Did the designers forget how to implement classes' allowable weapons?

[query]

Sorry for my harsh opening, but it's true:


For my first test, I decided to click on the Rogue description. Dum de dum...what's this? They get the MARTIAL WEAPONRY feat?! No, they don't. They get more than one weapon, but not all of them. It's like the Bard...oh no.....


And what a shock, the same generic listing of the feat, which just links to the description of being able to use those weapons, and not listing EITHER CLASS' limited weapons allowed in this list.


Well, after sending off an inappropriate content, for the seocnd time, I decided to stop, and just post here.

FOR SHAME Turbine, that you use a "Wikki" system that fails to list a class' limited weapon selection. If you can't properly set this one up now, then the wizard now and the monk later also will suffer in what "allowable" weapons they use on such a layout.

Oh yeah, wizards don't get all SIMPLE weapons either.


What a freaking mess.
Any reason you ignored the ORIGINAL Wikki creator even if not working for you and published this inaccurate work?

[TreknaQudane]

Calm down before you pull something

See in the upper left of the Compendium where the chest is? Do you see that little word under compendium? Beta. That means it isn't completely finished. Right now what you have access to is nothing more than a preview.

I find it in very poor taste to complain about missing details in a system that you don't have to use when it is obviously stated that it is not completed yet.

[query]

And this is supposed to be for BUG not CONTENT testing.

Before being all "do you see what the word is under the chest," please understand the development between Alpha, Beta closed and Beta open public testing. Saying they only have a few things left suggests the're more in the "load testing" and are about to release the final product to use a MMORPG's game development cycle as an analogy.


So you go ahead and rethink on how a person is to reply please since I used to technically WRITE process. Having a glaring mistake like this with the ENGINE core as an error not simply a reassignable link or table is far far beyond an engine testing area fo open BETA. It's not simply I click and it doesn't work or some java isn't running.


It's in the engine design itself.

This isn't affecting one class, but several.

This isn't a wikki, but a semi editable wikki site with said wrong propriatary locked info on the error side.


So you may not like my harsh response, but this is what ALL USES are supposed to use outside of the rule book gotten with the original purchase. This replaced a MUCH more accurate guide constantly updated. And apparently the former had a much better QA department (sarcastic as we know the person and the few others who maintained the DDO Wikki.) I wasn't looking for mistakes even, just seeing what was added for L 14-16 on one or two classes I rarely use as pure on higher levels, and saw that messup before I even progressed to clicking that little 16 number tab thingie.



You don't do any new overhauls to update the stuck at L 10 compendium? Fine. At least it gave nuts and bolts for the creation info.
But to completely scrap it for something even more inaccurate on a basic class level is inexcusable. Making a mistake at L 16 is one thing. Making a mistake to potentially many tens or thousands of new players trying to understand how to create a class when they now rush past the DDO creation feat info screem, and see post creation that rogue doesn't have a longbow or longsword or the wizard doesn't have a mace and having to post in the forums (of which much less than 5% of the total resident population even use regularly or potentially even use period) about this is dumb.


So what, their user's forum reply should be the following?

"Oh X classes don't have that. It's just the same software used to make X Y and Z compendiums, and they couldn't add that witb the way the software itself was made, so they simply listed all simple/martial weapons until they figure out how to list it. No, you're not allowed to change that even though it's a wikki. It's not all content or no content until approved. It's post stuff and they'll monitor it but some stuff is not changable. You can leave a note about it below all that and go in and list the allowable and not allowable stuff....."


If I'm suposed to do that, let alone a newbie, I'd request I be paid for maintaining a technical wikki...or give it to our unofficial but ORIGINAL wikki site owner.

This is beyond entering something. This is fundamentally having to go and change a core engine mechanic directly affecting SEVERAL of the core class systems of which this problem does not link to all those classes to report this inaccuracy like when you read something in Wikkipedia and see it has NOT been verified yet.

Or could you tell me if you were newbie user that bards, wizards and rogues at first glance had the wrong weapon feats?
Remember:
DDO is only like D&D when Turbine is able to follow the rules, and there is no indication in the wikki between when Turbine simply changes the rules or a core error is made.


I hate ignorance, but I hate inaccurate information more.


And I hate people telling me about my conduct in replying when they apparently give the written impression are not in the field or have done beta testing before.

But I will not demean your taste in the right of your response, just not say anything about your conduct and focus on the content as Turbine asked.

Your first sentence is interpred by me as condescending when you end up appearing being incorrect anyway at my read, and others may interpret it as such.

See the way I wrote that? Saying that when something is in alleged plain sight is taken as haughty and mocking, especially when the development version is way beyound what you try to interpret.


Now if Turbine uses a different release structure for their Alpha, closed beta and public open beta databases, by all means, they can reply to that on the boards of which they ASKED us to submit our feedback. If I'm wrong, I have no problem saying or writing that.


But I hate being detail oriented and seeing apparent glaring mistakes by any company or user.

That last above reply included.

Calm down before you pull something

See in the upper left of the Compendium where the chest is? Do you see that little word under compendium? Beta. That means it isn't completely finished. Right now what you have access to is nothing more than a preview.

I find it in very poor taste to complain about missing details in a system that you don't have to use when it is obviously stated that it is not completed yet.

[Beherit_Baphomar]

I hate ignorance, but I hate inaccurate information more.

Dude,

We would not get along well at ALL.

[Laith]

so the compendium is wrong. how is this news?

it's always been wrong, and it's always been incomplete.
at least now we have a means to fix it.
it's also probably MUCH easier for turbine to fix it.

