Jump to content

XP and loot should be distributed based on character performance


Recommended Posts


@Ninja_Kero quote:

1. Actually ignoring core game elements is common in games. From the knight moving an L shape in chess, to an otherwise crappy hero in a game having one game breaking/changing element that makes them worth giving a try. Summoners had moving towers that could self heal, I recall. Pretty much a heavy percent of the cards in magic the gathering take the rules and alter them. Etc. 

And what core element of Chess does the Knight ignore?  Each piece moves in a unique way.  All pieces are limited to the board spaces and take other pieces by landing on them or are taken when another piece lands on them.  Knights don't really do anything that violates the game's core concept.  Summoners combined the two core elements into one, but also get a lot of criticism for how they were implemented in the game.  And with Magic the Gathering, that's generally part of the design on most card games of that type.  You have a set of core rules and then introduce cards that let you break the rules.  That's not really going against the core concept of the game, it IS the core concept of the game.

@Ninja_Kero quote:

2. You're the one not getting it. They're stating that playing it in the way you want to force others to play is torture. Not playing the game itself. Playing it your way. People have varying tastes and opinions, you still don't get that? Really? You're trying to turn a top down strategy game into a side scrolling shooter. Or hockey into football. Yeah, it's gonna make people upset and leave. Which is exactly why so many people are so adamant about saying no, this is an extremely bad idea as it is currently, because you're tailoring it to yourself first and foremost.

Not at all.  saying participants should get the rewards for playing is not the same as changing the game.  That's an idiotic argument.  It's more equivalent to you claiming that every team in a league should get 1st place trophies, regardless of how they actually place.

@Ninja_Kero quote:

3. There are always going to be ways for those people to do that. Example, when you said Squires with buff swords get counted if they afk while buffing a tower. Simple. The person with multiple accounts puts a sword on squire, boosts with monk, and i dunno, throws down an ice for apprentice and plays on the huntress or puts it on auto click towards a lane or tapes down the button. Or has huntress as one of the main damage dealers via traps. Oh... you mentioned initiating a combo. Mhm. Geysers. Okay so afk for all.

In which case all of them are ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING.  You seem to be missing that part.  It's not really cheating if everyone actually has a role to play in beating the stage.  There's also no reason to do this with my system, though.  With the expanded deck system, you'd be able to accomplish the same thing from one account.  You could potentially level 5 characters at a time before taking any penalties playing solo.  Having multiple accounts would slow down your progression unless you were able to actively play on multiple accounts.

Share this post


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

Top Posters In This Topic


@Isukun quote:


@Ninja_Kero quote:

1. Actually ignoring core game elements is common in games. From the knight moving an L shape in chess, to an otherwise crappy hero in a game having one game breaking/changing element that makes them worth giving a try. Summoners had moving towers that could self heal, I recall. Pretty much a heavy percent of the cards in magic the gathering take the rules and alter them. Etc. 

And what core element of Chess does the Knight ignore?  Each piece moves in a unique way.  All pieces are limited to the board spaces and take other pieces by landing on them or are taken when another piece lands on them.  Knights don't really do anything that violates the game's core concept.  Summoners combined the two core elements into one, but also get a lot of criticism for how they were implemented in the game.  And with Magic the Gathering, that's generally part of the design on most card games of that type.  You have a set of core rules and then introduce cards that let you break the rules.  That's not really going against the core concept of the game, it IS the core concept of the game.

@Ninja_Kero quote:

2. You're the one not getting it. They're stating that playing it in the way you want to force others to play is torture. Not playing the game itself. Playing it your way. People have varying tastes and opinions, you still don't get that? Really? You're trying to turn a top down strategy game into a side scrolling shooter. Or hockey into football. Yeah, it's gonna make people upset and leave. Which is exactly why so many people are so adamant about saying no, this is an extremely bad idea as it is currently, because you're tailoring it to yourself first and foremost.

Not at all.  saying participants should get the rewards for playing is not the same as changing the game.  That's an idiotic argument.  It's more equivalent to you claiming that every team in a league should get 1st place trophies, regardless of how they actually place.

@Ninja_Kero quote:

3. There are always going to be ways for those people to do that. Example, when you said Squires with buff swords get counted if they afk while buffing a tower. Simple. The person with multiple accounts puts a sword on squire, boosts with monk, and i dunno, throws down an ice for apprentice and plays on the huntress or puts it on auto click towards a lane or tapes down the button. Or has huntress as one of the main damage dealers via traps. Oh... you mentioned initiating a combo. Mhm. Geysers. Okay so afk for all.

In which case all of them are ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING.  You seem to be missing that part.  It's not really cheating if everyone actually has a role to play in beating the stage.  There's also no reason to do this with my system, though.  With the expanded deck system, you'd be able to accomplish the same thing from one account.  You could potentially level 5 characters at a time before taking any penalties playing solo.  Having multiple accounts would slow down your progression unless you were able to actively play on multiple accounts.

