding the zeta and let the community make the choice on if they want to invest hard earned materials on a brand new leadership.

    Either way, they’re acting like Nero and simply watching Rome burn.

    1) that is a great question. They did attempt to answer that as they stated:
    As our internal testing has shown that Finn matches or exceeds where he was prior to C-3PO's launch and we expect the community to push him even further, we have no intention of refunding the zeta associated with him.

    - are we happen with that answer, no. Should this lead us to be less civil in our feedback, IMO, no.
    - can we conclude from that answer and the understanding of previous changes that the 2 refunded zetas did not match or exceed their prior functions, yes we can, but that doesnt change the fact that a refund would have been much appreciated by the community. Should this lead to us being less civil or name calling in our feedback and thoughts on this matter, IMO, no.

    2) the community suggestions all focus on changes to P3. Does anyone ever consider they have a long term general plan for how the phases will become easier as they release toons, and those changes could cause issues for that plan and they would rather not do that, to help keep control over power creep and the progression in the game?
    I also see (although they dont state this) that his current kit is an open source to loops and other things like this in the future, which they stated when making changes to the NS faction. So it's possible that they just wanted to stop it now. But it's odd they didnt say that, so that could just be my vision of this change.

    3)
    We look forward to your feedback on this proposed change.


    Here is the statement they made. There is nothing here stating they would not do this based on feedback or that changes would be made due to feedback.

    That also doesnt mean that they do not read feedback (as many assume) and that they will not make any changes due to this feedback.

    Asking for lip service, just so they can be called out for lip service is not really a fair call to make, which has been my point for most of this conversation. We dont give them a good opportunity to just let us know they are reading or considering anything. They very well may be considering changes, but if they are not sure, why would they come here to say they are? It will just be called out and then if they dont make the changes it will be pointed at as just being rhetoric to pacify a situation when " they had no intention of charging", but that's just my thoughts on how that could ho down. I'm sure the community would be much more civil than that.

    I can assure you they do read the feedback, not that many would believe me. It's not always that easy for them to make " an official statment".

    The post that started this was just full of personal attacks on the dev team, and I was just trying to point out that there is no need for that and that in theory it hurts the desired goal of the community. I have stated my opinion on this matter ( the zeta return) and am not trying to defend anything, just pointing out that maybe we as a collective could consider how we discuss such matters in the hopes that we can open up discourse rather than shut it down so quickly with none constructive comments. Will it make a difference, I dont know, it was just a thought.
  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    edited March 2019
    I think one of the problems is, that at least some people feel disrespected if they are asked for feedback without any sign that the feedback is taken into account. No follow up, no answers, no reaction.

    And feeling disrespected easily leads to feeling angry, which sometimes leads to rude behavior.

    Try it out, move in with a new partner, wait a week, ask for her feedback.
    If she asks you kindly to put the toilet seat down, say nothing.
    And DON'T PUT IT DOWN in the future. That's important.

    (Obvoisly you have to set this up beforehand. So ... keep it up ... bro.)

    Then complain, that she always starts to fight.

    This might result in a rather short relationship, but maybe you will learn something valuable for the future.

    The zFinn-situation has been discussed here ... a lot.
    The consens was: Do not touch zFinn, change the (boring and tedious) raid.

    Then there came a "we will change Finn."

    And TopHat Wrote:
    CG_TopHat wrote:
    We look forward to your feedback on this proposed change.



    And the forum said: "No, he is not. This is a horrible idea. Do you even play the game? Try it, its awful."

    He is awful in the fact he does not do what we used him for in the past...

    His actual rework is NOT awful and unlike 110 toons he actually is still very useful for certain things
  • SmurfLAX28
    288 posts Member
    edited March 2019
    SmurfLAX28 wrote: »
    Feel like it should be said... I for one am excited to try out Finns new kit in my JTR squad. Seems like if he can last long enough, he might be quite the heavy hitter. Sounds fun.

    So you want to try him out as an ally and not a leader, even though you used the zeta on his leader? That shows exactly why people are complaining that his kit was reworked but his zeta was nerfed to oblivion

    Never gave him the zeta. Always preferred JTR as my resistance leader.

