I’m not closely following the testing of the patch 1.3, just reading some bits here and there, but lately I’ve started to ask myself why Mythic has changed their patch policy in the past months..
Just shortly after release it’s normal that there are many bug fixes needed and so Mythic deployed bi-weekly or faster patch cycles for those bug fixes. I actually felt comfortable with this. It were minor changes, but could be solved quickly and there was no need to hold the fix back for some big (content) patch.
Then the policy changed.. I think it began with “Wait until 1.2 and than this will be fixed”..shortly followed by “wait fore 1.2.1” ..and now “oh.. in 1.3 this will be solved”.. So WAR is hopping from one big patch to another with several weeks in between and with hardly any hot fixes, though there is some stuff which should be solved better now than later.
Of course one could argue that they are still investigating on some of the bugs, but I think that the game has enough bugs to offer so that there are some ready to be hot fixed now and enough left for patch 1.3 ;) It’s just a matter of large numbers and statistics ;)
Some GM’s already answered on some bug reports that they are already identified and solved, but the fix will be implemented in 1.3. So the game is left in a bugged state on purpose. In my opinion the patches should be separated. So bug fixes should be introduced on a faster time scale independent on the big content patches. Patch 1.3 is a huge beast with bug fixes, new content and career balancing and overall combat changes. This are too many knobs Mythic is currently turning on. Too many variables that are changed and that leads to a not controllable situation. Baby steps is the answer and separation of stuff that does not depend on another, so that small controllable portions are left.
It’s imo better to introduce career changes prior to something like the Land of the Dead. Players are happy to try out the changes on their careers (if they work) and when the LotD release they are again happy because of the stuff they can experience there. So dividing those changes into e.g. two patches would not only allow better control of the changes, but would also improve satisfaction on the player side. This big patch philosophy leads imo only to big issues because of more introduced bugs, unforseen interactions of several mechanics, stability issues and so forth..
.. But there is one constant..One thing we will see in every patch. That’s “Improved ORvR performance” ;)