[<a href='5152.html'>Next Message in Time</a>] | 
[<a href='5150.html'>Previous Message in Time</a>] | 
[<a href='5177.html'>Next Message in Topic</a>] | 
[<a href='5150.html'>Previous Message in Topic</a>] <br/><br/>
<b>Message ID:</b> 5151 <br/>
<b>Date:</b> Tue Aug 10 19:00:32 BST 1999 <br/>
<b>Author:</b> Scott Thompson <br/>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: Missed notes on songs. <br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-2078293164">I have to disagree. In beta, there were frequent updates from<br/>
Verant about what they were doing both to tweak up and down<br/>
characters. Now, there is an eerie silence. When they improve<br/>
things, they post them all over the place. But changes for the<br/>
worse just dont appear. Either they are not nerfing anyone or<br/>
they are not admitting. Well, I think we have noticed that the<br/>
way some of our songs function have changed. The missed notes<br/>
issue was acknowledged as a high level song problem by Verant<br/>
and when they &quot;fixed&quot; it, the number of missed notes on lower<br/>
level songs went up. Of course, Verant hasnt mentioned a word<br/>
about that. Regardless of whether you consider the increase<br/>
a problem or not, it is there, detracts from the class, and is<br/>
completely unacknowledged by Verant. We have spent a lot<br/>
of bandwidth here trying to determine whats going when Verant<br/>
could have just stated it up front. As paying customers, it is<br/>
not our job to police Verant. I really dont think it is too much<br/>
to ask of Verant that they be forthright and document relevant<br/>
changes.<br/>
<br/>
Now, dont misunderstand me. The missed note issue is only one<br/>
of several odd changes that have gone undocumented. I gave it<br/>
as an example since it is currently on everyones mind but it<br/>
certainly is not the only instance. Some of the changes were<br/>
ostensibly &quot;the way things were supposed to be&quot; but Verant<br/>
hadnt gotten around to implementing them. Still, players should be<br/>
made aware of them. Do you think monks would have Instill Doubt<br/>
right now if a player had not discovered it and then people<br/>
called Verant on it? If we dont stand up on the issues, we will<br/>
get ignored.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
-----Original Message-----<br/>
From: Keith G. Spencer [mailto:<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:kgs@...">kgs@...</a>]<br/>
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 1999 10:39 AM<br/>
To: <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:eqbards@onelist.com">eqbards@onelist.com</a><br/>
Subject: Re: [eqbards] Missed notes on songs.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
From: &quot;Keith G. Spencer&quot; &lt;<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:kgs@...">kgs@...</a>&gt;<br/>
<br/>
Ok overall I&#39;m pretty sure this whole silent nerfing thing is some of you<br/>
getting worked up into a paranoid frenzy.  I checked with my enchanter<br/>
friend and he thinks he might have fizzled all of 2 times last night, but<br/>
noted that after every patch the enchanter boards fill up with this same<br/>
paranoid nonsense that resist rates and fizzle rates have changed, and after<br/>
running a few tests they&#39;re always around where they should be.<br/>
<br/>
I&#39;m going to run some trials tonight, and I suggest before anyone else makes<br/>
accusations of silent nerfing or any other wonderful conspiracies they do<br/>
the same.<br/>
<br/>
And a note about the random number generator, it does -seem- it likes long<br/>
strings of failures in a row, but over time, it still comes up statiscally<br/>
correct.</div>