Developers posts on forum
In this section you'll find posts from the official developers forum. The base is updated every hour and stored on a server wot-news.com. If you encounter any bugs, have suggestions or comments, write to info@wot-news.com
merig00
[FAQ]What will get you experience and what will not
20.10.2010 03:14:16
Subject: [FAQ]What will get you experience and what will not
Link on message: #183747
Azmodanrom, on Oct 18 2010 - 19:29, said: what exactly is the relation between XP earned and credits
earned?
i saw credits is somewhere between 20 and 30 times the XP.
but from where is the difference? i thought that everything that gives u XP gives u credits as well
Link on message: #183747
Azmodanrom, on Oct 18 2010 - 19:29, said: what exactly is the relation between XP earned and credits
earned?i saw credits is somewhere between 20 and 30 times the XP.
but from where is the difference? i thought that everything that gives u XP gives u credits as well
merig00: Yes but credits depend more on the vehicle you are driving.
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
20.10.2010 00:38:17
Subject: 
Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183629
Adiyahu, on 19 October 2010 - 10:57 PM, said:
jackal40, on 19 October 2010 - 05:21 PM, said:
I have worked in the software development industry, supporting the
developers and managing servers. I learned a lot about program
management, deadlines, and PR. The problem I see is the conflicting
information and announcements. As a number of folks have said, we
love this game and want to see the problems we know about fixed -
we want the game to get better. That's part of being a beta-tester.
There are some folks who seem to think that they are entitled to on
the spot notification and that their issues/bugs should be top
priority, sometimes you need to step back and realize that your
ideas and perceptions are not the developers focus.
All this being said, I question an announcement of such and such date for this action or that. Perhaps it would be better not to announce a date (some of us take that as a firm time) and instead announce that patch x.x is now available.
VirgilHilts, on 19 October 2010 - 05:48 PM,
said: With all due respect, and no small amount of sympathy, being
a business owner myself, it seems they're trying to do too much at
once, and letting two patches delay each other. Three significant
delays in a row on a patch that has already been released to one
group, and promised to another group, is a bit excessive. I do
enjoy the game, I'm not whining, nor am I in a rage. If we're not
getting the 6.X patch in the next couple of days, (and you say it
is 4-6 WEEKS away) take a day or two off from it and finish the
patch you've given dates for. I say that from the view point of a
business owner developing a policy intended to make happier
customers. Had the 5.5 patch not been delayed a couple weeks
already, customers (paying or not) wouldn't annoyed. If, two weeks
ago, you had taken a day, or three if necessary, to speed up
delivery on a patch you'd given a date for, no one would have even
known that it delayed 6.X, and they probably wouldn't have cared if
they did know. Especially since not only has no set date been given
for 6.X, but it is weeks away, and delayed already. People would be
happy to have 5.5, and you'd have breathing room for 6.X. Two days
is nothing when you're saying 4-6 weeks, but another day on a patch
already two weeks past due from your own given date is far
different.
Take all that for what it is worth.
can't agree more. devs should realize that not only the game itself need to be fixed at the beta testing stage, but also their terrible project management and PR. At least devs shouldn't treat their potential customers like nobody. The game is awesome, we treasure it very much, but like most ppl pointed out arrogant could really destroy it someday. The points from the most angry ppl are probably the most valuable suggestions for devs to improve their method of making business. Devs, just take them, for what it is worth.
on the other hand, nowadays good prj management and PR are not sufficient conditions for good game quality such as WoT. But they are still essential conditions for running a good business.
If devs are still not seeing problems like these, still not taking seriously about so many honest suggestions about their PR and management style, then they are in a big trouble. So are we - whomever you called us, beta testers, potential customers or "hey, you, have problem with our working style? take it, or quit".
I personally admire you devs as talented artists, excellent game makers, thanks for making a wonderful game.
But that's it, for
now.
jackal40, on 19 October 2010 - 05:21 PM, said: I have worked in the software development industry, supporting the
developers and managing servers. I learned a lot about program
management, deadlines, and PR. The problem I see is the conflicting
information and announcements. As a number of folks have said, we
love this game and want to see the problems we know about fixed -
we want the game to get better. That's part of being a beta-tester.
There are some folks who seem to think that they are entitled to on
the spot notification and that their issues/bugs should be top
priority, sometimes you need to step back and realize that your
ideas and perceptions are not the developers focus.
All this being said, I question an announcement of such and such date for this action or that. Perhaps it would be better not to announce a date (some of us take that as a firm time) and instead announce that patch x.x is now available.
VirgilHilts, on 19 October 2010 - 05:48 PM, said: With all due respect, and no small amount of sympathy, being a
business owner myself, it seems they're trying to do too much at
once, and letting two patches delay each other. Three significant
delays in a row on a patch that has already been released to one
group, and promised to another group, is a bit excessive. I do
enjoy the game, I'm not whining, nor am I in a rage. If we're not
getting the 6.X patch in the next couple of days, (and you say it
is 4-6 WEEKS away) take a day or two off from it and finish the
patch you've given dates for. I say that from the view point of a
business owner developing a policy intended to make happier
customers. Had the 5.5 patch not been delayed a couple weeks
already, customers (paying or not) wouldn't annoyed. If, two weeks
ago, you had taken a day, or three if necessary, to speed up
delivery on a patch you'd given a date for, no one would have even
known that it delayed 6.X, and they probably wouldn't have cared if
they did know. Especially since not only has no set date been given
for 6.X, but it is weeks away, and delayed already. People would be
happy to have 5.5, and you'd have breathing room for 6.X. Two days
is nothing when you're saying 4-6 weeks, but another day on a patch
already two weeks past due from your own given date is far
different.
Take all that for what it is worth.
Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 updateLink on message: #183629
Adiyahu, on 19 October 2010 - 10:57 PM, said:
jackal40, on 19 October 2010 - 05:21 PM, said:
I have worked in the software development industry, supporting the
developers and managing servers. I learned a lot about program
management, deadlines, and PR. The problem I see is the conflicting
information and announcements. As a number of folks have said, we
love this game and want to see the problems we know about fixed -
we want the game to get better. That's part of being a beta-tester.
There are some folks who seem to think that they are entitled to on
the spot notification and that their issues/bugs should be top
priority, sometimes you need to step back and realize that your
ideas and perceptions are not the developers focus.All this being said, I question an announcement of such and such date for this action or that. Perhaps it would be better not to announce a date (some of us take that as a firm time) and instead announce that patch x.x is now available.
VirgilHilts, on 19 October 2010 - 05:48 PM,
said: With all due respect, and no small amount of sympathy, being
a business owner myself, it seems they're trying to do too much at
once, and letting two patches delay each other. Three significant
delays in a row on a patch that has already been released to one
group, and promised to another group, is a bit excessive. I do
enjoy the game, I'm not whining, nor am I in a rage. If we're not
getting the 6.X patch in the next couple of days, (and you say it
is 4-6 WEEKS away) take a day or two off from it and finish the
patch you've given dates for. I say that from the view point of a
business owner developing a policy intended to make happier
customers. Had the 5.5 patch not been delayed a couple weeks
already, customers (paying or not) wouldn't annoyed. If, two weeks
ago, you had taken a day, or three if necessary, to speed up
delivery on a patch you'd given a date for, no one would have even
known that it delayed 6.X, and they probably wouldn't have cared if
they did know. Especially since not only has no set date been given
for 6.X, but it is weeks away, and delayed already. People would be
happy to have 5.5, and you'd have breathing room for 6.X. Two days
is nothing when you're saying 4-6 weeks, but another day on a patch
already two weeks past due from your own given date is far
different.Take all that for what it is worth.
can't agree more. devs should realize that not only the game itself need to be fixed at the beta testing stage, but also their terrible project management and PR. At least devs shouldn't treat their potential customers like nobody. The game is awesome, we treasure it very much, but like most ppl pointed out arrogant could really destroy it someday. The points from the most angry ppl are probably the most valuable suggestions for devs to improve their method of making business. Devs, just take them, for what it is worth.
on the other hand, nowadays good prj management and PR are not sufficient conditions for good game quality such as WoT. But they are still essential conditions for running a good business.
If devs are still not seeing problems like these, still not taking seriously about so many honest suggestions about their PR and management style, then they are in a big trouble. So are we - whomever you called us, beta testers, potential customers or "hey, you, have problem with our working style? take it, or quit".
I personally admire you devs as talented artists, excellent game makers, thanks for making a wonderful game.
But that's it, for
now.MrVic: can't agree more. devs should realize that not only the game itself
need to be fixed at the beta testing stage, but also their terrible
project management and PR. At least devs shouldn't treat their
potential customers like nobody. The game is awesome, we treasure
it very much, but like most ppl pointed out arrogant could really
destroy it someday. The points from the most angry ppl are probably
the most valuable suggestions for devs to improve their method of
making business. Devs, just take them, for what it is worth.
on the other hand, nowadays good prj management and PR are not sufficient conditions for good game quality such as WoT. But they are still essential conditions for running a good business.
If devs are still not seeing problems like these, still not taking seriously about so many honest suggestions about their PR and management style, then they are in a big trouble. So are we - whomever you called us, beta testers, potential customers or "hey, you, have problem with our working style? take it, or quit".
I personally admire you devs as talented artists, excellent game makers, thanks for making a wonderful game. But that's it, for
now.
Just curious where the "PR" side has told people to quit, I think your confusing that with some of the "aggressive" members of the community
My RL job actually is in project management. After working in that role for 15 years now I can tell you that no matter how prepared you are and how well you plan, something always goes wrong.
Hence the phrase "No plan survives first contact with the enemy" I have overseen projects were literally they created a item in the contract for preparing for the unknown also engineers/contractors/inspectors/consultants meet and reviewed all the information on the project for 9 months in preparation to anticipate EVERYTHING they could. The material cost of supplies to combat unforeseen issues was a Item in the Contract for a lump sum budget of 17 million (just for equipment supplies ect to handles these issues). Guess what 17 million did not cover the unforeseen issues that popped up daily
The only way they did not influence
the deadline was purely cutting corners (with approval) That is all
fine and good but in WoT I prefer the lets not cut corners approach
on the other hand, nowadays good prj management and PR are not sufficient conditions for good game quality such as WoT. But they are still essential conditions for running a good business.
If devs are still not seeing problems like these, still not taking seriously about so many honest suggestions about their PR and management style, then they are in a big trouble. So are we - whomever you called us, beta testers, potential customers or "hey, you, have problem with our working style? take it, or quit".
I personally admire you devs as talented artists, excellent game makers, thanks for making a wonderful game.
But that's it, for
now.Just curious where the "PR" side has told people to quit, I think your confusing that with some of the "aggressive" members of the community
My RL job actually is in project management. After working in that role for 15 years now I can tell you that no matter how prepared you are and how well you plan, something always goes wrong.
Hence the phrase "No plan survives first contact with the enemy" I have overseen projects were literally they created a item in the contract for preparing for the unknown also engineers/contractors/inspectors/consultants meet and reviewed all the information on the project for 9 months in preparation to anticipate EVERYTHING they could. The material cost of supplies to combat unforeseen issues was a Item in the Contract for a lump sum budget of 17 million (just for equipment supplies ect to handles these issues). Guess what 17 million did not cover the unforeseen issues that popped up daily
The only way they did not influence
the deadline was purely cutting corners (with approval) That is all
fine and good but in WoT I prefer the lets not cut corners approach
jackal40, on 19 October 2010 - 05:21 PM, said: I have worked in the software development industry, supporting the
developers and managing servers. I learned a lot about program
management, deadlines, and PR. The problem I see is the conflicting
information and announcements. As a number of folks have said, we
love this game and want to see the problems we know about fixed -
we want the game to get better. That's part of being a beta-tester.
