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 - PohtHehd

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8
Suggestions / Re: Penalizing Squads
 on: October 29, 2018, 11:49:20 PM 
I could be wrong but I've never heard anyone talk about a hidden difficulty for pre-made squads.

It certainly has some logic to it but even in the code we see that the difficulties are set up based off your MMR and nothing else.

Again, there is a lot of information there so I could be wrong.

Can you prove it?

Like make a video or something of a group of Raiders showing your MMR and theirs then what the MMR was at the end. If it is significantly different then there may be an issue. If not then there isn't.

I agree and I do not think you're an arrogant bastard. Anyone can have an opinion that is spot on for the situation at hand. A lot of what you say is true, the Antagonist system is a turn off for many players.

Some of us really like it but most seem to absolutely hate it.

The problem, I believe, stems from people's inability to pontificate on the presence of the antagonist. They instead do not wish to understand, as many people are wont to do, and simply want the aggressiveness to stop. An Antagonist makes the game thrilling, especially for higher level players. For lower levels, though, it is an exercise in frustration. Which to me is ultimately the problem.

Antagonists represent an end-game level of commitment to the game. You have beaten all the levels and have gained power and now you wish to show off that power to other people. At least, lower level Antagonists do not bother me so it seems this way to me.

Consider this little expressed theory; this is not an asymmetric game. It is not 1v4 but rather it is a 5-man team that creates the best experience for the game. 4 Raiders and an Antagonist.

If one Raider isn't playing optimally, as in they leave or just are AFK, then it ruins the system just as having an Antagonist who is friendly, which I do quite often, also seems to break the game.

If there is any change to the system I'd like to see it is having Bounty Hunter, Treasure Hunter, Affiliation bonuses add up from both Raider and Antagonist, then I think people would begin to understand that it really is just a team thing. Part of the team is just supposed to kill the other.

Suggestions / Re: Harec cannot melee while reloading
 on: October 28, 2018, 08:12:59 PM 
Its stupid to do so disadvantage to sniper on so "great" designed maps, where sniper have no free room. Here work agressive style of sniper gameplay, but with mechanic of melee of antagonist and mobs - its useless.
Have you considered that not every Raider will be useful on every map?

Because the game was definitely designed around changing and evolving your play-style with multiple factions rather than just playing snipers.

I dont care much about this game, i doubt devs will do it playable and interesting.  If you like disbalanced game - its your choice.
I think that actually you do and you just had a bad time as Harec. Perhaps if you took a moment to relax and considered trying a Wardog or Hades character you would find it much more suitable to the aggressive play-style you are looking to use. They have higher health and are generally better at handling CQC situations. Also, Alicia and Lycus are very very good characters that can take you far.

Often the only annoying thing about this community is the constant stream of people who have played it for a week and think they know exactly everything about it. Then they make demands and they make threats of leaving or predictions that the game is soon to die because of something they didn't like about it; probably getting overwhelmed as an Antagonist or Raider.

In this instance, you have played for less than 10 hours by your own admission and truly believe you understand how the game works. I very much doubt you have even made it to level 20 in that amount of time. You have not seen the majority of the content and already you find it lacking which is folly.

There is basically nothing, outside of being in the Sci-Fi genre, that I would associate between Spacelords and Destiny. They are not even the same style of game, one is third person and one is first person. One is class oriented gameplay the other is more a "hero-shooter" type of situation.

You talk about this "lack of goals" and "lack of content" and doing the same mission "hundreds of times", which you probably haven't done, as though Spacelords' has this unique problem. Indeed, you say this as though some of the most popular games in the world do not trespass the sin of a lack of content or repetitive gameplay. I doubt you have even played all the missions, much less unlocked all the Raiders, so it seems strange to chastise the developers for a lack of content when you have yet to explore the current content.

You should know that creating assets for anything is going to be time consuming and resource demanding work. Especially with the attention to detail most of Spacelords graphics typically show off.

As I understand they just released a big content update some couple months back which was an entire campaign. It makes sense from a development cycle to then wait several more months to release another big update. In the meantime weapons and skins are more than welcome to many Spacelords players. They are hardly indicative of a desire to cease production on the game or as a replacement for future updates.

