Jump to content

XP and loot should be distributed based on character performance


Recommended Posts


@Griede Starless quote:


@Isukun quotearrow-10x10.png:


Snip

lets try this again. i didnt disagree with you. we were both pointing out that your system has a flaw, that can be exploited tremendiously by builders. your system alows for BONUSarrow-10x10.png exp yes? based on preformance, yes? again, how can anyone get bonusarrow-10x10.png exp, if the mobs are destroyed by defences? that is what you seem to be missing.

honestly, your whole argument of builders not getting anything in the current system is based off the idea that builders do all the work, yet most times afkers still get even creditarrow-10x10.png for doing nothing. this, in your perspective, seems unfair because in comparison the afkers (w/e they are) are getting credit for something they didnt do. however, if everyone gets equal credit, how is it that the builders get nothing? point being, no one is getting 'ahead', the only way you really get screwed is due to rng on gear.

and you cant say that builders dont get anything in the current set up, they simply dont get anything 'extra'.  so it seems to me that this is more a system to alow builders to get something special, and not really to help everyone else out.

the whole point of your system 'seems' to be to alow for a more 'fair' system, when in reality to looks to be more to be simply to alow anyone who understands the system to exploit it, which really is no different from what we already have,

also, i would add that since there is a very low level cap (regardless of the grind to get there) any system designed simply to promote a bonus of exp is rather pointless.

As an example, basing it off of an average of player activity. This means people are actively encouraged not to do both well by other party members. It can also still be bypassed for boosting purposefully instead of just a community mentality.

Examples. We have one to two builders. One to three dps. Now, the more you do average, the better your exp. So... let's say a builder wants to also swap to a dps and help out, or even use their builder to apply abilities to stop enemies that are starting to break through. Such as a dark mage getting stuck at outskirts and people are busy elsewhere. Or they just want to. Reasons. Even not specialized they will damage the average if they do 'too' well, and may be encouraged by the actual fighters to not do anything but... sit there, even if they want to fight. On the other hand, an exploit is this. The builders already get an exp bonus. So to tilt the dps average they go swipe a sword once each at a monster. Or whatever the minimum is. The dps's may now afk after several swipes. By the average, they did massively more damage than anyone else doing dps.

You can also do the reverse for builders, which makes things... weird. Builders would ask dps to build BAD buildings that do very low dps to do increased average as well. So you'd have spare du being used on useless boosting towers on maps. People will figure out ways to afk or work around overly strict, unfun limitations. Somebody with excellent ice towers wouldn't want to build them for the combo. Ice towers do no damage. If ice firing did count, people can keep their greens and build crappy ice towers pointing everywhere regardless of defenses to ensure 'build average' and just afk after. With their giant range and lack of an actual damage value, that's another exploit. These are just things I think of as I respond! It's worse when somebody really wants to afk or troll!

I suppose you could say anyone who builds or does dps can only get averaged from one or the other, but then you again segregate it by making it so only builders build, and only dps do the damages, leaving only one maybe two builders allowed per map.

*adopts accent* Ah yes, only those who contribute may gain. No room for the individuality or personal desires. I'm thinking that while your idea is communism, that it is being too strong too early, comrade. Not entirely appropriate for the towering defenses, yes. Enforcement and rule and restriction, new ones and new ones as the oppressed continue to work around it. Adopting the aggressiveness when one does not simply going along with new militarization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 116
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

All seriousness though after the accent bit, I think that while perhaps your idea must be amazing and cool and all to you, and no one seems to quite 'get it', I think that if after all this time and posting by different people, just about no one getting or liking it, you ought to consider moving past trying to arguing aggressively with everyone into having a different opinion that's the exact same copy as yours.

It's not just one or two people. Even if I am wrong without understanding how, and I have taken that into consideration, there are several other people you also have yet to convince, not just myself. From what I've seen, just about every other person posting. Plus you haven't really addressed ALL of the issues brought to your attention. You're biting down on specific things, and then ignoring the rest of the posts while banking on those specific things you're talking about being incorrect. I understand that you feel strongly about this, but you must have noticed by now that your thread has... what, one like, and most of your bumps are disagreements with it, or you arguing with those people are incorrect in disagreeing.

There are just too many holes in it, to me, at least, and it strikes me as wholly unnecessary, perhaps even damaging to the game were it to be implemented, as well as a large amount of time spent being added in over many more needed things for gameplay that will be almost guaranteed to improve it better than this. Matchmaking, more combos, increase in dynamic play, ubers, etc.

Heck, simply having more new hero options in general would increase the amount of players contributing, as their buildings and abilities would be different. Ubers being the quick and dirty replacement holdovers til then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"XP and loot should be distributed based on character performance"


i read the tittle, and i laugh.