There are some folks who seem to think that they are entitled to on
the spot notification and that their issues/bugs should be top
priority, sometimes you need to step back and realize that your
ideas and perceptions are not the developers focus.All this being said, I question an announcement of such and such date for this action or that. Perhaps it would be better not to announce a date (some of us take that as a firm time) and instead announce that patch x.x is now available.
MrVic:
VirgilHilts, on 19 October 2010 - 05:48 PM, said: With all due respect, and no small amount of sympathy, being a
business owner myself, it seems they're trying to do too much at
once, and letting two patches delay each other. Three significant
delays in a row on a patch that has already been released to one
group, and promised to another group, is a bit excessive. I do
enjoy the game, I'm not whining, nor am I in a rage. If we're not
getting the 6.X patch in the next couple of days, (and you say it
is 4-6 WEEKS away) take a day or two off from it and finish the
patch you've given dates for. I say that from the view point of a
business owner developing a policy intended to make happier
customers. Had the 5.5 patch not been delayed a couple weeks
already, customers (paying or not) wouldn't annoyed. If, two weeks
ago, you had taken a day, or three if necessary, to speed up
delivery on a patch you'd given a date for, no one would have even
known that it delayed 6.X, and they probably wouldn't have cared if
they did know. Especially since not only has no set date been given
for 6.X, but it is weeks away, and delayed already. People would be
happy to have 5.5, and you'd have breathing room for 6.X. Two days
is nothing when you're saying 4-6 weeks, but another day on a patch
already two weeks past due from your own given date is far
different.Take all that for what it is worth.
MrVic:
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
20.10.2010 00:38:17
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183629
Adiyahu, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:57, said:
jackal40, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:21, said: I have
worked in the software development industry, supporting the
developers and managing servers. I learned a lot about program
management, deadlines, and PR. The problem I see is the conflicting
information and announcements. As a number of folks have said, we
love this game and want to see the problems we know about fixed -
we want the game to get better. That's part of being a beta-tester.
There are some folks who seem to think that they are entitled to on
the spot notification and that their issues/bugs should be top
priority, sometimes you need to step back and realize that your
ideas and perceptions are not the developers focus.
All this being said, I question an announcement of such and such date for this action or that. Perhaps it would be better not to announce a date (some of us take that as a firm time) and instead announce that patch x.x is now available.
VirgilHilts, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:48, said: With
all due respect, and no small amount of sympathy, being a business
owner myself, it seems they're trying to do too much at once, and
letting two patches delay each other. Three significant delays in a
row on a patch that has already been released to one group, and
promised to another group, is a bit excessive. I do enjoy the game,
I'm not whining, nor am I in a rage. If we're not getting the 6.X
patch in the next couple of days, (and you say it is 4-6 WEEKS
away) take a day or two off from it and finish the patch you've
given dates for. I say that from the view point of a business owner
developing a policy intended to make happier customers. Had the 5.5
patch not been delayed a couple weeks already, customers (paying or
not) wouldn't annoyed. If, two weeks ago, you had taken a day, or
three if necessary, to speed up delivery on a patch you'd given a
date for, no one would have even known that it delayed 6.X, and
they probably wouldn't have cared if they did know. Especially
since not only has no set date been given for 6.X, but it is weeks
away, and delayed already. People would be happy to have 5.5, and
you'd have breathing room for 6.X. Two days is nothing when you're
saying 4-6 weeks, but another day on a patch already two weeks past
due from your own given date is far different.
Take all that for what it is worth.
can't agree more. devs should realize that not only the game itself need to be fixed at the beta testing stage, but also their terrible project management and PR. At least devs shouldn't treat their potential customers like nobody. The game is awesome, we treasure it very much, but like most ppl pointed out arrogant could really destroy it someday. The points from the most angry ppl are probably the most valuable suggestions for devs to improve their method of making business. Devs, just take them, for what it is worth.
on the other hand, nowadays good prj management and PR are not sufficient conditions for good game quality such as WoT. But they are still essential conditions for running a good business.
If devs are still not seeing problems like these, still not taking seriously about so many honest suggestions about their PR and management style, then they are in a big trouble. So are we - whomever you called us, beta testers, potential customers or "hey, you, have problem with our working style? take it, or quit".
I personally admire you devs as talented artists, excellent game makers, thanks for making a wonderful game.
But that's it, for
now.
jackal40, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:21, said: I have worked in the software development industry, supporting the
developers and managing servers. I learned a lot about program
management, deadlines, and PR. The problem I see is the conflicting
information and announcements. As a number of folks have said, we
love this game and want to see the problems we know about fixed -
we want the game to get better. That's part of being a beta-tester.
There are some folks who seem to think that they are entitled to on
the spot notification and that their issues/bugs should be top
priority, sometimes you need to step back and realize that your
ideas and perceptions are not the developers focus.
All this being said, I question an announcement of such and such date for this action or that. Perhaps it would be better not to announce a date (some of us take that as a firm time) and instead announce that patch x.x is now available.
VirgilHilts, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:48, said: With all due respect, and no small amount of sympathy, being a
business owner myself, it seems they're trying to do too much at
once, and letting two patches delay each other. Three significant
delays in a row on a patch that has already been released to one
group, and promised to another group, is a bit excessive. I do
enjoy the game, I'm not whining, nor am I in a rage. If we're not
getting the 6.X patch in the next couple of days, (and you say it
is 4-6 WEEKS away) take a day or two off from it and finish the
patch you've given dates for. I say that from the view point of a
business owner developing a policy intended to make happier
customers. Had the 5.5 patch not been delayed a couple weeks
already, customers (paying or not) wouldn't annoyed. If, two weeks
ago, you had taken a day, or three if necessary, to speed up
delivery on a patch you'd given a date for, no one would have even
known that it delayed 6.X, and they probably wouldn't have cared if
they did know. Especially since not only has no set date been given
for 6.X, but it is weeks away, and delayed already. People would be
happy to have 5.5, and you'd have breathing room for 6.X. Two days
is nothing when you're saying 4-6 weeks, but another day on a patch
already two weeks past due from your own given date is far
different.
Take all that for what it is worth.
Link on message: #183629
Adiyahu, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:57, said:
jackal40, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:21, said: I have
worked in the software development industry, supporting the
developers and managing servers. I learned a lot about program
management, deadlines, and PR. The problem I see is the conflicting
information and announcements. As a number of folks have said, we
love this game and want to see the problems we know about fixed -
we want the game to get better. That's part of being a beta-tester.
There are some folks who seem to think that they are entitled to on
the spot notification and that their issues/bugs should be top
priority, sometimes you need to step back and realize that your
ideas and perceptions are not the developers focus.All this being said, I question an announcement of such and such date for this action or that. Perhaps it would be better not to announce a date (some of us take that as a firm time) and instead announce that patch x.x is now available.
VirgilHilts, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:48, said: With
all due respect, and no small amount of sympathy, being a business
owner myself, it seems they're trying to do too much at once, and
letting two patches delay each other. Three significant delays in a
row on a patch that has already been released to one group, and
promised to another group, is a bit excessive. I do enjoy the game,
I'm not whining, nor am I in a rage. If we're not getting the 6.X
patch in the next couple of days, (and you say it is 4-6 WEEKS
away) take a day or two off from it and finish the patch you've
given dates for. I say that from the view point of a business owner
developing a policy intended to make happier customers. Had the 5.5
patch not been delayed a couple weeks already, customers (paying or
not) wouldn't annoyed. If, two weeks ago, you had taken a day, or
three if necessary, to speed up delivery on a patch you'd given a
date for, no one would have even known that it delayed 6.X, and
they probably wouldn't have cared if they did know. Especially
since not only has no set date been given for 6.X, but it is weeks
away, and delayed already. People would be happy to have 5.5, and
you'd have breathing room for 6.X. Two days is nothing when you're
saying 4-6 weeks, but another day on a patch already two weeks past
due from your own given date is far different.Take all that for what it is worth.
can't agree more. devs should realize that not only the game itself need to be fixed at the beta testing stage, but also their terrible project management and PR. At least devs shouldn't treat their potential customers like nobody. The game is awesome, we treasure it very much, but like most ppl pointed out arrogant could really destroy it someday. The points from the most angry ppl are probably the most valuable suggestions for devs to improve their method of making business. Devs, just take them, for what it is worth.
on the other hand, nowadays good prj management and PR are not sufficient conditions for good game quality such as WoT. But they are still essential conditions for running a good business.
If devs are still not seeing problems like these, still not taking seriously about so many honest suggestions about their PR and management style, then they are in a big trouble. So are we - whomever you called us, beta testers, potential customers or "hey, you, have problem with our working style? take it, or quit".
I personally admire you devs as talented artists, excellent game makers, thanks for making a wonderful game.
But that's it, for
now.MrVic:
jackal40, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:21, said: I have worked in the software development industry, supporting the
developers and managing servers. I learned a lot about program
management, deadlines, and PR. The problem I see is the conflicting
information and announcements. As a number of folks have said, we
love this game and want to see the problems we know about fixed -
we want the game to get better. That's part of being a beta-tester.
There are some folks who seem to think that they are entitled to on
the spot notification and that their issues/bugs should be top
priority, sometimes you need to step back and realize that your
ideas and perceptions are not the developers focus.All this being said, I question an announcement of such and such date for this action or that. Perhaps it would be better not to announce a date (some of us take that as a firm time) and instead announce that patch x.x is now available.
MrVic:
can't agree more. devs should realize that not only the game itself need to be fixed at the beta testing stage, but also their terrible project management and PR. At least devs shouldn't treat their potential customers like nobody. The game is awesome, we treasure it very much, but like most ppl pointed out arrogant could really destroy it someday. The points from the most angry ppl are probably the most valuable suggestions for devs to improve their method of making business. Devs, just take them, for what it is worth.
on the other hand, nowadays good prj management and PR are not sufficient conditions for good game quality such as WoT. But they are still essential conditions for running a good business.
If devs are still not seeing problems like these, still not taking seriously about so many honest suggestions about their PR and management style, then they are in a big trouble. So are we - whomever you called us, beta testers, potential customers or "hey, you, have problem with our working style? take it, or quit".
I personally admire you devs as talented artists, excellent game makers, thanks for making a wonderful game. But that's it, for
now.
Just curious where the "PR" side has told people to quit, I think your confusing that with some of the "aggressive" members of the community
My RL job actually is in project management. After working in that role for 15 years now I can tell you that no matter how prepared you are and how well you plan, something always goes wrong.
Hence the phrase "No plan survives first contact with the enemy" I have overseen projects were literally they created a item in the contract for preparing for the unknown also engineers/contractors/inspectors/consultants meet and reviewed all the information on the project for 9 months in preparation to anticipate EVERYTHING they could. The material cost of supplies to combat unforeseen issues was a Item in the Contract for a lump sum budget of 17 million (just for equipment supplies ect to handles these issues). Guess what 17 million did not cover the unforeseen issues that popped up daily
The only way they did not
influence the deadline was purely cutting corners (with approval)
That is all fine and good but in WoT I prefer the lets not cut
corners approach
can't agree more. devs should realize that not only the game itself need to be fixed at the beta testing stage, but also their terrible project management and PR. At least devs shouldn't treat their potential customers like nobody. The game is awesome, we treasure it very much, but like most ppl pointed out arrogant could really destroy it someday. The points from the most angry ppl are probably the most valuable suggestions for devs to improve their method of making business. Devs, just take them, for what it is worth.
on the other hand, nowadays good prj management and PR are not sufficient conditions for good game quality such as WoT. But they are still essential conditions for running a good business.
