Hey guys So I was just reading the thread where people were complaining and others that were defending the unholy tomb. I stopped at one of dagda's posts that said "I'd like to see this happen in a perfect world." He was referring to specific changes. Now, to the point, I was thinking Poxnora could create a Public Beta Testing server at some point. Similar to the system in LoL, and for similar reasons. I think it'd help a lot in terms of balancing instead of looking at X ways to make a rune balanced on paper, where we would instead, be able to test our theories about changes. Now, I'm aware that there's a large possibility in which this could not be possible, but always look at that small percentage at which something could happen. IF, and I repeat, IF a system such as the PBE were to be implemented, it should only be accessible before a patch, or during a specific day of the week (This is so the normal Pox servers don't die down...which is already the case.) This would probably help the Devs as well as the community. If a change were to occur, such as the Unholy Tomb, players would have the ability to test it out and give feedback. Looking at a rune's changes on paper can be quite difficult, which is one of the many reasons to why this game's balance is out of reach. Rather, testing the theory can be a lot more accurate in terms of understanding whether the rune is then balanced or not.
Pox Nora, as it sits, is a public beta testing server. No one in their right mind would say this game is even closed to finished. I don't even think people in their wrong mind would say that. They'd be like: I'm so crazy, eat some crayons, bang my head on wall, slobber on a snail, Pox is beta, take my meds, eat jelly and mustard sandwich. There you have it, proof. One crucial component of a successful beta is staff working with players. We don't exactly do that around here.
The way I see it, Pox itself isn't a testing server, because if it were, we'd be much more satisfied with balance. Of course, we'd still have flaws here and there, but in comparison to now? I can probably see a lot more balance if this were to be implemented. I'd also like to mention that, as we all know, the Devs don't have much knowledge in terms of balance on paper nor in-game. If there were a server to test buffs and nerfs pre-release, then they might actually see that X is actually broken in-game where as X looked balanced on paper. Also, this game is on a ledge at the moment. No action is actually being taken as it currently stands.
Don't get me wrong, it's a good idea. I just think it won't be much different than the way it is now. We don't really patch balance and we don't work with players so it'd end up being the same thing as we have now called something different.
I see you guys still stay awake waiting for Santa Claus to show up with presents on Christmas, huh. Good for you!
Humm, I dont get it @Legato . I mean, I do, but the way Im perceiving it its a jab at me? Care to elaborate?
Not getting you wrong, know you too well to actually get you wrong Baskit. There is a point I would like to...point out. I actually do believe there could be a difference, even the slightest, in terms of balance. We're turning blind eyes with our suggestions for balance. For example, how do we know that even after, let's say, Ancestral Avenger loses his core Ethereal ability whilst replacing it with a similar ability (Ghost, Phase Shift, etc) would make him balanced? We're looking at things on paper, we can't test them at all to actually justify our methods. And personally, I don't think changing AA that way would make too much a difference, but what would I know, I haven't tested it. It all comes back to it in the end, being able to test what we propose would give us a slight idea of how and what to do to balance certain champions.
Who else remembers when you could buy a premium subscription that gave access to expansion beta tests? That was a loooong time ago, and though I'm not 100% certain why they did away with the practice, I have my suspicions - it would be interesting to know if the greens discovered anything about how the 2 week beta test impacted expansion sales on launch day. Managing multiple environments can be pretty expensive too, and they would need to be able to deploy changes to the beta environment without leaking anything secret that they're working on. There must be currently at least one test environment, which maybe the PDC has access to. In theory, getting people to test even things like patches before they go out is a great idea, both from a customer and from a quality assurance perspective. It might be a different story in practice though.
John Lithgow's performance of "nightmare at 20,000 feet" is not as funny as Shatner but much more dramatic. I like them both.