Sorry but, if you want active player, put a system like this is not good.

I only think about that :

1°) Im a stuffed player, i build all, i got all reward. k thx. Other player ? get ***ed.


2°) Squire tanky way, no reward ? damn but i tank ! what ? i did no hero damage or defense damage ? okay thanks...

3 to infinite°) Blablabla you can imagine easy other things who will tell you this idea suck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Ninja_Kero quote:

As an example, basing it off of an average of player activity. This means people are actively encouraged not to do both well by other party members. It can also still be bypassed for boosting purposefully instead of just a community mentality. 

Once again, you exhibit your total lack of comprehension on how this system works. It's getting to be pretty pointless to respond to you.  You clearly don't understand the suggestion and no amount of explanation makes it clearer for you.  Plus you evidently just ignored the bit about adding a handicap, but whatever, you're the only one that can improve your reading comprehension skills.

You may also want to look up Communism.  It doesn't mean what you think it means.

The reason people don't "get it" is because you've derailed the entire topic with your nonsense.   People are responding to your points, which I've shown over and over again, are not valid.  So, good job on confusing people.


@Kadiak quote:

"XP and loot should be distributed based on character performance"


i read the tittle, and i laugh.

Sorry but, if you want active player, put a system like this is not good.

I only think about that :

1°) Im a stuffed player, i build all, i got all reward. k thx. Other player ? get ***ed.


2°) Squire tanky way, no reward ? damn but i tank ! what ? i did no hero damage or defense damage ? okay thanks...

3 to infinite°) Blablabla you can imagine easy other things who will tell you this idea suck.

Good job, you read the title, but completely failed to read the thread.  Why not try reading the idea before you criticize it.  Might make you look like less of a fool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Isukun quote:


@Ninja_Kero quote:

As an example, basing it off of an average of player activity. This means people are actively encouraged not to do both well by other party members. It can also still be bypassed for boosting purposefully instead of just a community mentality. 

Once again, you exhibit your total lack of comprehension on how this system works. It's getting to be pretty pointless to respond to you.  You clearly don't understand the suggestion and no amount of explanation makes it clearer for you.  Plus you evidently just ignored the bit about adding a handicap, but whatever, you're the only one that can improve your reading comprehension skills.

You may also want to look up Communism.  It doesn't mean what you think it means.

The reason people don't "get it" is because you've derailed the entire topic with your nonsense.   People are responding to your points, which I've shown over and over again, are not valid.  So, good job on confusing people.


@Kadiak quote:

"XP and loot should be distributed based on character performance"


i read the tittle, and i laugh.

Sorry but, if you want active player, put a system like this is not good.

I only think about that :

1°) Im a stuffed player, i build all, i got all reward. k thx. Other player ? get ***ed.


2°) Squire tanky way, no reward ? damn but i tank ! what ? i did no hero damage or defense damage ? okay thanks...

3 to infinite°) Blablabla you can imagine easy other things who will tell you this idea suck.

Good job, you read the title, but completely failed to read the thread.  Why not try reading the idea before you criticize it.  Might make you look like less of a fool.

I read all, and its the same, i disagree about this system. I'm okay only with an anti-afk system improvement but not that.

I dislike an idea of reward about "what you do in the fight", if you dont like to see player who Slack, afk, or dont play 100%, then make friend in the game, and go private game.

Your system idea, is too complicated to make. Really, make a system who will take all type of game play, by stat, really ?

Come on dude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't want people getting xp from your work then go play solo and quit whining about it. Also, how is there even 2 pages worth of argument over something everyone can get maxed out in no time at all?

If you argue they are using you for xp then they could argue that you are using them for loot chance. Seriously who gives a damn either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Kadiak quote:

I read all, and its the same, i disagree about this system. I'm okay only with an anti-afk system improvement but not that.

I dislike an idea of reward about "what you do in the fight", if you dont like to see player who Slack, afk, or dont play 100%, then make friend in the game, and go private game.

Your system idea, is too complicated to make. Really, make a system who will take all type of game play, by stat, really ?

Come on dude.

It was pretty obvious from your first post you hadn't read beyond the title.  It's actually not that complicated to implement, it's just simple math and the game already tracks these stats.  It would just tack on a modifier based on how your stats compare to other players.  It's really not rocket science and would make the game more like most other games that have experience-based leveling systems, you know, where you get experience for actually doing things, rather than just getting experience for showing up.


