Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Hiero_Glyph

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 11

Suggestions / Re: Repeatable rewards for Solo mode

on: October 05, 2018, 05:37:10 AM

Quote from: LoganMaze on October 05, 2018, 05:23:37 AM

karen is right tho, i think instead of focusing on repeatable rewards for solo mode they could focus on making a "hard mode" which you could play daily and is meant to be done by a coordinated team, the difficulty could be independent of the raiders level and, MAYBE, avoid the antagonist factor for this mode since that tends to screw up the difficulty.
what you guys think?

I think having more options is rarely a bad thing. I also think having fixed difficulties would be good for the game, especially if they didn't have an antag since the difficulty could remain higher. For daily challenge missions I think having a preconfigured team would also be a good thing to avoid OP builds and to let players try out new characters, weapons, and cards.

Gameplay Feedback / Re: Some good feedback on this Vid...

on: October 05, 2018, 03:53:07 AM

Meh, most of it is ignorant opinion. I mean the locked campaigns unlock if any player in your party has it available, so obviously he didn't party with many players. It just doesn't count towards your progress or medals for solo. While I agree that the gold costs are high, he doesn't mention that you get additional gold per victory as your tier increases or that you can farm with bounty hunter weapons. The grind in Warframe can be much, much worse (and I'm MR 25). As for mid-match joining, just no. It's ironic that he complains about being a player down and then wants to skip cutscenes so he can start the mission solo. Again, not the most logical opinion.

There are certainly some valid points like communication and scoring being more transparent, but some of these are already on the roadmap. I do agree that the progression path is also very poor, especially for weapons. So yes, there are areas that definitely need work but I think this type of criticism would have more merit if it were from someone with more familiarity with the game. It is, however, a good generalization based on what new players think.

Spacelords Universe / Re: Mentor matches should not allow Antagonists

on: October 05, 2018, 02:21:59 AM

Quote from: Cryptek on October 05, 2018, 02:00:33 AM

Quote from: Level9Drow on October 05, 2018, 01:51:55 AM

Why lower rewards? Just keep the rewards for PvE the same as they are now
Because as I said there are cards and weapons which are better at PVP which you would normally want to bring in for regular missions on the off chance that an antag shows up, just like there are characters that are way better at dealing with PVE than dealing with an antag.

Like honestly give me a good reason to for example pick Harec over other raiders if PVP was optional, and no "thinking he's fun" doesn't count. His damage to objectives is worse than raiders like Schneider, Valeria and Hans and since his headshots kill elites rather than put them in a downed state there are much safer bets.

And finally because Mercurysteam is a business and current gold rewards like them or not, are balanced around the fact that you're going to lose matches or get a low score, thanks to antags showing up. You dont honestly think ANY company with a f2p model would just leave those values the same do you?

I mean why do you think the gold rewards for solo missions are a one-time thing? Because otherwise the most efficient way to grind gold would be to run missions solo, no bad players or antags to mess up your game and you can bring a character custom built to speed run that one specific map.

Blueprint missions, faction points (not everyone has multiple characters unlocked per faction), testing cards, trying a new weapon, using treasure/bounty hunter, a preferred character is locked, just for fun, etc. are all reasons why players would select suboptimal characters for PvE.

Also, there are plenty of gold sinks that could be added to the game. Converting gold into faction points, paying for experience boosters (technically already in the game but not worth it), buying loadout slots with gold (highly requested), rerolling weapon stats without upgrading, etc. You make it sound like players would be sitting on millions of gold when that is just an indication of not having enough gold sinks in the game.

Spacelords Universe / Re: Mentor matches should not allow Antagonists

on: October 05, 2018, 01:40:21 AM

Quote from: Cryptek on October 05, 2018, 01:16:44 AM

Quote from: Hiero_Glyph on October 05, 2018, 12:45:28 AM
Furthermore, you are worried about queue times as an antagonist which would also improve if there was a reason to play against them.
"decreasing the pool of players you can invade but increasing the amount of competing antagonists wont make queue times even worse, trust me"

Quote from: Whitebleidd on October 05, 2018, 01:04:21 AM
the community should be split
All the reasons in your earlier post as to why you enjoy pvp in this game mean squat to someone like me,
"I think antagonists should be removed from the game because I started playing a 4v1 PVP game, but I dont like PVP and fuck anyone who does"

If you honestly believe splitting the community wouldn't have adverse effects on Antag queue times you are either: Delusional or just don't give a damn and wouldn't mind if they where removed from the game but don't want to outright say it.

