|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2012 9:37 am
Red Kutai gataka Oh yeah that made me roll on the floor rofl But he sounded genuinely...humbled? If that makes sense : /
I think I know what you mean, yes; he just has this habit of using otherwise neutral terms as 'compliments', which allows me to interpret them in a fashion that doesn't cause my head to inflate. sweatdrop
Quote: So maps are fixed, as I suspected.... pretty sure I don't like that. I'll learn them and see what that changes before I go around shoutin'.
I'd learned that the maps were fixed through PvE, but I had hoped they used a more randomised version for PvP - fighting over 'who knows more maps' doesn't sound very interesting, and especially doesn't sound like that the game is aiming for. The first time I played ranked PvP though, I trounced some poor newbie because I knew where everything was as soon as we started. I don't think it's fun to beat my opponent because I know the map while he doesn't, and I don't think it's fun to lose because my opponent knows it better than me, so random PvP is just a little too risky for me at the moment... redface
xD I see where you're coming from: I think I scared off someone, and I wasn't that good then sweatdrop You should have made a thread complaining about that. I mean, important, issue, game changing. Plus, you'll find more people who know the maps are fixed if you tell em' it is x P
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2012 10:05 am
gataka You should have made a thread complaining about that. I mean, important, issue, game changing. Plus, you'll find more people who know the maps are fixed if you tell em' it is x P
I thought I'd raised it in the Game Design Issues thread, but I can't seem to find where I did so; perhaps I just imagined it. I tend not to make a whole thread for issues that seem obviously bad, or things that don't require an elaborate fix - it would certainly take some extra programming to diversify the map generator, but it's not something I really need to make explicit for them. if I can bring it up as an issue, they should be able to figure out how to fix it.
Actually... There's nothing wrong with preset maps, assuming both players can see them - how much do you think the hidden board layout adds to the game, really? It allows for scouting (not Scouts, though; personally I'd like to see Scouts as 'This Unit gets +X while in uncaptured Regions', which is independent of actual scouting) which is essentially my whole strategy, but that's not really the most elegant part of the game. Cataclysms already add a source of 'hidden information' (they're not easily predictable), so even with the whole board laid bare, the game wouldn't really be lacking randomness. Additionally, one of the biggest issues with starting a game - especially for new players - is that the first few moves are so arbitrary, and this would make them less so. Hmm.
Also, thinking about how easy it is to get Scouts in an opening hand made me realise that the hand size in this game is pretty massive - Magic has a 7-card hand in 60-card decks, and only 60-66% of those are generally 'business', meaning you start the game with 7% of your 'business' in-hand and only draw around 0.6 cards (another 1%) per turn. This game starts with 20% of your 'business' in-hand and draws a full card (3%) every turn, which is really, really... I don't know. It just seems a bit crazy... sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2012 8:21 pm
H O L Y C, Pantha du Prince! Can't miss that!! :O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:36 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:39 pm
Yeah, let's fix that. sweatdrop
Personally, I'd like to see campaign modes tied to individual heroes, accessible only when using them as your Herald - the starter Heralds would have long campaigns that start with tutorials, while rarer heroes could have shorter mini-campaigns (essentially side-quests) that allow them to evolve their own unique personality, and illustrate their own goals. Since the starting conditions and win conditions for a campaign mode don't necessarily need to be the standard, it would offer an opportunity to express unique motivations and different facets of each Faction.
Actually... Evolving on that premise, what do you think of Heralds having individual 'achievements'? Basically, while using a given Herald you have 'quests' that you can fulfill to gain extra experience/essence/affinity, in addition to 'just winning'. The 'quests' could reset each game, and would be also be active in PvP - allowing a Herald's 'personality' to extend beyond just the campaign modes. We'd probably want to adjust the 'my Units' panel to always show your Herald, and include an option to see the 'quests' he has available. For starter Heralds these quests would be fairly simple and straightforward, but for advanced Heralds they could be very specific with large rewards - allowing players to 'combo out' and gain rewards for it whether or not they win the game itself...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:25 pm
Oh I need to make a lag monster~ Red Kutai
Yeah, let's fix that. sweatdrop
Personally, I'd like to see campaign modes tied to individual heroes, accessible only when using them as your Herald - the starter Heralds would have long campaigns that start with tutorials, while rarer heroes could have shorter mini-campaigns (essentially side-quests) that allow them to evolve their own unique personality, and illustrate their own goals. Since the starting conditions and win conditions for a campaign mode don't necessarily need to be the standard, it would offer an opportunity to express unique motivations and different facets of each Faction.