    Got it. So in reality you never have invested in the reason that people are upset. Of course you are feeling no effect of the aspect of the character they nerfed (the actual "expensive" part of his kit)
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    I think one of the problems is, that at least some people feel disrespected if they are asked for feedback without any sign that the feedback is taken into account. No follow up, no answers, no reaction.

    And feeling disrespected easily leads to feeling angry, which sometimes leads to rude behavior.

    Try it out, move in with a new partner, wait a week, ask for her feedback.
    If she asks you kindly to put the toilet seat down, say nothing.
    And DON'T PUT IT DOWN in the future. That's important.

    (Obvoisly you have to set this up beforehand. So ... keep it up ... bro.)

    Then complain, that she always starts to fight.

    This might result in a rather short relationship, but maybe you will learn something valuable for the future.

    The zFinn-situation has been discussed here ... a lot.
    The consens was: Do not touch zFinn, change the (boring and tedious) raid.

    Then there came a "we will change Finn."

    And TopHat Wrote:
    CG_TopHat wrote:
    We look forward to your feedback on this proposed change.

    (His post has 4 (four!!) likes)

    And he stated something like "...and we think, he is now even better than before".

    And the forum said: "No, he is not. This is a horrible idea. Do you even play the game? Try it, this is awful."

    And ... silence.

    Changing something and saying it is now even better than before, when this is obviously not the case ...
    might lead to people thinking that you are thinking they are pretty dumb.

    Disclaimer: I am not a native speaker, so. if you find any errors ... keep them.

    TL/DR If you ask for feedback, you should be willing to enter a conversation.
    And saying something that is changed is better than before, when it is not ... is not very helpful.

    Ahh ... and I do not have a zFinn, but I think refunding the zeta would be fair.

    But this feedback is also not based on any actual game play. Or the actual rework, just our initial look at what it will be like.

    Different, absolutely. Worse, maybe not.

    Most of this feedback is based on his use in a single location that he most likely will perform worse in. But up until this many would have considered his zeta yo be one of the most useful in many aspects of the game. So that doesnt seem to be justified to now rate the rework on only one thing.

    I'm not saying they shouldn't talk more, but you cant act like the community has a full understanding of the new kit, or that that feedback is based on his general use.
  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    SmurfLAX28 wrote: »
    SmurfLAX28 wrote: »
    Feel like it should be said... I for one am excited to try out Finns new kit in my JTR squad. Seems like if he can last long enough, he might be quite the heavy hitter. Sounds fun.

    So you want to try him out as an ally and not a leader, even though you used the zeta on his leader? That shows exactly why people are complaining that his kit was reworked but his zeta was nerfed to oblivion

    Never gave him the zeta. Always preferred JTR as my resistance leader.

    Got it. So in reality you never have invested in the reason that people are upset. Of course you are feeling no effect of the aspect of the character they nerfed (the actual "expensive" part of his kit)

    Yeah but this was ALWAYS going to be a debate of long time players who used finn all the time and newer people who loterally have no reason to invest in him with all the new OP choices out there

    There are probably a TON of people who think we are all nuts when talking about finn who just think “why would anyone zeta him when REVAN” lol
  • Kyno wrote: »
    I think one of the problems is, that at least some people feel disrespected if they are asked for feedback without any sign that the feedback is taken into account. No follow up, no answers, no reaction.

    And feeling disrespected easily leads to feeling angry, which sometimes leads to rude behavior.

    Try it out, move in with a new partner, wait a week, ask for her feedback.
    If she asks you kindly to put the toilet seat down, say nothing.
    And DON'T PUT IT DOWN in the future. That's important.

    (Obvoisly you have to set this up beforehand. So ... keep it up ... bro.)

    Then complain, that she always starts to fight.

    This might result in a rather short relationship, but maybe you will learn something valuable for the future.

    The zFinn-situation has been discussed here ... a lot.
    The consens was: Do not touch zFinn, change the (boring and tedious) raid.

    Then there came a "we will change Finn."

    And TopHat Wrote:
    CG_TopHat wrote:
    We look forward to your feedback on this proposed change.