Usually, I do play private games, because at least with my friends, there is some incentive to work together.  You don't get too much of that in public games because there is no incentive to perform relative to your teammates.  Just like there is zero incentive to build together since building offers zero rewards in the game.  If you want to level your builder, you have to either convert them into a fighter and sacrifice their builder stats, or not use a viable fighter so your builder can soak up XP and generally be useless.  You do not gain experience based on the actions you take, only by being present in the combat phase.  You don't gain loot based on what you do, only by being present in the combat phase.  That is a major flaw in the game's design.  It doesn't do anything to encourage players to get better or do well.  You get the same rewards whether you sit there and do nothing or whether you're carrying the team.  You think that's fair?  Really?


@› Rabid Lemming quote:

If you don't want people getting xp from your work then go play solo and quit whining about it. Also, how is there even 2 pages worth of argument over something everyone can get maxed out in no time at all?

If you argue they are using you for xp then they could argue that you are using them for loot chance. Seriously who gives a damn either way.

First off, the max level cap will not always be 25 and as they push the cap higher, it will take longer to reach the higher levels.  Second, there was a lot more to this suggestion than just dealing with people who AFK.  It's also about creating a way for builder characters to gain XP and loot without having to be a throwaway fighter in the combat round.  You do not currently gain experience for building, upgrading or repairing defenses, nor do they grant experience for the mobs they kill.  Instead, XP is simply doled out for being present during the combat phase.  Since the game encourages players to have dedicated builder and DPS characters, it kind of sucks when you're forced to play as a fighter in order to actually build that character.  Playing solo doesn't fix that.  Another major goal was to promote team play by evaluating players based on how they perform compared to their teammates in each wave, incentivising actual participation and improvement.  After all, if you don't play the game, what's the point?


Considering how many topics there have been about encouraging better team play and the fact that even the devs are concerned about team play, I'd say there's a decent number of people who DO give a damn about this sort of thing. I'd also be willing to bet that if you asked people if they think builders should get XP from waves just like fighters, you'd find a lot of people would say "yes."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Griede Starless quote:

i wanted to reinterate. im not actually against this idea. im simply trying to point out potential flaws in it as a long time MMOer.

That's fine, I just get annoyed having to repeat myself over and over again when people like Ninja_Kero make it a point to misinterpret whatever I say or people like Kadiak chime in with a snooty post criticizing the idea without even bothering to read the first post.  I shouldn't have to defend the idea regarding flaws that don't exist.  That's why I just let it die before.  It wasn't worth trying to explain it over and over again, and nobody was going to agree with it based on misconceptions on how the system actually worked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Isukun quote:


You do not currently gain experience for building, upgrading or repairing defenses, nor do they grant experience for the mobs they kill.  Instead, XP is simply doled out for being present during the combat phase. 


 I am starting to doubt you play this game, and are simply writing from watching over somebody's shoulder. There are little pop ups that tell you that you did the thing. You also get these things called synergy bonuses. Agh, too much of the game to explain to you, long story short, that is totally wrong.


@Isukun quote:

Considering how many topics there have been about encouraging better team play and the fact that even the devs are concerned about team play, I'd say there's a decent number of people who DO give a damn about this sort of thing. I'd also be willing to bet that if you asked people if they think builders should get XP from waves just like fighters, you'd find a lot of people would say "yes."

The devs being concerned about team play is normal. It doesn't mean they need any old idea thrown out that is related to the topic.

Also yes, I'm sure that builders saying that they want more xp would be a thing. You know what would also give builders more exp aside from this idea? Giving builders more exp with the pop ups by itself. Bam.


@Isukun quote:

Since the game encourages players to have dedicated builder and DPS characters, it kind of sucks when you're forced to play as a fighter in order to actually build that character.  Playing solo doesn't fix that.  Another major goal was to promote team play by evaluating players based on how they perform compared to their teammates in each wave, incentivising actual participation and improvement.  After all, if you don't play the game, what's the point?

When you start out, and even later on, your defenses tend to weaken over time and require repair. You're looking at doing nothing as something that tower defense players don't want as opposed to something they aspire to. Players try to create the best variants of a defense. The fastest killing, the least maintenance (afk), and even the most amusing and prettiest. You see the tower planner and the thrones as ideas? They're there for a reason. There are different kinds of strategy types, and aiming for a defense you don't need to contribute to is a thing many builders aim for. So you sit upon your throne, and work upon your deadly works, and relax, job completed.


Normally this is an end achievement in many games, slaughtering enemies while relaxing, whereas before you were struggling just to make it to wave 2, and reminiscing, glorying in retribution. Yeah, part of playing the game would, by your current definition, be not participating at all... past building that perfect setup. It may take one builder, it may take four, and they may or may not be from the same person, or several people, perhaps using a schematic or making their own for the first time, but it is praise worthy.


