I am suggesting they do not use labor systemically changing the game based on feedback from pax
The system was prototyped, tested and implemented before PAX. PAX was just one of the first opportunities for a lot of people to try it out publicly.
I don't buy that you, agreeing with me, refuting your own statement
I wasn't agreeing with you. When you said 'A does not lead to B', I meant by my reply that 'A leads to B' was the observation that prompted this change.
Let's say you are stuck working late, and the only place around to get food is a vending machine that has 15 different price points and only takes nickles. Are you going to count your bag of nickles and work out the best combination of things to get (the longer you take, the later you have to stay until you are done), or would a more likely behaviour be to dump a handful of nickles in the machine until you can get a granola bar, since it is the only semi-health thing there, then do the same so you can get a bag of chips since that would be the most filling, then a bar, and... there isn't enough left to get gum, so hit the change return button? If you would count nickels, would most people? Would you if it were pennies?
Now, compare that to a vending machine that takes only quarters, and has 3 price points. Now how many people would count their quarters and work out what they could get in advance?
At some point, increasing the resolution decreases clarity, and lack of clarity leads to people approaching combat less tactically. Obviously decreasing the resolution too much reduces the ability to be tactical, but that (among other things) is the point of prototyping, testing and feedback.
p.s. There is not going to be the potential competitive usage of movement in pvp.
When theory and observation conflict, it is the theory that is wrong. People have played the new combat system, including quite a bit in PvP.
