Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 94

Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.
Thread: Testing BGS ? Yes. But what ?

  1. #76
    Originally Posted by Factabulous View Post (Source)
    Thanks for that feedback, if we had more time I would try again, but looks like it will have to wait for the full 3.3 drop...
    Hopefully this will be a server side fix and they can fix it before 3.3 goes live.

  2. #77
    Originally Posted by Schlack View Post (Source)
    That has been my experience. Adam stated on the livestream that the CZ wins/objectives might be weighted too low.
    Oh good, so it's not a "design" issue, it's a confirmed bug? And yes Zero is definitely too low. Completing objectives should be worth at least 1 bond turn transaction. Otherwise spamming small bonds will be remain subversively OP.

  3. #78
    Originally Posted by Ziljan View Post (Source)
    [...] repeat this immersion breaking "gameplay" loop ad nauseum.
    You were doing so good until right there, then you blew it.

    Your Immersion == Your Problem

    You're min/maxing, and that's all on you.

    I don't feel any particular desire to rush home after every single kill for that one bonus point. That's just a waste of my time. It's not worth it to me.

    Granted, my interest in BGS garbage is so periphery it's not even funny, so I'm not going to spend time min/maxing every little thing, because to me that exactly equals minimal fun.

    But even if I were the single most BGS-centric player here, I would still not waste my time doing this. Guess that's MY problem.

  4. #79
    Originally Posted by IndigoWyrd View Post (Source)
    You were doing so good until right there, then you blew it.

    Your Immersion == Your Problem
    Try not to get triggered by jargon. When I say "immersion" I mean doing a task and expecting the result to make sense. Like killing more enemies or winning battles to win a war. It's not unreasonable.

  5. #80
    Originally Posted by Ziljan View Post (Source)
    Try not to get triggered by jargon. When I say "immersion" I mean doing a task and expecting the result to make sense. Like killing more enemies or winning battles to win a war. It's not unreasonable.
    Yup.

    To change Conflict Zones so significantly as to include progress bars and new mini scenarios, complete with in-game indications that they at least should have an influence impact, if not an impact on the outcome of the war, but for them to have zero impact, is completely nonsensical.

    If Bonds are the only thing which count towards resolving the war;
    - why does every mission agent say "This will help us win the war"?
    - why does resolving a CZ or a scenario give an influence boost, if the rule is "Influence won't change in a conflict"?

    These are "immersion" aspects which are totally misleading, if this is not what actually happens. Missions don't *need* the flavour text... that in itself is just an immersion aspect... you could remove it or change it to "CATS CATS CATS" and nothing would change. But to have it contradict the actual game mechanics is bad.

  6. #81
    Adam will be fully aware that 'testing' involves ensuring that specific actions have specific outcomes. Without telling us either, we (sorry, you, I am not going to waste my time), are just urinating in the wind.

  7. #82
    Originally Posted by Dommarraa View Post (Source)
    Adam will be fully aware that 'testing' involves ensuring that specific actions have specific outcomes. Without telling us either, we (sorry, you, I am not going to waste my time), are just urinating in the wind.
    We were asked to test and feedback. That is what is happening. You don't need to if you thinks it's a waste. No need to post that here.

  8. #83
    It's a Beta test that has all new content that isn't balance still!!!! or we can't test great work team !!!!

  9. #84
    Originally Posted by Max Factor View Post (Source)
    We were asked to test and feedback. That is what is happening. You don't need to if you thinks it's a waste. No need to post that here.
    His point is that without information about what we are testing then there is nothing to test. Which is on topic. Unlike all this meta discussion. Including yours. And mine

  10. #85
    Originally Posted by Factabulous View Post (Source)
    His point is that without information about what we are testing then there is nothing to test. Which is on topic. Unlike all this meta discussion. Including yours. And mine
    Yes there is. The BGS. As long as Fdev get the figures and see what is wrong it doesnt matter. Sure we are not going to see all the ins and outs of it, but hopefully the devs will. Just play it's as usual, but report anything you see as a bug. What else do we need?

    Sure we cant feedback on everything as we do not know what's going on behind the scenes.

    Originally Posted by Daish View Post (Source)
    It's a Beta test that has all new content that isn't balance still!!!! or we can't test great work team !!!!
    Sorting out the balance is part of what the devs will doing going on from what they see. If we do not use the BGS, they will have no idea what needs to be balanced.

  11. #86
    Originally Posted by Max Factor View Post (Source)
    Yes there is. The BGS. As long as Fdev get the figures and see what is wrong it doesnt matter. Sure we are not going to see all the ins and outs of it, but hopefully the devs will. Just play it's as usual, but report anything you see as a bug. What else do we need?

    Sure we cant feedback on everything as we do not know what's going on behind the scenes.
    Not sure what you think FD are going to do with all your mete-feedback. It seems to have swamped any actual feedback you had - because I've not seen any from you (unlike Ziljan, Jmanis etc who have actually provided feedback for FD). Anyway, since you've decided this is your meta-feedback thread I'll leave you to it - have fun!

  12. #87
    Originally Posted by Factabulous View Post (Source)
    Not sure what you think FD are going to do with all your mete-feedback. It seems to have swamped any actual feedback you had - because I've not seen any from you (unlike Ziljan, Jmanis etc who have actually provided feedback for FD). Anyway, since you've decided this is your meta-feedback thread I'll leave you to it - have fun!
    Okaaaayy. What a stupid thing to say. I haven't been testing the BGS as I haven't been able to get online. PC issues.

    There really is no need to make it personal. I want the BGS to work well as much as anyone else as it provides 80% of the gameplay you can find in ED.

    Why do people have to lower themselves. I was not rude or unpleasent in any shape or form, but for some bizarre reason you decide to attack me.

  13. #88
    Guys, it is a feedback report. Please keep inline.

  14. This is the last staff post in this thread. #89
    Originally Posted by Ziljan View Post (Source)
    I ran a test of the Conflict Zone scenarios impact (or lack thereof). I checked the station traffic very carefully, and I was the only CMDR to land there in the last 24 hours, and there is no new traffic report today.

    Method:

    Side A:
    • Completed 1 scenario (kill 4/4 spec ops NPCs), received notice "Influence: moderate increase"
    • Defeated all enemy ships to "win" the CZ
    • Collected 349k in combat bonds, single transaction turn-in


    Side B:
    • Collected 353k in combat bonds, single transaction turn-in


    Test Result:
    Side B wins, gaining a Coriolis station, control of the system and a 10 point lead in the influence with only 4k more in combat bonds (a 1% difference), zero CZ wins, and zero CZ scenarios completed.


    Conclusion:

    Clearly the CZ scenarios & win/loss ratios are disconnected from the War result and the BGS.
    Name of the system really helps us with this kind of report please.

  15. #90
    Originally Posted by Adam Bourke-Waite View Post (Source)
    Name of the system really helps us with this kind of report please.
    The system where I conducted the test in the above post was:

    QI YUN CECH.

    On 28/11/18. Around 4:00 - 4:30 am UTC.

    It should be stressed however that this bug is repeatable in every system that I and others tested throughout the beta. Verified with zero traffic besides myself.

    Also, please see the other more definitive and concrete test I posted here as well, complete with bug report and screen shots.

    https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showth...ives-completed

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast