If the higher priority items were truly along those lines - I'd strongly
agree with you. But do you truly believe that for the past, lets say three
or four months (by which time this bug has "aged" long enough for my comment
to be valid) - every item addressed by the testing department has been those
type of serious problems?
Secondly - it seems that there are only one or two testers for the Live
team. IMHO this is woefully inadequate. Doesn't Verant say they have
approx 300,000 subscribers? Three million dollars a month revenue only buys
us two testers? I hope there are more testers quietly working away out of
the spotlight...
Anyway - I do believe that we need to have a certain amount of "Squeaky
Wheel" mentality. Albeit politely, and no flames. I do believe I worded my
comments in a "non-whining" manner. We've been quietly, patiently waiting
for this issue to be addressed - I don't want to see it pushed to the
backburner.
Lastly - since I made my post this morning - I found this thread from the
Concert Hall
http://pub5.ezboard.com/ftheconcerthallbackstage.showMessage?topicID=4864.to
pic
referring to Official Board post
http://boards.station.sony.com/everquest/Forum3/HTML/001020.html
Perhaps you saw that when you made this comment - I hadn't seen it until
after I saw your comment.
It seems that the "higher priority" duping problem Abashi was talking about
was the programmer assisting Ester - not Ester's testing of the problem.
Reading the threads above - I AM worried that the testing being done (so far
at least) if they're testing in Qenyos Hills - they may be testing low level
Bard on Low Level mobs. We KNOW the problem with Lullaby doesn't arise
until higher levels. I sure hope they are also testing with different
levels of charisma.
Call me paranoid - but with the recent announcement on Chains - I fear they
will announce Bard Mez works fine - case closed.
I hope that's not the case. While Chains is seriously less effective than
it use to be - it's not worthless. There are circumstances where it's an
okay song. But past the mid 20's or so - Lullaby is completely useless.
I tried Pixie Strike recently - and it too did more harm than good. I guess
it has some use to try to interrupt casters - but otherwise is also
useless...
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin L. Crawford [mailto:
Lyrnia@...]
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 5:49 PM
To:
eqbards@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [eqbards] Getting really Annoyed
Ok this REALLY falls into the "whiney player" category. If I'd known this
was what you were posting about earlier I wouldn't have replied to your
message at all on whineplay.
Sorry my friend but Duping bugs, corpse loss bugs, item poofing bugs etc
take FAR more priority, to me, than fixing a song that I have learned to do
without. I'd FAR rather not be able to mez than to lose all my hard earned
items to a corpse poofing bug.
Complaining about reality is one thing but they HAVE had some pretty major
bugs pop up over the past couple weeks that really do take priority over
fixing things like a secondary resist on our songs. I'm not saying our
songs aren't important to me, far from it, but I really think we need to
keep things in perspective.
Lyrnia Jongleur
Bard of Norrath since Beta 2
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen E. McCloskey" <s.mccloskey@...>
To: <eqbards@egroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 2:27 PM
Subject: RE: [eqbards] Getting really Annoyed
> You can find a snip of it on www.eqvault.com in the news.
> I know it was somewhere on the whineplay general forum, but with the
> servers currently down I can't connect to it with all the traffic.
>
> [Quote from original post: 4. When will the bard songs lullaby (AOE mes
> song), chains (level 23 non-exploited snare song) and pixie strike (target
> mes song) be fixed?]
>
> Gord'o:
> Ester is looking into lullaby and pixie strike, but we've had some other
> things pop up over the past few weeks that have taken priority. Regarding
> chains, it's working as it is supposed to. I understand that the claim is
> that it doesn't work as well as it did before NPC change that wasn't
> necessarily supposed to affect it, however upon looking into it we've
> determined that the way it works now is sufficient for the spell.
>
>
> At 11:27 AM 8/23/00 -0600, you wrote:
> >Where did you see comments from GZ that she had been taken off? I missed
> >them somehow.
> >
> > Kit
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Daniel Sniderman [mailto:fuzzbone@...]
> >Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 11:14 AM
> >To: EQ Bards
> >Subject: [eqbards] Getting really Annoyed
> >
> >
> >I'm very annoyed by GZ's comments stating Ester was yanked from our
problem.
> >See this post
> >http://boards.station.sony.com/everquest/Forum2/HTML/007440.html
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >Slyde
>
>
>
>
> Please send submissions for the eqbards newsletter to lol@...
with the subject submissions.
>
Please send submissions for the eqbards newsletter to lol@...
with the subject submissions.