1. Knights move in an L. While all pieces move differently. they have in common moving either horizontally, vertically, or diagonally in some manner, the Queen having the maximum values of these. Knights are the portion where it becomes even more lateral in thinking than usual, and that's why chess knights tend to be a symbol of that in various games and literature. Summoners may have gotten criticism, but they also got tons of love. More than most, even. People kinda like things that break tropes, seeing as how there are so many games to choose from that are all alike. I happen to think that Summoner hit that sweet spot in being a unit summoner that still managed to feel like a tower builder in a tower defense. That deserves praise.

2. Orly. Because everyone gets ip and summoner exp even if they lost the match in league. Yeah, even if they did badly they should still be allowed to proceed a little bit further down the game path just for trying. You're like one of those people that kicks others for refusing to use Flash and doesn't have a conventional hero for their lane and role. There ARE other ways to play.

 

3. ...Wow. You killed your own argument so thoroughly. Do you even read what you say, or what others say, before saying things? I know it's like the only insult you know, telling people they can't read, but... wow. See, I was responding to your rant on how people can cheat by logging multiple accounts at once and afking with them for lots of exp and loot to sell. I was telling you methods that would break your idea and do the exact same thing you had just said was horrible. You then jumped on the chance to tell me how it was okay because they appeared to be doing something, and it's not really cheating if they appear to be doing something. To who when it's one person logging multiple accounts? The invisible audience watching the solo player??


If you're arguing that one player can get 5 times the loot and exp on one char so they don't have to cheat, that also doesn't make sense. For one, if buffing towers really did count as helping, they'd get full exp and loot on that one char alone who was afking at towers or monk boosting. So you'd have to be lying on one account, or the other, rendering at least one previous argument moot. For another, five times loot would either mean you made the loot system horribly imbalanced, or it was a total lie about it even being an option not to use your system when you argued that earlier.


Btw, if your builder heroes get loot and exp based on contribution, but they can't build, they're forced to hop to another match to build, or to do dinky dps. You mentioned earlier in responses that builders shouldn't have to swap to dps to be leveled. So what's left is instead being a builder who knows quite well that they're only working hard to do minimal token damage, just to appear to be helpful so you can level and get loot. That's not all that much better than afking. If anything, at least afking lets you keep your dignity and save some time irl.


Another thing I noticed is that when confronted with the idea of characters with low dps, you mentioned there being a handicap. Now, with this handicap, one should note that a builder won't be optimized for hero damage or ability power no matter what level they are, and even a low level who focuses on dps will probably far out dps them, so the bar would need to be very low for them to even so much as qualify for what you say about them being able to contribute.
 But if this is true, then the bar is so low that your idea doesn't even work as advertised even to yourself. Anyone of any level on any map can dink some damage and the handicap will allow for them to get loot and exp. 

Yeah they can technically swap over to a dps, but before you also said loot and exp is distributed between the two by which char contributes what, and how much. So a new 20 builder on a 20 map wanting 20 loot for their builder has to choose between actually helping the team with a real dps, but not actually gearing or leveling their 20 builder, if the building is already done. Or they can fire weak shots and pretend at helping in order to qualify get their loot and exp, but not actually play the game and help the team out. Because unless they do damage on their builder they get nothing. It leaves them with two bad choices to choose between, even worse off than the current system we have. And this is just describing somebody who actually wanted to contribute.

It sounds like you're trying to make this game like Office Space or Wal mart. Appearing busy is more important than actually doing anything, even more important than fun, or freedom, or choice, or dignity, or any other positive soulful thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean heck man, at page one you mentioned that if a persons towers are badly destroying monsters on a stage, everyone elses loot and xp will suffer. Later on in the thread when it was pointed out how players are hard capped by monster health and you pretended it wasn't a thing and all silly math... dude.... you were pretending it wasn't when it was from the very first page, something you brought up, and pointed out, and condescendingly said yourself that players should suffer xp and loot loss if somebody else is much stronger and doing better. There's precedent! Yours!


And later on in the thread you're all like... nawwww. Naw, them doing more dps per person isn't a problem.


You really do go back and forth like a politician just to make your idea appear good rather than be better.



Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Griede Starless quote:


@Isukun quote:


@Griede Starless quote:

that is also only part of the problem, as after a lot of thought I figured out that isukun was also referring to the fact that the builder only gets exp for the build, if they are present during the wave. which is problematic if you need dps. not as much an issue in multiplayer, but annoying when in single player.

as such, this system would be an 'add-on' to the current system. potential flaws still exist for this system, but that is my understanding of the current problem, and the proposal to fix it.

Why is that problematic in single player?  The only thing that contributes to your ability to deal out damage is gear, gear properties are random based on the stage you're playing, and the only class specific gear are weapons.  XP has nothing to do with that.  Worst case scenario would be using three characters in solo with two builders and one DPS.  If they all get 100% efficiency, any weapon drop would have a 33% chance of being from one of each of those classes.  


It's also possible you could try an alternative system that checks against each character's efficiency to determine possible double or even triple drops on weapon drops.  For instance, if you're using two characters in a multiplayer game, one for building and one for DPS.  Say your DPS is at 100% efficiency, but your builder is only 50%.  You get a random weapon drop during a wave, it would automatically drop a weapon for your DPS, but would have a 50% chance of dropping a weapon for your builder, too.  I'm not sure how exploitable this would be, though.  Obviously a 0% efficiency would mean no weapon drops with an exception for a player who is using only one character (weapons would have to go to the lone character).  Could be interesting, though, and would make sense with how the XP system works.

ya know.. here is a very good example of someone failing to READ anything.