    (His post has 4 (four!!) likes)

    And he stated something like "...and we think, he is now even better than before".

    And the forum said: "No, he is not. This is a horrible idea. Do you even play the game? Try it, this is awful."

    And ... silence.

    Changing something and saying it is now even better than before, when this is obviously not the case ...
    might lead to people thinking that you are thinking they are pretty dumb.

    Disclaimer: I am not a native speaker, so. if you find any errors ... keep them.

    TL/DR If you ask for feedback, you should be willing to enter a conversation.
    And saying something that is changed is better than before, when it is not ... is not very helpful.

    Ahh ... and I do not have a zFinn, but I think refunding the zeta would be fair.

    But this feedback is also not based on any actual game play. Or the actual rework, just our initial look at what it will be like.

    Different, absolutely. Worse, maybe not.

    Most of this feedback is based on his use in a single location that he most likely will perform worse in. But up until this many would have considered his zeta yo be one of the most useful in many aspects of the game. So that doesnt seem to be justified to now rate the rework on only one thing.

    I'm not saying they shouldn't talk more, but you cant act like the community has a full understanding of the new kit, or that that feedback is based on his general use.

    You've already said that a refund is warranted because the monstrous change in the zeta. Demanding a refund based on the precedent they have shown 2x has absolutely NOTHING to do with any gameplay aspect of any game mode but the character himself
  • Reading through 42 pages of mostly complaints sounds awful. So if it’s been said already... oh well here it comes.

    No one has any idea how bad or good this leadership ability will actually be. It could be even better than than before, you really don’t know. You still get cooldowns reduced, you gain turn meter (granted not as much) and enemy loses it, which is awesome. RT will still be exposing people all the time with the added potency bonus, and will still get to use his special all the time. Throw in RPilot and you e got even more exposes.

    This is still a fantastic leader ability on paper. I would bet that if a zeta refund came, many people who get it would turn around and put it right back on.

    Just try it out first. Come to a conclusion once you’ve had the opportunity to try out the ability.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    SmurfLAX28 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    I think one of the problems is, that at least some people feel disrespected if they are asked for feedback without any sign that the feedback is taken into account. No follow up, no answers, no reaction.

    And feeling disrespected easily leads to feeling angry, which sometimes leads to rude behavior.

    Try it out, move in with a new partner, wait a week, ask for her feedback.
    If she asks you kindly to put the toilet seat down, say nothing.
    And DON'T PUT IT DOWN in the future. That's important.

    (Obvoisly you have to set this up beforehand. So ... keep it up ... bro.)

    Then complain, that she always starts to fight.

    This might result in a rather short relationship, but maybe you will learn something valuable for the future.

    The zFinn-situation has been discussed here ... a lot.
    The consens was: Do not touch zFinn, change the (boring and tedious) raid.

    Then there came a "we will change Finn."

    And TopHat Wrote:
    CG_TopHat wrote:
    We look forward to your feedback on this proposed change.

    (His post has 4 (four!!) likes)

    And he stated something like "...and we think, he is now even better than before".

    And the forum said: "No, he is not. This is a horrible idea. Do you even play the game? Try it, this is awful."

    And ... silence.

    Changing something and saying it is now even better than before, when this is obviously not the case ...
    might lead to people thinking that you are thinking they are pretty dumb.

    Disclaimer: I am not a native speaker, so. if you find any errors ... keep them.

    TL/DR If you ask for feedback, you should be willing to enter a conversation.
    And saying something that is changed is better than before, when it is not ... is not very helpful.

    Ahh ... and I do not have a zFinn, but I think refunding the zeta would be fair.

    But this feedback is also not based on any actual game play. Or the actual rework, just our initial look at what it will be like.

    Different, absolutely. Worse, maybe not.

    Most of this feedback is based on his use in a single location that he most likely will perform worse in. But up until this many would have considered his zeta yo be one of the most useful in many aspects of the game. So that doesnt seem to be justified to now rate the rework on only one thing.

    I'm not saying they shouldn't talk more, but you cant act like the community has a full understanding of the new kit, or that that feedback is based on his general use.