If devs are still not seeing problems like these, still not taking seriously about so many honest suggestions about their PR and management style, then they are in a big trouble. So are we - whomever you called us, beta testers, potential customers or "hey, you, have problem with our working style? take it, or quit".
I personally admire you devs as talented artists, excellent game makers, thanks for making a wonderful game.
But that's it, for
now.Just curious where the "PR" side has told people to quit, I think your confusing that with some of the "aggressive" members of the community
My RL job actually is in project management. After working in that role for 15 years now I can tell you that no matter how prepared you are and how well you plan, something always goes wrong.
Hence the phrase "No plan survives first contact with the enemy" I have overseen projects were literally they created a item in the contract for preparing for the unknown also engineers/contractors/inspectors/consultants meet and reviewed all the information on the project for 9 months in preparation to anticipate EVERYTHING they could. The material cost of supplies to combat unforeseen issues was a Item in the Contract for a lump sum budget of 17 million (just for equipment supplies ect to handles these issues). Guess what 17 million did not cover the unforeseen issues that popped up daily
The only way they did not
influence the deadline was purely cutting corners (with approval)
That is all fine and good but in WoT I prefer the lets not cut
corners approach VirgilHilts, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:48, said: With all due respect, and no small amount of sympathy, being a
business owner myself, it seems they're trying to do too much at
once, and letting two patches delay each other. Three significant
delays in a row on a patch that has already been released to one
group, and promised to another group, is a bit excessive. I do
enjoy the game, I'm not whining, nor am I in a rage. If we're not
getting the 6.X patch in the next couple of days, (and you say it
is 4-6 WEEKS away) take a day or two off from it and finish the
patch you've given dates for. I say that from the view point of a
business owner developing a policy intended to make happier
customers. Had the 5.5 patch not been delayed a couple weeks
already, customers (paying or not) wouldn't annoyed. If, two weeks
ago, you had taken a day, or three if necessary, to speed up
delivery on a patch you'd given a date for, no one would have even
known that it delayed 6.X, and they probably wouldn't have cared if
they did know. Especially since not only has no set date been given
for 6.X, but it is weeks away, and delayed already. People would be
happy to have 5.5, and you'd have breathing room for 6.X. Two days
is nothing when you're saying 4-6 weeks, but another day on a patch
already two weeks past due from your own given date is far
different.Take all that for what it is worth.
MrVic:
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
20.10.2010 00:38:17
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183629
Adiyahu, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:57, said:
jackal40, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:21, said: I have
worked in the software development industry, supporting the
developers and managing servers. I learned a lot about program
management, deadlines, and PR. The problem I see is the conflicting
information and announcements. As a number of folks have said, we
love this game and want to see the problems we know about fixed -
we want the game to get better. That's part of being a beta-tester.
There are some folks who seem to think that they are entitled to on
the spot notification and that their issues/bugs should be top
priority, sometimes you need to step back and realize that your
ideas and perceptions are not the developers focus.
All this being said, I question an announcement of such and such date for this action or that. Perhaps it would be better not to announce a date (some of us take that as a firm time) and instead announce that patch x.x is now available.
VirgilHilts, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:48, said: With
all due respect, and no small amount of sympathy, being a business
owner myself, it seems they're trying to do too much at once, and
letting two patches delay each other. Three significant delays in a
row on a patch that has already been released to one group, and
promised to another group, is a bit excessive. I do enjoy the game,
I'm not whining, nor am I in a rage. If we're not getting the 6.X
patch in the next couple of days, (and you say it is 4-6 WEEKS
away) take a day or two off from it and finish the patch you've
given dates for. I say that from the view point of a business owner
developing a policy intended to make happier customers. Had the 5.5
patch not been delayed a couple weeks already, customers (paying or
not) wouldn't annoyed. If, two weeks ago, you had taken a day, or
three if necessary, to speed up delivery on a patch you'd given a
date for, no one would have even known that it delayed 6.X, and
they probably wouldn't have cared if they did know. Especially
since not only has no set date been given for 6.X, but it is weeks
away, and delayed already. People would be happy to have 5.5, and
you'd have breathing room for 6.X. Two days is nothing when you're
saying 4-6 weeks, but another day on a patch already two weeks past
due from your own given date is far different.
Take all that for what it is worth.
can't agree more. devs should realize that not only the game itself need to be fixed at the beta testing stage, but also their terrible project management and PR. At least devs shouldn't treat their potential customers like nobody. The game is awesome, we treasure it very much, but like most ppl pointed out arrogant could really destroy it someday. The points from the most angry ppl are probably the most valuable suggestions for devs to improve their method of making business. Devs, just take them, for what it is worth.
on the other hand, nowadays good prj management and PR are not sufficient conditions for good game quality such as WoT. But they are still essential conditions for running a good business.
If devs are still not seeing problems like these, still not taking seriously about so many honest suggestions about their PR and management style, then they are in a big trouble. So are we - whomever you called us, beta testers, potential customers or "hey, you, have problem with our working style? take it, or quit".
I personally admire you devs as talented artists, excellent game makers, thanks for making a wonderful game. But that's it, for
now.
jackal40, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:21, said: I have worked in the software development industry, supporting the
developers and managing servers. I learned a lot about program
management, deadlines, and PR. The problem I see is the conflicting
information and announcements. As a number of folks have said, we
love this game and want to see the problems we know about fixed -
we want the game to get better. That's part of being a beta-tester.
There are some folks who seem to think that they are entitled to on
the spot notification and that their issues/bugs should be top
priority, sometimes you need to step back and realize that your
ideas and perceptions are not the developers focus.
All this being said, I question an announcement of such and such date for this action or that. Perhaps it would be better not to announce a date (some of us take that as a firm time) and instead announce that patch x.x is now available.
VirgilHilts, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:48, said: With all due respect, and no small amount of sympathy, being a
business owner myself, it seems they're trying to do too much at
once, and letting two patches delay each other. Three significant
delays in a row on a patch that has already been released to one
group, and promised to another group, is a bit excessive. I do
enjoy the game, I'm not whining, nor am I in a rage. If we're not
getting the 6.X patch in the next couple of days, (and you say it
is 4-6 WEEKS away) take a day or two off from it and finish the
patch you've given dates for. I say that from the view point of a
business owner developing a policy intended to make happier
customers. Had the 5.5 patch not been delayed a couple weeks
already, customers (paying or not) wouldn't annoyed. If, two weeks
ago, you had taken a day, or three if necessary, to speed up
delivery on a patch you'd given a date for, no one would have even
known that it delayed 6.X, and they probably wouldn't have cared if
they did know. Especially since not only has no set date been given
for 6.X, but it is weeks away, and delayed already. People would be
happy to have 5.5, and you'd have breathing room for 6.X. Two days
is nothing when you're saying 4-6 weeks, but another day on a patch
already two weeks past due from your own given date is far
different.
Take all that for what it is worth.
Link on message: #183629
Adiyahu, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:57, said:
jackal40, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:21, said: I have
worked in the software development industry, supporting the
developers and managing servers. I learned a lot about program
management, deadlines, and PR. The problem I see is the conflicting
information and announcements. As a number of folks have said, we
love this game and want to see the problems we know about fixed -
we want the game to get better. That's part of being a beta-tester.
There are some folks who seem to think that they are entitled to on
the spot notification and that their issues/bugs should be top
priority, sometimes you need to step back and realize that your
ideas and perceptions are not the developers focus.All this being said, I question an announcement of such and such date for this action or that. Perhaps it would be better not to announce a date (some of us take that as a firm time) and instead announce that patch x.x is now available.
VirgilHilts, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:48, said: With
all due respect, and no small amount of sympathy, being a business
owner myself, it seems they're trying to do too much at once, and
letting two patches delay each other. Three significant delays in a
row on a patch that has already been released to one group, and
promised to another group, is a bit excessive. I do enjoy the game,
I'm not whining, nor am I in a rage. If we're not getting the 6.X
patch in the next couple of days, (and you say it is 4-6 WEEKS
away) take a day or two off from it and finish the patch you've
given dates for. I say that from the view point of a business owner
developing a policy intended to make happier customers. Had the 5.5
patch not been delayed a couple weeks already, customers (paying or
not) wouldn't annoyed. If, two weeks ago, you had taken a day, or
three if necessary, to speed up delivery on a patch you'd given a
date for, no one would have even known that it delayed 6.X, and
they probably wouldn't have cared if they did know. Especially
since not only has no set date been given for 6.X, but it is weeks
away, and delayed already. People would be happy to have 5.5, and
you'd have breathing room for 6.X. Two days is nothing when you're
saying 4-6 weeks, but another day on a patch already two weeks past
due from your own given date is far different.Take all that for what it is worth.
can't agree more. devs should realize that not only the game itself need to be fixed at the beta testing stage, but also their terrible project management and PR. At least devs shouldn't treat their potential customers like nobody. The game is awesome, we treasure it very much, but like most ppl pointed out arrogant could really destroy it someday. The points from the most angry ppl are probably the most valuable suggestions for devs to improve their method of making business. Devs, just take them, for what it is worth.
on the other hand, nowadays good prj management and PR are not sufficient conditions for good game quality such as WoT. But they are still essential conditions for running a good business.
If devs are still not seeing problems like these, still not taking seriously about so many honest suggestions about their PR and management style, then they are in a big trouble. So are we - whomever you called us, beta testers, potential customers or "hey, you, have problem with our working style? take it, or quit".
I personally admire you devs as talented artists, excellent game makers, thanks for making a wonderful game.
But that's it, for
now.MrVic:
jackal40, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:21, said: I have worked in the software development industry, supporting the
developers and managing servers. I learned a lot about program
management, deadlines, and PR. The problem I see is the conflicting
information and announcements. As a number of folks have said, we
love this game and want to see the problems we know about fixed -
we want the game to get better. That's part of being a beta-tester.
There are some folks who seem to think that they are entitled to on
the spot notification and that their issues/bugs should be top
priority, sometimes you need to step back and realize that your
ideas and perceptions are not the developers focus.All this being said, I question an announcement of such and such date for this action or that. Perhaps it would be better not to announce a date (some of us take that as a firm time) and instead announce that patch x.x is now available.
MrVic:
can't agree more. devs should realize that not only the game itself need to be fixed at the beta testing stage, but also their terrible project management and PR. At least devs shouldn't treat their potential customers like nobody. The game is awesome, we treasure it very much, but like most ppl pointed out arrogant could really destroy it someday. The points from the most angry ppl are probably the most valuable suggestions for devs to improve their method of making business. Devs, just take them, for what it is worth.
on the other hand, nowadays good prj management and PR are not sufficient conditions for good game quality such as WoT. But they are still essential conditions for running a good business.
If devs are still not seeing problems like these, still not taking seriously about so many honest suggestions about their PR and management style, then they are in a big trouble. So are we - whomever you called us, beta testers, potential customers or "hey, you, have problem with our working style? take it, or quit".