Actually... Evolving on that premise, what do you think of Heralds having individual 'achievements'? Basically, while using a given Herald you have 'quests' that you can fulfill to gain extra experience/essence/affinity, in addition to 'just winning'. The 'quests' could reset each game, and would be also be active in PvP - allowing a Herald's 'personality' to extend beyond just the campaign modes. We'd probably want to adjust the 'my Units' panel to always show your Herald, and include an option to see the 'quests' he has available. For starter Heralds these quests would be fairly simple and straightforward, but for advanced Heralds they could be very specific with large rewards - allowing players to 'combo out' and gain rewards for it whether or not they win the game itself...
xP I kind of expect that considering the emphasis they've given to them. That's so RPG / first odd thought Not sure about having that in PvP, I mean the players wouldn't be playing the same game anymore and that kinds of defeats the point... Or actually instead of/in addition to "experience/essence/affinity", completing a/the quest would have some consequences that matter within the match, like... well top of my head, Raykl's (Rakyl?) into that glory thing so if he manages to take down opposing Herald/Some Big Thing 1v1 he get's a buff/heals to full... or something. You're better at this x D Also, friendly PvP means you could have the other side actually help you achieve that quest, which is kind of, huh, silly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:46 pm
gataka I kind of expect that considering the emphasis they've given to them. That's so RPG / first odd thought Not sure about having that in PvP, I mean the players wouldn't be playing the same game anymore and that kinds of defeats the point... Or actually instead of/in addition to "experience/essence/affinity", completing a/the quest would have some consequences that matter within the match, like... well top of my head, Raykl's (Rakyl?) into that glory thing so if he manages to take down opposing Herald/Some Big Thing 1v1 he get's a buff/heals to full... or something. You're better at this x D Also, friendly PvP means you could have the other side actually help you achieve that quest, which is kind of, huh, silly.
That's my point, yes; "Heralds" is right there in the name, but their only real significance at this point is that you start the game with one in play (which is arguably problematic on its own). I'd like to get attached to my Herald, but there's nothing really to him to get attached to. Even his special is called 'Enrage' rather than something cool and unique like 'Ire of the Claw' - come on, people, give me something! gonk
Well, as I've just mentioned elsewhere, having them 'not playing the same game' might be a good thing - for instance, if a match is already decided in your favour, I can still play out my Herald's quests and 'win' on my own terms in spite of my overall 'loss'. Keeping players in the game until it concludes naturally is something I consider important, and since only one can 'win' the main game, offering them smaller mini-games to 'win' really helps.
That said, I do like the idea of those 'quests' having actual effects on the field - that would also allow them to function as a valid deckbuilding strategy, a possible come-from-behind tool, and (to an extent) discourages people from 'working together' to complete each other's quests. The trouble is that this represents a good deal more to balance, and requires that my opponent be able to see my 'quests' - I'm not sure it's worth that much added complexity.
However, in regards to something I mentioned above, I'd be willing to consider having those 'quests' serve as a cost to summon one's Herald in the first place - getting them out for free really warps the game, but if each Herald required you to achieve a certain task in order to summon them to the field, that would maintain their central role to the deck (early games would be about getting Heralds out) and - in fact - probably amplify their importance and value. Additionally, I'd consider the option of letting players re-summon dead Heralds by re-completing the same quest, both to emphasise their importance, and to allow decks which rely on a Herald's synergy some modicum of reliability. That, though, would put some limit on what quests could be required.
And Friendly PvP shouldn't give out any rewards of any sort; I thought that was their plan, but it seems to have fallen through. That needs to be fixed, I think, and there's really no two ways about it... sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 7:56 pm
Just... Red Kutai
Well, as I've just mentioned elsewhere, having them 'not playing the same game' might be a good thing - for instance, if a match is already decided in your favour, I can still play out my Herald's quests and 'win' on my own terms in spite of my overall 'loss'. Keeping players in the game until it concludes naturally is something I consider important, and since only one can 'win' the main game, offering them smaller mini-games to 'win' really helps.
~~~
And Friendly PvP shouldn't give out any rewards of any sort; I thought that was their plan, but it seems to have fallen through. That needs to be fixed, I think, and there's really no two ways about it... sweatdrop
REALLY not sure about this. - Up to 3, or whatever, concurent games... - Keeping them in the game no doubt important. THE game, not A game. Scenario you give, we're both done with the main game, even if I wanted to take it to its 'natural conclusion' I can't really because you're done playing, it's over. So now we both either start or continue, maybe even conclude, our solo game(s) in the ruins of our duel. Assuming we actually want to play such. Just... .___O Concurrent games makes perfect sense in coop. Here it's WEIRD MAN and there's quite a bit of conflict. ~~~ Friendly PvP isn't always friendly: it's just the only way to select a particular opponent ¯3¯ ~~~ Panagrammic No (although Veteran allows you to "level up" a bit during a game). However, see that empty diamond on the card slots? Keep an eye on that space -- it will allow you to improve your cards. Only Gray Can you level up units? I've searched around at the shop and army tab, but I haven't found a way to level them up.