    You've already said that a refund is warranted because the monstrous change in the zeta. Demanding a refund based on the precedent they have shown 2x has absolutely NOTHING to do with any gameplay aspect of any game mode but the character himself

    I didnt say anything about the refund, I was nearly pointing out that when the posts says "the community says X" and they get silence, there is not much they can do or say because the feedback is not based on the full understanding.

    It is possible they could come here and say, no he is better, but that's not going to change the feedback because the feedback is based on the understanding of a single situation (pvp revan) and the statement they made was about his general use overall. So it may be seen as a better choice to say nothing and wait for his kit to roll out. (Its not the better choice in our minds, but I can understand it after looking at the general attitude here.)
  • Dk_rek wrote: »

    He is awful in the fact he does not do what we used him for in the past...

    His actual rework is NOT awful and unlike 110 toons he actually is still very useful for certain things

    Besides the Sith-Raid ... what people cared about is that he was able to defeat Revan.

    I can't see anything, that is helping against Revan in this kit.

    Ok, maybe he is not worthless ... but still

  • Kyno wrote: »
    I believe they would be more apt to respond with, some mild rhetoric of "we are reviewing the feedback, but have no changes at this time" if as a collective we were more constructive. But that is just my opinion. I also believe comments like that are not as helpful because they seem to spark less constructive comments than "calm the masses", but it's hard to gauge that, and is just speculation on my part.

    And how do we go about proving we are capable of doing that if we’re never given the opportunity? Judging based on the response to this “drop bad news and run for cover” post isn’t necessarily indicative because we’re not given the opportunity for constructive dialogue, just left shouting into the void.

    Again. I am just make an observation and not asking anyone to prove anything, its a suggestion, that is all.

    How have we not been given an opportunity? They asked for feedback and our general attitude can be seen here. Why shouldnt we as a collective try to be more civil, regardless of the frequency of response? " be the better person", "take the high road", or any other adage that may help convey the sentiment. Just a thought.

    I think if you go back to the beginning of this thread you’ll find that a majority of it did in fact start out civil. It’s the silence and lack of dialogue that spurred on further spiraling.

    When someone asks for feedback, there’s typically some expectation of a certain amount of back and forth, reasoning/rationale is presented, questions are asked...it’s a dialogue.

    Judging the “general attitude” that can be expected if they were to actually come in and have a discussion by what’s occurred here is not, in my opinion, an accurate comparison. I don’t see any reason to expect that if Carrie popped in here the same way she did on reddit that it would go significantly different than it did there.
  • [/quote]

    Got it. So in reality you never have invested in the reason that people are upset. Of course you are feeling no effect of the aspect of the character they nerfed (the actual "expensive" part of his kit)[/quote]

    See my other comment. No one has been able to test the kit with their squads, which is also the point @Kyno is trying to make. So why is there so much outcry when it’s totally possible that this kit is even better now?

    You personally, before 3PO came, we’re you using Finn more than JTR in the Sith Raid?

  • mvmss
    213 posts Member
    Let's take your comments one by one.
    mvmss wrote: »

    It would be a community if we had a dialogue, perhaps? As of now, if feels like a church and we are waiting for the return of the deity to speak back to us.

    This hyperbole is not constructive. As a person, I'd just dismiss it and ignore your comments. I wouldn't expect a response from anyone at CG, and if you do expect one, you're really not seeing the point I'm making. This is just mean.

    I don't mean to say how people should do their jobs, but it must be someone's job and someone gets paid to do this, right? I can assure you there are much worse jobs around, than answering to mobs that frow angry on internet forums. Also, it's very reasonable, on our end, to expect some sort of "back and forth", when our opinion was asked to be expressed.

    You come off as 'being' reasonable, but in actuality you're not. You don't mean to tell CG how to do their job, then you go right ahead and tell them exactly how to do their job. Again, don't expect a response. Your comments are just rude. If you're expecting 'back and forth' from comments like this, you'll not get one.

    As we all can see, this has become a metadiscussion and, 42 pages later, we are stilk waiting for someone to talk back to us.