I personally admire you devs as talented artists, excellent game makers, thanks for making a wonderful game. But that's it, for
now.
Just curious where the "PR" side has told people to quit, I think your confusing that with some of the "aggressive" members of the community
My RL job actually is in project management. After working in that role for 15 years now I can tell you that no matter how prepared you are and how well you plan, something always goes wrong.
Hence the phrase "No plan survives first contact with the enemy" I have overseen projects were literally they created a item in the contract for preparing for the unknown also engineers/contractors/inspectors/consultants meet and reviewed all the information on the project for 9 months in preparation to anticipate EVERYTHING they could. The material cost of supplies to combat unforeseen issues was a Item in the Contract for a lump sum budget of 17 million (just for equipment supplies ect to handles these issues). Guess what 17 million did not cover the unforeseen issues that popped up daily The only way they did not
influence the deadline was purely cutting corners (with approval)
That is all fine and good but in WoT I prefer the lets not cut
corners approach
can't agree more. devs should realize that not only the game itself need to be fixed at the beta testing stage, but also their terrible project management and PR. At least devs shouldn't treat their potential customers like nobody. The game is awesome, we treasure it very much, but like most ppl pointed out arrogant could really destroy it someday. The points from the most angry ppl are probably the most valuable suggestions for devs to improve their method of making business. Devs, just take them, for what it is worth.
on the other hand, nowadays good prj management and PR are not sufficient conditions for good game quality such as WoT. But they are still essential conditions for running a good business.
If devs are still not seeing problems like these, still not taking seriously about so many honest suggestions about their PR and management style, then they are in a big trouble. So are we - whomever you called us, beta testers, potential customers or "hey, you, have problem with our working style? take it, or quit".
I personally admire you devs as talented artists, excellent game makers, thanks for making a wonderful game.
But that's it, for
now.Just curious where the "PR" side has told people to quit, I think your confusing that with some of the "aggressive" members of the community
My RL job actually is in project management. After working in that role for 15 years now I can tell you that no matter how prepared you are and how well you plan, something always goes wrong.
Hence the phrase "No plan survives first contact with the enemy" I have overseen projects were literally they created a item in the contract for preparing for the unknown also engineers/contractors/inspectors/consultants meet and reviewed all the information on the project for 9 months in preparation to anticipate EVERYTHING they could. The material cost of supplies to combat unforeseen issues was a Item in the Contract for a lump sum budget of 17 million (just for equipment supplies ect to handles these issues). Guess what 17 million did not cover the unforeseen issues that popped up daily
The only way they did not
influence the deadline was purely cutting corners (with approval)
That is all fine and good but in WoT I prefer the lets not cut
corners approach VirgilHilts, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:48, said: With all due respect, and no small amount of sympathy, being a
business owner myself, it seems they're trying to do too much at
once, and letting two patches delay each other. Three significant
delays in a row on a patch that has already been released to one
group, and promised to another group, is a bit excessive. I do
enjoy the game, I'm not whining, nor am I in a rage. If we're not
getting the 6.X patch in the next couple of days, (and you say it
is 4-6 WEEKS away) take a day or two off from it and finish the
patch you've given dates for. I say that from the view point of a
business owner developing a policy intended to make happier
customers. Had the 5.5 patch not been delayed a couple weeks
already, customers (paying or not) wouldn't annoyed. If, two weeks
ago, you had taken a day, or three if necessary, to speed up
delivery on a patch you'd given a date for, no one would have even
known that it delayed 6.X, and they probably wouldn't have cared if
they did know. Especially since not only has no set date been given
for 6.X, but it is weeks away, and delayed already. People would be
happy to have 5.5, and you'd have breathing room for 6.X. Two days
is nothing when you're saying 4-6 weeks, but another day on a patch
already two weeks past due from your own given date is far
different.Take all that for what it is worth.
MrVic:
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
20.10.2010 00:22:27
Subject: Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183613
Armor9, on 19 October 2010 - 10:13 PM, said:
MrVic, on 19 October 2010 - 10:02 PM, said:
Armor: first off that was not a date. But some wish to know
ballpark time frames. Also I refrain from dates since I know
unforeseen problems do come up. Many understand that the times can
change and wish to know the estimated time. If you do not want to
know these and want patches times and content avoid this thread
then it will never disappoint
you.
The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
I am more talking about Overlord giving out dates. He has given pretty "firm" dates on 3 occasions for the release of 0.5.5; each one of those dates have been missed. Also, no reason has been given for the missed dates. If the reason is because of bugs in 0.5.5 that doesn't make since. Because you all released 0.5.5 to the Russians on a LIVE server. If there was even a HINT of bugs, shouldn't it have been released to the "beta" testers first to ummm "test"?
MrVic, on 19 October 2010 - 10:02 PM, said: Armor: first off that was not a date. But some wish to know
ballpark time frames. Also I refrain from dates since I know
unforeseen problems do come up. Many understand that the times can
change and wish to know the estimated time. If you do not want to
know these and want patches times and content avoid this thread
then it will never disappoint
you.
The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 updateLink on message: #183613
Armor9, on 19 October 2010 - 10:13 PM, said:
MrVic, on 19 October 2010 - 10:02 PM, said:
Armor: first off that was not a date. But some wish to know
ballpark time frames. Also I refrain from dates since I know
unforeseen problems do come up. Many understand that the times can
change and wish to know the estimated time. If you do not want to
know these and want patches times and content avoid this thread
then it will never disappoint
you.The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
I am more talking about Overlord giving out dates. He has given pretty "firm" dates on 3 occasions for the release of 0.5.5; each one of those dates have been missed. Also, no reason has been given for the missed dates. If the reason is because of bugs in 0.5.5 that doesn't make since. Because you all released 0.5.5 to the Russians on a LIVE server. If there was even a HINT of bugs, shouldn't it have been released to the "beta" testers first to ummm "test"?
MrVic: I am more talking about Overlord giving out dates. He has given
pretty "firm" dates on 3 occasions for the release of 0.5.5; each
one of those dates have been missed. Also, no reason has been given
for the missed dates. If the reason is because of bugs in 0.5.5
that doesn't make since. Because you all released 0.5.5 to the
Russians on a LIVE server. If there was even a HINT of bugs,
shouldn't it have been released to the "beta" testers first to ummm
"test"?
Still stands And problems that arise are not
"bugs" in the patch but issues that can arise from non software
side of things (As no major bugs that I know of are in 5.5 as it is
just a couple maps for the most part and a couple value changes,
not sure what made you think that). Now we did have a patch long
ago that patched RU and the next day was EU. In the end the patch
did not have bugs it was bugged as it hard crashed the RU server
for a few days. That was a long while back tho, and EU was delayed
since it pointless to patch EU and just want the server die so
everyone was unable to play. I was happy to keep playing hehe
As far as I can remember only 18-19
were ever given the rest were estimates, since they try to give the
community all the information they can. The others were not firm
dates, Many are listed as round X date. Basically you can either
flame overlord for giving us estimates or you can ignore all dates
given and just act surprised a lot. The only other alternative is
the blizzard version. Were tell you nothing for 3 years until were
burning the Discs to distribute Personally I like some info even if
its estimates or hopes. The ideal of 100% guarantee all the time is
near impossible its the aspiration of every company but reality is
a cruel thing.
Still stands
And problems that arise are not
"bugs" in the patch but issues that can arise from non software
side of things (As no major bugs that I know of are in 5.5 as it is
just a couple maps for the most part and a couple value changes,
not sure what made you think that). Now we did have a patch long
ago that patched RU and the next day was EU. In the end the patch
did not have bugs it was bugged as it hard crashed the RU server
for a few days. That was a long while back tho, and EU was delayed
since it pointless to patch EU and just want the server die so
everyone was unable to play. I was happy to keep playing hehe
As far as I can remember only 18-19
were ever given the rest were estimates, since they try to give the
community all the information they can. The others were not firm
dates, Many are listed as round X date. Basically you can either
flame overlord for giving us estimates or you can ignore all dates
given and just act surprised a lot. The only other alternative is
the blizzard version. Were tell you nothing for 3 years until were
burning the Discs to distribute Personally I like some info even if
its estimates or hopes. The ideal of 100% guarantee all the time is
near impossible its the aspiration of every company but reality is
a cruel thing.MrVic, on 19 October 2010 - 10:02 PM, said: Armor: first off that was not a date. But some wish to know
ballpark time frames. Also I refrain from dates since I know
unforeseen problems do come up. Many understand that the times can
change and wish to know the estimated time. If you do not want to
know these and want patches times and content avoid this thread
then it will never disappoint
you.The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
MrVic:
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
20.10.2010 00:22:27
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183613
Armor9, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:13, said:
MrVic, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:02, said:
Armor: first off that was not a date. But
some wish to know ballpark time frames. Also I refrain from dates
since I know unforeseen problems do come up. Many
understand that the times can change and wish to know the estimated
time. If you do not want to know these and want patches
times and content avoid this thread then it will never disappoint
you.
The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
I am more talking about Overlord giving out dates. He has given pretty "firm" dates on 3 occasions for the release of 0.5.5; each one of those dates have been missed. Also, no reason has been given for the missed dates. If the reason is because of bugs in 0.5.5 that doesn't make since. Because you all released 0.5.5 to the Russians on a LIVE server. If there was even a HINT of bugs, shouldn't it have been released to the "beta" testers first to ummm "test"?
MrVic, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:02, said: Armor: first off that was not a date. But
some wish to know ballpark time frames. Also I refrain from dates
since I know unforeseen problems do come up. Many
understand that the times can change and wish to know the estimated
time. If you do not want to know these and want patches
times and content avoid this thread then it will never disappoint
you.
The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
Link on message: #183613
Armor9, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:13, said:
MrVic, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:02, said:
Armor: first off that was not a date. But
some wish to know ballpark time frames. Also I refrain from dates
since I know unforeseen problems do come up. Many
understand that the times can change and wish to know the estimated
time. If you do not want to know these and want patches
times and content avoid this thread then it will never disappoint
you.The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
I am more talking about Overlord giving out dates. He has given pretty "firm" dates on 3 occasions for the release of 0.5.5; each one of those dates have been missed. Also, no reason has been given for the missed dates. If the reason is because of bugs in 0.5.5 that doesn't make since. Because you all released 0.5.5 to the Russians on a LIVE server. If there was even a HINT of bugs, shouldn't it have been released to the "beta" testers first to ummm "test"?
MrVic:
I am more talking about Overlord giving out dates. He has given pretty "firm" dates on 3 occasions for the release of 0.5.5; each one of those dates have been missed. Also, no reason has been given for the missed dates. If the reason is because of bugs in 0.5.5 that doesn't make since. Because you all released 0.5.5 to the Russians on a LIVE server. If there was even a HINT of bugs, shouldn't it have been released to the "beta" testers first to ummm "test"?
Still stands And problems that arise are not
"bugs" in the patch but issues that can arise from non software
side of things (As no major bugs that I know of are in 5.5 as it is
just a couple maps for the most part and a couple value changes,
not sure what made you think that). Now we did have a
patch long ago that patched RU and the next day was EU. In the end
the patch did not have bugs it was bugged as it hard crashed the RU
server for a few days. That was a long while back tho,
and EU was delayed since it pointless to patch EU and just want the
server die so everyone was unable to play. I was happy to keep
playing hehe As far as I can remember
only 18-19 were ever given the rest were estimates, since they try
to give the community all the information they can. The
others were not firm dates, Many are listed as round X
date. Basically you can either flame overlord for giving
us estimates or you can ignore all dates given and just act
surprised a lot. The only other alternative is the
blizzard version. Were tell you nothing for 3 years
until were burning the Discs to distribute Personally I like some
info even if its estimates or hopes. The ideal of 100% guarantee
all the time is near impossible its the aspiration of every company
but reality is a cruel thing.