>isukun< verbatim stated that only the hero present in a wave gets xp with the current system. indeed, he went through GREAT PAINS to explain that xp is doled out, in mass, at the end of the wave, to everyone present. that there is no difference in weather you build or dps currently, you ALL get the exact same xp

so >isukun<, contemplate this? you reading? pppplease start reading?

if I build a map solo with my monk, and then switch to my huntress for dps because I need it for the specials, at the end of the wave, who gets the experience? again, im playing by myself. got an answer?

by your definition, the huntress gets all the xp.

now, lets try this again, how can I, solo, gain experience on my builder with the current system? by sitting through the wave with my builder.

now, lets try something else- since im assumeing you actually PLAY the game instead of sitting on the forums just creating words that don't mean anything. what happens if I take my monk, build a map, then change out all his gear and orbs for dps? got an answer? it drops all of my auras stats back down. so how is this going to help me solo a map if I need my defenses at their best?

so again, how is it an issue to solo? hmm? (SARCASUM FONT)

and ya know, the biggest point id make here is that I actually went back through and reread all the stuff you posted. and then I actually COMPLIMENTED your post, and you STILL go out of your way to bash me.

you have only proven that either you stay up to late at night answering posts, or that you yourself don't bother to try and read what people post.


also, I would point out that you miss a very valid argument, and go out of your way to bash it or ignore it altogether

if there are 300 mobs in a wave, and the defenses kill 298 of them, how exactly are 4 players going to get any kind off quota off of 2 goblins? that are at 10% health? hmm?

we were very patiently trying to point out that you are not acknowledging that there isn't an infinite amount of damage that can be done, there is a very real hard cap.

the hard cap is based directly off the amount of mobs there are per wave, per map. and once each map is cast, the amount of each mob is more or less determined to a degree. in that, there is only so much hp total for all the mobs. for all the waves, and for the entire map.

 that being said, the amount of POTENTIAL DAMAGE for the map, is set by the total hp of all mobs. and again, when the defences can kill 80 - 90% of all the mobs, including specials (possible at least with monk and the uber lightning auras) you are still left with very few mobs with which the dps must all TRY to damage at least a little bit, or receive no credit for their participation.

now, lets try this again. I AKNOWLEDGED that your system would allow all of a players characters that participated in a wave, to receive experience based off that participation, which atm does not exist.

I also AKNOWLEDGED that yes, there should be some deference between afkers, and people who contribute.

now maby you can READ and UNDERSTAND that if I play in multiplayer and kill ALL OF THE MOBS WITH MY DEFENCES<<<<<<<<<<<<< then how will anyone else get credit?


@Isukun quote:


@Griede Starless quote:

also, I would point out that you miss a very valid argument, and go out of your way to bash it or ignore it altogether

And at what point was I bashing your post?  I didn't insult you, talk down to you, or act like a general ass.  I disagreed with your assessment, explained how the system worked and offered an alternative if that wasn't satisfactory.  Your response to that is to act like an ass?  And you wonder why I get a little hostile at times.


As for the first part of your post, you're confusing what I mean by "current system."  When I speak of the current system, I'm not talking about my proposal, but the currently existing system they are using in the game, now, which only awards standard XP to the characters who are present during the combat phase. If your builder is not present, they can only earn XP through bonuses, which award significantly less and require you to play a certain way.  How can my system be the "current system" if it's not implemented?  what you've basically done is attribute a problem that only exists in the game right now to my system which eliminates it by allowing your builders and your DPS to gain XP and loot simultaneously, so there's no need to change your gear or even use that character as a DPS when playing solo.  And you try to use this as an argument against the proposed system?  If I seem confused by your post, it's because I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume they understand what they're responding to, unless they give me cause to doubt that.

@Griede Starless quote:

also, I would point out that you miss a very valid argument, and go out of your way to bash it or ignore it altogether

if there are 300 mobs in a wave, and the defenses kill 298 of them, how exactly are 4 players going to get any kind off quota off of 2 goblins? that are at 10% health? hmm?

I have responded to this, several times.  Basically, you're asking how those people who sat there and did nothing for the duration of the wave will get credit.  And as I've said before, credit for what?  Credit for sitting there?  Credit for doing nothing?  Even with the proposed system, they're still getting loot and gold, so it's not a complete waste of their time, but I really don't think players should advance if they aren't playing the game.  

@Griede Starless quote:

what moron believes that the person building all the defences, FOR THE ENTIRE map is doing nothing?

That would be the devs.

so.. for my next hat trick, i will make an argument....reapear?

this time i posted my post and your post so you can read your argument, off of my argument, and see where you misunderstood me. and to point out, you dint bash me specifically, you bashed in general anyone who broght it up as a troll or someone who couldnt read or comprehend what you were talking about.