    42 pages is not the total comments worth responding to. If you going to be _____(insert adjective) ____ then don't expect an answer.
    Who is unreasonable, at this point??

    I can see that you're still not getting it. To end your mean response you called CG unreasonable. Look, maybe it's not your strong point, but ridicule is not polite. It can be mean especially in text when non-verbal signs, body language, tone of vouce, inflection are not present.

    In summary. Reading your respinse, I wouldn't blame anyone at CG for not responding to you.


    Wow, pardon me for my bluntness, but, sure, go ahead and lay the blame on me (ha!) for no reply from CG, if it makes you feel better.

    The idea of "if you behave, they shall reply" sounds like "if you build it, they will come" and, nothing personal, is pathetic.

    Someone pointed out the frequency of responses from CG on the forums and it doesn't really seem very frequent to me. That leads me to think that it has little to nothing to do with how polite or not the discussion evolves. Instead, it's quite tangible the perception that communication is simply lacking, borderline non-existant.

    At the same time, I am positive this is one of the most heated discussions we have ever had in the history of this game, so, obviously you can expect people venting their frustrations over the suggested changes - and, yes, even frustrated rants have to be accounted for, because they sure are opinions. Yet, zero responses. Null. Nada. Rien de rien.

    They have asked our opinion, our opinions were given, a lot of them very reasonable and polite, if you wish, time and again. Yet, not even a single protocolar follow up post. Wouldn't you agree that all the polite opinions shared here merit some sort of response? Would it be unreasonable to consider impolite to ask for someone'a opinion on a matter and leaving them at it?

    My point is, as I've explained above, based on the frequency of responses from CG, there seems to be no active engagement in back and forth communication between CG and the player base. One may act like a hooligan or a lord and it does not seem to matter. They simply do not seem to engage in discussions.

    Communication could be greatly improved by, at the very least, acknowledging having taken our opinions into consideration. Again, it's disrespectful to ask someone's opinion and not giving any feedback, after so long, at all.

    The deafening silence has turned the ZFinn discussion into a metadiscussion, dwelling on proper etiquette on an internet forum. It should never have come to this point.
  • I think one of the problems is, that at least some people feel disrespected if they are asked for feedback without any sign that the feedback is taken into account. No follow up, no answers, no reaction.

    And feeling disrespected easily leads to feeling angry, which sometimes leads to rude behavior.

    Try it out, move in with a new partner, wait a week, ask for her feedback.
    If she asks you kindly to put the toilet seat down, say nothing.
    And DON'T PUT IT DOWN in the future. That's important.

    (Obvoisly you have to set this up beforehand. So ... keep it up ... bro.)

    Then complain, that she always starts to fight.

    This might result in a rather short relationship, but maybe you will learn something valuable for the future.

    The zFinn-situation has been discussed here ... a lot.
    The consens was: Do not touch zFinn, change the (boring and tedious) raid.

    Then there came a "we will change Finn."

    And TopHat Wrote:
    CG_TopHat wrote:
    We look forward to your feedback on this proposed change.

    (His post has 4 (four!!) likes)

    And he stated something like "...and we think, he is now even better than before".

    And the forum said: "No, he is not. This is a horrible idea. Do you even play the game? Try it, its awful."

    And ... silence.

    Changing something and saying it is now even better than before, when this is obviously not the case ...
    might lead to people thinking that you are thinking they are pretty dumb.

    Disclaimer: I am not a native speaker, so. if you find any errors ... keep them.

    TL/DR If you ask for feedback, you should be willing to enter a conversation.
    And saying something that is changed is better than before, when it is not ... is not very helpful.

    Ahh ... and I do not have a zFinn, but I think refunding the zeta would be fair.
  • I think one of the problems is, that at least some people feel disrespected if they are asked for feedback without any sign that the feedback is taken into account. No follow up, no answers, no reaction.

    And feeling disrespected easily leads to feeling angry, which sometimes leads to rude behavior.

    Try it out, move in with a new partner, wait a week, ask for her feedback.
    If she asks you kindly to put the toilet seat down, say nothing.
    And DON'T PUT IT DOWN in the future. That's important.