I am more talking about Overlord giving out dates. He has given pretty "firm" dates on 3 occasions for the release of 0.5.5; each one of those dates have been missed. Also, no reason has been given for the missed dates. If the reason is because of bugs in 0.5.5 that doesn't make since. Because you all released 0.5.5 to the Russians on a LIVE server. If there was even a HINT of bugs, shouldn't it have been released to the "beta" testers first to ummm "test"?
Still stands
And problems that arise are not
"bugs" in the patch but issues that can arise from non software
side of things (As no major bugs that I know of are in 5.5 as it is
just a couple maps for the most part and a couple value changes,
not sure what made you think that). Now we did have a
patch long ago that patched RU and the next day was EU. In the end
the patch did not have bugs it was bugged as it hard crashed the RU
server for a few days. That was a long while back tho,
and EU was delayed since it pointless to patch EU and just want the
server die so everyone was unable to play. I was happy to keep
playing hehe As far as I can remember
only 18-19 were ever given the rest were estimates, since they try
to give the community all the information they can. The
others were not firm dates, Many are listed as round X
date. Basically you can either flame overlord for giving
us estimates or you can ignore all dates given and just act
surprised a lot. The only other alternative is the
blizzard version. Were tell you nothing for 3 years
until were burning the Discs to distribute Personally I like some
info even if its estimates or hopes. The ideal of 100% guarantee
all the time is near impossible its the aspiration of every company
but reality is a cruel thing.MrVic, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:02, said: Armor: first off that was not a date. But
some wish to know ballpark time frames. Also I refrain from dates
since I know unforeseen problems do come up. Many
understand that the times can change and wish to know the estimated
time. If you do not want to know these and want patches
times and content avoid this thread then it will never disappoint
you.The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
MrVic:
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
20.10.2010 00:22:27
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183613
Armor9, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:13, said:
MrVic, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:02, said:
Armor: first off that was not a date. But
some wish to know ballpark time frames. Also I refrain from dates
since I know unforeseen problems do come up. Many
understand that the times can change and wish to know the estimated
time. If you do not want to know these and want patches
times and content avoid this thread then it will never disappoint
you.
The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
I am more talking about Overlord giving out dates. He has given pretty "firm" dates on 3 occasions for the release of 0.5.5; each one of those dates have been missed. Also, no reason has been given for the missed dates. If the reason is because of bugs in 0.5.5 that doesn't make since. Because you all released 0.5.5 to the Russians on a LIVE server. If there was even a HINT of bugs, shouldn't it have been released to the "beta" testers first to ummm "test"?
MrVic, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:02, said: Armor: first off that was not a date. But
some wish to know ballpark time frames. Also I refrain from dates
since I know unforeseen problems do come up. Many
understand that the times can change and wish to know the estimated
time. If you do not want to know these and want patches
times and content avoid this thread then it will never disappoint
you.
The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
Link on message: #183613
Armor9, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:13, said:
MrVic, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:02, said:
Armor: first off that was not a date. But
some wish to know ballpark time frames. Also I refrain from dates
since I know unforeseen problems do come up. Many
understand that the times can change and wish to know the estimated
time. If you do not want to know these and want patches
times and content avoid this thread then it will never disappoint
you.The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
I am more talking about Overlord giving out dates. He has given pretty "firm" dates on 3 occasions for the release of 0.5.5; each one of those dates have been missed. Also, no reason has been given for the missed dates. If the reason is because of bugs in 0.5.5 that doesn't make since. Because you all released 0.5.5 to the Russians on a LIVE server. If there was even a HINT of bugs, shouldn't it have been released to the "beta" testers first to ummm "test"?
MrVic:
I am more talking about Overlord giving out dates. He has given pretty "firm" dates on 3 occasions for the release of 0.5.5; each one of those dates have been missed. Also, no reason has been given for the missed dates. If the reason is because of bugs in 0.5.5 that doesn't make since. Because you all released 0.5.5 to the Russians on a LIVE server. If there was even a HINT of bugs, shouldn't it have been released to the "beta" testers first to ummm "test"?
Still stands And problems that arise are not
"bugs" in the patch but issues that can arise from non software
side of things (As no major bugs that I know of are in 5.5 as it is
just a couple maps for the most part and a couple value changes,
not sure what made you think that). Now we did have a
patch long ago that patched RU and the next day was EU. In the end
the patch did not have bugs it was bugged as it hard crashed the RU
server for a few days. That was a long while back tho,
and EU was delayed since it pointless to patch EU and just want the
server die so everyone was unable to play. I was happy to keep
playing hehe As far as I can remember
only 18-19 were ever given the rest were estimates, since they try
to give the community all the information they can. The
others were not firm dates, Many are listed as round X
date. Basically you can either flame overlord for giving
us estimates or you can ignore all dates given and just act
surprised a lot. The only other alternative is the
blizzard version. Were tell you nothing for 3 years
until were burning the Discs to distribute Personally I like some
info even if its estimates or hopes. The ideal of 100% guarantee
all the time is near impossible its the aspiration of every company
but reality is a cruel thing.
I am more talking about Overlord giving out dates. He has given pretty "firm" dates on 3 occasions for the release of 0.5.5; each one of those dates have been missed. Also, no reason has been given for the missed dates. If the reason is because of bugs in 0.5.5 that doesn't make since. Because you all released 0.5.5 to the Russians on a LIVE server. If there was even a HINT of bugs, shouldn't it have been released to the "beta" testers first to ummm "test"?
Still stands
And problems that arise are not
"bugs" in the patch but issues that can arise from non software
side of things (As no major bugs that I know of are in 5.5 as it is
just a couple maps for the most part and a couple value changes,
not sure what made you think that). Now we did have a
patch long ago that patched RU and the next day was EU. In the end
the patch did not have bugs it was bugged as it hard crashed the RU
server for a few days. That was a long while back tho,
and EU was delayed since it pointless to patch EU and just want the
server die so everyone was unable to play. I was happy to keep
playing hehe As far as I can remember
only 18-19 were ever given the rest were estimates, since they try
to give the community all the information they can. The
others were not firm dates, Many are listed as round X
date. Basically you can either flame overlord for giving
us estimates or you can ignore all dates given and just act
surprised a lot. The only other alternative is the
blizzard version. Were tell you nothing for 3 years
until were burning the Discs to distribute Personally I like some
info even if its estimates or hopes. The ideal of 100% guarantee
all the time is near impossible its the aspiration of every company
but reality is a cruel thing.MrVic, on Oct 19 2010 - 21:02, said: Armor: first off that was not a date. But
some wish to know ballpark time frames. Also I refrain from dates
since I know unforeseen problems do come up. Many
understand that the times can change and wish to know the estimated
time. If you do not want to know these and want patches
times and content avoid this thread then it will never disappoint
you.The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
MrVic:
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 23:02:33
Subject: Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183524
Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 updateLink on message: #183524
MrVic: Armor: first off that was not a date. But some wish to know
ballpark time frames. Also I refrain from dates since I know
unforeseen problems do come up. Many understand that the times can
change and wish to know the estimated time. If you do not want to
know these and want patches times and content avoid this thread
then it will never disappoint
you.
The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
then it will never disappoint
you.The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 23:02:33
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183524
Link on message: #183524
MrVic: Armor: first off that was not a date. But
some wish to know ballpark time frames. Also I refrain from dates
since I know unforeseen problems do come up. Many
understand that the times can change and wish to know the estimated
time. If you do not want to know these and want patches
times and content avoid this thread then it will never disappoint
you.
The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
then it will never disappoint
you.The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 23:02:33
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183524
Link on message: #183524
MrVic: Armor: first off that was not a date. But
some wish to know ballpark time frames. Also I refrain from dates
since I know unforeseen problems do come up. Many
understand that the times can change and wish to know the estimated
time. If you do not want to know these and want patches
times and content avoid this thread then it will never disappoint
you.
The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
then it will never disappoint
you.The contradiction part is actually a quick update due to an issue that was encountered. So it's actually a rapid update.
The middle statement is funny when you read it. Espically for those with kids I bet
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 22:30:55
Subject: Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183493
Kazomir, on 19 October 2010 - 09:16 PM, said: I could care less for this update, i dont know why you are so
inpatient...almolst nothing will change...
American tanks on a side note, are that i am waiting for. and if the delay of this patch means that yanks tanks are comin faster, im all thumbs up for this.
+19th october isnt over yet.
Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 updateLink on message: #183493
Kazomir, on 19 October 2010 - 09:16 PM, said: I could care less for this update, i dont know why you are so
inpatient...almolst nothing will change...American tanks on a side note, are that i am waiting for. and if the delay of this patch means that yanks tanks are comin faster, im all thumbs up for this.
+19th october isnt over yet.
MrVic: Actually you have a good point depending when the patch starts,
missing the deadline could be a few hours late in total
technically. Kinda humorus really
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 22:30:55
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183493
Kazomir, on Oct 19 2010 - 20:16, said: I could care less for this update, i dont know why you are so
inpatient...almolst nothing will change...
American tanks on a side note, are that i am waiting for. and if the delay of this patch means that yanks tanks are comin faster, im all thumbs up for this.
+19th october isnt over yet.
Link on message: #183493
Kazomir, on Oct 19 2010 - 20:16, said: I could care less for this update, i dont know why you are so
inpatient...almolst nothing will change...American tanks on a side note, are that i am waiting for. and if the delay of this patch means that yanks tanks are comin faster, im all thumbs up for this.
+19th october isnt over yet.
MrVic:
Actually you have a good point depending when the patch starts, missing the deadline could be a few hours late in total technically. Kinda humorus really
Actually you have a good point depending when the patch starts, missing the deadline could be a few hours late in total technically. Kinda humorus really
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 22:30:55
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183493
Kazomir, on Oct 19 2010 - 20:16, said: I could care less for this update, i dont know why you are so
inpatient...almolst nothing will change...
American tanks on a side note, are that i am waiting for. and if the delay of this patch means that yanks tanks are comin faster, im all thumbs up for this.
+19th october isnt over yet.
Link on message: #183493
Kazomir, on Oct 19 2010 - 20:16, said: I could care less for this update, i dont know why you are so
inpatient...almolst nothing will change...American tanks on a side note, are that i am waiting for. and if the delay of this patch means that yanks tanks are comin faster, im all thumbs up for this.
+19th october isnt over yet.
MrVic:
Actually you have a good point depending when the patch starts, missing the deadline could be a few hours late in total technically. Kinda humorus really
Actually you have a good point depending when the patch starts, missing the deadline could be a few hours late in total technically. Kinda humorus really
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 22:27:54
Subject: Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183488
berree, on 19 October 2010 - 08:26 PM, said: Are U.S tanks still on track to be released "sometime" in November?
Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 updateLink on message: #183488
berree, on 19 October 2010 - 08:26 PM, said: Are U.S tanks still on track to be released "sometime" in November?MrVic: Not sure I want to answer this anymore... But I'll give the idea of
any info is better then none November looks good
November looks goodMrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 22:27:54
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183488
berree, on Oct 19 2010 - 19:26, said: Are U.S tanks still on track to be released "sometime" in
November?