Man, if you were bored writing that imagine how bored I am reading it.

Suggestions / Re: Harec cannot melee while reloading
 on: October 28, 2018, 07:14:48 PM 
Obviously my first question is why with any character you would start reloading then decide that is the time for a confrontation.

The Local characters are supposed to be physically weak. Not only within the storyline of the game but also its gameplay.

For as long as videogames have existed the more damage something does the more defenseless it becomes. Hence the term "Glass Cannon" from MMORPGs which denotes a very offensively powerful character with limited defensive capabilities.

While it is true that you can set up Locals to be vicious CQC masters it does still require the necessary skill to pull off. It is a very high risk high reward style of play without consistent benefits.

Locals can also typically be built to reload much faster to offset their balancing as far as gunfights are concerned. This would also reduce the amount of time being helpless if you started reloading but now must fight an antagonist/raider in melee.

However, if you are reloading and charging into a fist fight at the same time then that is all on you. Throwing a character who is a SNIPER into the middle of a melee confrontation before you finish reloading really only shows your poor strategy. It does not show any need to fix something about the game.

Spacelords Universe / Re: What is an Aurora Specter?
 on: October 26, 2018, 08:29:33 PM 
Yeh, Shamash will be pretty central to the next big content update. Probably along with the Aurora Specters.

The developers have not said what connection Shamash and the Specters have to anything in the current game aside from the fact that Shamash inadvertently released the Specters from their prison by activating the Legacy.

As far as AI antagonists, perhaps the concept of the Specters is going to revolve around a new mode where they take the place of a human antagonist. A lot of people have been saying they want a PvE only mode and this would allow the developers to grant that without neutering the concept of the antagonist.

This is good because I believe the antagonist role will start factoring into the storyline in the future.

Suggestions / Re: Spacelords identity update wishlist
 on: October 25, 2018, 02:26:28 AM 
I strangely very much want that toilet seat for Loaht.

I am very interested in the Local's ability to grow facial hair which I hope the Identity system expands on with its accessories.

Other cool things would be particle effects like the antagonist gets but in different colors and patterns. Perhaps even the ability to customize what "stuff" the guys you kill turn into when they vaporize. Like confetti or vicious amounts of gore.

Elmer Fudd costume for Rak. Elmer Fudd costume for everyone.

Flamenco dancing costume pieces. Especially for Harec.

Horns. Crazy hairpieces. Weirdo Fifth Council implants, like Ku'ur Sag's.

Clothes and stuff from the lore pages, like Me'er-Yaak's sweet robes. Or the toad and birdman masks Da'ra and Mi'gel wear.

The ability to make anyone bald.

Suggestions / Re: Quality of life chances
 on: October 23, 2018, 11:24:35 PM 
All of that.

I generally play with pick up groups, yes. I generally get a ~9 score.

It takes roughly 5 minutes for me to find a match at MMR ~30. If your MMR is higher then you are doing yourself a disservice regarding queue times and efficiency in gold grinding as the rewards for doing so are minimal compared to the difficulty you encounter.

If you wanted a challenge then that is all good but if you're wondering why it takes so long to match up and why you don't get a lot of gold a hour then that is reason.

As far as limiting antagonists consider this; an antagonist at level 1 will not have a good time. However, it is good time when a level 1 player, with their squad, successfully beats a high level antagonist.

Level 10, to me, is far too low. I believe antagonists should be at least level 50 before they can antagonize but it is your funeral if you want to antagonize at any level before 150.

I like that there is no restriction to which matches antagonists can enter. At a certain level they become the only entertainment. That and mentor matches.

...dont want to loose damage in my weapons in order to get more gold.
It is a pretty minuscule trade-off when your forge level is around 12-15. The gold amount increases substantially.

Gameplay Feedback / Re: Harec is a bad starting character
 on: October 23, 2018, 10:33:29 PM 
Nope, sorry, sitting on the Harec is for the good of the mission. Also It forces the baby Harec out of his comfort zone and he is forced to play another character. Another character that would beneficial for him. Plus, they make you recruit Hans almost immediately.