    (Obvoisly you have to set this up beforehand. So ... keep it up ... bro.)

    Then complain, that she always starts to fight.

    This might result in a rather short relationship, but maybe you will learn something valuable for the future.

    The zFinn-situation has been discussed here ... a lot.
    The consens was: Do not touch zFinn, change the (boring and tedious) raid.

    Then there came a "we will change Finn."

    And TopHat Wrote:
    CG_TopHat wrote:
    We look forward to your feedback on this proposed change.

    (His post has 4 (four!!) likes)

    And he stated something like "...and we think, he is now even better than before".

    And the forum said: "No, he is not. This is a horrible idea. Do you even play the game? Try it, its awful."

    And ... silence.

    Changing something and saying it is now even better than before, when this is obviously not the case ...
    might lead to people thinking that you are thinking they are pretty dumb.

    Disclaimer: I am not a native speaker, so. if you find any errors ... keep them.

    TL/DR If you ask for feedback, you should be willing to enter a conversation.
    And saying something that is changed is better than before, when it is not ... is not very helpful.

    Ahh ... and I do not have a zFinn, but I think refunding the zeta would be fair.
  • Ripperpa
    298 posts Member
    edited March 2019
    Reading through 42 pages of mostly complaints sounds awful. So if it’s been said already... oh well here it comes.

    No one has any idea how bad or good this leadership ability will actually be. It could be even better than than before, you really don’t know. You still get cooldowns reduced, you gain turn meter (granted not as much) and enemy loses it, which is awesome. RT will still be exposing people all the time with the added potency bonus, and will still get to use his special all the time. Throw in RPilot and you e got even more exposes.

    This is still a fantastic leader ability on paper. I would bet that if a zeta refund came, many people who get it would turn around and put it right back on.

    Just try it out first. Come to a conclusion once you’ve had the opportunity to try out the ability.

    And when the leader ability suck, we still have it zetad.... That's the point. So just refund and most people are happy...
  • mvmss wrote: »
    Let's take your comments one by one.
    mvmss wrote: »

    It would be a community if we had a dialogue, perhaps? As of now, if feels like a church and we are waiting for the return of the deity to speak back to us.

    This hyperbole is not constructive. As a person, I'd just dismiss it and ignore your comments. I wouldn't expect a response from anyone at CG, and if you do expect one, you're really not seeing the point I'm making. This is just mean.

    I don't mean to say how people should do their jobs, but it must be someone's job and someone gets paid to do this, right? I can assure you there are much worse jobs around, than answering to mobs that frow angry on internet forums. Also, it's very reasonable, on our end, to expect some sort of "back and forth", when our opinion was asked to be expressed.

    You come off as 'being' reasonable, but in actuality you're not. You don't mean to tell CG how to do their job, then you go right ahead and tell them exactly how to do their job. Again, don't expect a response. Your comments are just rude. If you're expecting 'back and forth' from comments like this, you'll not get one.

    As we all can see, this has become a metadiscussion and, 42 pages later, we are stilk waiting for someone to talk back to us.

    42 pages is not the total comments worth responding to. If you going to be _____(insert adjective) ____ then don't expect an answer.
    Who is unreasonable, at this point??

    I can see that you're still not getting it. To end your mean response you called CG unreasonable. Look, maybe it's not your strong point, but ridicule is not polite. It can be mean especially in text when non-verbal signs, body language, tone of vouce, inflection are not present.

    In summary. Reading your respinse, I wouldn't blame anyone at CG for not responding to you.


    Wow, pardon me for my bluntness, but, sure, go ahead and lay the blame on me (ha!) for no reply from CG, if it makes you feel better.

    The idea of "if you behave, they shall reply" sounds like "if you build it, they will come" and, nothing personal, is pathetic.

    Someone pointed out the frequency of responses from CG on the forums and it doesn't really seem very frequent to me. That leads me to think that it has little to nothing to do with how polite or not the discussion evolves. Instead, it's quite tangible the perception that communication is simply lacking, borderline non-existant.