Thought I read something about leveling them up. sweatdrop I guess this is the first detail on the RPG aspect. Not like they need to focus or anything :U
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 8:45 pm
gataka REALLY not sure about this. - Up to 3, or whatever, concurent games... - Keeping them in the game no doubt important. THE game, not A game. Scenario you give, we're both done with the main game, even if I wanted to take it to its 'natural conclusion' I can't really because you're done playing, it's over. So now we both either start or continue, maybe even conclude, our solo game(s) in the ruins of our duel. Assuming we actually want to play such. Just... .___O Concurrent games makes perfect sense in coop. Here it's WEIRD MAN and there's quite a bit of conflict.
First, there can only ever really be up to 2 concurrent games - the game you're playing, and the game I'm playing. When these are the same, great; when they're not, no big deal. Since we're hand-crafting each of these games, we can work to ensure that there are intersections between them, even when they're not identical. Additionally, only one of these 'quests' would represent a 'game' - the other are 'minigames' at best, and should be playable as part of the normal game at large.
Every game in HoC requires 'an opponent' - keeping players in "the" game isn't important; what's important is keeping that 'an opponent' available for each of them. Again, the games don't need to be identical - strategy games are at their most boring when both players are playing the same game. What's necessary is that there are enough intersections between the two players' games that they never become irrelevant to each other - the system does break whenever I stop caring that you exist.
Also, keep in mind that Cataclysms end the game on their own terms - there should never be a time when players don't have a game left to play, because one of the game's core mechanics is constantly pushing the game toward resolution regardless. This is very important and extremely beneficial, and the system probably wouldn't work without that support. Luckily, Cataclysm is pretty integral to the game (and should be even moreso), so I'm perfectly comfortable leaning on it as necessary.
Quote: Friendly PvP isn't always friendly: it's just the only way to select a particular opponent ¯3¯
Be that as it may, there's still no reason to offer rewards for it. If it were the ability to wager for something, sure - but actually generating experince and Essence during 'friendly' matches is just too abusable to really justify. Anything that can be prearranged is, I'm afraid. sweatdrop
Quote: I guess this is the first detail on the RPG aspect. Not like they need to focus or anything :U
... gonk
I've mentioned before that I thought that's what the stars represented, back when all Units were 3-star - I thought they were levels, and they wanted to start things off 'fair'. That said, this really is just more needless 'would be cool if' junk, and I'd prefer they at least save it until they really need something novel...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2012 4:51 am
Red Kutai
... gonk
I've mentioned before that I thought that's what the stars represented, back when all Units were 3-star - I thought they were levels, and they wanted to start things off 'fair'. That said, this really is just more needless 'would be cool if' junk, and I'd prefer they at least save it until they really need something novel...
You've probably noticed by now but now they say "Lvl. 3 ***" instead of "Rarity: ***" confused
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2012 5:28 am
This is random but I've always dreamed of a TCG where you make your own cards o3o edit: Quote: Error: The Accept Request failed. The selected requests have been accepted, and you are now on each other's Friend Lists: Red Kutai What kind of fail error is that? ._. edit: gid=3093147459
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:38 am
gataka You've probably noticed by now but now they say "Lvl. 3 ***" instead of "Rarity: ***"
You vastly overestimate the regularity with which I play the game. Today was the first time I've actually played it in a couple of weeks - so, no, I heard it here first.
That said, stars make more sense for level than for rarity, but I don't see any other rarity indicator or any way to increase units' levels, so that change seems a little bit premature. sweatdrop
Quote: This is random but I've always dreamed of a TCG where you make your own cards o3o
Wow, sounds like you might be interested in games design. Ever considered looking into that? wink
Quote: What kind of fail error is that? ._.
Just imagine what would've happened if it succeeded... redface
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:04 am
Red Kutai gataka You've probably noticed by now but now they say "Lvl. 3 ***" instead of "Rarity: ***"
You vastly overestimate the regularity with which I play the game. Today was the first time I've actually played it in a couple of weeks - so, no, I heard it here first.
That said, stars make more sense for level than for rarity, but I don't see any other rarity indicator or any way to increase units' levels, so that change seems a little bit premature. sweatdrop
I thought you were at least keeping track of the changes xP This one happened 2 or something days ago. It's only visible in the lobby for now. Plus, Pan said levels had something to do with that top right "?" box you see on cards in game. Thought levels would be displayed there so... ¯|(O.o)/¯ Red Kutai Quote: This is random but I've always dreamed of a TCG where you make your own cards o3o
Wow, sounds like you might be interested in games design. Ever considered looking into that? wink
You vastly overestimate the regularity with which I consider looking into things. Today was the first time I've actually considered looking into anything in a couple of weeks - so, no, I considered it here first. >.> Red Kutai Quote: What kind of fail error is that? ._.
Just imagine what would've happened if it succeeded... redface
>.<
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 1:19 am
Nice to see familiar faces. I was out of commission for a few months (I think it was about 3-4 months) due to a move. I switched states.
Dare I ask what's new? I see Towns 2.0 and a few more games have been added to the site, but anything on the zOMG! front? I popped in for a bit, but didn't see much of anything.
How's life for all of y'all?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 4:10 pm
The servers are auto cycling now. That's about it xD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
