MacAran posted:

---

I'm not sure I agree with this, as from what I can tell Pendragon absolutely DIED as a play server when they added free RR13. You even admit there is a very low test population. Last patch Mythic had to beg, then bribe, people to test their content. I do not think you are correct in your assessment. I am assuming you are referring to all testing, as this idea has absolutely no correlation with what we typically call "stress" testing. It would never get thousands of people on.


[colorurple] Mythic has in the past had many events on Pendragon where hundreds and hundreds participated. Granted the events were better implemented than the last stupidly organized event with the Pendragon ring (the ring which has yet to be handed out).


When a Pendragon event is announced to everyone that logs into the game, and if it seems that the event will be well run and a fun event (published times, published rules, etc. . .), many players show up from each realm.


Pendragon events need not be large stress test events. Mythic has in the past gathered players together to participate on Pendragon, which shows that there are methods available to Mythic/Bioware that will increase Pendragon’s population. While the stress tests are not typical of the population normally found on the test server, if Mythic/Bioware wants to increase the test server population there are methods they could use, methods similar to what worked for stress testing events, that Mythic could adjust and modify to draw in fewer but adequate numbers necessary for thorough testing. [/color]





When did "finding bugs" change to "giving advice on mechanics?" Seriously would ANYONE be stupid enough to listen to someone who doesn't actually play send in a report, "Mez seems overly powerful." NO. However, it requires absolutely zero knowledge of the current state of RvR tactics to send a bug report saying, "Quest NPC [soanso] has the following miss-spelled dialog:" I must have submitted 20+ bug reports last patch cycle, and EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM got their own patch note. Clearly Mythic cares, or at least cares when the bug report comes from a veteran account with a creation date from beta (maybe they don't listen to normal people, I don't know).


[colorurple] “When did "finding bugs" change to "giving advice on mechanics?"” Most bug reports involve identifying erratic or aberrant game behavior. Some bugs involve evaluations and comparisons to normal game operation or “mechanics”. So yes, quite often a bug report will depend on understanding the expected mechanics of the game. This should be self-evident.


"Seriously would ANYONE be stupid enough to listen to someone who doesn't actually play send in a report" well most of your post on this thread is about getting former players to a test server to test . . . if they are not going to file reports then there is no point to having them test. If no one is going to be stupid enough to listen to them, again there is no point to having them file a report and no reason for them to test. You can ignore the inconsistencies in your logic but that does not make the inconsistencies go away.


Also, there are things in the game that can appear to be a bug but in fact are things simply "working as intended". So the thought that former players would only be reporting bugs but make no comment about any other perceived problem, that is not a well thought out concept.


"Clearly Mythic cares"

No, "Clearly Mythic cares" is a false statement. Not to say you are misrepresenting things with your anecdotal comments about the how many bugs you find and how Mythic/Bioware fixes every single bug you reported in the last patch, but history shows that huge numbers of reported bugs never get fixed before a patch or especially an expansion goes live. I am not making this up based on anecdotal personal experience that can't be verified. Every expansion Mythic ever produced caused floods of posts on the boards with testers yelling about bugs not being fixed before things went to the live server. After things did go live, more testers posted complaints on the boards about how all the bugs players were finding on the live server had actually been reported on the test server but not fixed.


Another verifiable thing are the posts on the board about the recent patches going live but with bugs. Contrary to your anecdotal and unverifiable experience it would seem that reality is a bit different than your experiences.


Isolated variances from the general rule does not change the general rule and in general, Mythic does not care much about what testers find on Pendragon.


The test servers are primarily for creating word of mouth hype, and occasionally someone pays some attention to some players that test. If Mythic really paid attention to the testers almost no bug would go live.


[/color]





Please READ my post. I want a server were veterans can come and HELP make the game better, so that one day we might want to return. Chances are VERY FEW of these people would subscribe, we are ADULTs now, wife, children, and jobs occupy the majority of our time. People interested in this program would be DONATING their time to make the game better, not looking to have fun playing a game. Honestly, did you actually expect this idea to make Hector PLAYABLE in any way like live? You'd have to be incredibly naive to think that. At most I could see 50 people logged on. With the majority of those TESTING new content, not out RvRing. This would be NOTHING like live, and every single last person who signed up for it would KNOW THAT.


[colorurple] I did read your post. You do not seem to be reading mine (or perhaps you are skimming and are not good at it) or you are purposefully reading out of context.