    At the same time, I am positive this is one of the most heated discussions we have ever had in the history of this game, so, obviously you can expect people venting their frustrations over the suggested changes - and, yes, even frustrated rants have to be accounted for, because they sure are opinions. Yet, zero responses. Null. Nada. Rien de rien.

    They have asked our opinion, our opinions were given, a lot of them very reasonable and polite, if you wish, time and again. Yet, not even a single protocolar follow up post. Wouldn't you agree that all the polite opinions shared here merit some sort of response? Would it be unreasonable to consider impolite to ask for someone'a opinion on a matter and leaving them at it?

    My point is, as I've explained above, based on the frequency of responses from CG, there seems to be no active engagement in back and forth communication between CG and the player base. One may act like a hooligan or a lord and it does not seem to matter. They simply do not seem to engage in discussions.

    Communication could be greatly improved by, at the very least, acknowledging having taken our opinions into consideration. Again, it's disrespectful to ask someone's opinion and not giving any feedback, after so long, at all.

    The deafening silence has turned the ZFinn discussion into a metadiscussion, dwelling on proper etiquette on an internet forum. It should never have come to this point.

    How we communicate reflects only on the communicator. All I'm saying is there are certain kinds and styles of communication that warrant no response. Ultimately it's solely on the communicator to take responsibility for what they say or type. No one is responsible for what someone else says. You can't blame CG or its employees for the community's mean responses.
    what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
  • mvmss
    213 posts Member
    Either:

    1) Fix P3 to avoid loops, zFinn is not the only toon capable of loops here.

    or

    2) Accept that P3 can be solo'd like ALL other raid content. Maybe it happened sooner than you thought, but it is an inevitability. Live with it.

    Please do not completely change a toon that is a staple of progression thru the game, and that continues to have end-game usefulness.

    I agree with your logic. The CLS loop will force them into making a difficult choice, in terms of gaming principles.

    They also may, however, change ZFinn for the long term health of the game and, while I will not be happy if they follow this path, I understand the reason behind it. Refunding the zeta would go without saying, of course.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    SmurfLAX28 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    I think one of the problems is, that at least some people feel disrespected if they are asked for feedback without any sign that the feedback is taken into account. No follow up, no answers, no reaction.

    And feeling disrespected easily leads to feeling angry, which sometimes leads to rude behavior.

    Try it out, move in with a new partner, wait a week, ask for her feedback.
    If she asks you kindly to put the toilet seat down, say nothing.
    And DON'T PUT IT DOWN in the future. That's important.

    (Obvoisly you have to set this up beforehand. So ... keep it up ... bro.)

    Then complain, that she always starts to fight.

    This might result in a rather short relationship, but maybe you will learn something valuable for the future.

    The zFinn-situation has been discussed here ... a lot.
    The consens was: Do not touch zFinn, change the (boring and tedious) raid.

    Then there came a "we will change Finn."

    And TopHat Wrote:
    CG_TopHat wrote:
    We look forward to your feedback on this proposed change.

    (His post has 4 (four!!) likes)

    And he stated something like "...and we think, he is now even better than before".

    And the forum said: "No, he is not. This is a horrible idea. Do you even play the game? Try it, this is awful."

    And ... silence.

    Changing something and saying it is now even better than before, when this is obviously not the case ...
    might lead to people thinking that you are thinking they are pretty dumb.

    Disclaimer: I am not a native speaker, so. if you find any errors ... keep them.

    TL/DR If you ask for feedback, you should be willing to enter a conversation.
    And saying something that is changed is better than before, when it is not ... is not very helpful.

    Ahh ... and I do not have a zFinn, but I think refunding the zeta would be fair.

    But this feedback is also not based on any actual game play. Or the actual rework, just our initial look at what it will be like.

    Different, absolutely. Worse, maybe not.

    Most of this feedback is based on his use in a single location that he most likely will perform worse in. But up until this many would have considered his zeta yo be one of the most useful in many aspects of the game. So that doesnt seem to be justified to now rate the rework on only one thing.

    I'm not saying they shouldn't talk more, but you cant act like the community has a full understanding of the new kit, or that that feedback is based on his general use.