I like DD1 for its various multipliers, myself. Avoid fighting as much as possible, making it harder but more exp. Things like that. Personalized challenges tied to each person not to the group.


Really I think for you it's our personal problem with other people. You admitted to playing solo mostly, and only with specific friends, because otherwise you don't care about others, because it gets you nothing out of it, there is no incentive. So you post this suggestion so that you can get something out of working with others, without adjusting your attitude in the slightest. Really, most or all of your problems would be solved if you got so upset over things that are really up to the preferences of other players, and actually played to enjoy yourself, rather than treating it like work instead of a game. People play to relax. O_o While your idea of relaxation may essentially be a work farm, some people prefer napping or yoga, something light. You want this game to be way way more active, requiring far more constant attention, and DDE illustrates how going far down that route can kill a thing.


People also have, surprisingly enough to you I am sure, reasons to be slow or appear afk.

A lot of strategy players don't play shooter heavy games because they're physically or mentally too slow to keep up reaction time wise, or have busy real lives, or just really need stress relief, or simply prefer thinking long term, planning it out (again, dd2 planner), being smart about things, and while they may not be every single player, they're going to be a huge chunk of the base. They have many reasons more than this. These types of players came from DD1, and will be expecting a lot more of the same, alongside new things. Your whole 'constantly doing things always or else you're useless' mentality doesn't fit with them. You need to consider who else is playing, how they are playing, not just yourself and what you want, and throwing out rules and restrictions and addenda.

Your constant sneer down your nose and calling others stupid or illiterate schtick thing isn't helping anyone either. I've warned you about you derailing conversations with that sort of talk. Btw, suggesting I'm the sole reason people don't like your idea is silly. My response is hardly the first, only. And many people read JUST your messages and still say no. It's no healthy to be blaming or hating on people simply because no one will tell you yes.

Following that, I strongly suggest you actually address all of the issues presented by everyone, rather when, being stumped by a flaw, you start in on degrading them or telling them they can't read. If you're going to be rude, at least include something of substance to address the real issues as well, good god man. Otherwise it's pure vitriol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Isukun quote:
@Griede Starless quote:

i wanted to reinterate. im not actually against this idea. im simply trying to point out potential flaws in it as a long time MMOer.

That's fine, I just get annoyed having to repeat myself over and over again when people like Ninja_Kero make it a point to misinterpret whatever I say or people like Kadiak chime in with a snooty post criticizing the idea without even bothering to read the first post.  I shouldn't have to defend the idea regarding flaws that don't exist.  That's why I just let it die before.  It wasn't worth trying to explain it over and over again, and nobody was going to agree with it based on misconceptions on how the system actually worked.

Kadiak did read it in full and disliked it anyways, I can quote him saying so if you like. I can also quote you dismissing him as a liar directly afterwards...

You know, you can't improve on something if you insist there is absolutely nothing to improve upon. It's stagnation at best, and most certainly an abyss where ideas go to die. If you find that just about everyone else is insisting there are flaws, something has to be wrong, imo. If you did create an idea of absolute perfection, I demand you work on world peace, food, energy, morality, aging, and disease instead of this, and create the ultimate utopia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Ninja_Kero quote:

 I am starting to doubt you play this game, and are simply writing from watching over somebody's shoulder. There are little pop ups that tell you that you did the thing. You also get these things called synergy bonuses. Agh, too much of the game to explain to you, long story short, that is totally wrong.

You have a couple of feats that may provide a smattering of XP to builders if they meet particular criteria and even then, it only grants it to the character who initiates the synergy.  So if it's set off by a fighter based on an effect created by a trap, the fighter gets the bonus.  If the synergy is created by two traps, like the water trap and lightning aura synergy, only the character who built the second trap gets the bonus.  Feats that grant XP are ALL combat-oriented, intended to grant further bonuses to characters who fight.  You also have several feats for building, but none of them grant you anything except an icon on your screen. That's not leveling the playing field.  Builders do not see any of the standard stage XP, they're only able to get a small amount through a loophole on two of the feats.


@Ninja_Kero quote:

When you start out, and even later on, your defenses tend to weaken over time and require repair. You're looking at doing nothing as something that tower defense players don't want as opposed to something they aspire to. Players try to create the best variants of a defense. The fastest killing, the least maintenance (afk), and even the most amusing and prettiest. You see the tower planner and the thrones as ideas? They're there for a reason. There are different kinds of strategy types, and aiming for a defense you don't need to contribute to is a thing many builders aim for. So you sit upon your throne, and work upon your deadly works, and relax, job completed.