Link on message: #183488
berree, on Oct 19 2010 - 19:26, said: Are U.S tanks still on track to be released "sometime" in
November?MrVic: Not sure I want to answer this anymore... But I'll give
the idea of any info is better then none November looks good
November looks goodMrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 22:27:54
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183488
berree, on Oct 19 2010 - 19:26, said: Are U.S tanks still on track to be released "sometime" in
November?
Link on message: #183488
berree, on Oct 19 2010 - 19:26, said: Are U.S tanks still on track to be released "sometime" in
November?MrVic: Not sure I want to answer this anymore... But I'll give
the idea of any info is better then none November looks good
November looks goodMrVic
State of the Beta Post (Updated 20/09/10)
19.10.2010 20:29:48
Subject: Archives\Junkyard\State of the Beta Post (Updated 20/09/10)
Link on message: #183344
Pongo, on 18 October 2010 - 10:50 PM, said: Thanks Mods,
Is the ridge alone the east edge of the Monestary map (intended to be) navigable?
Love the looks of the new maps.
Archives\Junkyard\State of the Beta Post (Updated 20/09/10)Link on message: #183344
Pongo, on 18 October 2010 - 10:50 PM, said: Thanks Mods,Is the ridge alone the east edge of the Monestary map (intended to be) navigable?
Love the looks of the new maps.
MrVic: Basically there is a road along that deep chasm. The steep ridge on
the far east is not drivable. It's one of those things that's hard
to get a feel for top down. That map has numerous avenues to attack
from. Also it's amazingly scenic
MrVic
State of the Beta Post (Updated 20/09/10)
19.10.2010 20:21:18
Subject: Archives\Junkyard\State of the Beta Post (Updated 20/09/10)
Link on message: #183324
karl_eller, on 19 October 2010 - 01:06 PM, said:
MrVic, on 18 October 2010 - 01:19 AM, said:
Is it possible to cross the river in the top right corner of this map? Or is there only 2 ways across? From the road, it kind of looks like there might be a ford there, but it's kinda hard to tell.
MrVic, on 18 October 2010 - 01:19 AM, said:
Archives\Junkyard\State of the Beta Post (Updated 20/09/10)Link on message: #183324
karl_eller, on 19 October 2010 - 01:06 PM, said:
MrVic, on 18 October 2010 - 01:19 AM, said:Is it possible to cross the river in the top right corner of this map? Or is there only 2 ways across? From the road, it kind of looks like there might be a ford there, but it's kinda hard to tell.
MrVic: Is it possible to cross the river in the top right corner of this
map? Or is there only 2 ways across? From the road, it kind of
looks like there might be a ford there, but it's kinda hard to
tell.
There are 3 this map is going be interesting how
it plays out.
There are 3
this map is going be interesting how
it plays out.MrVic, on 18 October 2010 - 01:19 AM, said: MrVic:
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 20:12:34
Subject: Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183308
Vernah, on 19 October 2010 - 06:23 PM, said: So if the 6.13 patch is being finalized, why don't we just test the
6.13 patch? If the russians have already played 5.5, what's the use
of us testing it if the fixes for that patch are already done?
Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 updateLink on message: #183308
Vernah, on 19 October 2010 - 06:23 PM, said: So if the 6.13 patch is being finalized, why don't we just test the
6.13 patch? If the russians have already played 5.5, what's the use
of us testing it if the fixes for that patch are already done?MrVic: 6.1.3. From what I know is part of the internal testing. Basicaly
it's a small part of .6/.7. This sort of patching is to watch the
internal client go boom as they piece together the patch for us.
While we were delayed on 5.5 for a few reasons, the work on .6 has
not really been put on hold it's still going on. So the info about
the devs working on 6.1.3 is actually good news, since it's one
piece of the puzzle for the big patch that hopefully does not crash
the server ect. Over all were not in bad shape considering the next
2-3 patches massive amount of content. I think the big trick is
shuffling multiple client patches in a day. Down the road things
improve. Really I am surprised they gave out that info as most
would not give any reason.
Testing 5.5 is as I talked about pages ago. Is some tank tweaks from bugs and 2 maps the tweaks are not really large content or game breaking so testing those is kind of mute. The 2 maps are in good shape, and map testing is a never ending process. Most of it is done through long term data collection. So EU testing for months prior to RU is really a waste. 5.5 is not really a "test this it needs it" it was an attempt by the devs to pull a few things out and give us some new maps to hold us over until .6 was made stable. It was a nice gesture that we have thrown in their face. It sucks to wait but we'll have them soon enough.
For me if a delay on 5.5 meant we see .6 faster then it's worth it in spades. From what I know I suspect that might have been some of the reasons
Testing 5.5 is as I talked about pages ago. Is some tank tweaks from bugs and 2 maps the tweaks are not really large content or game breaking so testing those is kind of mute. The 2 maps are in good shape, and map testing is a never ending process. Most of it is done through long term data collection. So EU testing for months prior to RU is really a waste. 5.5 is not really a "test this it needs it" it was an attempt by the devs to pull a few things out and give us some new maps to hold us over until .6 was made stable. It was a nice gesture that we have thrown in their face. It sucks to wait but we'll have them soon enough.
For me if a delay on 5.5 meant we see .6 faster then it's worth it in spades. From what I know I suspect that might have been some of the reasons
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 20:12:34
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183308
Vernah, on Oct 19 2010 - 17:23, said: So if the 6.13 patch is being finalized, why don't we just test the
6.13 patch? If the russians have already played 5.5, what's the use
of us testing it if the fixes for that patch are already done?
Link on message: #183308
Vernah, on Oct 19 2010 - 17:23, said: So if the 6.13 patch is being finalized, why don't we just test the
6.13 patch? If the russians have already played 5.5, what's the use
of us testing it if the fixes for that patch are already done?MrVic:
6.1.3. From what I know is part of the internal testing. Basicaly it's a small part of .6/.7. This sort of patching is to watch the internal client go boom as they piece together the patch for us. While we were delayed on 5.5 for a few reasons, the work on .6 has not really been put on hold it's still going on. So the info about the devs working on 6.1.3 is actually good news, since it's one piece of the puzzle for the big patch that hopefully does not crash the server ect. Over all were not in bad shape considering the next 2-3 patches massive amount of content. I think the big trick is shuffling multiple client patches in a day. Down the road things improve. Really I am surprised they gave out that info as most would not give any reason.
Testing 5.5 is as I talked about pages ago. Is some tank tweaks from bugs and 2 maps the tweaks are not really large content or game breaking so testing those is kind of mute. The 2 maps are in good shape, and map testing is a never ending process. Most of it is done through long term data collection. So EU testing for months prior to RU is really a waste. 5.5 is not really a "test this it needs it" it was an attempt by the devs to pull a few things out and give us some new maps to hold us over until .6 was made stable. It was a nice gesture that we have thrown in their face. It sucks to wait but we'll have them soon enough.
For me if a delay on 5.5 meant we see .6 faster then it's worth it in spades. From what I know I suspect that might have been some of the reasons
6.1.3. From what I know is part of the internal testing. Basicaly it's a small part of .6/.7. This sort of patching is to watch the internal client go boom as they piece together the patch for us. While we were delayed on 5.5 for a few reasons, the work on .6 has not really been put on hold it's still going on. So the info about the devs working on 6.1.3 is actually good news, since it's one piece of the puzzle for the big patch that hopefully does not crash the server ect. Over all were not in bad shape considering the next 2-3 patches massive amount of content. I think the big trick is shuffling multiple client patches in a day. Down the road things improve. Really I am surprised they gave out that info as most would not give any reason.
Testing 5.5 is as I talked about pages ago. Is some tank tweaks from bugs and 2 maps the tweaks are not really large content or game breaking so testing those is kind of mute. The 2 maps are in good shape, and map testing is a never ending process. Most of it is done through long term data collection. So EU testing for months prior to RU is really a waste. 5.5 is not really a "test this it needs it" it was an attempt by the devs to pull a few things out and give us some new maps to hold us over until .6 was made stable. It was a nice gesture that we have thrown in their face. It sucks to wait but we'll have them soon enough.
For me if a delay on 5.5 meant we see .6 faster then it's worth it in spades. From what I know I suspect that might have been some of the reasons
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 20:12:34
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183308
Vernah, on Oct 19 2010 - 17:23, said: So if the 6.13 patch is being finalized, why don't we just test the
6.13 patch? If the russians have already played 5.5, what's the use
of us testing it if the fixes for that patch are already done?
Link on message: #183308
Vernah, on Oct 19 2010 - 17:23, said: So if the 6.13 patch is being finalized, why don't we just test the
6.13 patch? If the russians have already played 5.5, what's the use
of us testing it if the fixes for that patch are already done?MrVic:
6.1.3. From what I know is part of the internal testing. Basicaly it's a small part of .6/.7. This sort of patching is to watch the internal client go boom as they piece together the patch for us. While we were delayed on 5.5 for a few reasons, the work on .6 has not really been put on hold it's still going on. So the info about the devs working on 6.1.3 is actually good news, since it's one piece of the puzzle for the big patch that hopefully does not crash the server ect. Over all were not in bad shape considering the next 2-3 patches massive amount of content. I think the big trick is shuffling multiple client patches in a day. Down the road things improve. Really I am surprised they gave out that info as most would not give any reason.
Testing 5.5 is as I talked about pages ago. Is some tank tweaks from bugs and 2 maps the tweaks are not really large content or game breaking so testing those is kind of mute. The 2 maps are in good shape, and map testing is a never ending process. Most of it is done through long term data collection. So EU testing for months prior to RU is really a waste. 5.5 is not really a "test this it needs it" it was an attempt by the devs to pull a few things out and give us some new maps to hold us over until .6 was made stable. It was a nice gesture that we have thrown in their face. It sucks to wait but we'll have them soon enough.
For me if a delay on 5.5 meant we see .6 faster then it's worth it in spades. From what I know I suspect that might have been some of the reasons
6.1.3. From what I know is part of the internal testing. Basicaly it's a small part of .6/.7. This sort of patching is to watch the internal client go boom as they piece together the patch for us. While we were delayed on 5.5 for a few reasons, the work on .6 has not really been put on hold it's still going on. So the info about the devs working on 6.1.3 is actually good news, since it's one piece of the puzzle for the big patch that hopefully does not crash the server ect. Over all were not in bad shape considering the next 2-3 patches massive amount of content. I think the big trick is shuffling multiple client patches in a day. Down the road things improve. Really I am surprised they gave out that info as most would not give any reason.
Testing 5.5 is as I talked about pages ago. Is some tank tweaks from bugs and 2 maps the tweaks are not really large content or game breaking so testing those is kind of mute. The 2 maps are in good shape, and map testing is a never ending process. Most of it is done through long term data collection. So EU testing for months prior to RU is really a waste. 5.5 is not really a "test this it needs it" it was an attempt by the devs to pull a few things out and give us some new maps to hold us over until .6 was made stable. It was a nice gesture that we have thrown in their face. It sucks to wait but we'll have them soon enough.
For me if a delay on 5.5 meant we see .6 faster then it's worth it in spades. From what I know I suspect that might have been some of the reasons
Overlord
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 18:55:11
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183190
Neverwhere, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:52, said: Any chance for adding Panther 2 in patch 0.6??