#1 i started off by pointing out that you pointed out in great detail that the current system that we are useing atm only allows for the character in a hero deck that was present in the wave to get experience for that wave. point being that if i build with 1 character, then dps with another, the dps would get the experience. this is what you said, i said that you said that. how you miss understood me i have no idea. i didnt say that your system would do THIS, i said that your proposed system would potentially FIX this. now, that was YOUR misconception #1.

#2 my following point was based off your question 'how would dps when soloing would be an issue?' between 2 characters on the same account based on how the game currently works. i stated that if i build with my builder, i have to stay on my builder to get any experience. i was referring to the current system. in which only the person present during the wave gets exp. obviously im referring to a builder who is not wearing legendary gear. otherwise he would not need exp. and if he isnt wearing legendary that suggests that his stats are just high enough to kill most mobs, but not high enough for say, all of the orcs, or the ogres, or anything else with either high resist or high hp. as he is a builder, he doesn't have a dps build. so things with high hp and/or resist are going to be a problem for a non dps character in a solo map. again, just pointing out that you misunderstood what i said. YOUR misconception #2

#3 this point was again pointing out how soloing dps is an issue for a builder by offering a completely idiotic way of allowing a builder to TRY to do atleast adiquit dps in the curent system. again, i wasnt talking about useing your system, i said the current system. i was rather clear in my distinctions between the 2.

now, this started because of a post where i ACKNOWLEDGED how your system would help level multiple characters in a deck at the same time.

because current system dosent alow for 2 characters in the same deck to gain exp off the same wave when you build with 1 and dps with the other in the same wave.

now, those first 3 points, were arguments about the current system (as in the system that is currently in the game), and i wanted to point out in this current post, that you miss understood them when you read them and responded.

the following 2 points were me trying to point out the biggest flaw of your system (which you continue to misread) and me trying to point out where i agreed and disagreed with you.

#4 i am not asking how the people that were afk for the whole map are going to try to rig the system. please try to understand my point.

EXAMPLE WAS (if we are useing your system of efficiency) and have 4 players on an incursion map, and all 4 players are WANTING to contribute, and they ALL expect to win. 1 person will have to build based on the current maps, and the other 3  will have to dps to gain efficiency (we exclude the builder because he can but doesn't have to dps).  this is a standard.

the builder builds the auras close to spawn, to ensure maximum chance of success in winning the map for the gear. in doing this, it IS possible to destroy nearly all, if not every single mob if the builder is a monk useing the lightning aura build (im useing this example because ive actually seen it done with the uber damage aura). that being the case, the other 3 players being DPS, all still WANT to contribute, but they can only contribute by attacking whatever is left. in the example i first stated what was left was 2 goblins. at maby 10% health. i wasn't stating that people who afked the whole match were trying to get credit, i was talking about a match in which all 4 people were actually at the computer, in the game, and moving around TRYING to do something. in this event, there isnt anyway for them to contribute as the mobs die with 1 hit apiece, so 1 or maby 2 dps get credit.

the point of this example was to point out the very real hard cap which i went through great pains to explain how it exsists and that it isnt some figment of the imagination that someone made up. and no mater what difficulty you have, or how many players you have, there is always a set number of mobs per wave, per map. yes, it differs per difficulty, per map, but if i play throne on 25+ with 3 other people and there is 800 mobs total (an example of course) for the map, there will be 800 mobs total on that map, everytime i play on 25+ with 3 other people. 

that means there is a hardcap for damage. the hard cap number is the total hp for all of the mobs. that is the physical FLAW in your proposed idea. the flaw that can be manipulated in a very clear way. a way that several of us pointed out. the sad part is that you dont get that mostly this is a passive manipulation, meaning that most of the time the builders who would be 'guilty' of such, are actually only doing it as part of the build, and not an any active attempt to short anyone.

the problem with this is exactly what Ninja_Kero pointed out several times. builders will have to dial back on their defenses to give others a chance to actually damage stuff. and when your playing on incursion, you cant guarantee that all of the dps have good enough gear to take down the specials. so at this point, because the builder held back, your team loses because he was trying to let everyone participate (again, in this match, everyone IS trying to participate). if you don't win you don't get anything.

this causes a stigma. the reason it is a stigma is because there is no person to blame for the fault. usually when you lose its because of a bad strategy, or because the stats of the builders/dps just arnt there at all. in this case they were more than capable of winning but couldn't due to constraints of fair play?


at this point, you are no longer punishing people for deliberately afking the match, your punishing them for not being able to participate. 2 very clear extremes.


now, to be clear, i feel that the worst part of this is that you perceive yourself to be one of the very few in this thread to have a decent or better understanding of the current games core mechanics, and a further perception that all who have conflict with it are either trolls, cant read, dont understand the game, or all of the above. that is my opinion based on how you bask in praise, and bash anyone who disagrees while only annotating small portions of someones arguments, while simultaneously stateing that the rest of the argument couldnt be understood.