If your skill with the game is such that one person picking Harec over another literally is the difference between success and failure then you are not skilled enough to be making judgement calls on other people's ability to play the game.

You didn't ever get off Harec so we don't know if that person was going to pick them or not.

Also, the person picking Shae almost didn't because they thought you were going to pick Harec which more proves my point about the inherent problems with such a method. The person picking Shae was only level 17 and yet that doesn't seem to concern you at all.

Which leads me to believe most people who complain about "baby Harecs" are doing so because it is a popular thing. Jumping the band wagon, as it were. Level 2 Harec and Level 17 Shae should, by your own estimation, be equally useless.

No one has yet to identify the exact thing that is wrong with allowing someone to pick their character they like.

Perhaps the solution is as simple as there being more people who cannot complete a mission with a low level handicap than people who can complete a mission with a low level handicap. Which makes sense, not everyone is going to be good enough to do that as this thread shows.

Gameplay Feedback / Re: Mentor Matches and Antagonists...
 on: October 23, 2018, 09:53:35 PM 
A whole bunch of sensationalist nonsense.
First you say that people of a lower level should not join mentor matches.

Then you go on to explain that you're sorry to the players that necessitate a mentor match but no one wants to join with you and that you wish things were different.

Do these two ideas seem like they make sense when used together?

I can't tell my dog to stay inside then get mad when they pee on the carpet, right?

I shouldn't tell people not join mentor matches then immediately complain about people not joining mentor matches, right?

Honestly, if you have so much shit to throw at the game, as I've seen from most of your recent posts, then why not leave?

You are at this point trying to personally attack the developers of the game and I doubt it is helpful at all.

MSE has at the most made it so YOU don't want to play mentor matches and YOU are hardly the majority of players.

Gameplay Feedback / Re: Game Difficulty
 on: October 22, 2018, 03:38:42 PM 
The problem is the game is being balanced towards pvp as well. So guns eventually don't deal enough damage to take care of the enemy hordes and your hp doesn't scale up either while enemies damage/health just keeps going higher. Eventually at around 60%+ mmr it becomes too much for raiders to handle. They need to remove the mmr system and just add difficulty modes that are properly balanced for the current raiders strenghts.
Yes. Hm. Like I said; higher MMRs should be more challenging. In fact, you should be losing more than winning at such a high MMR because at 60% there is likely very few other people at that level. Your queue times must be ridiculous. And to what end?

Having a high MMR is foolish. It greatly detracts from the ability to generate gold/exp/faction.

The lapse in logic I am referring to happens in this moment. Having almost double the difficulty the game was balanced for is definitely a choice you have to make. Just like you could choose to lower your MMR and not ever hassle with super strong grunts and lose nothing in the process. Because it is a choice you are actively making then is it not something you truly desire?

But you don't, obviously, want to lower your MMR. Many people stoically believe a higher MMR does anything, in any game, to make you directly superior to others and it almost never does.

I keep my MMR low, way low, and I still run into antagonists with a skill level of 40-50%. Man, I'd love to see their face when they lose to lil' 25% me.

MMR means nothing other than the difficulty of the game.

When I found the game too challenging I realized I could manipulate the MMR very easily and have ever since not allowed it to go past 50% because I don't think I'm hot shit. I know I'm not the best and so when I lose at 45-50% MMRs to the AI I don't think; "Man, this game is fucking broken!" I think; "Oh, I can just lower my MMR and I will be back to an appropriate difficulty."

But, a lot of people believe they are hot shit and know they are the best so it will never settle with them that there is a challenge they cannot overcome. Even though the challenge was designed specifically to not be overcome. It is a problem with ego and being human in general.

Suggestions / Re: Quality of life chances
 on: October 22, 2018, 03:00:36 PM 
There will be a form of chat system when guilds arrive.

The new "Identity" system also will likely have many cosmetics to purchase and use.

