| |
 | |  |
|  | Posted By: Sanya Thomas | 2003-02-27 18:03:45 |  |
| |  |  The questions continue to fall like snowflakes in Northern Virginia:
Q: Is the new Minstrel buff "Ablative Armore" supposed to be 100% absorb or 25%?
A: It's set to 100%.
Q: From 1.60: "- Scureol's Belt, from the Ogre's Might Quest, previously had Piety 5 and Constitution 5. Because this belt is given to both Friars and Infiltrators, the 5 Constitution has been changed to Dexterity 5." First thing, his name is Scurceol, I see that the C is missing every time you refer to him. Also, I have stats listed at 7 not 5, from several sources, please look into it. Thanks.
A: You’re quite right, and the patch note is quite wrong. Thanks for the heads up.
Q: What is the difference between Tower and Heater shields (they're both large shields, but is there any difference between the two besides looks)?
The difference is strictly appearance - there is no further difference than what can be found in the delve and right click info.
Q: Is there a cap on the chance to block?
A: There is currently no hard cap.
Q: Does shield quality affect your chance to block?
A: Not currently.
Q: Does shield condition affect your chance to block?
A: Yes.
Q: What does enchanting a shield do?
A: Increases chance to block.
Q: Do To-Hit modifiers on styles have any effect on whether your opponent successfully Evades, Blocks, or Parries?
A: Nope.
Q: Is the correct Order of Resolution in combat definitely Evade, Parry, Block (Shield), Guard, Hit/Miss, and then Bladeturn?
A: Yes.
Q: What are the ideal criteria for proving a point through log testing? When attempting to test Melee combat would being fully unbuffed or fully buffed be more accurate?
A: In the exact words of one of our lead programmers: "It really depends on exactly what kind of test you're trying to do. In general, the longer the test the better. Sending one log in which shows you fumbling 3 times in a row doesn't prove that you have a high fumble rate. That test would require setting out to do a test specifically on that. Fight with the same weapon, keep the weapon repaired to the same point, fight against the same creatures if possible, for as long as possible, and detail the number of fumbles you've had at the end of the test. Generally a good solid number like 1000 swings gives decent data. The thing to keep in mind is there really is a lot of luck involved. Both good and bad. You generally don't notice as much when you're having good luck, it's those bad streaks that stick out and make you believe that something's wrong."
So, it’s not so much buffed vs. unbuffed as it is making sure your test is consistent throughout the process, and to repeat the test often enough to create a statistically significant data pool. We have and will continue to take action using in-depth player logs. We run our own tests every day, and we try and stay as close to the scientific method as possible.
Q: How does the Bonus % on a staff affect it? Does it simply effect to-hit when in combat with the staff? Does it affect spells in any way? Does it affect the duration/condition of the staff in any way?
A: Just to hit. It doesn't flow into the duration/condition of the staff to make it more effective in spellcasting.
Q: (Insert question about a technical problem with your computer or a video card or problems logging in or billing and so forth.)
A: Guys, my heart breaks whenever I see a tech question in the feedback forms. Why? Because although I read all the questions, I don’t go through it every day, and had you contacted tech support, you’d probably be taken care of already.
And I can’t just forward your emails due to the way our system works. Every time you send an email to support@darkageofcamelot.com, a customer service ticket is created using the header information on your email. Those tickets exist to make sure a live human being gets in touch with you within 72 business hours (although I’m told we manage same day service 99% of the time). It would not do you any good to have my contact information on your service ticket! So, please, don’t ask technical questions of me – write to the above address.
But as I said in another grab bag, DO use the Herald form for other questions. The Support email address is only for technical issues and billing support – any balance issues or other in-game related things are just deleted.
Q: Why did you change the name appeal system?
A: First off, everybody, let me apologize. There was a miscommunication about when the new system was going live, and I did not explain the new system in advance as I should have. So, my bad. Part of what follows appeared on a message board earlier this week.
The new name appeal system requires you to click on the offending character in order to appeal it. The main concern people seem to have is that they are unable to report names they see scrolling by in zone chat or death spam. Why is this okay? Because while you might not be able to report a particular bad name, believe me, everyone standing next to the guy with the bad name already has. Our new system is designed in part to cut down on duplicate appeals, so that we can read them and respond to them much faster than we have been able to in the past.
Let me give you a classic example. Every case I’ve investigated this week has gone exactly the same way. The first person I worked with is a terrific person, a long time customer, and has submitted more name appeals than any other player ever has in the history of DAOC. She was concerned about a particularly raunchy name, and her fear was that no one had appealed it. (Since she had not been in visual range of the person, and had only seen their name in her text box, she was unable to appeal it herself.) So, she sent a regular appeal – and was told not to do that again. She was pretty mad, and so she and I got in touch. I looked it up for her – and in the time it took her to send one regular appeal, eleven people who had been in visual range had clicked on the raunchy name and appealed it. Eleven in less than two minutes, everybody, using the new system. Just imagine how many appeals we got using the old system!
Now, under the old system, when we got the very first appeal, our "name cops" hopped on it, and changed it. But since we have a policy of reading every single appeal, the ten other appeals needed to be opened and read. And reading those other ten appeals meant that the next name to be appealed had now been in the game for five minutes. That name had fifteen appeals attached to it. So, the name cop changed the second name. All fifteen appeals had to be opened. And the time THAT took meant the third name had twenty five appeals on it. And of course, people who were AFK would come back, see the first name in their text window, and send an appeal, not realizing the bad name was already changed. The CSR would get that appeal, and if enough time and enough other cases had passed, wouldn’t remember the specific case and would need to do research and make sure it had been changed. Add to all that the fact that we do triage – we remove raunchy and racist names first, and then stupid names – and we had a problem that snowballed out of control.
How much did it snowball? Eleven thousand new name appeals for three hundred names. Several dozen of which aren’t even bad at all. In one day. Adding to the backlog the name staff couldn’t get to in days past.
Hence the new system. It’s in place mostly because of the RP servers (indeed, it is to the players of the RP servers that I am speaking to right now :)), although it applies to all servers. We have now had a few days to check it out – every email I have received about a bad name, written by a player who was worried that no one appealed it, has been checked out. Each and every bad name mentioned by email had been appealed by no less than a dozen other players.
The new system allows us to see how many people appealed the same name, cuts down on duplicates, and allows us to "mark" good names so that they cannot be appealed again. This is going to save us SO much time – time that can be better spent on other essential RP server problems. (Which, speaking of, we worry about as much as you do. Channel abuse, immersion breaking people, etc, all things that we’re concerned about, and trying to find solutions.) Try to remember that you not being able to appeal a name is not preventing all the people standing next to the bad name from appealing it. And try to keep in mind that this system is allowing us to make real headway on the huge backlog of bad names. If you’re really, truly worried that no one else has appealed a particular name, or if a name is marked as good and you disagree, you are welcome to email me or send a form through the Herald, and we’ll look it up. But I’ll bet that someone else beat you to it using the new system. Please do not send regular appeals about names.
This is only step one in what we hope will be a whole new approach to these kinds of problems. But the next step, I swear we won’t surprise you with it.
And thus ends the bag for this week. In theory I am going out of town tomorrow (she says as she peers out the window at the gathering storm), hence the early post. For some reason, mother nature thinks this is the frozen tundra of the north and not a climate billed as "temperate," and keeps dumping snow on us, and I am getting a teensy bit annoyed.
Be safe, have fun, see you Monday!
|  |
| |
|  |
| |
|  |
| | |
Herald Features
Game News