Sounds boring to me.  The game is SUPPOSED to be a hybrid action RPG/tower defense.  If all you want is the tower defense, there are other games that let you JUST build your defenses.  Doesn't make much sense to balance this game to be JUST a tower defense game.  So basically your argument is that players don't really want to play this game, they only want half of the game.  What's the point of buying into a game like this, then?  If playing the game is SUCH HARD WORK, why bother with it?  Why not pick up something less work intensive without the labor intensive combat elements?


Plus another example of your impeccable logic is that once again, you've brought up a problem that doesn't exist.  Since builders would get experience based on their towers in this scenario, they could still "relax" in the combat phase and get their XP from the towers.  They aren't pressured to perform as fighters since their efficiency is based on which role they were most effective at.  That's in the first post.  That's kind of one of the major points of the system.  It doesn't lock you into specific roles.  That's why every potential role is evaluated separately, so one role cannot take away from another and each character is only responsible for excelling at one thing, whether that be delivering damage, taking damage, building strong barriers, or building effective towers and traps.  Whatever they did the best will gain them XP and they aren't pressured to do the rest.  Not that I believe most people want to be inactive, I think that is a minority of players, it's just many are forced into it due to the way the current system favors fighters.  If you want your characters to level evenly, you HAVE to switch off periodically and put your builders in during the combat phase.  I get the feeling, though, most people would like to be able to swap out to their fighters for the combat phase, but get stuck having to use their builders when they want better loot or need to catch up on their levels.

@Ninja_Kero quote:

Kadiak did read it in full and disliked it anyways, I can quote him saying so if you like. I can also quote you dismissing him as a liar directly afterwards...

You know, you can't improve on something if you insist there is absolutely nothing to improve upon. It's stagnation at best, and most certainly an abyss where ideas go to die. If you find that just about everyone else is insisting there are flaws, something has to be wrong, imo. If you did create an idea of absolute perfection, I demand you work on world peace, food, energy, morality, aging, and disease instead of this, and create the ultimate utopia.

The first sentence there is a perfect example of how you don't read other people's posts.  I didn't call him a liar, I simply called him out on his first post again.  He hadn't read the thread before posting the first time.  The second time, who knows, he doesn't actually give any concrete criticism beyond "I don't like it."  But like I said, only you can improve your reading comprehension skills, so you might want to get working on that.


"People keep bringing up flaws I invented based on my misconceptions about your idea, flaws which I keep bringing up over and over again, so the flaws must exist!"  Yeah, no, the world doesn't work that way.  Imagining a problem exists does not make it exist.  You say something enough times, though, and people will believe it.  So, like I said before, good job confusing people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Isukun quote:

Sounds boring to me.  The game is SUPPOSED to be a hybrid action RPG/tower defense.  If all you want is the tower defense, there are other games that let you JUST build your defenses.  Doesn't make much sense to balance this game to be JUST a tower defense game.  So basically your argument is that players don't really want to play this game, they only want half of the game.  What's the point of buying into a game like this, then?  If playing the game is SUCH HARD WORK, why bother with it?  Why not pick up something less work intensive without the labor intensive combat elements?

I like playing mostly by building defenses.  This game still provides a very different experience from traditional tower defenses in a few ways.  Firstly, the defenses can get damaged.  In a pure tower defense, the defenses are typically invulnerable, or at least enemies won't aggro them if they can find a way path them.  Secondly, you can only interact with your immediate surroundings and not the entire map at once.  Even visibility is limited as the minimap only provides a rough indication of each enemy's power.  Thirdly, the item system is very attractive to someone who is also a fan of Diablo.

The person saying that builders can snatch the XP bonuses actually brings up a fair point.  You said that synergies can boost XP to over 100%.  So if lightning auras and geysers take out all the enemies right at the spawn point, how are the fighters to get any synergies?  Or would repairing the auras and traps count as healing and provide the XP bonus to them?

Another issue I'd like to raise is differentiating between fighters and builders.  I play with three builders in solo games, but my huntress also has a bit of dps stats to deal with difficult situations.  If builders and fighters are treated separately, wouldn't a hybrid build like that lose out since her damage output in either category is likely not as high as a dedicated build?  I suppose you could combine the efficiences in some way that still doesn't pit pure fighters against pure builders.

Finally, the item distribution.  The current system allows me to control which character I'm getting loot for.  At the moment my huntress is getting ahead so I'll probably have one of the others out during waves in the next few maps (and pick maps where I know my defenses can deal with the enemies with limited support).  Your suggestion would remove this control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@tdb quote:

The person saying that builders can snatch the XP bonuses actually brings up a fair point.  You said that synergies can boost XP to over 100%.  So if lightning auras and geysers take out all the enemies right at the spawn point, how are the fighters to get any synergies?  Or would repairing the auras and traps count as healing and provide the XP bonus to them?