NOW, I WILL TYPE THE REST IN CAPS SO THAT YOU CAN SEE IT. SOME OF US WHO RESPOND DO HAVE AT LEAST A BASIC UNDERSTANDING OF THE CORE MECHANICS OF THE GAME, AND UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, AND HOW IT WORKS. WHAT THAT ALSO MEANS IS THAT SOME OF US ARE ACTUALLY ABLE TO POINT OUT VIABLE FLAWS. AND JUST BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE SPECIAL TITLES LIKE 'DEVELOPER' OR 'CEO OF TRENDY', THAT DOES NOT MEAN WE ARE TROLLS OR THAT WE SHOULD BE IGNORED OUT OF HAND.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Isukun quote:

That's not really a flaw with the system, though, it's a flaw with the balance in the game.  A lot of people have concerns about how the game is balanced to favor defenses over DPS.  It even came up again in the last Devstream, so I wouldn't be surprised to see that rectified down the line.  Of course, you're never going to fix every problem and there will always be that guy who just wants to be a ***, but that's what moderation tools are for.


Honestly, if a guy is that overgeared, he's not doing enough to challenge himself and could be playing on a higher tier.  People don't buy into a game like this to sit around, they want some gameplay with their reward system and a guy who solo builds in a multiplayer match and doesn't allow the other players to DPS is simply disrupting the game.  They don't really have anything to gain by playing down like that as the better loot will be at the higher tiers.  I also don't see the appeal of playing with a friend who does all the work.  It's not really that fun to watch someone else play over the internet.  Hotseat, I could see, maybe, but over the internet, sitting in front of the computer by yourself, it's like the antithesis of social gaming.

again, on many maps, without the guy with uber gear, you wont win at all. and you always go with the builder with the best gear, or the builder with the best stratigy that has the gear to make it work.

and again, your argument is based around dps not doing enough, and your blameing them not being able to do anything on the builder. as if blame is necessary? this isnt a crime.  and you sure as hell dont fix it by nerfing the crap out of the dominateing element to the core gameplay of the game. you fix unbalences like these by adjusting map difficulty. as the unbalance is based on damage vs damageable mobs. the dps isnt over powered by defnces, the mobs are. and nerfing defences will still leave the dps overpowered by mobs.


also, i wonted to point out something, dungeon defenders and dungeon defenders 2 are both unique in the tower defence genra due to 1 very important aspect of the core gameplay. you can completely block a lane, either temporarily or perminantly (due tot he mobs unable to break through). this is not a common item, if it is even availible at all in other tower defences,  in most TDs you can only slow the mobs, whittle them down.


and the builder not challenging him/her self? exactly how do you think they came by that gear? they got it by grinding levels. now they are level caped and have the best gear/ stats for their build. what are they supposed to do? get geared out then just not play?

ya know, you went from suggesting that all dps who do nothing are slackers

and now to builders who are overgeared just shouldnt play at all. 


im not sure i understand at this point just who you are more opposed to?

and is this to suggest that you your self are not level capped with uber gear?

because if you are, you are an out and out Hypocrite and if you arnt, then why are you even posting on the forums as if you know everything about the game?


hostle? no. your just dealing with someone with slightly above average intelligence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Isukun quote:
@› 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."

isukun, incase you were wondering, this is the post we keep referring to when you patiently explain to us how the current exp system works that the game uses. i agreed with your assesment of the currently implimented system, and your idea of how to level multiple characters in the same hero book based on their efforts in the same wave.

im starting to consider makeing a post filled only with direct statments made by you as to the basic outlines of your proposed implimentation, though i worry you will simply complain that i misunderstood what your saying...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Isukun quote:


@Ninja_Kero quote:

1. Actually ignoring core game elements is common in games. From the knight moving an L shape in chess, to an otherwise crappy hero in a game having one game breaking/changing element that makes them worth giving a try. Summoners had moving towers that could self heal, I recall. Pretty much a heavy percent of the cards in magic the gathering take the rules and alter them. Etc. 

And what core element of Chess does the Knight ignore?  Each piece moves in a unique way.  All pieces are limited to the board spaces and take other pieces by landing on them or are taken when another piece lands on them.  Knights don't really do anything that violates the game's core concept.  Summoners combined the two core elements into one, but also get a lot of criticism for how they were implemented in the game.  And with Magic the Gathering, that's generally part of the design on most card games of that type.  You have a set of core rules and then introduce cards that let you break the rules.  That's not really going against the core concept of the game, it IS the core concept of the game.

The bit with chess is that the knight moves in an L shape, not a variation of straight line, like almost every other piece, it's right there in the post, if you read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The knight's moving pattern is hardly the only exceptional movement rule in chess:

  1. In addition to moving in an L shape, the knight is also the only piece that can bypass other pieces
  2. Normally you only move one piece per turn, but castling allows you to move two (only once per game, and in a very particular situation)
  3. Most pieces can move in any direction, but pawns only move forward
  4. Pawns can move two squares on their first move
  5. Pawns capture other pieces diagonally, in a break from their usual movement pattern
I'm not a chess player so I may be forgetting something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Ninja_Kero quote:

2. Orly. Because everyone gets ip and summoner exp even if they lost the match in league. 

You seemed to miss the fact that they also get less because they did poorly.  What a novel concept!  The losers don't get as much XP and IP as the winners NOT the EXACT SAME AMOUNT.  I did mention this previously that most other games limit XP gains for less active or effective players.  What a novel idea, wish someone would apply that to DD2.  Oh right, that's what this thread is about.  The funny thing is, I probably would concede to having it be reduced XP, although I feel such a system is far too exploitable, but I get the feeling even that would be objectionable to you.