Last time I checked Doldren was 180k(maybe it went up?) and you can get about 4-5k gold per match with a max bounty hunter weapon. At roughly 10 minutes a match, which is a good time to shoot for if you want 9+, in one hour you would have have roughly 15% of him unlocked. If it did increase to 280k then it would be about 11%. Either way at 4 hours a day getting on average a score of 9 you should have him totally unlocked in just a few days. If it takes you months are definitely doing it wrong.

Also, 10% of 280k is 28k. It took you several days to make 28k? Playing 4 hours a day? Come on, now.

Gameplay Feedback / Re: Game Difficulty
 on: October 22, 2018, 02:22:14 PM 
It seems like there is a lapse in logic if you believe having a high MMR should mean you win every match. I do not think the majority of the people who complain about this situation understand what MMR is supposed to do and what it means having a high and low MMR.

Any game that uses a matching system will eventually match you to a match you will not win because as you increase your MMR you are telling the game you are better than X% of the people who are also playing. Just like MMRs work for every game, it is a measure of your skill in relation to other players.

In this case the "other player" is the AI and it seems logical that it should become increasingly challenging as you increase your MMR.

I mean, you can't get a score of 10 at any MMR as far as I know. And even at ~30% MMR you will get a 9.2-9.3 with a perfect score(even less than perfect). You should logically infer that the game was balanced for ~30% or whatever the lowest MMR is that you can also achieve a 9.2-9.3 with a near perfect performance.

Then you can draw the conclusion that having ~20% OVER the difficulty the game was designed with then you are attempting an extra challenge for largely your own personal gratification. There are very very minuscule rewards for getting your MMR high and the reason for this is super duper obvious. It is stupid easy to get a high MMR.

MMR is for the challenge, if that is your thing. It does not seem to be anybodies thing, however. Well, you're in luck as it is stupid easy to lower your MMR.

The idea that the game isn't being balanced correctly comes from this misunderstanding about the nature of the MMR system. Many people fail to realize that just because the game lacks a sophisticated PVP ranking system doesn't mean the rules have changed at all regarding the way matching is set up. You will eventually, like every other game, get a match you can't win. Just because it is against the AI shouldn't matter either way.

Unfortunately, no one will see it this way. They will relentlessly slam their head against the MMR wall wondering how they, who are so very good at the game, could possibly lose. Then come here and strongly imply the game is too difficult without admitting it is their own lack of skill preventing them from claiming the victory they feel they are owed.

Gameplay Feedback / Re: Harec is a bad starting character
 on: October 22, 2018, 06:33:15 AM 
Just pick Herrick as soon as you're able to but don't ready up. Then when it gets to like 3 seconds left pick the character you actually want to play. This way low levels can't pick him up even if they tried.

Yeah...but if they are so new that you don't trust them to play as Harec wouldn't they only have three other characters to choose from?

Wouldn't there be a few situations where someone wants to play as Alicia but they follow your advice to sit on Harec. Then when it is 3 seconds they pick Alicia but the other two players have chosen Lycus and Konstantin. The new player would be forced into Harec anyway.

Or what if the reverse happened; someone sits on Harec but you want to pick him for BP or whatever but you decide not to because they are just sitting on him not locking in.

Either way, Harec is a good character and I don't think it is appropriate to take that away from anyone.

And honestly, I would think a person who does this is an asshole.

Shamash and his army may or may not have knowledge of Aleph engines. I personally believe that they don't because they didn't bring a ship with them. The idea of leaving the Broken Planet was a taboo one in his time and ascending to the stars to spread their destructive ways was the absolute last thing a great majority of Locals wanted to happen.

Even now, in real life, we have a significant amount of people and organizations working on traversing the stars in a reasonable manner. They still can't quite get it right and that is without most of the population trying to actively get in their way.

I doubt knowledge of space-time bending spaceship engines was knowledge anyone could freely discuss. In fact, the existence of the Legacy shows that they thoroughly believed spaceships were not necessary and anyone who believed in Shamash would not worry themselves with such astronomical wonders. Since Shamash and his crew did know what the Legacy did they knew they would not need a ship of any sort to accomplish their task of aiding their descendants.

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8