There are zero arguments you can make that allowing people to opt out of PVP wouldn't decrease the amount of available matches for antags. The current queue times are already so bad that I have a book on my table for while I wait, if you give people the option to opt out (I mean we already have one person flat out admitting no reward would be big enough to entice them to play PVP mode) you might as well just remove antags, the queue time would be over an hour.

So dont give me that bullcrap.

In the current system you are correct as there is zero incentize to play against an antagonist. If, however, the playlists were separate there are a dozens ways to make playing against an antagonist more appealing. I would personally recommend a general play list for both raiders and antags, as well as a total prize that is split among all parties involved based on performance. So if an antag shuts down the raiders they get a larger portion; the same is true for the raiders. Similarly, I would include weekly challenges that reward additional bonuses based on winning in the antagonist pkaylist, and this could even include exclusive cosmetic items. And these are only a few of a dozen plus ways to encourage players to play as/against antagonists. It really is simple once you split the playlists as you can now provide rewards that are also separate.

Spacelords Universe / Re: Mentor matches should not allow Antagonists

on: October 05, 2018, 12:45:28 AM

Cryptek, the moment MSE allowed you to play a match without an antagonist present it became optional to have one. So for you to claim that the core of the game requires an antagonist is simply false. The fact that you cannot choose when an antagonist invades your game is what the argument is here; not having one has always been possible.

EDIT: As for splitting an already small community, well the community would not be as small if antags were optional. Furthermore, you are worried about queue times as an antagonist which would also improve if there was a reason to play against them. Right now there is exactly 1 reason to play as an antagonist and it requires minimal play time to flip your experience meter from raider to antagonist. Any more than that and you are doing it purely to grief others, even if it is fun for you, since only the antagonist gets to decide when PvP will occur.

Suggestions / Re: Loadout slots

on: October 04, 2018, 11:59:13 PM

If additional slots cost gold each then players would still either have a long grind or could use premium currency to purchase gold. So really it would be the same thing that we have now, just with more reasons to continue grinding. As for the cost, I'd say 75-100k per slot sounds fair; there's no reason to charge more for each additional slot.

Spacelords Universe / Re: Mentor matches should not allow Antagonists

on: October 04, 2018, 11:34:47 PM

I think Level9Drow hit the nail on the head; it's about respecting the player's time. Its one thing to reward the player for playing the game and to keep making the game harder the more that player succeeds. It's another thing to force the player to face an antag and potentially make the game harder/longer and reducing the rewards. One respects the player's time and the other wastes it.

Now some players have more time than others so wasting some of it may not matter to them, but for many players failing a long, hard fought mission and scoring a 3.2 doesn't really respect their time when they could have gotten a 6.5 against the AI. This is especially problematic for blueprint missions since you need to win and if you get a duplicate you basically wasted your time anyway.

Spacelords’ Advice / Re: Today on Harec and Friends: All the Aleph you can carry

on: October 04, 2018, 11:07:27 PM

Quote from: Whitebleidd on October 04, 2018, 10:25:43 PM

Skyline does have a point, harec generally when used by most ppl as a raider sucks, he is almost always a liability, however as an antag even a bad harec can be a pretty big annoyance. Worst part is nowadays there’s almost always a harec on the team, basically a man down.

MS did good when they increased the lvl requirements for some of the aliens, but they should have done so for harec, in fact he should probably be the alien with the highest lvl requirement.

Except they couldn't do this since Harec is tied to the in-game tutorial that every new player has to play before playing online. Oh, wait.

Spacelords’ Advice / Re: Today on Harec and Friends: All the Aleph you can carry

on: October 04, 2018, 08:32:41 PM

Quote from: TheBrentWoody on October 04, 2018, 08:11:26 PM

How can he be garbage and broken simultaneously?

It probably has to do with the difference between playing as a Raider against hordes of enemies versus playing as an Antag against at most 4 players.

Spacelords’ Advice / Re: Today on Harec and Friends: All the Aleph you can carry

on: October 04, 2018, 07:40:53 PM

One of my friends help new players by selecting Harec to prevent them from picking him, and then once they lock in their choice he picks someone else.