[akla_thornfist]

instead of ranting about it log in and fix it,

[Laith]

instead of ranting about it log in and fix it,

i also happened to find it interesting that there was no correction in the "discussion" sections of rogue or wizard that users can post to...


gotta love the internet.

[TreknaQudane]

rant

Try again.

They are asking for constructive criticism, creating a half a page rant on why there system is horrible and shame of them for making something similiar to someones side project is not constructive.

"Hey, classes are listed as recieveing all weapon feats instead of class only" is different from what you have. Of course, if you are looking for a reason to rage against Turbine, I bet that left sidebar is off 3px from what it should be. Doom!

[query]

I respect that. But I don't condem that statement as inevitable until I actually met you and got to know you.


Saying how I am the way I post my forum replies is well, incomplete.

And i've said it on other posts, that when somebody messes up on Turbine big time, I am not afraid to bring the hammer down hard.

Was this a little thing, sure I have no problems simply pointing out a simple correction in a nice or netural tone. But core things like this when the original wikki owner was outright ignored not even thanked and ended up being MUCH more accurate than the company?

That is not a small thing.
That gives the impression that the community is only important enough to give their opinion, not expect anything more on a so-called user-edited site, the whole IDEA of Wikki's in the first place, even with moderated replies (which were to stop as much bashing of people and events on Wikkipedia as to keep facts factual BTW.)

And I have been a staunch SUPPORTER of Turbine's DDO, but have no problem going after them either. Good bad or not applicable, my posting history can attest to that.

So thanks alot assuming people how I am and assuming how I feel about the company.
So that's the way you feel, OK.

But get to know the source first.

[Beherit_Baphomar]

I am not afraid to bring the hammer down hard.

I lol'd....along with the Turbine staff Im sure.

[Oreg]

But core things like this when the original wikki owner was outright ignored not even thanked and ended up being MUCH more accurate than the company?

That is not a small thing.
That gives the impression that the community is only important enough to give their opinion, not expect anything more on a so-called user-edited site, the whole IDEA of Wikki's in the first place, even with moderated replies (which were to stop as much bashing of people and events on Wikkipedia as to keep facts factual BTW.)

And I have been a staunch SUPPORTER of Turbine's DDO, but have no problem going after them either. Good bad or not applicable, my posting history can attest to that.

So thanks alot assuming people how I am and assuming how I feel about the company.
So that's the way you feel, OK.

But get to know the source first.

Is this your real issue? if so, it's fine to discuss it but you mention it twice and quite heatedly so I am just curious.

[Chelsa]

Cool another pointless thread where we will all argue about stuff that isn't worth really arguing about. Gotta love the DDO forums.

[WeaselKing]

Sorry for my harsh opening, but it's true:


For my first test, I decided to click on the Rogue description. Dum de dum...what's this? They get the MARTIAL WEAPONRY feat?! No, they don't. They get more than one weapon, but not all of them. It's like the Bard...oh no.....


And what a shock, the same generic listing of the feat, which just links to the description of being able to use those weapons, and not listing EITHER CLASS' limited weapons allowed in this list.


Well, after sending off an inappropriate content, for the seocnd time, I decided to stop, and just post here.

FOR SHAME Turbine, that you use a "Wikki" system that fails to list a class' limited weapon selection. If you can't properly set this one up now, then the wizard now and the monk later also will suffer in what "allowable" weapons they use on such a layout.

Oh yeah, wizards don't get all SIMPLE weapons either.


What a freaking mess.
Any reason you ignored the ORIGINAL Wikki creator even if not working for you and published this inaccurate work?

Congratulations!! You found something to complain about!! Now the voices in your head will be quiet for another day!!

Seriously though, in the rogue listing it does say:

Proficient with all simple and martial weapons

but for wizard it says:

Proficient with some simple weapons

for bards:

Proficient with all simple weapons and some martial weapons

and for sorcs it says:

Proficient with all simple weapons

At any rate that is only one incorrect entry. It hardly seems to me that the sky is falling. I appreciated your attention to detail I am very similar in that matter but guess what not everyone is as good at that, give it some time it is beta you have already reported the error give it some time they will get to it in due time I doubt they employ someone just to monitor compendium errors and immediately correct them day or night.

[Burem]

For some reason I get the impression you're just looking for something to attack because you're angry that they released a wiki alongside the old one. Half of what you've typed seems to be gibberish on one level or another, and edits to the compendium aren't moderated so I don't know what that's all about either. Whatever the case you should probably calm down before you have an aneurysm over an information site for a game on the internet.

More importantly this is a pretty minor issue with something that's just been implemented and is still in beta. They don't need to load test a website, this isn't an MMORPG, and the beta part is likely referring to content especially considering the fact that there's still a decent number of pages that say "Coming Soon". I guess you could reasonably be angry because they released it to the public early instead of hiding it away until it was 100% perfect but that seems pretty banal.

Considering the following was including in the announcement I would say your estimation of what they're testing is pretty off even if you are a super-duper-beta expert:
We'll be fleshing out the content over the next few weeks, so keep checking for new information!

[Kistilan]

Is this your real issue (DDO Wikki Sidebar Project)? if so, it's fine to discuss it but you mention it twice and quite heatedly so I am just curious.

My psychic abilities say yes. tucks away his magic 8 ball...

The Wikki has been contaminated. Donn MOPP4 Gear and proceed to the nearest Fallout Shelter. I repeat, the Wikki has been contaminated! Proceed to the nearest Fallout Shelter at your earliest convenience.

[WilbyZ]

I'd like to ask where does one find Skill points per level based on Class?

It seems Turbine has misplaced that important data somewhere