Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dizzydiana

Wave restrictions

Recommended Posts

I noticed more or less by accident that there are restrictions in place for when a player can join a current match. I can understand why this might be beneficial in public matches, but with private matches it seems out of place. What to me makes it more confusing is as far as I am aware is we will have the ability to host kick. Wave restrictions were brought into Dd2 to stop people jumping into games last minute and gaining an advantage. This made sense in a Vote Kick system when if only 2 players were present there was no way for the host to remove the other player. Further restrictions were also put in place to stop players boosting others with having gear score a requirement to do a certain tier of difficulty or purchase items from a higher level of difficulty than they are currently at. In a F2P game all those decisions made sense. In a vote kick system these decisions made sense. I dont see them making sense in DDA. Even more so if I am playing privately, If i progress further than my son and I want to help him catch up I really dont see any harm in it if it does not ruin the economy (eg buying gems or other mtx) Cg wont lose money if someone takes less time than another. I dont see where making me restart on wave 1 in survival so my son can join when I am on wave 8 is needed or worse if I reached wave 22. If someone joins my game that I dont agree to I can simply kick them if I feel they are being unreasonable etc. 

For public matches there may be an arguement (albeit weak imo) about preventing a random person from joining on the last wave and only earning end game rewards. Since I suppose only the host can decide to kick if someone joins in last minute, others in the public match may not like randoms joining and feel upset they cannot directly do anything other than leave.

I would like CG to rethink the wave restriction in place. I would also like to appeal to them and ask not to make forced restrictions on what content or gear players can access. In a full priced game I really fail to see why such restrictions are needed.

Edited by dizzydiana
  • Like 4
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, dizzydiana said:

[...]

Even more so if I am playing privately, If i progress further than my son and I want to help him catch up I really dont see any harm in it if it does not ruin the economy (eg buying gems or other mtx)

[...]

This is not a singleplayer game. You can play it in singleplayer, yes, but all the things you do will have an impact on other players, because you can open public games, you can trade your items, you bring in a certain amount of gold into the economy and therefor influence the prices. And in terms of difficulty, playing with different amount of players makes a difference and you should not be able to cheat the system by playing up to a certain point solo and then invite all your friends to grab the loot (such as pet farming).

If you want to play together, I do not see a real reason, why you would not also want to start together. We could maybe argue, that the "wave restriction" is a bit too restrictive and you should still be able to join maybe up to level 10 in survival - on the other side this would make pet farming a lot easier. And the time it would take to start over is not that much.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do understand what you are saying that there may be a reason where trading is concerned. I just dont want to feel forced that I should only play when my son can. I dont have the same time restrictions as he does. Even if they only allow this felxability in something like Open vs ranked from Dd1 I would not feel as opposed to this as I do. I can see restrictions with gear I am not completely against it. I have no real time limit on my play my sons have commitments like University where they cannot play all day. I really dont want to spend the day unable to play just to keep at the same pace. I just want to be forced into playing Hard if I have progressed into Nightmare just because I can play more than my children. I dont want to have to restart if in massacre a survival takes 6 hours as can and does do in some maps in DD1 if I am near the end. In Dd1 you can also start survival at wave 24 if you like, what if this is implemented into DDA? If my son and I do want to play together we both have to start at wave 1, because we cannot skip unless solo? I just want to be able to play both when I can and play when my sons can without being forced into only one way to do so. There is an offline mode in DDA so it could be possible for us NEVER to interact with others and play totally offline and not affect the economy. In offline progression at least  surely I should be allowed if in no way does it affect anyone other than me and my family. 

I just want a way for me to play without feeling i have to choose never playing with them or only playing when they can. If there is a way that allows people like myself where not everyone can play together at exactly the same time, then I will feel allot better.Give us the choice at least even with a cost attached, dont remove the option entirely.

