A minor but cool request for TLP2024 - All races/classes

And yet you were defending the idea that it would launch with Kunark...

I have and that is why I read it as saying no without actually saying no. The amount of items on the list of things to do in the future from that AMA alone is pretty massive and most of them will likely never get done as it is an ever growing list.

I was? You need to learn how to not read things into things - I've been stating "there's been speculation of X because of Y" and similar phrasings.

I was acknowledging there were some making the speculation, that WAS affirmative - but nothing more than that. Part of why I made the thread explicitly clarifying that speculation appearing incorrect.

But yet many of those they did state the challenge with implementation time - and then Ngreth expressly went out of his way to say that it could be done quickly without content additions.

Don't get me wrong, it doesn't sound like a "tomorrow" thing from his choice in phrasing - and TLP2024 is likely already in "lockdown" mode for decisions VERY soon, which does make it unlikely to me. But TLP2025? I'd put high odds.

If I was a gambling actuary, I'd put 20-30% odds for TLP2024 and 80-90% for TLP2025.

Just because something "can" be done doesn't mean it is something that they want to do or are planning to do. The issue has never been if they could do it or not rather if they wanted to do it or not.

NYI isn't the phrasing you use when something isn't at least close to a planning phase. IF Ngreth used that when it's not something that he's actively considering working on in the next 14 months (due to TLP cycles), it was a VERY unwise choice in phrasing.

To be clear I'm on the pro-bst/ber side of this one. It was encouraging that the question didn't get a flat out "no we're not going to do that," but as a developer that has to do some customer facing communication from time to time, I use "not yet implemented" to basically mean "aware of the request, not scheduled for development at this time, and not closed as 'will not implement.'" I don't read anything in that response that indicates we're any further along on this topic than we have been for several years now beyond basic acknowledgement from the dev team that the request exists.

It shows nothing of the sort. Youre wrong. The devs say so. Now you can leave the thread alone with your tail tucked between your legs

We are going to have to agree to disagree on that, saying something isn't implemented yet doesn't mean that they are planning to do it. It also sounded like he wanted to see player interest in accepting the limitations of how it would be implemented based on another thread in this section of the forums. If he is looking for that why would you think it is on the upcoming roadmap to be done?

And we are going to have to agree to disagree on that point, as to me it doesn't say they want to do it rather that it has been talked about in the past and they found issues with it and implementing it.

So BST/BER in classic IS on the upcoming roadmap to be done (highlighted for ease of reading for those who can't) ? Is this you confirming it?

???? Why would you think that? I was responding to someone who was suggesting that the wording Ngreth used suggested that it was being planned on being done soon and I was saying that isn't the case.

The fact that he is asking for a response on something indicates that there are no plans to do it otherwise they wouldn't need the response in the first place.

As someone that used to do HR, including for developers, such implications without some sort of vague timeframe target would absolutely be brought up in discussions about whether or not those people should be in an aspect where they'd be communicating with clients.

As I said, I think we're far too close to mid-May for it to be much of a chance for this round though - but I'd put a krono on TLP 2025 (assuming 2025 TLPs happen at least, starting to feel like they'll start skipping years soon)

The difference is that when talking with customers you're typically obliged to answer their questions, where here we're not really treated like customers/users. If I were to say, "feature X is not currently implemented" (I concede "yet" is a little bit baiting and leads to assumptions), a follow up question may be "When do you think that it will be implemented?" I don't get to ignore that question, so I can go into more detail at that point about current priorities and how the feature fits into the longer term roadmap. We don't have that feedback loop here in the same way, but to me it doesn't change the meaning of the answer.

Why would you say that? It is unlikely that any of the provided answers in that AMA went out without being vetted by someone in the company. When they are being vague about timeframes it is likely intended so that we can't call them out on it later if it doesn't happen.