Jump to content

Ondis

  • Content Count

    16
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Ondis last won the day on August 3

Ondis had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2 Neutral
  1. Three questions, my apologies if it has been answered before, just point me there and I'll read that instead. 1. Why can't the war systembe re-introduced immediately since the code is there I assume? 2. Donation goals are always a bit messy. First of all it only offsets other costs. Like one problem in international relations is that food aid to certain dictatorships offsets those costs that means they can buy more weapons. Its a bad example and nothing to do with this game more so than process-wise. I mean maybe I'm overdoing my concerns here a bit but does for example donating for a certain goal mean that G-Arena doesn't get a cut of that money as they would with gold coins? What stops them from getting a bigger cut from gold coins ^^ ? I guess one thing is that the donation goals wouldn't be worked on at all due to the state of the game otherwise. But then questions 3: Remaking HoN into a 64 bit process was something thought of as too expensive and time consuming even pre-Garena times. Are we sure that isn't a bit too lofty of a goal? The others seem fine tho.
  2. At least EU got the rubberbanding under control a bit. Which I guess is one of the positive effects of streamlining. Though of course some game execs and marketing people have argued that this constant change adds to keeping the game fresh and new. But when pressed, like in Hearthstone they say it's because that's what gets people buying new cards. Which granted in their cases is more about power creep than rubberbanding but still. Some people seem to genuinely like it, I never cared for it. The cycle is basically people work hard to figure out a hero or a meta, then that meta is considered too "OP" and nerfed which is then replaced by a new meta or hero that suddenly starts shining or shines as necessity is the mother of invention and then the cycle repeats itself. I'm pretty terrible at some mechanics of the game. Like I could never learn Silhoutte even tho I'm pretty good with Ophelia. DR is way too twitchy for me, etc. But I alwaÿs enjoyed watching people play them to their fullest potential. I think my Accursed (current winration at about 75%) and old Nitro play was close to legendary if I tryhard for example - i play around, rage and multitask too much to climb tho. Bubbles was almost ruined for me when his shell was slowed down but now it's more or less back to normal or close to it ( I forgot which ). While some heroes have been streamlined or had their unique mechanics nerfed or removed I still think it's the streamlining of the general gameplay that has caused the various roles and situational actions mentioned by ensid get a more and more diminishing return which makes it feel like a lot of those heroes you enjoyed in the past just suck now. But yah, it's a problem either way. edit: I suspect that one of the things EU and company might be looking at is the above mentioned fact that in SEA CM is more popular than normal mode. Well part of that is the reason that in SEA this is or was the default MOBA while in NA/EU/RUS or even Latin America this is the hardcore moba or retained a following because it is hardcore. So different demographics. And even CM is better because it just makes it easier and faster to do all these different tasks. CM doesn't disrupt the game, in fact it encourages alternative plays. While the loser doesn't get punished much the winner of big fights or sneaky moves gets a lot more profit.
  3. So first of all ever since like about 4.x the game doesn't go to the stat screen for me once finished. (the one with Exp, coins earned, peoples gpm etc) Instead it pushes me out into the main menue. This has several issues. Reports aren't made if they were made in game until you see the stat screen. Nor can you see your stats and check other peoples stats for a while. The second issue has been happening since forever so I guess you're aware of it but if not: So basically sometimes you can't even report someone in game and this has been going on since like 3.0. Two of the people on the left side aren't reportable through the in-game or rather in-match interface, two others are which is the weird part about this bug. They are through the stat screen but that brings us to point 1.
  4. @ensidI think that's a symptom of not being able to outsmart the enemy. You just have to be super consistent now, like in HotS. If you really know the mechanics of twitchy heroes and play them well like Silhoutte or Bubbles or stuff like this you can still dominate completely but it's becoming harder and harder to outsmart and outmanouver people. Wards are too cheap, cost gets refunded, stacking is easy, loss on death is low, orb helps with xp and gold. So "moves" you make have a smaller value and if the moves fail you've lost too much for not farming. Game's become more like HoTS where you have to saturate those lanes and have everything stacked at every moment when you're not fighting and keep in range of the orb when every ou can. It's even more important now with the new jungle because its so much easier to stack and in late game the old ancient patch is obviously worth less now so you clear the jungle much faster if you're just roaming through it. It's much less a "solo" game and much more a team game. Both in terms of like a carry looking for kills and a support looking not to get killed. These matter less now.
