Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
BRiTTEN

Main problem with this game... being allowed to play it

Recommended Posts

the problem with roles as suggested by seph is that each role could only be filled by one or two classes.  A tank is not a tank if he cant taunt enemies, that that means only the squire can do it. The Support role building towers is wrong that is a builders job.  Also the fact that only one class (monk) has support towers once again locks a roll to a hero.  Not trying to kill your buzz just trying to point out the roles need to be more open.  They need to reflect what you want to do, not what hero you are bringing,

A more open role system would be something like 

Builder: builds it all then changes over to whatever they please for the remainder of the game
Support: Funnels mana to builder, reps, upgrades, helps with problem lanes (IE what every normal player should do)
Leech: "Hey guys i will push G, can i sit in the corner now"

Clearly Trendy wont call someone a leech so the community needs to come up with another name for people that are just looking to chill and get power lvl/geared up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Andurian quote:

I often have the opposite problem.  I have five level 50 characters.  If I join a non NM game (to work on a quest, or get quick pet food, or whatever), people will insist that I build.  I've arrived to see builds already completed, and when they see a level 50 squire (my 5th character is a DPS squire), they start selling barricades so I can rebuild them.  Without even asking me.

Same thing happens to me most of the time I join a non NM match.

But usually I don't say a word and just drop mana so lvl 49's and below can have they're fun building while I just go dps.    :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Dianececht

I do not know why do you label "each role could only be filled by one or two classes" as a bad thing. It is a RPG element. The game is RPG as well.
There are usual RPG Classes: tank, dps, support. DPS cannot tank, while Tank bows down before DPS in terms of damage output. That is definitely not a bad thing and it also calls for variety in the game: no tank, dps, builder and support all-apprentice teams.

Yes, you are right: only Squire can TAUNT. It is a RPG Tank quality. However, what a tank primarily does in Dungeon Defenders, is soak the damage primarily from Special Enemies and Mini Bosses. So Monk can do that job just as fine as a Squire. You can take the aggro from the enemies by sitting on their faces. Monk can do that just fine. Squire would fit a "perfect" tank role, yes. Squire is squire, after all. Let's not turn away from the sword / shield RPG role:) While squire would be a PERFECT tank, a Monk with High survivability could tank things just as well.

So, if the system does not find a, say, Tank (primarily - a Squire), it should fill the spot with a most tanky melee hero, if not = most tanky ranged hero.

Imagine for yourself: You create a game and are looking for a tank: you want squire. But if you do not get a squire, Monk is fine, too. He can soak the damage just as fine. So if there is no squire available, why not? Let's roll with a monk.

When you look for a specific role, you have a specific class in mind, don't you?

DPS could be divided into "physical / magical / both" options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm guessing a lot of these complaints and suggestions come from folks still leveling. If your doing end game progression stuff there is no way you can justify someone running around repairing only while others build or dps only. At the point you can just barley squeak by or worse, only starting out can beat a few waves for drops EVERY player is pretty much required to up and rep mid wave...if your not doing that you'll have a much harder time getting thru end game and people will be less likely to want to play with you again.


What you guys are proposing will require a dramatic rebalancing of endgame content balance as well as hero dynamics. Which is fine and all I just wanted to point out that matchmaking has to work all the way up and down the spectrum. What's ok in campaign and free okay isn't necessarily going to fly in endgame. 


Also, still waiting to hear from TE about the hero deck. Why does it exist with no perceivable benefit? Will it be removed or renovated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Satori

Have been in End Game since forever =)
Honestly, it is ALL i need from people: to be active. repair things, take aggro. Doesn't matter what the role is right now, unless it's a Tank Squire.

If you pick a DPS role that doesn't mean you can't repair things =) It's only one click away!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Seph quote:

@Dianececht

I do not know why do you label "each role could only be filled by one or two classes" as a bad thing. It is a RPG element. The game is RPG as well.
There are usual RPG Classes: tank, dps, support. DPS cannot tank, while Tank bows down before DPS in terms of damage output. That is definitely not a bad thing and it also calls for variety in the game: no tank, dps, builder and support all-apprentice teams.

Yes, you are right: only Squire can TAUNT. It is a RPG Tank quality. However, what a tank primarily does in Dungeon Defenders, is soak the damage primarily from Special Enemies and Mini Bosses. So Monk can do that job just as fine as a Squire. You can take the aggro from the enemies by sitting on their faces. Monk can do that just fine. Squire would fit a "perfect" tank role, yes. Squire is squire, after all. Let's not turn away from the sword / shield RPG role:) While squire would be a PERFECT tank, a Monk with High survivability could tank things just as well.

So, if the system does not find a, say, Tank (primarily - a Squire), it should fill the spot with a most tanky melee hero, if not = most tanky ranged hero.

Imagine for yourself: You create a game and are looking for a tank: you want squire. But if you do not get a squire, Monk is fine, too. He can soak the damage just as fine. So if there is no squire available, why not? Let's roll with a monk.

When you look for a specific role, you have a specific class in mind, don't you?

DPS could be divided into "physical / magical / both" options.

