Another new (and) broken mechanic, another month wait

https://forums.daybreakgames.com/eq...lious-bugs-needed-fixes-thread.231582/page-14

Based on the above referenced link, I couldn't figure out how to quote from there to here, why are we waiting another month to fix potm's detrimental effect?

More specifically why are we waiting a month or longer to fix a newly implemented and fully known (and broken) mechanic on servers that are premised on "time"?

We've seen this happen over and over now:

Launch MOTM. Broken. Wait a month.
Fix/change MOTM. Broken. Wait a month.
Fix MOTM again. Works 60 days subsequent to initial implementation.
New Expansion released, changed regeneration, new MOTM. Broken. Wait a month.
Fixed Regeneration, nerfed MOTM, added POTM. POTM broken. Wait a month.

Assuming this scenario continues and POTM gets fixed next month, after 60 days of Velious, mobs will finally act "normally" on servers that have specific time frames to progress be it completing content or actual days. How is this even a remotely acceptable practice?

Do your consultant developers only work the third week of every month or something?

You do realize that if Luclin is this messed up for so long on Phinny, you're cheating them out of 2/3 of their time to raid working (as intended) content?

You are aware that even with the "broken" MOTM and POTM that almost every mob on Ragefire was killed before the MOTM was fixed. POTM's brokenness, while annoying, isn't a huge issue.

So, we're thankful that Phinny will get luclin first...to test the "new" respawn timers on raid bosses, etc. Will be a pleasant change of RF not having to beta test everything for LJ and Phinny.

Folks can always move back to RF or LJ if they don't like taking the lead on WoWQuest. After all, folks had to know that Phinny was going to be in this position ahead of time....and still chose to go.

Well, I suppose that depends on your definition of broken. If requiring 240 people to down AoW is not "broken" then perhaps we may have a difference of opinion.

Yes, POTM doesn't break anything that makes it unkillable (TM-Darkwind). It is still a broken, newly implemented mechanic. MOTM was also broken at different points although content was still "beaten" if my memory serves correctly.

I don't play on the carebear server. I actually feel bad for those fools because they have broken instancing to work out as well. Such as, oh, I don't know, Dain banishing to "unusual" places outside of your instance or the wrong version of Inny popping in their instances (an Inny from PoP I think).

You might find this an interesting read:
https://forums.daybreakgames.com/eq...n-bugs-issues-is-a-focus-for-the-team.229952/

(Hint: take a look at TBM release date and the date of DBG announcing the huge list of problems they'd yet to address. More specific Hint: Welcome to the club)

On top of their "idgaf" attitude on epic bottlenecks that make no sense and are quick fixes...

Phinny really had the potential to be the perfect prog server.

There will never be a "perfect" progression server, because there is no consensus on what a "perfect" progression server is!

I don't understand why they don't just hotfix this stuff. It's not like they have QA anyways, it's already fixed internally, meaning coded, so just release it. I don't get why it takes a month to release these fixes yet when hotzones are completely messed up and on TLPs they fix it immediately.

It is really the consistency of application of hotfixes. It seems whimsical, which is frustrating at best and bad business at worst.

Can we stop adding weird debuffs that make our characters suck artificially and bring back pet/mob push and Enrage so we can do more on raids than dodge aoe's. I feel like I'm playing a Frogger MMO in 2016.

Inb4 tulgins "open world mobs are dumb"

Is this the only metric we care about, that people have killed the broken encounters?

Please be sure to review our forum guidelines regarding both constructive posts and crossposting.

We can't hotfix spell data.

We do understand that this is frustrating. This is a technical limitation, not a whimsical decision.