Jump to content
SaintsBC

Herodeck / Leveling / XP balancing discussion

Recommended Posts

Hey everyone,

 

In the last couple of days i saw a lot of discussion about the balancing of XP. The discussions about that were about hero deck, the role of levels(AI level restrictment on gear) And XP gain as whole

Since there are a lot of different opinions and a lot of different solutions i would like to gather them in one place so it's easier for the Devs to see the different point of views and possible make adjustments if they see fit.

Please keep it civilized, everyone has their own opinion on this topic regards to balance and design. These are opinions and therefor are not wrong even if you share this opinion.

 

I'll start of with my suggestion about balancing the current hero deck. In my opinion the herodeck in the current state of XP sharing is a bot overloaded. i think this way the leveling process will be to easy because 3 heroes in the hero deck don't have to do anything on the map and are yet eligable for the full XP. But in concerns of endgame and the need for multiple characters the leveling progress should be sped up a bit at that point.

 

A solution in my opinion to this point would be a scaling XP share percentage.

this could be a percentage that increases by every map you complete or it increases in big steps for completing all the campaign levels on a certain difficulity(Maybe add HC in this callculation)

So let's say for starters that the hero's in the hero deck gain 15% of the XP that the hero active in the game get's.

In the case of small increase per map we could say that every map you complete you gain 1.3% increase for every difficulity(if you complete the map on hard for the first time multiply by 3) this way we cap out the 100% at the end of insane(in my opinion a reasonable point)

In the case of the big steps you could get 21.25% increase after completing every map on a specific difficulity. Also capping out at 100% and that will also be achieved by completing every map on insane.

 

In my opinion about max level, this should really take a while, it should feel like a true acomplishment and something you can brag about. 

But in concerns of balancing and where the need for levels need to be less is somewhere around the 75/80 mark.(i am refering to DD1 and the point where you can use mythic, transcendent and supreme mark. 

This way you don't have the feeling that you are that much weaker than the person who leveld to the cap but still gives the people who level to the cap the satisfaction of being a rare feat.

 

 

So please let me and everyone who reads this post know what your opinions and if necessary possible balance changes are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The solution is simple either make the game where each player only needs 1 max level character to be very useful to a group or make it not painfully annoying to get more to cap.    The hero deck accomplishes the 2nd option

Edited by fluffycalico

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are creating problems that don't actually exist.

Lets talk about how the current systems works.

You can put up to 4 heroes in the hero deck. Each of those 4 heroes gains an equal amount of experience. Characters level up to a level of 100. As you level, it takes an exponential amount of experience to level. I have ~45 hours playing in the beta, I'm level 70. It took somewhere in the 3-3.2 million experience to get to that point. To get to level 71 takes a total of a little over 4 million experience to get to that point. So a quarter of the amount of experience it took me to get from 1-70 it will take me to get to 71. That will only get worse as levels increase.

Max level will take a lot of time in this game. It is not a trivial thing. The hero deck does not make it less trivial, it allows you to play the game as you progress.

 

Lets move on to point 2. You are going to want more than 4 characters. Just like in DD1, you will want multiple of classes for different purposes. For example, I am currently leveling a second Monk to use as a Boost Monk, while my initial Monk can be used as a builder. That means I had to stop a character from gaining experience (in my case I took out my Huntress).

Further on from that point, we don't actually know what the important levels are going to be from gear, because right now we are leveling even faster than we will in live due to the fact that gear doesn't have it's levels on it. The only pseudo important level right now is 60 because that is when you get your last tower upgrade.

 

All making level taking longer does, is make you spend more time doing things you've already done. It doesn't increase the challenge of the game, or the playability, or the desire to play. It just makes it take longer. There is no net positive for making it take longer.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hero levelling and how you get all the possible heroes you may want will be a factor no matter what system is in place at the moment. I have seen suggestions for a global level which goes even further than what advantage the hero deck presents. When you need 8k stats on each of 3 or 4 areas being able to put 350 or so onto one single stat isnt that much of a difference.. When you need perhaps 450 million XP to reach the next level it is going to take a very long time to reach regardless. I look at hero level from I suppose a different angle than the OP. If I got to level 100 what benefit does that actually give me - it allows me to use loot that is set to be equipped only at that level. It does not by itself make me over powered for anything than perhaps running campaign maps at low difficulty. I still need to invest hundreds if not thousands of hours into farming loot for every hero until I reach a point where every hero is in gear that enables me to run the highest difficulty maps in hardcore survival mixed mode. 