You said, "put the changes on Hector first, these old players would play it, and maybe like it so much they'd subscribe." That is what my comment #3 is about. Former players testing on Hector will not get a good idea of the game for the pervious listed reasons, reasons that you now confirm as you have now stated, “Honestly, did you actually expect this idea to make Hector PLAYABLE in any way like live?”. No, that was my point. Hector would ‘not’ be “PLAYABLE in any way like live” but for one of your expected benefits, Hector would need to give former players an experience that had them wanting to subscribe. You are contradicting your self.


Again, instead of getting existential we should clearly define intent. One of your intentions seems to be to increase testers on the test server but another stated intent is for players to check out the game using the test server.


Based on your comments denigrating your straw man creation where you accuse me of thinking you meant Hector would be playable like live, I in fact was not saying any such thing. I was trying to get you to understand that Hector would not be like live and therefore one of the benefits of your idea “put the changes on Hector first, these old players would play it, and maybe like it so much they'd subscribe” is faulty because as I have stated (and as you now state) Hector would not be able to give former players anything like a live server experience. Yes, yes you stated that players would know it was a test server, that still does not validate your assumed benefit of, “put the changes on Hector first, these old players would play it, and maybe like it so much they'd subscribe” and it does not mean players would get anything like a real server experience where they could actually evaluate the game.


So:

1. Players are coming to the test server to help but not give reports because as you said, “Seriously would ANYONE be stupid enough to listen to someone who doesn't actually play send in a report.

and

2. Players are coming to the test server to get an idea of what the game is like with the new changes but as you point out (and as I have been pointing out) “did you actually expect this idea to make Hector PLAYABLE”. So these players are getting their taste of the game by playing a server that is not like the game.


You seem to have a problem with mutual exclusivity. Former players are checking out the game or they are not? They are testing and sending in reports or they are ignored as stupid? For an existentialist I can see how anything and everything is true, but that is not the real world.

[/color]





So is this supposed to argue AGAINST getting more people testing? "We hardly have anyone testing, so obviously we shouldn't try and get more people testing." I have no non-inflammatory response to that, so I will leave it.


[colorurple]You are using a straw man to obfuscate the point and then you are arguing against the straw man.


The point of my comment about the low population on the test server is again to counter your idea that former players would get a feel for upcoming changes by playing the test server. The test server does not have the population necessary for former players to get an idea of what play would be like with the new patch.


Of course it would be nice to get more players on Pendragon, but I doubt that your idea would get more than a handful of players to log into the test server. But your idea may very well get more than a handful of players to cancel and then get their DAoC fix on the free test server.


As previously stated Mythic has shown that in the past that when Mythic held a well-organized Pendragon event, players would attend. If Mythic/Bioware is truly interested in getting players to Pendragon Mythic knows exactly how to do it because they have done it in the past. If Mythic does not hold events that get players to go to Pendragon it is because:

1. Mythic does not want those testers on Pendragon or

2. Mythic does not care about the testers on Pendragon or

3. Mythic is stupid and forgot how they once organized things to get testers to go to Pendragon. <<<<< I think it's this one


[/color]





If anything I think this response SHOWs that you are lumping the suggestion with other F2P models, as you are suggesting that it in any way is associated with live style gameplay.

[colorurple]

Again with the straw man?


The above is not about F2P at all. It is about players checking out the game on the free test server, “put the changes on Hector first, these old players would play it, and maybe like it so much they'd subscribe” and how the the “Come Back To Camelot” offer is a better method that is already in place. [/color]





You're really starting to hurt yourself with this "I read your post" rhetoric. Either you've never taken a reading comprehension course, or your are, as we have been suggesting, simply lumping the post with your preconceptions of f2p.

[colorurple]


Attacking my reading comprehension, another straw man, will not validate the flaws in your concept. If your concept is valid you should be able to defend it without resorting to the straw man.


Your expected benefits of getting players back, improving loyalty, having players check out the game. . . that is all accomplished by Mythic’s/Bioware’s “Come Back To Camelot” offer.


Your other expected benefit of getting more players to a test server, it has been show in the past that Mythic already has the tools to get more players to Pendragon, Mythic just needs to properly use the tools they have. If Mythic is too stupid to use the tools they already have, your idea will not help them at all.


I am sorry that your idea has some problems but that is not my fault. I only pointed out the problems in your concept, I did not create the problems. However much you twist, obfuscate, insult, etc. . . the problems with your concept will not go away.


You may not believe this but I have given some serious thought toward how to make your idea work. Unfortunately I always conclude that there are better ways of accomplishing all of your stated goals without some of the problems your idea brings. [/color]

---