@BitzSam
To answer your question, it's in those paragraphs that you constantly ignore because I disagreed with your idea. You're only digging your hole deeper by ignoring them, because I should trust someone who does that, right?
Printable View
@BitzSam
To answer your question, it's in those paragraphs that you constantly ignore because I disagreed with your idea. You're only digging your hole deeper by ignoring them, because I should trust someone who does that, right?
I personally apologize if what I say comes off as pretentious, however as I said I do understand your concerns, if you know anything about me or what I advocate you would see the threads I make and post are all in relation to helping the community over what staff have done. I advocate fairness, and as stated before your concerns are valid. However, attacking Bitzsam, making riots, and start threads flaming him isnt the right way to go about getting change. Now not everyone who is against the gun changes are like this, BUT a large part of this opposition is, and it is their failure to properly communicate and discuss things that this issue still remains.Quote:
Originally Posted by GenoIndeed
I still see my argument as valid, what I have said is the truth, and through this entire post you can then see not one other person made an actual suggestion, other than pinehoney. I am sure there are others who have attempted to communicate suggestions to sam as well, however their use of aggression and sarcasm as well as other hostile actions is the reason why he overlooks these (I am not sam obviously so I cant speak on his behalf, but this is what I at least assume). You can continue to state your dissatisfaction, but if you want to be treated with human decency (not you in particular), then have that same decency towards everyone else. You get what you give.
As far as legitimate suggestions go I feel another gun admin is needed. If not another gun admin then a group of admins so there is some type of checks and balances system when changes are made. The fact that one person can alter the entire era "economy" and play style of the community is not legitimate at all. A big issue is who are you to say what's legitimate or not? This is why a group is needed to make these decisions so something drastic like this isn't done again. For the people that actually play era it's obviously a mistake. But Bitzsam is trying to alter people's play style to one that that he feels the game should be played.Quote:
Originally Posted by BiTzSam
Definitions:
checks and bal·anc·es
noun
counterbalancing influences by which an organization or system is regulated, typically those ensuring that political power is not concentrated in the hands of individuals or groups.
dictatorship
[dik-tey-ter-ship, dik-tey-]
noun
a country, government, or the form of government in which absolute power is exercised by a dictator.
absolute, imperious, or overbearing power or control.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I agree you do sound pretentious. You keep framing everyone who disagrees with Bitz as aggressive, irrational & don't know how to negotiate. We've done our best to rationalise with Bitz its unfortunate that he shares your frame of mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Adelphos
I myself have tried my best to talk with Bitz, it doesn''t help hes ONLY open to gun suggestions & I'm not just talking about BAR I'm talking about the lower tier guns & questioning the eventual outcome of the nerfs.
We have tried seeking a compromise, ié we want some compensation or at least an explantion of why our guns were nerfed, it doesn't help he keeps ignoring them.
We feel the nerfs may have been over done & it was done on the basis of faulty assumptions of the eventual outcome of who it is for & who it affects.
Contrary to what you've said we have made suggestion to Bitz I've seen a lot of people suggest that maybe just a lower ROF nerf or lower damage to the BAR will do, you can see for yourself that Bitz ignored all of them.
I have asked BItz what are my options, he hasn't replied me to this day.
How do I make suggestions to improve the gun if you don't tell me why you nerfed it in the first place like I don't know whats the problem how do I come to a compromise?
So no you don't know how we feel Pyscho, & stop trying to think that you do. You're affected yes but not everyone affected shares your world view, some of us want a better explanation rather than accept things at face value.
And don't say we're hostile to Bitz if you follow this thread from the start most of us have tried to rationalise respectfully with Bitz only he keeps dismissing us & refusing to acknowledged our concerns & point choosing only to paint us as self interested b*stards.