You're talking about the bonus system, which would basically just be the equivalent of the current feats system.  Getting extra XP based on special scenarios is already implemented in the game.  So no, it's not the same as stealing XP from other players any more than it is with the current system.

@tdb quote:

Another issue I'd like to raise is differentiating between fighters and builders.  I play with three builders in solo games, but my huntress also has a bit of dps stats to deal with difficult situations.  If builders and fighters are treated separately, wouldn't a hybrid build like that lose out since her damage output in either category is likely not as high as a dedicated build?  I suppose you could combine the efficiences in some way that still doesn't pit pure fighters against pure builders.

You're talking about playing solo, in which case, if you're favoring your Huntress as your fighter, she would be getting XP based on her combat role, so no, she'd still be getting full XP in a solo game.  Unfortunately, with the way the game is currently structured, hybrid builds are really only viable in solo or private matches with people you know.  If you're playing multiplayer, you should have enough variety that you don't need to rely on hybrids to fill in the gaps.  Randoms favor builders that are maxed to build and fighters that are maxed to DPS.

@tdb quote:

Finally, the item distribution.  The current system allows me to control which character I'm getting loot for.  At the moment my huntress is getting ahead so I'll probably have one of the others out during waves in the next few maps (and pick maps where I know my defenses can deal with the enemies with limited support).  Your suggestion would remove this control.

It removes the limitation of only getting loot for the active character.  It changes the guidelines, but doesn't remove control.  You still choose which characters are active and to what degree when you are playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Isukun quote:


@Kadiak quote:

I read all, and its the same, i disagree about this system. I'm okay only with an anti-afk system improvement but not that.

I dislike an idea of reward about "what you do in the fight", if you dont like to see player who Slack, afk, or dont play 100%, then make friend in the game, and go private game.

Your system idea, is too complicated to make. Really, make a system who will take all type of game play, by stat, really ?

Come on dude.

It was pretty obvious from your first post you hadn't read beyond the title. 

and

@Isukun quote:


@Griede Starless quote:

i wanted to reinterate. im not actually against this idea. im simply trying to point out potential flaws in it as a long time MMOer.

That's fine, I just get annoyed having to repeat myself over and over again when people like Ninja_Kero make it a point to misinterpret whatever I say or people like Kadiak chime in with a snooty post criticizing the idea without even bothering to read the first post.

You keep saying it even after he says that he did. Strongly suggesting somebody didn't or repeatedly making it look like it enough is still about as bad as outright saying it, if not worse.

Another example.

@Isukun quote:

The first sentence there is a perfect example of how you don't read other people's posts.  I didn't call him a liar, I simply called him out on his first post again.  He hadn't read the thread before posting the first time.  The second time, who knows, he doesn't actually give any concrete criticism beyond "I don't like it." 

Right there, even now strongly suggesting he never read it because he didn't post an essay of a reply.


Calm down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Isukun quote:
@Ninja_Kero quote:

Kadiak did read it in full and disliked it anyways, I can quote him saying so if you like. I can also quote you dismissing him as a liar directly afterwards...

You know, you can't improve on something if you insist there is absolutely nothing to improve upon. It's stagnation at best, and most certainly an abyss where ideas go to die. If you find that just about everyone else is insisting there are flaws, something has to be wrong, imo. If you did create an idea of absolute perfection, I demand you work on world peace, food, energy, morality, aging, and disease instead of this, and create the ultimate utopia.

The first sentence there is a perfect example of how you don't read other people's posts.  I didn't call him a liar, I simply called him out on his first post again.  He hadn't read the thread before posting the first time.  The second time, who knows, he doesn't actually give any concrete criticism beyond "I don't like it."  But like I said, only you can improve your reading comprehension skills, so you might want to get working on that.


"People keep bringing up flaws I invented based on my misconceptions about your idea, flaws which I keep bringing up over and over again, so the flaws must exist!"  Yeah, no, the world doesn't work that way.  Imagining a problem exists does not make it exist.  You say something enough times, though, and people will believe it.  So, like I said before, good job confusing people.

Going back to this, my favorite part really. After suggesting again that another commenter didn't do as they said, and instead went back to when they may not and commenting on that instead of responding properly, you continue onward by questioning another commenters reading skills.

Followed by talking to yourself angrily, and somehow suggesting I confused people about flaws constantly brought up by people who never even read my responses, just your post, and some who wrote before I even posted, instead of possibly acknowledging even the possibility that your idea might have a flaw or could stand to see improvement. 