Link on message: #183190
Neverwhere, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:52, said: Any chance for adding Panther 2 in patch 0.6??Overlord:
No, in terms of new vehicles it will bring only US tech-tree.
No, in terms of new vehicles it will bring only US tech-tree.
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 18:38:21
Subject: Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183155
Asky said: And u think that is a well made beta test? Giving examples of other bad made beta tests doesn't motivate u guys for not keeping you're promise. So far Wargaming.net did a very good game, they have a pretty good communication with the community and that's why we expect to keep u're promise...
Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 updateLink on message: #183155
Asky said: And u think that is a well made beta test? Giving examples of other bad made beta tests doesn't motivate u guys for not keeping you're promise. So far Wargaming.net did a very good game, they have a pretty good communication with the community and that's why we expect to keep u're promise...
MrVic: A well made beta does not exsist, due to perfect world ideas people
have. For you everything fast and on time with no delays equals
well made I am guessing. Seeing as Released games cannot make that
happen, holding such an ideal to a beta is destined to be flawed.
Beta is debugging stress testing for players but at the same time
it is a beta for the devs. They are bug testing patching methods
and encouraging situations that delay the game patches, they find
issues in sever stability on their side a work to eliminate those.
While they work to make thing better and improve their methods we
work to find problems in their game.
The examples were to point out there has never been a perfect beta by what your standards seem to be. Moments in a beta are good others suck, such is how it really works
Ps. I do not have any more control on getting a patch out then you. I just try and provide help and information where I can
The examples were to point out there has never been a perfect beta by what your standards seem to be. Moments in a beta are good others suck, such is how it really works
Ps. I do not have any more control on getting a patch out then you. I just try and provide help and information where I can
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 18:38:21
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183155
Asky said:
And u think that is a well made beta test? Giving examples of other bad made beta tests doesn't motivate u guys for not keeping you're promise. So far Wargaming.net did a very good game, they have a pretty good communication with the community and that's why we expect to keep u're promise...
Link on message: #183155
Asky said:
And u think that is a well made beta test? Giving examples of other bad made beta tests doesn't motivate u guys for not keeping you're promise. So far Wargaming.net did a very good game, they have a pretty good communication with the community and that's why we expect to keep u're promise...
MrVic:
A well made beta does not exsist, due to perfect world ideas people have. For you everything fast and on time with no delays equals well made I am guessing. Seeing as Released games cannot make that happen, holding such an ideal to a beta is destined to be flawed. Beta is debugging stress testing for players but at the same time it is a beta for the devs. They are bug testing patching methods and encouraging situations that delay the game patches, they find issues in sever stability on their side a work to eliminate those. While they work to make thing better and improve their methods we work to find problems in their game.
The examples were to point out there has never been a perfect beta by what your standards seem to be. Moments in a beta are good others suck, such is how it really works
Ps. I do not have any more control on getting a patch out then you. I just try and provide help and information where I can
A well made beta does not exsist, due to perfect world ideas people have. For you everything fast and on time with no delays equals well made I am guessing. Seeing as Released games cannot make that happen, holding such an ideal to a beta is destined to be flawed. Beta is debugging stress testing for players but at the same time it is a beta for the devs. They are bug testing patching methods and encouraging situations that delay the game patches, they find issues in sever stability on their side a work to eliminate those. While they work to make thing better and improve their methods we work to find problems in their game.
The examples were to point out there has never been a perfect beta by what your standards seem to be. Moments in a beta are good others suck, such is how it really works
Ps. I do not have any more control on getting a patch out then you. I just try and provide help and information where I can
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 18:38:21
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183155
Asky said:
And u think that is a well made beta test? Giving examples of other bad made beta tests doesn't motivate u guys for not keeping you're promise. So far Wargaming.net did a very good game, they have a pretty good communication with the community and that's why we expect to keep u're promise...
Link on message: #183155
Asky said:
And u think that is a well made beta test? Giving examples of other bad made beta tests doesn't motivate u guys for not keeping you're promise. So far Wargaming.net did a very good game, they have a pretty good communication with the community and that's why we expect to keep u're promise...
MrVic:
A well made beta does not exsist, due to perfect world ideas people have. For you everything fast and on time with no delays equals well made I am guessing. Seeing as Released games cannot make that happen, holding such an ideal to a beta is destined to be flawed. Beta is debugging stress testing for players but at the same time it is a beta for the devs. They are bug testing patching methods and encouraging situations that delay the game patches, they find issues in sever stability on their side a work to eliminate those. While they work to make thing better and improve their methods we work to find problems in their game.
The examples were to point out there has never been a perfect beta by what your standards seem to be. Moments in a beta are good others suck, such is how it really works
Ps. I do not have any more control on getting a patch out then you. I just try and provide help and information where I can
A well made beta does not exsist, due to perfect world ideas people have. For you everything fast and on time with no delays equals well made I am guessing. Seeing as Released games cannot make that happen, holding such an ideal to a beta is destined to be flawed. Beta is debugging stress testing for players but at the same time it is a beta for the devs. They are bug testing patching methods and encouraging situations that delay the game patches, they find issues in sever stability on their side a work to eliminate those. While they work to make thing better and improve their methods we work to find problems in their game.
The examples were to point out there has never been a perfect beta by what your standards seem to be. Moments in a beta are good others suck, such is how it really works
Ps. I do not have any more control on getting a patch out then you. I just try and provide help and information where I can
Overlord
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 18:34:58
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183148
LtChief, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:20, said:
It was stated by Overlord earlier in this thread that there would be simultaneous releases of patches here and in Russia and that they had a system to convert the patches so that wouldnt be a problem.
Link on message: #183148
LtChief, on Oct 19 2010 - 16:20, said: It was stated by Overlord earlier in this thread that there would be simultaneous releases of patches here and in Russia and that they had a system to convert the patches so that wouldnt be a problem.
Overlord:
It is still a long way to go to release updates simultaneously, but that's our objective.
The gap between updating both versions to 0.6.x is supposed to be smaller.
It is still a long way to go to release updates simultaneously, but that's our objective.
The gap between updating both versions to 0.6.x is supposed to be smaller.
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 17:29:28
Subject: Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183075
Important Information\Updates & Patch Notes\beta 0.6.1.5 updateLink on message: #183075
MrVic: Delays happen. Many betas there is little to no warning when
patches are coming half the time. The dev team is posting patch
notes way before the patches are out, honestly I have not seen that
in a beta before. So far for myself they have gone above and beyond
with information that most companies never give out. Patch notes
before patches. They are actually telling us why it was delayed,
heck most games never tell you that much. During betas you sit in
the dark and if your pre warned of a patch and its delayed they
never say why in most cases.
It arrives when it arrives and thank the dev staff for the volume of information they share.
Getting worked up over something that is moving this fast to get us tons and I mean tons of new content and toys is just silly. I remember ib swg testing the server would go offline for 4 days no warning and no information wden it would be back online. You just checked on it once in awhile and played when it was up. I think many confuse this beta as release. Due to stability and patch info. I guess holding back information would be better? If you had no idea of .6 or .7 patch schedule and content would it cause people to complain less since they would see it as a gift instead of their right?
Sometimes it makes you wonder if their effort to keep us overly informed causes them more work. Keep making the game better many are willing to play an even better game
It arrives when it arrives and thank the dev staff for the volume of information they share.
Getting worked up over something that is moving this fast to get us tons and I mean tons of new content and toys is just silly. I remember ib swg testing the server would go offline for 4 days no warning and no information wden it would be back online. You just checked on it once in awhile and played when it was up. I think many confuse this beta as release. Due to stability and patch info. I guess holding back information would be better? If you had no idea of .6 or .7 patch schedule and content would it cause people to complain less since they would see it as a gift instead of their right?
Sometimes it makes you wonder if their effort to keep us overly informed causes them more work. Keep making the game better many are willing to play an even better game
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 17:29:28
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183075
Link on message: #183075
MrVic: Delays happen. Many betas there is little to no warning
when patches are coming half the time. The dev team is
posting patch notes way before the patches are out, honestly I have
not seen that in a beta before. So far for myself they
have gone above and beyond with information that most companies
never give out. Patch notes before
patches. They are actually telling us why it was
delayed, heck most games never tell you that much. During betas you
sit in the dark and if your pre warned of a patch and its delayed
they never say why in most cases.
It arrives when it arrives and thank the dev staff for the volume of information they share.
Getting worked up over something that is moving this fast to get us tons and I mean tons of new content and toys is just silly. I remember ib swg testing the server would go offline for 4 days no warning and no information wden it would be back online. You just checked on it once in awhile and played when it was up. I think many confuse this beta as release. Due to stability and patch info. I guess holding back information would be better? If you had no idea of .6 or .7 patch schedule and content would it cause people to complain less since they would see it as a gift instead of their right?
Sometimes it makes you wonder if their effort to keep us overly informed causes them more work. Keep making the game better many are willing to play an even better game
It arrives when it arrives and thank the dev staff for the volume of information they share.
Getting worked up over something that is moving this fast to get us tons and I mean tons of new content and toys is just silly. I remember ib swg testing the server would go offline for 4 days no warning and no information wden it would be back online. You just checked on it once in awhile and played when it was up. I think many confuse this beta as release. Due to stability and patch info. I guess holding back information would be better? If you had no idea of .6 or .7 patch schedule and content would it cause people to complain less since they would see it as a gift instead of their right?
Sometimes it makes you wonder if their effort to keep us overly informed causes them more work. Keep making the game better many are willing to play an even better game
MrVic
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 17:29:28
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183075
Link on message: #183075
MrVic: Delays happen. Many betas there is little to no warning
when patches are coming half the time. The dev team is
posting patch notes way before the patches are out, honestly I have
not seen that in a beta before. So far for myself they
have gone above and beyond with information that most companies
never give out. Patch notes before
patches. They are actually telling us why it was
delayed, heck most games never tell you that much. During betas you
sit in the dark and if your pre warned of a patch and its delayed
they never say why in most cases.
It arrives when it arrives and thank the dev staff for the volume of information they share.
Getting worked up over something that is moving this fast to get us tons and I mean tons of new content and toys is just silly. I remember ib swg testing the server would go offline for 4 days no warning and no information wden it would be back online. You just checked on it once in awhile and played when it was up. I think many confuse this beta as release. Due to stability and patch info. I guess holding back information would be better? If you had no idea of .6 or .7 patch schedule and content would it cause people to complain less since they would see it as a gift instead of their right?
Sometimes it makes you wonder if their effort to keep us overly informed causes them more work. Keep making the game better many are willing to play an even better game
It arrives when it arrives and thank the dev staff for the volume of information they share.
Getting worked up over something that is moving this fast to get us tons and I mean tons of new content and toys is just silly. I remember ib swg testing the server would go offline for 4 days no warning and no information wden it would be back online. You just checked on it once in awhile and played when it was up. I think many confuse this beta as release. Due to stability and patch info. I guess holding back information would be better? If you had no idea of .6 or .7 patch schedule and content would it cause people to complain less since they would see it as a gift instead of their right?
Sometimes it makes you wonder if their effort to keep us overly informed causes them more work. Keep making the game better many are willing to play an even better game
Overlord
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 15:51:01
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183023
viborabr, on Oct 19 2010 - 13:42, said: A message to the fan boys, this is a business and it must be ruled
like it.
This is a test for the go live, it is still free but it wont in short future, they will have schedules to accomplish with customers.
They are going pretty bad on this live test right now, it was not the first delay, this is a sequence of delays.