@Ninja_Kero quote:

If you're arguing that one player can get 5 times the loot and exp on one char so they don't have to cheat, that also doesn't make sense. 

The amount of ignorance in the next part of your post is astounding.  It starts with you defending your past ignorance.  You gave an example of four character contributing in different ways to defeat a stage.  Which I said, wasn't really cheating because unlike the example I gave, each character was actually doing something towards beating the stage.  Plus, that sort of convoluted setup wouldn't be necessary with a system where all characters that are used can gain the same reward so long as they all participate in this manner.  The difference being that in my scenario, you don't have anybody AFKing, because your DPS is still active in the game and you can get a similar effect with just one account.  In addition, because of the XP penalty on using too many characters to build (put in there to deter this kind of abuse) there's even less incentive to multi-account like that since it would actually reduce your gains.


On to the specific points you made that were wrong.  You don't get 5x the XP or the loot on a single character.  That's impossible with this system, something you've failed to get right from the start.  And dignity, really?  How undignified it is to have to play the game I signed on to to play.  Oh woe is me, I can't just leave it running and get a sandwich while my XP and loot are granted to me for nothing.  You're already dedicating time out of your real life to play the game, so you may as well play it.  Once again, you make it seem like playing the game is punishment and every time you bring that up, I'm just going to have to ask, why are you playing it then?  You are also wrong on how the handicaps work.  I even explained that one before.  You have a multiplier based on your ability that changes how your actual values are perceived by the game.  The bar doesn't move, so minimum values remain the same regardless of the handicap, it's just easier for those who can't do as much damage to reach it.


@Griede Starless quote:

 now, that was YOUR misconception

Yes, you are correct, I did misread that part of your post, and I apologize for that.


As for the second half of your post, though, I haven't missed anything in that regard.  This isn't about intentions, it's about action.  And even in your example, there are ways for the DPS to get in there and do more than just take out a couple of weakened enemies.  Plus, with your particular example, this is only possible due to a known balance issue that's heavily exploited, but unique to monks and very likely to be fixed.  In fact, a lot of your argument here kind of hinges on the game remaining in the incomplete and unbalanced state it currently is in.  We see problems with solo builds like this because players stagnate too early in the game.  Because of the level cap and the absence of higher difficulty levels, we have nothing to balance out players building characters that are overpowered for what the game currently offers.  Maybe Onslaught will fix some of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@tdb quote:

The knight's moving pattern is hardly the only exceptional movement rule in chess:

  1. In addition to moving in an L shape, the knight is also the only piece that can bypass other pieces
  2. Normally you only move one piece per turn, but castling allows you to move two (only once per game, and in a very particular situation)
  3. Most pieces can move in any direction, but pawns only move forward
  4. Pawns can move two squares on their first move
  5. Pawns capture other pieces diagonally, in a break from their usual movement pattern
I'm not a chess player so I may be forgetting something.

Mhm, but balancing. Pawns may be weak, but they are numerous, have a quick map start, and have the most potential. In fact they're the only ones that can advance beyond who they are and return to the battle line as completely different. They're entirely about moving forward until they achieve their goal.

Castles start off in the corners, hemmed in, but they have a unique king movement interaction. They remind me of brutish tanks. The ones that seem slow, but mow you down because of how single mindedly they can charge. You'd think you could easily dodge them, but not when others interfere.

Now... chess, the entire beauty of it, is in these little quirks. That's why it's not a common deck of cards type game, or dice, or checkers. With hemmed in straight line ideas like checkers or tic tac toe, the possible moves are too small. Chess, while finite, is still the closest to being endlessly replayable. That's what we want.

It's a simple not so simple, by the rules but not entirely, game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Ninja_Kero quote:

endlessly replayable. That's what we want.

You're not looking for endlessly replayable, you're looking for excuses not to play.  Like you said, you don't want the game to take away from your IRL time or to actually encourage you to play in order to advance in the game.  Chess doesn't allow that.  In fact, the game doesn't progress at all if you don't play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Isukun quote:
@Ninja_Kero quote:

If you're arguing that one player can get 5 times the loot and exp on one char so they don't have to cheat, that also doesn't make sense. 

The amount of ignorance in the next part of your post is astounding.  It starts with you defending your past ignorance.  You gave an example of four character contributing in different ways to defeat a stage.  Which I said, wasn't really cheating because unlike the example I gave, each character was actually doing something towards beating the stage.  Plus, that sort of convoluted setup wouldn't be necessary with a system where all characters that are used can gain the same reward so long as they all participate in this manner.  The difference being that in my scenario, you don't have anybody AFKing, because your DPS is still active in the game and you can get a similar effect with just one account.  In addition, because of the XP penalty on using too many characters to build (put in there to deter this kind of abuse) there's even less incentive to multi-account like that since it would actually reduce your gains.


Right. Ignorant. >_> . You... missed the point again entirely. Twice. In a row. With me specifically pointing out the point that you missed in depth, so you couldn't possibly do what you're doing now. Provided you're so super intelligent and able to look down on others for 'lack of reading comprehension' as you constantly put it.

My point was also cheating.