What you say in some ways does have merit, I agree with you that not everyone shares my views on the matter, however can you really say that there arent a large number of individuals who have taken matters too far, such as harassing him, calling him names, and making groups demanding he resigns? If you feel dissatisfied with the reasoning that isnt my place to tell you too bad or give you a better explanation, all I honestly can say is that you just have to go based off of the reasonings hes given on the first page.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald
Now obviously these changes were made under the notion that there would be room for more skill based strategic play and I get that changing the damage or firerate of a gun would upset people. But from what staff have said, as well as Meph, is that the BAR was going to get these changes done anyway, it was just that prior gun admins were afraid to implement it sooner because of exactly this. I think that these other guns were changed as well to compensate the changes of the BAR so that it wouldnt feel underpowered, and maybe it does now feel underpowered, but then again most of the guns changed feel a bit different anyway.
Also I would just like to point out that I am not calling everyone who disagrees with this idea a child, or aggressive, or immature. There are mature individuals on here who disagree with the idea, and those are the ones whom I respect because of the way they offer their opinion politely.
One thing I do want to get straight is that I don't want to make any enemies here and I don't want our debate to escalate to that. Personally, I still don't agree with what you've said regarding the debate but I don't see you as a bad person tho, we can be cool but still disagree on things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Adelphos
I also do advocate fairness, which is why I'm arguing all this because this isn't a fair situation in any way. For starters, we got no real say in whether the idea should be done or not, it was just said then done. Then when we try to argue against it, we just get ignored or just straight up told we're wrong without any real reason as to why we're wrong, no matter how many facts we throw in. Even when people supported most of the changes but felt it should be reset due to one little thing they're ignored. The only people he said even had a legit suggestion we're people who are in FULL support of him, basically saying we don't know what we're talking about because reasons. Isn't resetting the stats due to a flaw in the logic a legit suggestion? It's not fair to us and it's not even fair to you that support this idea because he will do the exact same to you guys when you disagree with something he did, because this is how he conducts his work. All of this is more than apparent now, it's undeniable that he isn't listening to us. Now, what if something major was changed and you didn't like it, or even got a say in it, and no matter how much you argued, how many facts you can throw out, you were treated like you didn't know what you were talking about and your opinion didn't matter? You or anyone else would not be happy about that. And in most cases, your argument would boil down to "undo it all, start over, take it one step at a time and lets all talk this out", which would be the best way, but your suggestion doesn't matter in this case. With something like that happening to you or anyone else, it will take some enjoyment out of the game, or possibly cause you to quit altogether. No ones winning when things like this happen.
I agree with Genos. I think its a huge disincentive to me & other players knowing the gun we saved so hard for could be changed at anytime without prior notice. Especially when we feel they weren't really a problem or Op in any way. Bitz never said why some of the lower tier guns were nerfed so we don't know for sure whether it was to compensate for bar or not. You know the best arguable gun out there? I'm not gonna save for it because I'm afraid Bitz could decide to nerf it anytime so in end its not as good as I thought why bother?
When BiTzSam said the nerf was gonna happen at the end of may and it happens less then half way through may.
Shows how much he is to his word.
What difference does it make when it's going to happen. I said it would and it did. There was no point putting it off. Besides the changes aren't finalised yet, the first week testing the changes isn't even over yet so chances are the changes will be finalised by the end of the month anywayQuote:
Originally Posted by N!chola$
- - - Updated - - -
And yes I saw the people suggesting a change such as 'make bar 8-9 damage and increase firerate' which I had already answered when first asked and didn't feel I had to keep repeating myself
- - - Updated - - -
I have read what you have said (once again hypocritical to use that as you yourself haven't taken the time to read what I have said (the first page of the thread for one which I quoted you on in the last message).Quote:
Originally Posted by GenoIndeed
Nothing you have said is 'unique' if you want your answer go look at the response I gave to the 5 other people saying the same things. I'm done repeating myself to every individual person who if they cared about this topic would go and look for the answers first instead of demand to be spoon fed and individually catered for.
You aren't even arguing for the sake of the change, at this point it's just an excuse to make an attack on me.
If you really wanted your opinion to be considered you would think at some point (providing you are even reading the responses you have been given) would suggest your own statistical changes and provide your reason why you think it should have that.
Can you people try to actually talk properly rather than bashing and sending negativity towards others? If not it's best to start warning the players who do.