We can't be impolite with the developers or aggressive, but we are here to demand quality and goals being accomplished.
If you, fan boys, that thinks that the best for the game is just keep saying: "OK, the game is perfect, nothing needs to improve, delays are normal, keep going..."
You are wrong, we are beta testers, potential customers, we are here to push (on a reasonable way) quality and help them to improve.
So stop thinking you are being good when you are so permissive, but also, don't think you are being good when you are being aggressive.
Link on message: #183023
viborabr, on Oct 19 2010 - 13:42, said: A message to the fan boys, this is a business and it must be ruled
like it.This is a test for the go live, it is still free but it wont in short future, they will have schedules to accomplish with customers.
They are going pretty bad on this live test right now, it was not the first delay, this is a sequence of delays.
We can't be impolite with the developers or aggressive, but we are here to demand quality and goals being accomplished.
If you, fan boys, that thinks that the best for the game is just keep saying: "OK, the game is perfect, nothing needs to improve, delays are normal, keep going..."
You are wrong, we are beta testers, potential customers, we are here to push (on a reasonable way) quality and help them to improve.
So stop thinking you are being good when you are so permissive, but also, don't think you are being good when you are being aggressive.
Overlord: Yes, it is business. But at the same time beta test is a kind of
training period for the company.
Constructive criticism is always welcome here, pure aggression from users wouldn't add much to the game development, we have enough of it on the Russian forums.
Constructive criticism is always welcome here, pure aggression from users wouldn't add much to the game development, we have enough of it on the Russian forums.
Overlord
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 15:39:01
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #183004
yodamester, on Oct 19 2010 - 13:30, said: So tomorrow which patch will we get 0.5.5 or 0.6.1.3?
Schneider, on Oct 19 2010 - 13:31, said: strange i had some beta where there was No delay (at least not the
announced but we will see
Atleast you heve the guts to stand foreward
Link on message: #183004
yodamester, on Oct 19 2010 - 13:30, said: So tomorrow which patch will we get 0.5.5 or 0.6.1.3?Overlord: 0.5.5
Schneider, on Oct 19 2010 - 13:31, said: strange i had some beta where there was No delay (at least not the
announced but we will see Atleast you heve the guts to stand foreward
Overlord: I'm not claiming that everybody postpones updates. Each company has
its own strategy and methods of work.
Beta is no shield for us, but at release we will follow the schedule more thoroughly.
Beta is no shield for us, but at release we will follow the schedule more thoroughly.
Overlord
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 15:29:46
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #182992
Schneider, on Oct 19 2010 - 13:21, said: Soryy but but i agree with Misanthrops 100 % correct
.
When you can't keep writen promises you better stop your job and quit.
This is very "good" Pr and advertising and i am shure i will tell my folks about it .
Next time shutting up and writing nothing is always better than selling a bear before you shot it .
But still : it is now 14:17 so you still have 8 hours
Ps i don' mean WOT hours. Real hours if can handle real time notifications.
And yes i am AGAIN very dissappointed in this game.
no salute this time
And again our russian friends have the favours what a coincidanse
Link on message: #182992
Schneider, on Oct 19 2010 - 13:21, said: Soryy but but i agree with Misanthrops 100 % correct
.When you can't keep writen promises you better stop your job and quit.
This is very "good" Pr and advertising and i am shure i will tell my folks about it .
Next time shutting up and writing nothing is always better than selling a bear before you shot it .
But still : it is now 14:17 so you still have 8 hours
Ps i don' mean WOT hours. Real hours if can handle real time notifications.
And yes i am AGAIN very dissappointed in this game.
no salute this time
And again our russian friends have the favours what a coincidanse
Overlord: So you suggest we close the project and quit after that? At least
you are not going to burn us at the stake.
Delay is usual practice in video game industry. And at the moment it is 1-day delay.
Delay is usual practice in video game industry. And at the moment it is 1-day delay.
Overlord
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 14:45:19
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #182925
Link on message: #182925
Overlord: Planned 0.5.5 update has been rescheduled for tomorrow due to
finalization of 0.6.1.3 test patch.
Overlord
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 13:27:54
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #182834
varrakk, on Oct 19 2010 - 10:37, said: Weight is a pretty bad term to be using, Networth would be more
accurate.
Link on message: #182834
varrakk, on Oct 19 2010 - 10:37, said: Weight is a pretty bad term to be using, Networth would be more
accurate.Overlord:
"Networth" reminds me of economics or finance. Perhaps, value.
"Networth" reminds me of economics or finance. Perhaps, value.
Overlord
beta 0.6.1.5 update
19.10.2010 12:10:17
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #182762
Eliminateur, on Oct 18 2010 - 21:46, said: overlord, any ideas what will happen to the current owners of the
M3 Stuart "premium" tank when the US tank tree goes live(including
the stuart in the regular light tree)?
will it be deleted?, refunded?, converted to elite tank?, converted to basic tank?, what about crew?
Zeshin, on Oct 19 2010 - 09:44, said: Will platoons be included in this?
Platoons are currently (seemingly) excluded from the matchmaking system. Whenever we play with a platoon of three light tanks (tier 1-3), we always end up in a battle with a bunch of other platoons of tier 6+...
Link on message: #182762
Eliminateur, on Oct 18 2010 - 21:46, said: overlord, any ideas what will happen to the current owners of the
M3 Stuart "premium" tank when the US tank tree goes live(including
the stuart in the regular light tree)?will it be deleted?, refunded?, converted to elite tank?, converted to basic tank?, what about crew?
Overlord:
Nothing is going to happen to "premium" M3 Stuart (tho it's not premium). It will stay as it is. Until wipe at least.
Nothing is going to happen to "premium" M3 Stuart (tho it's not premium). It will stay as it is. Until wipe at least.
Zeshin, on Oct 19 2010 - 09:44, said: Will platoons be included in this?Platoons are currently (seemingly) excluded from the matchmaking system. Whenever we play with a platoon of three light tanks (tier 1-3), we always end up in a battle with a bunch of other platoons of tier 6+...
Overlord:
Overall platoon "weight" is going to be decreased. Platoons will be "weighed" lower than they are now.
Overall platoon "weight" is going to be decreased. Platoons will be "weighed" lower than they are now.
Overlord
beta 0.6.1.5 update
18.10.2010 23:11:23
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #182142
MemoryReborn, on Oct 18 2010 - 21:02, said:
Any info on that you can share with us?
Link on message: #182142
MemoryReborn, on Oct 18 2010 - 21:02, said: Any info on that you can share with us?
Overlord:
It's a draft version that is being tested at the moment.
It's a draft version that is being tested at the moment.
Overlord
beta 0.6.1.5 update
18.10.2010 22:55:53
Subject: beta 0.6.1.5 update
Link on message: #182112
ArmorShark7, on Oct 18 2010 - 18:58, said: So, US tanks are supposed to be inexpensive to purchase and
repair?
Overlord, since there's already been some form of testing of the US tanks, can you confirm/refute this?
eLdritchZ, on Oct 18 2010 - 20:41, said: am i seeing this right that the changes to the matchmaking system
dropped out of this update?
FrankK2, on Oct 18 2010 - 20:44, said: M3 Grant, would be lovely to use them both. Of course not at the
same time. Aswell the MAUS could use the 75mm attached
next to the big gun.
Link on message: #182112
ArmorShark7, on Oct 18 2010 - 18:58, said: So, US tanks are supposed to be inexpensive to purchase and
repair?Overlord, since there's already been some form of testing of the US tanks, can you confirm/refute this?
Overlord:
Overall US tanks' costs won't differ greatly from German and Soviet vehicles.
Overall US tanks' costs won't differ greatly from German and Soviet vehicles.
eLdritchZ, on Oct 18 2010 - 20:41, said: am i seeing this right that the changes to the matchmaking system
dropped out of this update?Overlord:
There will be changes in match-making. We are switching to new system comprising 8 battle tiers. This one proved to be not effective.
Equipped modules are going to have less weight.
There will be changes in match-making. We are switching to new system comprising 8 battle tiers. This one proved to be not effective.
Equipped modules are going to have less weight.
FrankK2, on Oct 18 2010 - 20:44, said: M3 Grant, would be lovely to use them both. Of course not at the
same time. Aswell the MAUS could use the 75mm attached
next to the big gun.Overlord:
Secondary guns are going be enabled later. For some time only the primary one will be active.
Secondary guns are going be enabled later. For some time only the primary one will be active.
ARGO
The "why didn't that hit them" topic
18.10.2010 22:16:54
Subject: Archives\Beta\The "why didn't that hit them" topic
Link on message: #182050
bloodwork, on 18 October 2010 - 08:52 PM, said: Another problem occured (besides lag among other things). I have
noticed today that i have enemy tanks on sight, even from close
range, and the shot is a miss. I mean, it finds the target and is a
miss, not a bounce, it's like the shell passes through the tank and
hits the ground. I played many games today before i post and it's
always the same thing, many unexplained misses. I was wondering if
other players experienced the same, at least one guy agreed with me
in game.
Archives\Beta\The "why didn't that hit them" topicLink on message: #182050
bloodwork, on 18 October 2010 - 08:52 PM, said: Another problem occured (besides lag among other things). I have
noticed today that i have enemy tanks on sight, even from close
range, and the shot is a miss. I mean, it finds the target and is a
miss, not a bounce, it's like the shell passes through the tank and
hits the ground. I played many games today before i post and it's
always the same thing, many unexplained misses. I was wondering if
other players experienced the same, at least one guy agreed with me
in game.ARGO: By any chance are you using the German 88mm? because I have heard
the same complaint from a lot of players who have the 88mm. I too
have the same issue where you can be point blank, hit the trigger
and the gun jumps over the target and fires. I have noted which
guns I have that do it but it seams the 88mm is most plagued by
this. I mean seriously, I your close enough to spit in the other
tank jockeys face then how the heck can you miss?
BL9 russian "Jumps over target and fires, misses at point blank range"
10.5 conicle German "No accuracy at all, jumps all over the place"
88.mm German "Jumps over target and fires, misses at point blank range. Has also had delayed fire"
BL9 russian "Jumps over target and fires, misses at point blank range"
10.5 conicle German "No accuracy at all, jumps all over the place"
88.mm German "Jumps over target and fires, misses at point blank range. Has also had delayed fire"
Overlord
Maintenance Works Scheduled on October 19
18.10.2010 22:08:29
Subject: Maintenance Works Scheduled on October 19
Link on message: #182034
Havoc77, on Oct 18 2010 - 17:00, said: what's with all the maintenance on forum?? is the forum getting a
bug or virus, is it sick?
Link on message: #182034
Havoc77, on Oct 18 2010 - 17:00, said: what's with all the maintenance on forum?? is the forum getting a
bug or virus, is it sick?Overlord: It's server maintenance. forum.worldoftanks.com and
game.worldoftanks.com are located on the servers from Russian
cluster. And this cluster is going to be expanded.
That's why the site and forum may be unavailable for some time.
That's why the site and forum may be unavailable for some time.
ARGO
WOT offline?
18.10.2010 20:51:08
Subject: Archives\Beta\WOT offline?
Link on message: #181940
Archives\Beta\WOT offline?Link on message: #181940
ARGO: I wonder if it is connected anyway with what happend yesterday.
Every second time you go into battle the game went in, started
countdown, then dropped you back into the garage with some message
regarding creation errors.
Реклама | Adv