Massively Features
Our Writers
Shawn Schuster
Editor-in-Chief
Dan O'Halloran
Features Editor
Seraphina Brennan
Editor
Beau Hindman
Contributing Editor
Brendan Drain
Contributing Editor
Eliot Lefebvre
Contributing Editor
Jef Reahard
Contributing Editor
Justin Olivetti
Contributing Editor
Krystalle Voecks
Contributing Editor
Kyle Horner
Contributing Editor
Rubi Bayer
Contributing Editor
Tateru Nino
Contributing Editor
WIN Network
- Autos
- Technology
- Lifestyle
- Gaming
- Finance
- Entertainment on AOL
- Lifestyle on AOL
- Sports on AOL
- Travel on AOL
- Also on AOL
Featured Galleries
Most Commented On (7 days)
- The Daily Grind: What do you think of Cryptic? (77)
- Bill Roper no longer executive producer of Champions Online, game improvements promised (70)
- GDC10: Hands-on with Star Wars: The Old Republic (64)
- BioWare and EA expect 2+ million subs, potential pricing model 'twists' (61)
- The Daily Grind: How well do you think SWTOR will do? (55)
- Mortal Online to launch this month (48)
- Anti-Aliased: Is SWTOR worth 2 million users, part 2 (41)
- Derek Smart and ex-Alganon employees butt heads (40)
- Video shows CCP's incredible cloth and hair simulation (38)
- The Daily Grind: What's the most important part of the trinity? (34)
AOL Games
© 2010 Weblogs, Inc. All rights reserved. Massively is a member of the Weblogs, Inc. Network.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
12-06-2008 @ 4:05PM
InfamousBrad said...
Fascinating. It means that both the paranoids and those of us dismissing the paranoids were partially right. It really was random. It apparently really was based heavily on what order you showed up in the zone in; he doesn't quite admit that part, but does admit that the "tie breaker" code that was supposed to kick in on tie scores was "retarded," not a smart design for a tie-breaker, and that would be consistent. On the other hand, they really do have a working contribution system for keep sieges -- it just /wasn't turned on./ (*head desk*)
This goes a long way towards explaining one of the patch notes buried very, very far down in the preliminary patch notes for 1.1, the version that's expected to go live this coming week: "Keep/Fortress Contribution: ... All enemy kills, both Player Character and Non-Player Character, will now contribute towards the Public Quest for taking a Keep/Fortress. Other actions that lead to taking a Keep/Fortress will now result in contribution toward the Public Quest for taking a Keep/Fortress." That had some of us scratching our heads, since we always thought that that was how it was supposed to work in the first place, and not a few of us were pretty sure it *was* working that way the first month or two the game was out.
Reply
12-06-2008 @ 6:10PM
Arashikou said...
You know, both detractors and defenders being a little right seems to happen a lot in MMOs. :P Far more often than one or the other side being totally right.
What's rare is for the developer to come out and explain themselves. Usually, between not wanting to admit a mistake and not wanting to admit how the math behind the illusion works, devs just quietly gloss over these kinds of problems.