Edited by dizzydiana
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its restricted to what, wave 3? I can understand inviting your friends for wave 15/25 to get the pets for doing no work and wasting no time. But wave 3 takes like 10 mins when you spend a long time in survival. What if you wanted to be in multiplayer but the game just doesnt find you any? Does not seem long enough. I'd restrict it at like wave 7 or 8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have tried to think how I might be being unreasonable, but I dont think I am.  Sure pets or other items might become cheaper, but wouldnt this happen anyway as more players advance? In a year a hard survival giraffe wont be worth anything much to the community. If I want to take my son through a Nightmare or Massacre map as far as I can tell there is no restriction as long as it is in the first couple of waves. This still causes issue with loot that was raised from letting him joining me in survival other than a pet.  Are you then to avoid that from happening force restrictions on what IPWR you need to enter each difficulty? I can see that happening. With levels being tied to loot you could tie it to levels as well. IN either system I feel restricted like I do in DD2 compared to DD1. In DD1 you seem public matches boosting other reasonably frequently. When you tier players you get only a few individuals who are willing to do lower content to help others. With no reason in DDA to play hard once you get to Nightmare, it is not like you are farming shards etc. I do not like restrictive content that actively discourages helping others. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea I dunno, I would maybe fine tune the restrictions to only be like no one can join you on wave 11-15 then 21-25 so then at least people need to do some work for the pets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh,  hope they don't keep restrictions in! Had no idea they had added it in DD2 cos I never got that into it. And memory is rusty on DD1 but I think I used to bring 3 of my other characters in on the last wave for pet farming? I would hope to be able to do that again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a compromise, I would suggest to allow joining any game at any time, but you would not get any loot nor rewards for the next 3 (full) waves, if you joined at a later point and the game is already running for a while (> 3 waves).

This would prevent someone from just joining at the very end to grab rewards like pets, but it still allows you to rejoin a longer game after being disconnected or if your friends started playing earlier. So for instance if your friend is already at wave 18, you could join him and would profit from the good loot once you reach the higher waves together. And if your friend is already at wave 29 out of 30, you would not get any loot anymore - but in this case it won't take long to finish the game and start over.

On 11/28/2019 at 2:41 PM, Toradorable said:

Not to mention if someone disconnects for whatever reason, be it in pub or friends in a private game, they'll be unable to join again. 

Well, even with the current system you could add an exception and allow rejoining, if you have been part of that game during the last 15 min or so.

 

*all numbers are just examples*

Edited by The Ich
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rejoining should be a consideration (and one I hope they have a solution for - if you DC you really should be able to reconnect within reason), but no I don't think the wave restriction should change at all. Just play through with people to begin with. The scaling is in place for a reason, and getting around that by inviting people in later solely to pick up loot is cheesy as hell. While I know that's not the only reason people would want this, it's absolutely a factor that needs to be taken into account. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Restrictions are unhealthy for the game. It should be just like dd1. Join any time, don't get loot until start of wave.

If you can't join anytime you create too many problems. If I can play now and only have 2 hours, bit my friend can't play for 30 minutes a restriction on him joining would effectively mean I could not do survival with him, and would just have to play a different game with him instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its difficult i think since I understand why restrictions might be needed. I see for maps with only 5 waves having the restriction set to third wave be appropriate if you feel a restriction is needed. I dont see where in a 25 wave game mode like survival; or Pure Strategy why at least make the wave limit more reasonable. I like the suggestion that for X amount of waves they dont get extra loot and if they join on wave 14 or 24 they dont get the pet. I think I would be allot happier with this restriction than only 3rd wave. As pointed out what do you do with people who DC? I am also wondering if this restriction also applies for split screen? If it possible to add in split screen after wave 3 then I have a REAL problem with the system. I hope the developers will be able to clarify this. i would like the wave restriction for survival be around wave 10 if present at all. i am willing to see how joining in the last wave or on pet wave could devalue the system. i do wonder if this restriction will mean that there wont be a way to pick the wave you actually start survival on like you could in DD1. I worry if everyone has to start on the first wave it prevents those with less playtime from being able to do survivals where they may last for hours in harder difficulties. I hope the developers look at restrictions in place and at least adjust the restriction more appropriately for modes like survival.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see a need for restrictions on joining games.  If it's a public game, it's public because it was created for random people to join.  If it's a private game, I can decide who I'm inviting without developer assistance/ interference.

  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

must agree, wave restrictions are completely unnecessary.  i play almost exclusively alone, and would very rarely add someone mid-way through a survival.  but if a friend did log in and wanted to join me, and couldnt, i would be pretty upset and would likely just go play something else instead.  the only thing we need to avoid is the emulated split screen from dd1 where 1 person with only ONE account was quadrupling his own personal loot.  if someone wants to pay for extra accounts fine whatever CG needs to make a profit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like when it comes to economy, the players are more concerned about it than CG. They watched as the prices in DD2 climbed to absurd levels, then finally implemented a patch to lower them in a way and allowed PC players to use an extra account at the same time and the prices hit the floor making everything half decent crash into worthlessness. I don't know why everyone is so concerned about trading anyways, the more damaging thing is carries which will happen and anyone who knows someone willing to do that will pick that option over buying something from another player. Players will also get great gear from their friends for free. PS4 and Xbox players will also start the game with markets that are boned from the get go because cross play. Some players, myself included, will give away the 2nd best and below items for free or nearly free like we do in DD2.

There are just so many reason why trading doesnt matter but joining matches does matter.

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...