The point of the convoluted setup was specifically to cheat. That's why it's convoluted and specific. So they can afk within the bounds of your system, exposing the fail. Context clues, man.

You don't actually combat people multi logging. Not when you also say people can afk whilst 'contributing', and your contribution system itself is heavily flawed.

Not only that, but having a penalty on too many builders building means that as heroes are increased, a team that actually works all together to build, gets punished for doing so. For actually using combos and effects to win, together, as is intended to be rewarded by Trendy.

Unless of course, you got confused again and hoped somehow I meant somebody not cheating, in hopes of having something to argue rather than responding to the question about glaring errors in your concept. Nope, I meant somebody on multiple accounts farming, as you yourself had just said post prior.

Moving back to previous, contribution while doing nothing for the game itself includes, but is not limited to: pseudo tanks running into enemies and dying when they revive for that tank contribution, wearing boots of boost and afking on any main tower (great for multi logging, zero penalty and thus all of the bonus loot and exp), builders being forced to do weaksauce dps damage with their builders to get anything from the map rather than dpsing as they would wish to (so you can be too busy to type to friends AND frantically pecking things with your bolts while not actually helping with the map, just pretending to for the system so you can catch up to them).

Set aside from the destructive elements that emerge such as players being more likely to build ahead of one another to play or loot as they want, among other new social problems, of course.

Amusingly enough, even if you did find a way to mildly reduce multi account gains, my secondary post section was entirely on the issue of you saying repeatedly how it's not worth it. My response, repeated in short, is that there is no way you should be able to say that. Four multi logged accounts looting should ALWAYS beat out one single logged account. Especially with the concept breaking flaws I have pointed out to you being used. It's incredibly easy to break your system, meanwhile, your system does badly what it's aimed at doing, to the point of damaging the game, both the fun of it and the players interactions socially.

You're pretty much trying to clone others into becoming you, and if your posts are any indication, that would be a terrible thing. I doubt you could stand that many of yourselves. One mistake and every Isu Kun clone would fall into cursing, trolling, and shouting how they can't read at one another and how they need to learn to contribute better. Sheesh.

I'm going to point out a situation. Try and follow along, I'll try and simplify it further so you don't feel the need to tell me how I am oh so stupid for you not understanding me again.

Later maps when you're maxed are about gear. Not leveling, since you're maxed. Still following? Gear. Goood. Gear gooood, Isu Kun. *head pat*

Now, let's say a builder is trying to tier up. This frequently happens, as you farm previous maps to get gear to do later ones. Now they have to do an actual challenging map to tier up. As in, everyone on the map is trying very hard, and using a dps, and not having good stats means that you die before you can even repair at times. If they couldn't build the map, because even with previous map gear they're not good enough yet, they can't get the next tier gear. Simply because that map requires a dps. You said yourself, builders shouldn't be making it easy and doing most of the damage, enough to carry. In the harder map, they can't pick up the slack of somebody trying to use a builder to fight. Sure they will be 'contributing', but they will lose because of a lack of an actual team contribution on a map requiring all hands on deck. Your concept doesn't do its main job, because of cases like these, where contribution.. is not contribution. That builder would have to play another class as dps, and not get the desired loot type (it's percentage by contribution, but using their builder would kill the team, so it would be 0% as it goes unused), or they can try but endanger teams for trying, and probably get kicked. In your initial posts you said that no one should be having to swap out to dps gear from builder. Two things your concept doesn't do well, now, as they will likely end up swapping out just to get the gear.

Or how about those players who get worse gains simply because they do too well or their team isn't exactly as the average playthrough teams was? I wrote a whole post on that, and you went and hid in a corner rather than reading it and posting a cogent reply. Ur hurrr you be dumb and no understand me genus smartness so me no reply is not a proper response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Isukun quote:


@Ninja_Kero quote:

endlessly replayable. That's what we want.

You're not looking for endlessly replayable, you're looking for excuses not to play.  Like you said, you don't want the game to take away from your IRL time or to actually encourage you to play in order to advance in the game.  Chess doesn't allow that.  In fact, the game doesn't progress at all if you don't play.

Interesting. Did you know that people would post their moves to eachother via mail, and play chess over months or even years at a time between moves, because they had lives to live out and things to do? That's still actually a thing. Having a life is not an excuse. You degrading the reasons people have to not want to pay full attention, be it irl issues, physical issues, personal preference down to 'excuses' does not make it so. You have so little respect for others, and it shows. Not everyone likes speed chess. There are tons of variants, at different speeds, some extremely so, some fast, some with altered rulings. You're sitting here saying no one else should be playing chess except your way, no 'excuses'. It's sad really. You're like, extremely boring and angry at the same time.

So this phenomenal idea of yours, how many likes is it at now? It's so flawless, and it has been a month. It must be at least 2 likes a day average, so... 60 likes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Such a phenomenal idea that a little piece of tape can ruin it all. Just play your huntress or monk, tape down the attack mouse button, go afk. Only have to make sure you are aimed down a lane. I've tried explaining before you can't force people to do things with a gun to their head. You don't seem to get it. This idea at best will only encourage the absolute minimum of participation.