  5. Yeah but the problem here is not the Orb in of itself dude. It's just one example. I liked Merricks bounty a bit more because it evened out the gold a bit without forcing you to commit to it. And it worked for roamers too because of the large radius and the way it functioned. It's the problem of limiting frustration, including positive frustration. So I'd like your perspective on that. Because as I said I could list dozens of examples of design choices that whether I think of them as good or bad had the unifying point of limiting frustration and making the game less hardcore. While in some cases as this they've added negative frustration that cannot be overcome. And yeah, this includes hatchets, and now hatchets are a near must buy on ranged heroes as well. At that point you might as well boost everyones initial attack. But at least it's jsut 200 gold. As was Merricks. The orb is especially destructive because supports were supposed to be able to add variety through their initial purchases. You even limited the initial variety by increasing the price of the bottle by 50 gold. So you can't go for a boosted mid anymore but nor can you really go say ring of teachers as a first item. And when it comes to other design choices they are built into the design of the game now. Choices have been streamlined, heroes have been streamlined, mechanics and map have been simplified. And you can't even tell people to fuck off anymore ;D It's still there to a degree, yes... but it's limited. And every choice or nearly every choice in patching has been limiting it rather than adding to it. And it's of course surrounded by the various meta choices that limit "frustration" such as unkillable couriers, lower pause times, lower afk times now, heck even the safe teleport thing that was imported from DotA 2 which is an option. That thing kills me every time I install the game and I know of nobody that uses it. But it was only included I guess, because DotA has it. And DotA still has some hardcore elements like fighting over the runes. And on the topic of the runes, of course you made the merrick rune. And there's no early kong and so on - I really could go on Again it limits frustration, that's all it does, it limits the feeling of failure and heck in this case I even like it. I think the difference was a bit too big. But from the greater perspective almost every change is in this direction. It doesn't make logical sense. If the game was so negatively frustrating in the past it wouldn't have grown as huge as it did. So clearly you need or should review the concept of positive frustration and begin adding it back to retain your core demographic bla bla bla. So it's not like every individual change is bad, it's that the sum total is a clear downward trend into casualness. And why? You know I said I understand it from a business perspective but to tell you the truth I don't. What kind of gamers are you trying to attract, are you trying to compete with DotAs demographic? Or worse LoLs?` And why would they switch?
  6. I know that a lot of companies working down there partner up with something else than payapal. I'm not an expert but it could be worth checking into. In the past Internet Cafés were key but that has changed a lot in recent years in Brazil. Shedding that's pretty nice of you.
  7. Even Blizzard can't do that. Tons of ex employees have born witness of how Activision ruined the company inside out and we know what EA does with the studios it buys. The worst thing about capitalism is acquisition. If there's anything I'd regulate it's that (after health hazards I guess). You can't just buy shit and add it to your corporate portfolio. There are generally two types of acquisitions. "Hold for value" and "milk it for what its worth". There was a long time Blizzard was owned by a "hold for value" corp that invested in it from a long term perspective. Then Activision got ahold of it and its stock soared obviously as it was milking the IP for all it was worth. EA used to milk, deplete value and then buy an other studio, rince and repeat. Though I honestly don't know what G-Arena is doing .
  8. I dont know, maybe Im a bit harsh here. I liked Goldenveil he is a fun hero with a unique mechanic and I think you're balances are fine stat wise in terms of what you're trying to do. The apple and lunar tea is kinda nice too! Certainly makes it a *bit more* hardcore :)! I haven't bought a multiplayer game except for Sim-racing that I've liked in a long time that's all. Everything is so casual. Except in like Sim and War-strategy but then it's so hardcore and you need to spend like 70 usd per plane or 30 per car to get something. That good hardcore mass appeal kind of thing seems gone. I guess it kinda survives in these PUBG like clones or like Z-day stuff where if you die you lose your stuff and there's only one life per round and stuff like that. MMORPGs too, used to be tons of things like TIbia, UO, Eve Online... there's really nothing new like that where if you die you get fucked. Yet there's clearly a market since these old relics still survive, Runescape too. I don't blame you for taking the path you and probably G-Arena have made up your minds for. I just wish it wasn't and I can't help but complain like an old dog that will never learn to sit Starcraft isn't casual I guess but I just don't have the reaction time for that anymore.
