Developer and Player relationships

You need to understand that blocking and unblocking of players is done by EA and not Envision. Yes, Envision have a direct route to EA support that players don't, but they can't do the unblocking. Getting another player blocked, as you're suggesting here is also an EA decision. You need to use the system provided to action that. Questions here about both blocking and unblocking specific accounts are unlikely to produce the result you desire.

"sentierorosso;d-241502" wrote:
Why moderator close Topic?
I think many want talk around this question.

You know why the previous discussion was closed, by @EE_Elephterion not a moderator. The discussion was going off-topic a great deal and also the developers needed time to discuss the concerns. The length of the thread made it difficult enough with the same points being made, often by the same people.

This discussion is about the statement and is a follow on. If it goes 'off topic' then it will also be closed.

We have had conversations like these in the past with players who approached us directly and we accepted this invitation to connect with players and get insights that were not shared on the forum. This has happened after the WCS 2015 and in the recent past when the post combat lockdown mechanic was subject to exploitation strategies. We have gained some valuable intelligence by this and therefore we acted in good faith.

I find this a bit hard to believe to be honest. The subject of 'locking' was a pretty prominent talking point in the forum and in game for quite some time. If Developers only learned of this through a Teamspeak conversation recently, then they are simply not reading the forum or paying attention to input from 'average players'.

It seems quite funny that the discussion from the previous post on the same name focuses on the WCS, Update 19.1 and some alleged favoritism about the star players who often win the WCS. I myself have never joined the WCS, but with all that commotion, I don't suppose the same commotion could occur if all the players participating in the chat are part of the same alliance. That is, there is only 1 alliance and your either part of it or not. The alliance is meant to hold all players and if there is a heated argument, why not settle the score by beating the lights out of each other's bases. E.g. you are allowed to attack your alliance member, even the CiC if you hate him. I would want for once peace within the community, no rivalry between alliance and players from other alliances would always cooperate in any way.

"ODirtyBstrd;c-2054115" wrote:

Look on T38, they are running an alliance called Test 19.1 to make sure they understand the mechanics of the latest patch prior to the WCS. I see two other alliances doing similar...but most aren't "training". It's frustrating for sure, but it's the way games work. Money won't fix all problems.

So their the ones behind why my alliance lost 1st place? Were they doing things very effeciently. I joined that world under a game-exclusive alt. That very account never participated in the forums, and this one here doesn't join new worlds. What exactly were they doing and how were they able to move fast when my alliance had the lead as 1st place? I was once a member of an alliance called the wolf pack. I left the alliance after seeing that we were too slow and like half were new players.

Why is game's developers talking with members of WCS wining alliances??
At least, when others are hiding elephterion is sincere, but why?? Talk over the PTE or forums about game issues, not prior to WCS or during the championship.

Is it ever possible to have a fair championship server?

Was Test 19.1's aim to claim the fortress or was it to test the most recent changes only? Besides, I didn't last long in that alliance cause of our dig positions. We had 2 small digs and an ally was in-between. We could 't help each other if we wanted to. The distance to jump was simply too large.

"ODirtyBstrd;c-2054115" wrote:
The "nVidia" teams of today and the past are very good make no mistake about it, and the relationships or communications members have now, or in the past with devs isn't new. Hell, Opa and others openly talked about helping work through issues early on in the forums. These side talks, although seemingly outside the rules are quite common. I've played in alliances with and against a lot of them over the years and the one thing that is hard for people to understand unless you've seen it firsthand is the amount of TIME these guys put in to the worlds they are looking to compete. When you have 24x7 activity you will never sneak up on them. When they know all players from their alliance you will never steal information. When they share account information you will never catch them doing what they don't want to do. It's a machine; far more than just upping caps and digging, these guys go in shifts. I'd like to beat them one day, but just like every other alliance on servers where they are playing, it's a huge undertaking.

Look on T38, they are running an alliance called Test 19.1 to make sure they understand the mechanics of the latest patch prior to the WCS. I see two other alliances doing similar...but most aren't "training". It's frustrating for sure, but it's the way games work. Money won't fix all problems.

The problem is not whether they are good or not, but if others study how to beat them and beat them (look at tib 37) you can not change the rules before the WCS on their suggestion.......and other question is they admit in public share login and this is against TOS.
But you think is normal they speak with developer-team and DT change rules and adapt the game to their style?.
Me not

"sentierorosso;c-2054143" wrote:
The problem is not whether they are good or not, but if others study how to beat them and beat them (look at tib 37) you can not change the rules before the WCS on their suggestion.......and other question is they admit in public share login and this is against TOS.
But you think is normal they speak with developer-team and DT change rules and adapt the game to their style?.
Me not

I am still waiting for your input on why we changed the game following input from specific players? Our conversation with the winners of the last WCS winners happened AFTER the patch went live on all servers, they where never part of the design decision in the first place.

"EE_Elephterion;c-2054147" wrote:

"sentierorosso;c-2054143" wrote:
The problem is not whether they are good or not, but if others study how to beat them and beat them (look at tib 37) you can not change the rules before the WCS on their suggestion.......and other question is they admit in public share login and this is against TOS.
But you think is normal they speak with developer-team and DT change rules and adapt the game to their style?.
Me not

I am still waiting for your input on why we changed the game following input from specific players? Our conversation with the winners of the last WCS winners happened AFTER the patch went live on all servers, they where never part of the design decision in the first place.

not trying to call you out .. but we only have your word for it .. we would like to have some proof it happened after the patch went up live .. as to me and many others it looks very suspicious that you guys talk to the winners and it looks favourable to them ... be open and share the dialogues .. and talk with other alliances .. not look like coseying up to one set only !!