I know that there are a lot of discussions and questions around legendary drop rates at the moment, and truth be told I think there are multiple different reasons that come together to form the overall sentiment. (e.g. opinions about not getting enough legendaries overall, not getting specific enough legendaries etc.)

I'm hoping to be able to share a bit of info/news about drop rates soon, but don't want to promise anything specific just yet. But I just wanted to say that we're aware.

One of the reasons why it's taking a bit longer is precisely because we're seeing what's possible in order to provide you with a better experience.

For example, we're looking into coding whether it's feasible that the appreciation package makes sure to only include a legendary(s) that the player has not received to date. This isn't part of the script that we used for the inventory restoration, but it's an example of us needing a bit more time with it.

This patch won't include a fix for that, but that particular issue is on our radar to be included in a future patch.

Yep, we're aware of this issue - it seems related to when the client or the host might not have the Hell's ranger gear pack installed. The investigation is ongoing so I can't promise when it will be fixed, but we're aware of it.

The latest Stadia build is continuing to be worked on but I dont have any news today. But as soon as I do, I'll let you know. You've not been forgotten.

No problem, I appreciate your ongoing support here on Reddit! :)

I'm also trialing out a new "latest dev comments" section on this megathread's OP, so that will hopefully make some of my replies about such topics a bit more visible.

This is a known issue and is on our radar. At this moment in time I can't yet say for certain when it will be patched though, but we are aware of it.

As just announced, unfortunately the patch is not ready for release today despite our best efforts.

For me personally (as one of the Outriders CMs), with us having previously talked about our aim to deliver the patch today, this raises a bit of a quandary about how we're communicating that I'd been keen to hear your opinions on.

As you know, we've made it our goal from the start to be as open and transparent about Outriders as we can be. That's also the reason why I've never shied away from acknowledging issues or setting up gather threads here on reddit, but also why I've made sure to always provide you (the community) with as much behind the scenes info as I can.

For example, during our launch week, with the server issues, we made sure to update everyone regularly (in 20 minute time-gaps) with what was going on and we also subsequently shared our connectivity issues post-mortem (also as previously promised).

Similarly, we've made sure to try to keep you updated the latest status of each issue in the time since then and we have on a number of occasions talked about our intentions for things, rather than our guaranteed plans. We've often told you what we were planning to do, even while we still working on those specific things.

For example, in the past we've shared our intentions for demo patch releases, inventory restoration plans and release, the community appreciation and now also this damage mitigation patch release, all before these things were guaranteed and set in stone.

Now let's get to the crux of this post:

Truth be told, the safest option (Lets call it Option A) might have been to not say anything at all or be very vague, but then pleasantly surprise you with what we've been doing when the specific thing happens (e.g. the restoration runs/patch releases etc.). This would mean that when you first hear about things, you know they're guaranteed to be live at that moment, but it would also mean that you could go for a long time without tangible news. It would also reduce your ability to feedback on the things we're aiming to do. However, it also means that you wouldn't be disappointed if our intentions don't come to fruition (as has happened today).

The alternative option (Let call it Option B) is to do what we have been trying to do so far: share regular updates ("announcement posting" with an aimed minimum of twice a week with tangible news, usually on a Tuesday or a Thursday). At the same time I also cover smaller topics in one-to-one conversations in reddit threads that aren't a big announcement mega-thread but that still do give you an insight into whats going on (I'm trying to better surface these now).

However, with Option B, the risk is there that you might occasionally be disappointed if things don't go quite according to plan.

As per usual, I'm sure I've waffled on longer than need be - Please note that this post isn't a declaration that we're changing the way I/we communicate. Consider it more an invitation for you to let me know where on that sliding scale between Option A and B your ideal communication scenario is. Yes, it's a sliding scale that needs to be balanced, not a black and white A or B option with a "choose one" outcome.

Thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts!

PS: This comment is purely about how we're communicating. Delaying patches like happened today is nobody's intention, but it still happened. So this comment is more about how you would like us to deal with those kind of situations.

given how your turn around time on each patch seems to be about a month it would be way worse not to know your intentions.

Yep, none of us want such a long turn around cycle, but it's partially a result of the sudden "high-impact but quite random" issues that we've faced. If a bug were happening 100% of the time to everyone, it'd be much easier to reproduce and fix in turn, thus also speeding up the patch release.

That being said, we are looking at ways to increase the frequency of patches so you don't have to go so long in between them.