Quote Originally Posted by Hestzhyen View Post
Why does this being implemented mean Eureka gets delayed again? They've already said Eureka's coming out in the mid-patch cycle "tide-over" patch. It's 99% of the way there, only a catastrophic event would cause it to be pushed back since it finally has an announced date after many push-backs.

If they were even planning for improvements to the MSQ dungeons that's all it'd be right now probably: planning, researching specifications and resource requirements, risk/reward ratios, etc. Do you even SDLC? Saying "SE can't fix a thing because a different thing will be pushed back!" is dumb. Especially when the different thing in question is already set to go live a few weeks from now. A company this large knows how to plan and schedule resources effectively.

SE can certainly start looking at a more nuanced solution to the problem. You don't have to commit to the results of the research- someone looking into the issue does not mean you suddenly have to divert ALL of your resources -even the guy who sleeps in the corner with his eyes open- to work on a resolution. For all we know they've already had a team research the problem and possible solutions and this is the best form of remediation we can expect. But if we ask for more, and make a compelling case for it, SE can slot it in for Dev time. Doesn't mean it'll ever go live. Doesn't mean we'll ever even hear about it. But asking for a better implementation of a dull story segment does not suddenly mean all the fun stuff gets pushed back indefinitely.
I didn't say any of that. I asked would you be OK with it? I'm just using Eureka as an example because it's something a lot of people are looking forward to. I'm asking if something you WANTED needed to be pushed back or delayed (not forever, maybe just one patch cycle) for this to happen would you be OK with that? Even something you didn't know if you wanted but was planned for the future. I'm pointing out that resources being limited as they are, it's possible a choice was made and this was what could be done with the current allocation, AND if this was their proposed final decision then further resources would have to be moved to accommodate this future change.

Once again, I'm all for making them separate, but there will be a price and is it worth that price (likely sight unseen) to you for this to happen? Or will you, as many have, just ignore MSQ from this point forward?

It's extremely possible there's their, as you put it, "guy sleeping with his eyes open" on this and we'll get the results soon. That would be great. People would be made happy and the forums could move on to things that are much more relevant. SE making some announcement to this effect would alleviate a great burden on many minds, but they haven't. So for now we have to assume they are flying by results currently and will adjust as necessary.