I have never seen a monk pull off the "tank" roll. the AI on this game is too random they ignore things they are supose to target, walk over things that should stop them.  Maybe if the AI responded in a fixed manor then we could talk about others acting as a meatshield.  I also dont want this game to come down to a "One of each class is required" game.  The roles should be more generic so they don't bind the player base to a set meta. 

We simply dont have the players, heros, or gear to allow such narrow role selections.  Remember this game is supose to be more open (this will become F2P).  An forced Meta just wont work with causal players.  While you will always have your top tier players who will want that type of finite control over their team, that has no place in the general match making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Diancecht quote:


@Seph quote:

@Dianececht

I do not know why do you label "each role could only be filled by one or two classes" as a bad thing. It is a RPG element. The game is RPG as well.
There are usual RPG Classes: tank, dps, support. DPS cannot tank, while Tank bows down before DPS in terms of damage output. That is definitely not a bad thing and it also calls for variety in the game: no tank, dps, builder and support all-apprentice teams.

Yes, you are right: only Squire can TAUNT. It is a RPG Tank quality. However, what a tank primarily does in Dungeon Defenders, is soak the damage primarily from Special Enemies and Mini Bosses. So Monk can do that job just as fine as a Squire. You can take the aggro from the enemies by sitting on their faces. Monk can do that just fine. Squire would fit a "perfect" tank role, yes. Squire is squire, after all. Let's not turn away from the sword / shield RPG role:) While squire would be a PERFECT tank, a Monk with High survivability could tank things just as well.

So, if the system does not find a, say, Tank (primarily - a Squire), it should fill the spot with a most tanky melee hero, if not = most tanky ranged hero.

Imagine for yourself: You create a game and are looking for a tank: you want squire. But if you do not get a squire, Monk is fine, too. He can soak the damage just as fine. So if there is no squire available, why not? Let's roll with a monk.

When you look for a specific role, you have a specific class in mind, don't you?

DPS could be divided into "physical / magical / both" options.

I have never seen a monk pull off the "tank" roll. the AI on this game is too random they ignore things they are supose to target, walk over things that should stop them.  Maybe if the AI responded in a fixed manor then we could talk about others acting as a meatshield.  I also dont want this game to come down to a "One of each class is required" game.  The roles should be more generic so they don't bind the player base to a set meta. 

We simply dont have the players, heros, or gear to allow such narrow role selections.  Remember this game is supose to be more open (this will become F2P).  An forced Meta just wont work with causal players.  While you will always have your top tier players who will want that type of finite control over their team, that has no place in the general match making.

Some well stated points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lack of content and playerbase is kind of an obvious point, so i left it out :p

But my suggestion covers it all, as it draws from the current pool of the players, it just puts priorities where priorities are needed. I never proposed a matchmaking where system would only look for one certain role and stop after not finding a match :p

It would simply help people tell the game what they want: 1) i want people to play with. 1.1) i need a dps apprentice.

Anything else is a role balance issue :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Seph quote:

Satori

Have been in End Game since forever =)
Honestly, it is ALL i need from people: to be active. repair things, take aggro. Doesn't matter what the role is right now, unless it's a Tank Squire.

If you pick a DPS role that doesn't mean you can't repair things =) It's only one click away!

Haha, I don't doubt you have! I wasn't singling anyone out btw. Just a lot of times I hear comments that apply to one end of the spectrum only.

Your last line plays into my point. One concern is new players getting the message from the devs that 'the game design says all I need to do is tank or dps, etc. and the players in game telling me to repair are being rude'. I have seen the attitude in mmos before and this game is significantly less suited to 'roles' as they are standardly applied.

That said, top tier players know how to blend/bend roles etc. I have many times been in the situation to save a raid with impromptu off tanking, dps healing, etc. I worry more about the casuals that will be received harshly by other players or the game itself by map failure if mislead by confusing or uneccesary design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't know why trendy won't just give players a sever list & let them setup their own lobbies with their own lobby names, it would help solve a lot of issues with the matchmaking & is a very, very common feature in online pc games.

In fact I believe a simple sever list would do more then whatever trendy has in store for matchmaking in general, actually I feel the matchmaking system they are currently doing feels more like a console matchmaking system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@topler quote:

I still don't know why trendy won't just give players a sever list & let them setup their own lobbies with their own lobby names, it would help solve a lot of issues with the matchmaking & is a very, very common feature in online pc games.

In fact I believe a simple sever list would do more then whatever trendy has in store for matchmaking in general, actually I feel the matchmaking system they are currently doing feels more like a console matchmaking system.

Now that you mention it...with the upcoming PS4 version...interesting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

topler

I am guessing, that current matchmaking could be modded leftover of their MOBA version of the game? I wasn't present when MOBA was going on, so i can't tell for sure:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest while the matching by roles sounds pretty good... It does feel like a step more directed to an MMO style. The issue with that I find is that with MMOs come certain mindsets. The one I most worry about is the feeling of a required Meta. Which in a vague sense isn't bad. You want some damage heroes, some builders (Preferably different kinds), and most likely some kind of leach. The thing is that eventually this could lead to a mindset of requiring these things.