  9. I kind of doubt that you would be able to or willing to admit you're wrong on this point and I wrote a much longer post listing all the things that you've done to limit frustration. But I think we agree on the basic premise. No matter the good or bad things of the patching since you took over from WZA (and it has been far more consistent and less all over the place) the one unifying factor is limiting frustration. So instead of listing the dozen or so meta changes you've made to limit it and listing my reasons for why I think lmiting frustration is bad I'll ask you first. Why do you think that limiting frustration is good? Eh, I mean you'll probably fall back on "not discussing moderator actions in public" or some lame excuse this time.but if I remember correctly the story was more akin to you not allowing a particular line of discussion among forum members (not you and forum members) and me telling you to fuck of if you can't handle people discussing your reworks. Regardless a permanent ban was a bit harsh. This is why I liked Maliken, inspite of everything the man had some spine. He could dish it out but he could also take it and his ethos is what made this game so amazing, inspite of his many faults. Now this will be relevant lower down in the post. _ About frustration: I mean I could send you this if you'd actually read it? I'm not saying you're the exception here. Most people do not want to change their beliefs or have them challenged, especially when they are in a position of authority. : http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A821653&dswid=-781 I think you fall in a totally different category of people and players to those that enjoyed and made this game what it was early on. Your style and your ethos and thus your design choices are much different to that of early S2. Let's just point out the taunts and announcers. They are meant to cause frustration (on one side) - or anger, resentment, etc... and a sense of accomplishment and pride on the other. I bet if you had a say they wouldn't have looked quite the way they do. Maybe we'd not even have custom avatars but generic trash like in other games Heck there's a Devo-skin that says "Come here you b i t c h". It's probably a word already censored in the forum and something that I imagine today could lead (if repeated) to a ban in game. This game, despite being in a state of disrepair for a long while survived because it's or "was" hardcore. And it was hardcore because punishment and reward were so enormous. Mistakes cost dearly AND it catered to that segment of the population. And this is something that would be self evident if you were that type of player. But I can bring up more casual examples instead of university papers. There's a reason why Counter Strike became the popular game it is. Its main innovation was a timer. A timer of frustration. Where if you failed too much too early you'd be punished with less play. You'd have to wait for your team to finnish. It was an innovation. And it created a sense of accomplishment to stay alive and be in a situation of 5v1 and sitll win that previous FPS games with their dethmatch or CTF didn't have. __ TL DR (exemplified positive frustration (working hard, with small margins as a support in the past) with negative - imposed - frustration (being forced to every game buy an item to stay competetive with the other support):
  10. I kind of doubt that you would be able to or willing to admit you're wrong on this point and I wrote a much longer post listing all the things that you've done to limit frustration. But I think we agree on the basic premise. No matter the good or bad things of the patching since you took over from WZA (and it has been far more consistent and less all over the place) the one unifying factor is limiting frustration. So instead of listing the dozen or so meta changes you've made to limit it and listing my reasons for why I think limiting frustration is bad I'll ask you first. Why do you think that limiting frustration is good? Edit: also yeah, I was permanently banned from the boards after criticizing you over Nitro, I figured the database of bans not being transfered over was intentional was intentional otherwise you need to learn or more likely remember to do that if you feel that people previously banned should stay so.
  11. @EU Why should heroes be perfectly balanced to each other? What I mean is that there may be heroes few players play really well but others can't play i.e. skill ceilings may be different. In other cases certain heroes may only be good in certain compositions? Or rather balancing itself is semantics. What I mean is that rather than thinking about concepts and cool mechanics or combo potentials you've these few years been trying to bland out the game a bit, nerfing or reducing certain that you felt were "abusive" or "annoying" mechanics while trying to pool more and more heroes towards a center. This has also in general been happening even before that by making it easier for supports and junglers, and again it happened. Less specialization basically and more of a "same same" around which you can micro-balance things. It's a very bland approach imo. edit: Even the reasoning is this: The main goal of the changes to the "new" Forests of Caldavar map is to make the viability of each laning setup choice to be more on par with one another, while retaining their own unique benefits and disadvantages." "Everything should be similiar."..seems to be the mantra and what ever you pick you should have more oppurtunity to play the game anywhere (any lane/role) the way you want to. Even less consideration to be given on which side you're on. Tbh I found it kinda interesting (and certainly a result of the nature of the map being community made) that hellbourne and legion had different strengths and weaknesses in terms of location and map while still being overall balanced. That has been steadily eroded.
  12. It should be the other way around unless it's a pure business decision. Right now the high sub account price doesn't make sense because of the ease to make a new account to smurf and just creates more disjointment in the community and a hastle for people. It even discourages other types of purchases like skins for the account and it has very little effect on stemming the smurfing. But if new accounts for the purpose of smurfing were made more difficult the price could stay the same and new players wouldn't be buying too many sub accounts anyway. But yeah it could be lowered a bit in general I guess.
  13. So you suggest smurfers can smurf without actually having to worry about not getting sprees to keep the lower rank? I would assume that almost no smurf would have problem with this - while new players would, since they couldn't degrade to lower ranks and were forced to play against way too strong opponents. Let alone the actual average players which play with op-smurfs with an immortal each game and totally garbage players in every single game. Where's the improvement again? I mean if your suggestion is actually to just hide their rank: Why would they even care? You don't get anything from your rank (aside from blames why you're rank X when you clearly play like bronze) They get somethign from having a good kdr and a high winrate. Their first 20+ games wouldn't contribute to this but would adjust their placement. Make it 30 or 40 if you want. This means that they either have to play average/shitty 20-40 games or if they tryhard and crush they will by the time of reaching ranked be like DIamond and then the system is working as intended.
  14. The solution is simple, as its implemented by Blizzard already despite having a 100 times larger playerbase in Sc2. Let the people in unranked play with ranked but without a rank. Lowers the reward and feeling of accomplishment for a smurfer. Otherwise just lower the price for making a new account, doesn't make sense to keep that in place then.
×
×
  • Create New...