You did get one thing right, though, which is exactly like what I said myself earlier in the very quote of mine you were responding to. Imagining a problem exists doesn't make it exist. There's also imagining there are no problems, even the possibility of them. Denial and hubris my friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Ninja_Kero quote:

Calm down.

Yawn.  Well, that was a waste of a post.  You need to find a new hobby.  At least something to do while you work on those reading comprehension skills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Isukun quote:

It removes the limitation of only getting loot for the active character.  It changes the guidelines, but doesn't remove control.  You still choose which characters are active and to what degree when you are playing.

Well, consider solo play again.  If I build on all three characters, would the loot not be generated randomly for all three?  If I wanted to get a set of dps gear for my huntress, I would then have to win maps on her alone, which could be difficult.  In multiplayer the problem goes away since there are up to three other players to provide stopping power for difficult enemies.

I suppose powerleveling at least isn't affected, as long as the players agree to let the one to be powerleveled be the only one to do hero damage on enemies.  He would then get the full amount of XP based of his performance as a fighter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@tdb quote:

Well, consider solo play again.  If I build on all three characters, would the loot not be generated randomly for all three?  If I wanted to get a set of dps gear for my huntress, I would then have to win maps on her alone, which could be difficult.  In multiplayer the problem goes away since there are up to three other players to provide stopping power for difficult enemies.

Honestly, you can make the opposite argument as well, that with the current system if you want to level your full deck and get gear for all of your characters more evenly, you can't.  You can only focus on one character at a time.  That's not particularly great for solo play, especially early on where you're restricted by the lowest level character in your deck.  So it's really dependent on which outcome is worse for more people.  Considering a system where all of your active character level together eliminates a lot of the need to power level specific characters, I'd be willing to wager more people would benefit from a system that distributes loot based on which characters you use.  Then seeking out specific loot becomes more of a late game activity where it's easier to play with a more restricted group.

@tdb quote:

I suppose powerleveling at least isn't affected, as long as the players agree to let the one to be powerleveled be the only one to do hero damage on enemies.  He would then get the full amount of XP based of his performance as a fighter.

They wouldn't even need to do this.  Efficiency is based on the average hero damage.  If you have four players that's {total hero damage}/4.  There is a 20% buffer before you begin to lose efficiency and if you use the handicap I mentioned on the previous page, even low level players could get max efficiency when they're outclassed by higher level players.  So there's no reason for other players to hold back.  Everybody wins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I've read your system will only encourage people to fight over the builder slot so that they can use that to get their efficiency for the round. The builder can still afk while everyone else has to go dps enemies that don't even need killed by heroes anyway. You do realize that heroes aren't required to do anything right now to win a map?

Why should you be taking away xp and items from people just because you can't stand the thought of them putting in less effort. People will always take the easiest path and with your idea I think everyone will just be soloing. Trying to make everyone work their ass off when they don't have to for a win is just dumb. No species thrives by overexerting itself. The sloth is a perfect example of this. It moves only as fast as it has to.

You also keep mentioning afk people but you know damn well they can be kicked. What you really mean is people who aren't doing much, but are there handing you the mana or upgrading things between rounds. Don't forget its those people who join games that actually make your loot chance better.

If things change with onslaught and people aren't contributing I will kick them. Until I have any reason at all to care what people do in a round of combat. I'm not selfish. I don't need to penalize people out of jealousy if they get to sit there and take it easy. After all, not everyone has characters with legendary legacy gear to go jump into a game with and perform well.

As for the whole loot distribution and what character you play vs what loot you receive that seems like a different topic entirely. I might have supported some change along those lines if you had something good to suggest for it. I wont support anything as long as its attached to all these penalties.

"If you don't play the game, whats the point?" Unfortunately the point is to grind out the same mission nonstop until you get good enough gear to actually be capable of building something that's worth a damn. It gets old. It gets tedious. It needs to be done if you ever want to be the one building but it's hardly anything that can keep a person's attention. This whole idea seems about forcing people into even more of a difficult grind than before.

Please just drop this whole idea. Think of something better. Changes could be made but not these.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@› Rabid Lemming quote:

From what I've read your system will only encourage people to fight over the builder slot so that they can use that to get their efficiency for the round. The builder can still afk while everyone else has to go dps enemies that don't even need killed by heroes anyway. You do realize that heroes aren't required to do anything right now to win a map?

You do realize we don't have access to all difficulty levels, stages, or content and the game is still being balanced, right?  And there's no reason why people would be encouraged to build solo with this system when the XP gain is the same whether you solo it or whether you split the duty between multiple players.  If anything, players WON'T want to drop their mana so another player can build solo.  