As to these "cheaters" with multiple accounts. As the tape a mouse button example shows this wont stop anyone. Ninja has already made this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@› Rabid Lemming quote:

Such a phenomenal idea that a little piece of tape can ruin it all. Just play your huntress or monk, tape down the attack mouse button, go afk. Only have to make sure you are aimed down a lane. I've tried explaining before you can't force people to do things with a gun to their head. You don't seem to get it. This idea at best will only encourage the absolute minimum of participation.

As to these "cheaters" with multiple accounts. As the tape a mouse button example shows this wont stop anyone. Ninja has already made this point.

Another method is afk units just inside attack range for tanking, while on serenity aura. No tape there.

The aforementioned buff boots though, it helps. Also buff sword for squire. If having two builders is okay, monk can boost or huntress can geyser. Oddly enough, you'd be more likely to build an afk apprentice like a tank, as the others have easier afk methods, except for boots. Though... perhaps that special staff debuff counts :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@tdb quote:

The knight's moving pattern is hardly the only exceptional movement rule in chess:

  1. In addition to moving in an L shape, the knight is also the only piece that can bypass other pieces
  2. Normally you only move one piece per turn, but castling allows you to move two (only once per game, and in a very particular situation)
  3. Most pieces can move in any direction, but pawns only move forward
  4. Pawns can move two squares on their first move
  5. Pawns capture other pieces diagonally, in a break from their usual movement pattern
I'm not a chess player so I may be forgetting something.

there is also a move called en passant - meaning 'in passing' where a pawn can capture an enemy pawn on a square diagonal from it if the enemy pawn could have captured it in the previous move, this also can only be preformed immediately after the pawn has made the 2 square start. characteristic is that the capturing pawn moves forward instead of diagonal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Isukun quote:


@Griede Starless quote:

 now, that was YOUR misconception

Yes, you are correct, I did misread that part of your post, and I apologize for that.


As for the second half of your post, though, I haven't missed anything in that regard.  This isn't about intentions, it's about action.  And even in your example, there are ways for the DPS to get in there and do more than just take out a couple of weakened enemies.  Plus, with your particular example, this is only possible due to a known balance issue that's heavily exploited, but unique to monks and very likely to be fixed.  In fact, a lot of your argument here kind of hinges on the game remaining in the incomplete and unbalanced state it currently is in.  We see problems with solo builds like this because players stagnate too early in the game.  Because of the level cap and the absence of higher difficulty levels, we have nothing to balance out players building characters that are overpowered for what the game currently offers.  Maybe Onslaught will fix some of that.

point to you, though atleast your not a jerk about it.


as for the other, why 15 posts beating around the bush instead of saying that you understood what we were talking about? and no, my argument isnt based on an incomplete game, its based on an actual scenario that will continue at every level cap. the reason for this is fairly simple. some people simply have more time to devote to the game, and either more experience gameing in general, or are simply more able to adapt to the systems of this game then most others.

as for the most time, since loot is RNG, the only real way to get ahead is by playing more matches, and/ or having more people on a level with you. obviously if someone can play an average 30 matches a day, and someone else can only do 10, the one with 30 will hit level cap and gear soft caps much quicker.

as for understanding the system, the people who are more experienced, or understand the game better, will know which maps to farm for better equipment, and which for accessories, or pets.... etc.

and this is why these issues come up. when mixing those who play all the time, and those who cant. basically the hardcore players, and the casuals.

I also pointed out that a system that only rewards exp for participation is fairly shortsighted. the reason being is that it accelerates a very important part of any rpg. immersion. and without that, people lose interest in a game fairly easy.

a common example is when someone has just started playing an mmo, and some high level comes along and gives the new player all of their old cast off gear and a ton of money. basicly setting them up for quite a few levels. the reason this is an issue, is because 9/10 times, the person receiving that particular kind of boost, that early in the game, loses interest in the game, as they haven't seen enough of the game to want to continue, and all of the difficulty of actually PLAYING the lower levels of the game are taken away.

this also happens in PVPVE games when the devs nerf all the zones from lev 1 - 30 in a game and boost the exp because players constantly complain about the grind. when in reality, the only reason it takes them so long is because they are trying to solo stuff they shouldn't be fighting, and they get killed a lot. ignorance. now though, you have level 60 players who have no idea how the game works. they cant be taken to high level raids, they cant be taken to boss fights, they cant pvp. because at that level, everyone is actually trying to DO things that the player should already know about. so how exactly did boosting them help?


you have called both me and ninja incomprehencible and ignorant for comeing up with different flaws in your plan.

though the biggest 1 will remain. it will not be fun. it is simply another type of grind. and while grinding exsists in all games to some degree or another, most games combat grinding by making it either fun or amusing, or both. they don't do it by addeing another grinding system parallel to the 1 they already have. experience is only a reward so long as its actually usefull, its usefulness ends at level cap.

a system that helps all toons in a hero book would be helpful.

but a system with rewards centered on a finite cap? isn't all that helpful. and the way your wanting to implement it only benefits people of a solo grinding mentality. at some point you have to realize that there are other people in the world with perspectives that do not match yours. and while they all might agree that changes might be either desired or nessasary, they will often disagree on implementation.

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...