Best Of

looks like we're gonna wait for every christmas/anniversary events for the free +13 gear booster again

@KaguyaSama said:
looks like we're gonna wait for every christmas/anniversary events for the free +13 gear booster again

Hope not, korea gets +13 Boosters very frequently similarly to how we get +12 Boosters. They've even gotten a +14 booster one time. I wanna get spoiled like Korea does :rageemoji: xd

Kinda sad that we don't follow in their footsteps a little bit more

I think it'd be pretty nice to have more events including +13 boosters, even if it's not often. It's something we can ask about in the least.

Would be a step on softing P2W imo

First, let me apologize to everyone who wrote all these lovely theses that I have no time to read, but I wanted to give my own input. Also, I hate the newest character names, so forgive me as I simply refer to them as Mystic and Beast instead.

I feel that the biggest concern that most people have is that character releases were a consistent 6 weeks apart (with some hiccups along the way such as the item renovation update). Suddenly going from that to more than twice the wait time is a big and unexpected change. Furthermore, the development road map doesn't even suggest that there is even a whole lot of material that could be used to help tide players over during the wait. In my opinion, a maximum of 12 weeks would've been much more acceptable given where we are currently and how many updates there were leading up to Mystic's release. It would be sufficient time for the 2 new areas (Hunter's Night, Theater) and 3 Task Force releases followed by the new character.

The other problem that I see is that a certain private server already has Mystic and it wouldn't surprise me if they're already on the look out for a newer build for people eager to try out Beast. Private servers are always doing their best to do what they can to pull players away from official servers and the increased wait is only making the situation worse. EME effectively forced them to update just as quickly which resulted in them adding 2 characters at once. I'm not saying that EME has to accept their challenge of getting things out fast, but people only have so much patience.

As someone who was waiting for Luna since the start of 2018, all I can say to people who have been eagerly awaiting Mystic is
1. At least you didn't have to wait a whole year (I suppose it's kind of close, but it's still not a full year), and
2. You're lucky you didn't have to suffer a character release order switch like I did (Do I hate Soma though? Not at all. I play her regularly too)

In all honesty though, we're unable to craft every single daily item that resets one a single character due to the dungeon being limited 1 entry per account rather than character.

I think that's the real issue.

I think "best" is going too far...way too far
Yes, it may have improved slightly on performance (for opening/closing), but it is still ridiculous being based on a web page rather than a full application. It still works poorly when your connection is unstable, the interface also feels "laggy" when clicking around even on my 7700k with 50gb internet speed.

Also the reason I have quit before still exists: the launcher don't have a self-repair when it's .css and related page files are deleted (by ccleaner or other cleaning program), which is only solved by a full restart of the system.

So in the end, while they worked on the eyecandy factor, it still runs very poorly and is using slightly more memory with no minimize to tray option (used to have before).

Hello everyone, I am back

It does seem that there is such a poll currently running that is being put forth as evidence for people's rational and I am happy to see it!

I will be frank, I did not join that group and I am entirely relying on the good faith that all reported poll numbers to be accurate. Thank you to those who are keeping track of these numbers.

However, I believe that some people are missing the context of my points.

I am being given only one link, instead of having the already aforementioned historical data that is being cited beforehand

As mentioned, the current poll is a monthly activity set forth by a Facebook group that casually collects data in a way that is more accurately described as a "Monthly Fun Event" than any serious collection of player sentiments in regards to characters and their hierarchy there forth.

This is also "current efforts" to get this data. I would personally like to see the historical data that is being cited for previous claims of Majority for a broader and bigger sample sizing. This is to validate current data trends and observe how player sentiments change for a more accurate extrapolation.

This does not follow Statistical standards

I have mentioned before that there are standards that are followed in cases like these. Standards that are set in terms of ensuring that the data is collected in a fair, unbiased way that is used to accurately gauge numerical data and be able to extrapolate such data to a bigger pool of players.

Users here might be wondering "What standards? Are you just pulling things out of your arse?"

Absolutely not. These are well documented things and is cornerstones by both governments worldwide and big corporations. To this point, let me provide some links

This is a document published by the UK government, penned by "National Statistics" . This is to outline as to what "Quality" statistics are, how to get them, and how to determine if it is accurate. While it is penned during 2007, the core concepts still apply. Please also note that this is used by the UK Government at some point in the past, attesting to its credibility.

This document is published by "Indian J Opthalmol" and posted to the PMC "US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health". This talks about the ways one can run a statistical test and on what method should these statistics be gathered upon to ensure accuracy and quality. While it is used with a bias towards medical application, the same core thoughts are applicable in any other methods.

This article is written by "Ross Crooks" for the website "HubSpot". This talks about guidelines one must have to find "...accurate and compelling data." This is more of a general read that users can read and not be thrown against the wall with terms that they might not understand or denseness of information that the above two examples undoubtedly has in spades.

This article is posted on "The Stevenson Company" by an unknown author. This is like the "HubSpot" article in which users can have guidelines on how to "... tell if statistics are accurate." in a more casual and easy-to-understand format.

I am not dismissing the numerical data that is being presented by users in this thread about the faceboook poll they are citing. However, I am unable to confidently say that I can take this data and translate it via extrapolation to conclude that a majority does indeed want Bai Winchester to be released earlier because it is Bai Winchester, not because it is a new character. Such a woefully small sample size along with the fact that such a small percentage of "group members" are responding to such a poll.

I hope this clears up any misunderstandings and illustrate on how things like this can be done.