@› Rabid Lemming quote:

Why should you be taking away xp and items from people just because you can't stand the thought of them putting in less effort. People will always take the easiest path and with your idea I think everyone will just be soloing. Trying to make everyone work their ass off when they don't have to for a win is just dumb. No species thrives by overexerting itself. The sloth is a perfect example of this. It moves only as fast as it has to.

We're not talking about nature, we're talking about a game.  Most games offer a challenge to be engaging and players are supposed to derive joy from actual gameplay.  What's the point of a game where one person does everything and three players just sit around and reap the rewards for doing nothing?  For three of those players, there is no game, it's just wasting time.  You may as well be playing one of those mobile games where you just check in every hour and get XP and rewards.  What fun!

@› Rabid Lemming quote:

Please just drop this whole idea. Think of something better. Changes could be made but not these.

That's your opinion, which you're entitled to, just as I'm entitled to think you're wrong.  Don't like it?  Pitch your own idea in your own thread.  That burden doesn't fall on me if you can't think of something better.  At any rate, you've said your piece, obviously you don't like the idea.  It's time for YOU to move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This dude, i dont comment your idea with quote like the others, because i dont like waste my time (and I lost it by reading all post),

They have patience with you, i don't. Its why i dont argument all of your fking tard idea. (yeah i can only insult, when I see a guy be as stubborn, who thinks his idea is worth, saying just as much crap for being right.)

Anyway, this idea will never see the day, only in your dreams.


Best regards,


Kadiak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Players drop mana since most players in Incursion are not capable of building. Even if say, a mage could be capable of building betsy (which I've never once seen aside from Legacy gear), it would require that person to have... ALL the mana. A build just doesn't work at this stage of development if everyone sticks whatever random thing wherever they want to. I've lost matches simply because people upgrade the wrong defenses. There is little to no room for improvisation.

2. Your idea of getting better fun and game play is to hold a gun to everyone's head and say, do this or get NOTHING. What fun! We are talking about human nature and nobody wants to work their butt off to do something that some towers are going to do anyway. Your changes are only to penalize people for doing something they don't currently have to do to win.

3. I'll move on whenever I feel like it. You are trying to change the game that all of us play. You don't seem to understand that it's going to get you some criticism. We aren't going to remain silent and just let you creep in and take our loot and xp.

There are already threads such as Lets Player: Tower Breaker that are far more productive than this train wreck of rage. People, including me, are actually suggesting legit ideas that could get heroes out there doing interesting stuff to fight unique monsters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@› Rabid Lemming quote:

1. Players drop mana since most players in Incursion are not capable of building. Even if say, a mage could be capable of building betsy (which I've never once seen aside from Legacy gear), it would require that person to have... ALL the mana. A build just doesn't work at this stage of development if everyone sticks whatever random thing wherever they want to. I've lost matches simply because people upgrade the wrong defenses. There is little to no room for improvisation.

2. Your idea of getting better fun and game play is to hold a gun to everyone's head and say, do this or get NOTHING. What fun! We are talking about human nature and nobody wants to work their butt off to do something that some towers are going to do anyway. Your changes are only to penalize people for doing something they don't currently have to do to win.

3. I'll move on whenever I feel like it. You are trying to change the game that all of us play. You don't seem to understand that it's going to get you some criticism. We aren't going to remain silent and just let you creep in and take our loot and xp.

There are already threads such as Lets Player: Tower Breaker that are far more productive than this train wreck of rage. People, including me, are actually suggesting legit ideas that could get heroes out there doing interesting stuff to fight unique monsters.

That's actually a good lead in example.

The thing about afkers is they afk, expecting to win. They get gold, exp, loot, and that win. Afkers have these two things about them, and regardless of why they're afking, they want those things.

If you think laterally, there are more ways than to just put a gun to people's heads to get them to want to interact. For example, having more monsters or effects that require hero's to pay more attention, things change. People afk less at betsy because there are frequent leaks, ogres, and that aoe emp. In the least, they adjust where they stand so as not to endanger their win and loots.

So if for example, some monsters on some maps could straight up stealth past towers, one would not be afking. Or, if they had to afk, they would not be on that map afking on that map, because doing so would grant them nothing. Maps like those would be your kind of thing to play, as people would be contributing, as a group, to survive. That's just by adding one type of monster. No rules or regulations required, no rebalancing of the entire game. There are other ways one could induce players to pay attention. For example a harsh blizzard map, where towers can freeze over, so you must crack the ice sometimes. If it's a large map, everyone would need to be stationed by those points defended, as the base would crumble due to frozen buildings, no matter what building was in use... See? Lateral thinking, and it gives the game more depth for the developers time and trouble, as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...