Spacelords Universe / Re: Mentor matches should not allow Antagonists

on: October 04, 2018, 07:35:32 PM

Quote from: Cryptek on October 04, 2018, 05:02:51 PM

To those who feel bad for the newbies in the first post, I guess you could say I got what I deserved
22 minutes against a Konstantin doing everything to throw away the bombs or shoot them was grueling work, but getting the two newbies their guns made it worth the effort!
Sadly I doubt that baby-harec is ever coming back.

At least they got the blueprints! And when everything is done, no one had a good time. That's the worst part since the antag just ruins the game in most cases either by making you lose what would have been a challenging match, or by giving you less rewards despite requiring more effort.

This reminds me of what Todd Howard said about making PvP in Fallout 76 as you don't need a reason to make players grief others, but you do need a way to make those griefers into valuable content. The antag is no different here and MSE needs to figure out how to reward raiders so that they want to face antags, but you don't really need a reason to make players want to play as an antag (and Spacelords already has one with the card system).

Gameplay Feedback / Re: Tolchok is still broken

on: October 04, 2018, 05:08:00 AM

Quote from: LoganMaze on October 04, 2018, 05:01:32 AM

how about this, the weapon wont push you when you are rolling/dodging, that way you can jump into cover if you are close to it and you have a mean to avoid being stunlock, what you guys think?

It's better to add temporary kockback immunity after it procs on a player. That way it solves the problem for every weapon simultaneously. It would also prevent multiple knockback effect procing on the same player in succession.

Spacelords Universe / Re: In Shock testing videos: Patch 11.0

on: October 03, 2018, 05:57:27 PM

Quote from: MSE_Ojuel on October 03, 2018, 03:20:41 PM

Quote from: Cryptek on October 03, 2018, 03:07:22 PM
The switches are what have failed the mission for me the last 4 times I ran it, basically impossible if you didn't bring a character that can tank huge amounts of damage.

I'm really sorry to hear that.

Let me quote myself from what I said in other thread:

"...whenever the new patch kicks in, there will be a vast amount of time to press the levers, letting the players do the task in a more calm way, thus not requiring a suicidal approach at all."
"Both time values (Shae's survival time & lever interaction time) are being changed in the next patch release. Also, both values will be tweaked differently depending on whether there's an Antagonist in the match or not."
"Antagonists are actually supposed to be able to cancel the Raiders's lever interaction if they are fast enough, but of course it's not supposed to be trivial thing either. "

As long as you actually tested it in house and can do it successfully I'm fine with the change. You did actually test it successfully, right? Solo as well I assume? Of course you did!

Never underestimate the value of testing things in-game no matter what the data tells you. We love the game and want it to succeed but this issue could have been avoided. I look forward to the next patch.

Spacelords Universe / Re: Troll/Griefer Raider

on: October 03, 2018, 05:53:42 PM

You do realize that destroying the extractor pauses the countdown timer, right? So did you have the full amount of aleph to Overload it yet? Sounds like the pathetic level 100+ was the only one on your team that knew how the mechanic actually worked.

Gameplay Feedback / Re: Game difficulty seems higher than normal when playing in a full Squad

on: October 03, 2018, 05:00:56 PM

Quote from: MSE_KarenHB on October 03, 2018, 03:11:08 PM

Hi there!

Thank you very much for taking the time to tell your experience, this feedback provides a lot of useful information to keep improving the game!

In the first place, you are right about the difficulty in the Council Apocalypse's missions. We have noted the duration of the games is higher than usual, so we'll fix it in a future update.

Regarding the overall difficulty on Spacelords, we have seen how the players have become so skilled that we have tried to balance the missions. We have focused on the bulk of players to establish this difficulty so this is probably why it is concieved like it's too hard when having an specific MMR. For this reason, we'll focuse on different groups of players (the most skilled or the newest ones, for example) in order to adapt the difficulty in a future patch.

We want the game to be a challenge and for you to enjoy it!

Having a challenge is great as long as the rewards are also scaled to compensate. Don't forget to reward players for doing more difficult missions, including having a better chance at a blueprint. Right now the added challenge isn't worth the effort given the reward.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 11