Every few months is pretty routine. But the degree to which people are willing to take crap from CB is starting to get kind of cult-like and creepy.
You see there's this problem with most of the arguments around here. One person comes on and says, X was shitty and I don't like it, and because I paid money for models you need to listen to me. But when someone else says, I like X, I also paid money and I'd like you to shove off with your ideas. Somehow one of those people is being shafted and the other person is a shaft-licker. We kind of hope that you might realise that using that you're a paying customer as justification, on a forum full of paying customers, might be considered very weak grounds. And it's hard to formulate a complaint that doesnt involve an emotional content, and it's obvious people will disagree. But when you decide, people are disagreeing based on some conspiracy level logic, rather than reflecting on the fact it might be the way you presented an argument, or maybe you just don't like something that others do. Well, people get pretty dismissive of that shit fast.
I would like to remind that basic conversational decency is expected by forum users. There is nothing out of the ordinary about Bit and Kiss leaving Morats and Shasvastii now and I do not see the controversy about it.
CB are perfectly entitled to move units and profiles around as they see fit however if indeed removing profiles is nothing out of the ordinary now then I think providing a small note as to why might be a good idea. I get the impression some of the objections come from it feeling somewhat arbitrary. If people had a reason why it might help settle them down. Granted they may not agree with the reason but at least it would feel less random and arbitrary.
I see no controversy as well, though I also see no reason. It's weakening two sectorials that weren't particularly powerful to begin with. And if someone had bought B&K recently to use it specifically in MAF or SEF, their reaction will probably start around annoyed "seriously?" and escalate from there.
Do you have trouble seeing why WE may see it as controversial? Why were they added to shas and MAF after release in onyx and vanilla CA, only to be removed again? Was that part of the plan? Is the scheme to rotate models around to "incentivise" players to switch armies and not stick to one given sectorial? I would be very grateful if you would expand on this point, as currently it is basically reads to me as us being told to quiet down, and I hope there's more behind is than that.
Are you talking generally here about the evolving nature of the game or something more specific to CA and Bit&Kiss? I agree they have been clear that things will continue to change, however, much of the time the reasons why they change are not clear. CB do not owe us an explanation, it's their game and IP after all but if this trend is going to continue I'm beginning to think some sort of "designer commentary" could accompany updates to give an idea behind the thinking. It could be just "X has been removed as our stats show it was barely used and we feel lots of unused options create unnecessary confusion" or "This was done for narrative reasons yet to be revealed". It would remove the arbitrary feel of some of the changes. Take the original topic of the thread for example, Shas are barely played, under powered and furthermore due a complete overhaul next year. In this context removing a unit from them now just feels arbitrary and a bit pointless. EDIT: In the interests of clarity this change doesn't effect me really, I don't play Shas currently and I never took B&K in MAF anyway. It's just some thoughts about handling the evolution of the game going forward.
Much appreciated. Apart from the added benefit of calming some of the community down I think it would just be really interesting. I remember playing Portal with the Valve developer commentry on and it was fascinating with some great insights into why they did certain things.
I caniballized Oznat and Raicho pilot just one month before Bit&Kiss release in order to proxy her. Played her in one tournament. Then I bought the oficial one, put it together and never actually fielded her. For me it's hard to see the selling point of 0,5 SWC killer hacker in the world where Ker-nau exists, but I play vanilla CA.
I'm not sure what to make of Corvus Belli. Was there some way for me to know the models i just purchased were going to be rendered useless shortly after? I'm playing MAF exclusively. If models are 'planned' to be temporary within a faction, shouldn't players and potential customers be warned about this? I get they're not obligated but surely it's the nicer or right thing to do? I don't know how long BIt&Kiss were available in MAF. Only how long I got to use them. Which IMO wasn't very long and I get that others will have different opinions on how long is enough to justify their purchases. I don't buy a cell phone and accept my provider may stop servicing that model a month later leaving me in the lurch and out $400 or even $50. An evolving game sounds fun but the way CB handle it feels like they're playing with fire. What if someone just bought a large number of Yu Jing models a month before the Uprising... are they going to feel good? Should this question be something CB considers as they evolve their game? I think so. I think it would be a good practice for CB to establish some sort of process in these cases moving forward. A one year notification before any change like Bit&Kiss or Uprising on the affected models for example. (EDIT: or some refund policy). Have a small warning on the physical packaging to check online for the latest news. They don't need to shoot themselves in the foot with a big red sign, but at least knowing it's there seems like the right thing to do. So once CB decided to axe Bit&Kiss, there should've been a one year notification. In cases where a new release only has a one year lifespan, CB should think carefully. Because if they're worried it's going to impact sales... it's all the more reason for CB to rethink their strategy. That or extend the lifespan for 2 or 3 years until everyone is happy. The players and their bottom line. As an aside; There's a clear distinction in my eyes between changing profiles and the functionality of units/models players can continue to use vs making purchases completely useless.
I haven't gotten hold of the newnbew or had time lately. Is there mention of bit in the fluff anywhere? It makes sense if bit was rescue/captured by Morats on behalf of vanguard's, and she cooperated with Morats - who would think she not worth their time and would rather kill her, probably - and shasvasti who are probably weird folks to work with... So the EI would probably do the Ko Dali thing and put her in specific mixed-units where she can be a propaganda and versatile tool for the war effort. She makes sense in onyx (mixed units) and vanilla (mixed units, ad hoc force composition feel) but not in MAF (racist Oni bastards) and shasvasti (egg-lizard-frog-people aliens that are probably slimy and hard to talk to.)
Agreed. The commentary on Dart was really fun to read about. These little snippets about design process are as interesting as the game itself. For that matter, seeing pictures and getting pattle reports of how CB testers and such play the game would be cool, too. I've always felt the discrepancy between CB releasing troops and some of us scratching our heads about how to use this is just us not seeing how they work or what was intended with them.
She has her own fluff in the new book, talking about her life before joining the EI/CA, and after. There's no mention of Shas at all, and only that MAF were the forces detailed to retrieve her. There's also a fluff block that's related to Bit by her specially prepared educator Geist, talking about how humanity was already ensnared in the EI's plans...
Neat. The AI v. EI fight is shaping up more and more. I like the prediction (I don't recall which user here I first saw it from) that aleph is an early-life-cycle EI but doesn't have the inherent objective-based flaws the EI has, so may trick the EI into meeting or finding some tenable cooperative agreement. The Tohaa are kicking about, why can't the Humans make it for a while? Id like to learn more about the other aliens that have been briefly mentioned in paradise and such.
@Razi the reason they didn't notify people in advance is because it might hurt sales. It's weird that they understand that but don't understand how people's minis not being playable on a whim makes people more leery of buying minis from their range as a whole.