    You've already said that a refund is warranted because the monstrous change in the zeta. Demanding a refund based on the precedent they have shown 2x has absolutely NOTHING to do with any gameplay aspect of any game mode but the character himself

    I didnt say anything about the refund, I was nearly pointing out that when the posts says "the community says X" and they get silence, there is not much they can do or say because the feedback is not based on the full understanding.

    It is possible they could come here and say, no he is better, but that's not going to change the feedback because the feedback is based on the understanding of a single situation (pvp revan) and the statement they made was about his general use overall. So it may be seen as a better choice to say nothing and wait for his kit to roll out. (Its not the better choice in our minds, but I can understand it after looking at the general attitude here.)

    You absolutely have said you think this rework deserves a zeta refund (not that it would happen though) and let people decide for themselves because the difference it is from what people first invested in

    Do you really need me to go back and find the post you mentioning your personal thoughts on the issue?

  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    SmurfLAX28 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    SmurfLAX28 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    I think one of the problems is, that at least some people feel disrespected if they are asked for feedback without any sign that the feedback is taken into account. No follow up, no answers, no reaction.

    And feeling disrespected easily leads to feeling angry, which sometimes leads to rude behavior.

    Try it out, move in with a new partner, wait a week, ask for her feedback.
    If she asks you kindly to put the toilet seat down, say nothing.
    And DON'T PUT IT DOWN in the future. That's important.

    (Obvoisly you have to set this up beforehand. So ... keep it up ... bro.)

    Then complain, that she always starts to fight.

    This might result in a rather short relationship, but maybe you will learn something valuable for the future.

    The zFinn-situation has been discussed here ... a lot.
    The consens was: Do not touch zFinn, change the (boring and tedious) raid.

    Then there came a "we will change Finn."

    And TopHat Wrote:
    CG_TopHat wrote:
    We look forward to your feedback on this proposed change.

    (His post has 4 (four!!) likes)

    And he stated something like "...and we think, he is now even better than before".

    And the forum said: "No, he is not. This is a horrible idea. Do you even play the game? Try it, this is awful."

    And ... silence.

    Changing something and saying it is now even better than before, when this is obviously not the case ...
    might lead to people thinking that you are thinking they are pretty dumb.

    Disclaimer: I am not a native speaker, so. if you find any errors ... keep them.

    TL/DR If you ask for feedback, you should be willing to enter a conversation.
    And saying something that is changed is better than before, when it is not ... is not very helpful.

    Ahh ... and I do not have a zFinn, but I think refunding the zeta would be fair.

    But this feedback is also not based on any actual game play. Or the actual rework, just our initial look at what it will be like.

    Different, absolutely. Worse, maybe not.

    Most of this feedback is based on his use in a single location that he most likely will perform worse in. But up until this many would have considered his zeta yo be one of the most useful in many aspects of the game. So that doesnt seem to be justified to now rate the rework on only one thing.

    I'm not saying they shouldn't talk more, but you cant act like the community has a full understanding of the new kit, or that that feedback is based on his general use.

    You've already said that a refund is warranted because the monstrous change in the zeta. Demanding a refund based on the precedent they have shown 2x has absolutely NOTHING to do with any gameplay aspect of any game mode but the character himself

    I didnt say anything about the refund, I was nearly pointing out that when the posts says "the community says X" and they get silence, there is not much they can do or say because the feedback is not based on the full understanding.

    It is possible they could come here and say, no he is better, but that's not going to change the feedback because the feedback is based on the understanding of a single situation (pvp revan) and the statement they made was about his general use overall. So it may be seen as a better choice to say nothing and wait for his kit to roll out. (Its not the better choice in our minds, but I can understand it after looking at the general attitude here.)

    You absolutely have said you think this rework deserves a zeta refund (not that it would happen though) and let people decide for themselves because the difference it is from what people first invested in

    Do you really need me to go back and find the post you mentioning your personal thoughts on the issue?

    I meant in that post, sorry for the confusion
  • The issue with his reworked lead is that it is based on number of resistance allies, so good luck in 3v3...
This discussion has been closed.