In regards to DD I never felt like I absolutely had to have a certain party member to fit a role. You'd have random people join playing various classes at various power levels... and you'd work with it. You'd modify your defense to fit with what others brought to the table. 

But with an MMO mindset you start getting towards needing required things. "Well all party is naturally going to have a wall builder, a turret builder, a tank, and a DPS hero." So content starts getting balanced with that in mind. The people who then suffer are solo players and friends who just want to play together with whatever they have. 

I know it's not guaranteed to go that way... but I can't help but worry. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Seph quote:

I am guessing, that current matchmaking could be modded leftover of their MOBA version of the game? I wasn't present when MOBA was going on, so i can't tell for sure:)

ah, I never thought of that and that does make a lot of sense, but I'm in the same boat as you in that I wasn't around back then...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@topler quote:


@Seph quote:

I am guessing, that current matchmaking could be modded leftover of their MOBA version of the game? I wasn't present when MOBA was going on, so i can't tell for sure:)

ah, I never thought of that and that does make a lot of sense, but I'm in the same boat as you in that I wasn't around back then...

This isn't the first iteration of matchmaking since those scary moba days

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@TrendyBrad quote:


To be honest, a solution here is still a  bit off, but we've been discussing quite a bit "around the water cooler," so to speak. We believe the problem here centers around not being able to influence the type of role you want to play before being matchmade with others players.


It is a great feeling to see you're aware of the problem. This means to me there will be a fix some time later.

I just think this problem should be taken care of and also publicy tested before the game goes f2p because once the game is f2p there will be hoards of players who won't care if there will be changes some time later. The first impression of the new masses will also be a great influence to this game's image. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 things: Firstly as Topler said these people with 2-3 lvl 50 characters have to grind freeplay to level.

@topler quote:

I imagine this happens a lot more then it should simply because people have to grind free play & normal onslaught to lvl their characters.

But secondly I think there is an issue with the ability to kick from public matches. We need to get a block list/get the upvote downvote system started to go rather than relying on the kick mechanism. If you queue up in public with a since friend you can repeatedly kick someone who wants to do the same map as you.

Today I randomed into a freeplay hard, said hello, got told to "F*** off" and got kicked from the game. The 2nd time I got matched in I quit myself and tried again. 3rd time I gave up and played the rest of the round then was kicked.

@BRiTTEN quote:you just get kicked for being toxic and wanting to play a tower defense game by actually wanting to build towers..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I need an option to start a public game with lock on. I can then unlock it when i'm finished building.


And i have total kick control over MY game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@IGELmitDEAGLE quote:

This is why we need better dps on heroes. 

I just watched the Weekly Defense on twitch where someone said that what makes Dungeon Defenders fun is building towers and watching them wreck everything without doing much other than repairing. But this is supposed to be a free2play multiplayer game. People want to join public matches and still have fun. No one wants to be the repair bot for someone else. 

So what is the only thing you can do other than building towers? Right! Be a hero and kill stuff! 

But right now joining a game just results in a lower chance of winning because you just can't contribute enough to make up for the harder difficulty. 

At least that is my experience from NM2.

so you want to buff DPS to that point where you can't solo anymore because the content is too hard to do without 4 dps? TOWER DEFENSE, not HERO DEFENSE game.

I see your point, but you are creating more problems, and pulling the game further away from legitness by making DPS stronger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 

agreed.  why wouldn't you want the strongest towers set up?  building is a privilege, not a right, in a public game.   



@Woqini quote:

I need an option to start a public game with lock on. I can then unlock it when i'm finished building.


And i have total kick control over MY game.

I like the sound of this. Close enough to the (IMO) perfectly workable DD1 matchmaking mechanics.


@Trueday2001 quote:

building is a privilege, not a right, in a public game.   

I cannot agree with that. With Trendy side servers there is no map host but if OP starts the map and has the mana then I would say he has the right to build if he wants. People joining  could offer to help but if OP and map instigator wants to build then the person joining (who feels he MUST build) should leave or accept it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Woqini quote:

I need an option to start a public game with lock on. I can then unlock it when i'm finished building.

I like this. I don't like to rush while building. Hate people joining while I'm building and they simply "G" up instantly. Big lack of respect, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Shadkillz quote:

so you want to buff DPS to that point where you can't solo anymore because the content is too hard to do without 4 dps? TOWER DEFENSE, not HERO DEFENSE game.

I see your point, but you are creating more problems, and pulling the game further away from legitness by making DPS stronger

No, I did not say that I want an unbalanced game. Stop talking BS.

I said that more players joining results in a higher difficulty. So these extra players need to be able to make up for that AND have FUN playing their HERO.

Sorry but a watch-other-people-build-and-watch-their-towers-kill-stuff free2play game wont last very long. 

This game is not just tower defence. If you want a tower defence game you don't need heroes you just need a top down view mobile game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@mmaakk quote:I like this. I don't like to rush while building. Hate people joining while I'm building and they simply "G" up instantly. Big lack of respect, imo.

You G them instantly and see what happens :^)
kek.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...