I feel only looking at 4/15 maps and four out of 6 difficulties and other modifiers like mixed mode and hardcore not being present - it gives a false impression on how quick the progression will be. Even myself fell foul of that, I felt it seemed allot quicker to get to insane than in DD1. That may well be true, but we dont know what difficulty spike will be present getting from Insane to Nightmare or from Nightmare to Massacre. The game may be balanced around getting to the end of insane quickly but severely slowing us down once we hit Nightmare. We are gauging the game on less than quarter of what will be present upon full release. Maybe once the full game is out and we know exactly how the whole game has been balanced then we can say whether or not the hero deck needs changing. 

Edited by dizzydiana

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The hero deck is *great*. There's no added benefit to having to run back to the forge to switch heroes, and leveling up multiple heroes is just a pointless grid, so being able to split exp is fantastic. The only thing better would be a single global level, which seems like the obvious correct way for the game to go, but which goes against the grind principles.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I hate the hero deck. Outright. I think it was one of the worst additions to DD2, and contributed to the overall downfall to both my interest and the co-op aspect of the game. I hate being able to instantly swap heroes, too, but thank fuck that's not in combat at least. I'd sooner see the forge re-implemented, bring back the hectic rush to grab mana and get towers up. Definitely hard pass on instant swapping. 

As far as shared XP though... I don't know. The mindless AFK grind on the caverns or whatever else in DD1 for days on end to get 'alts' up didn't feel great. I'm not sure there's a happy medium. I'd probably be okay with shared XP as long as it wasn't 100%. Maybe if it was even different percents for each slot. 75%, 50%, and 25% for the three that you're currently not playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, dizzydiana said:

I feel only looking at 4/15 maps and four out of 6 difficulties and other modifiers like mixed mode and hardcore not being present - it gives a false impression on how quick the progression will be. Even myself fell foul of that, I felt it seemed allot quicker to get to insane than in DD1. That may well be true, but we dont know what difficulty spike will be present getting from Insane to Nightmare or from Nightmare to Massacre. The game may be balanced around getting to the end of insane quickly but severely slowing us down once we hit Nightmare. We are gauging the game on less than quarter of what will be present upon full release. Maybe once the full game is out and we know exactly how the whole game has been balanced then we can say whether or not the hero deck needs changing. 

While i agree whith your statement that this is still beta and we will have to see how things work out in the final product. In my opinion beta is meant for aspects like these and with only 4 maps available i also think that insane difficulity was to easy to reach in the current state. Whether this is through gear being to strong early and not having a level requirment in the beta or that it's because we had acces to a leveling system that alowed us in my opinion level heroes to effieciently.

 

16 hours ago, PastafarianGames said:

The hero deck is *great*. There's no added benefit to having to run back to the forge to switch heroes, and leveling up multiple heroes is just a pointless grid, so being able to split exp is fantastic. The only thing better would be a single global level, which seems like the obvious correct way for the game to go, but which goes against the grind principles.

The point of there only be one level going against the grind doesn't necesserily have to be. i don't know if you are familier with Fortnite save the world? they have implemented a account level which offers different rewards on leveling up. Some rewards grant skill points which you can invest in several different things(Hero abilities or passive increases) and other rewards give out either crafting mats(could give gold or something) and others gave out schematics/new heroes(this can be weapons or pets or even costumes) Though both games are incredible different i can see some kind of simmilar system work out. granted that it will be balanced out properly.

12 hours ago, Xurtan said:

Honestly, I hate the hero deck. Outright. I think it was one of the worst additions to DD2, and contributed to the overall downfall to both my interest and the co-op aspect of the game. I hate being able to instantly swap heroes, too, but thank fuck that's not in combat at least. I'd sooner see the forge re-implemented, bring back the hectic rush to grab mana and get towers up. Definitely hard pass on instant swapping. 

As far as shared XP though... I don't know. The mindless AFK grind on the caverns or whatever else in DD1 for days on end to get 'alts' up didn't feel great. I'm not sure there's a happy medium. I'd probably be okay with shared XP as long as it wasn't 100%. Maybe if it was even different percents for each slot. 75%, 50%, and 25% for the three that you're currently not playing.

I can only say i almost completly agree with you. Though for me the feeling of power granted through leveling in DD2 and being that level 50 was so easily aquired left a bad taste in my mouth mainly. I would like to go back to the core DD1 and for my feeling being more a TD game with the possibility to pve in it than the counterpart DD2.

As for your point of balancing i think that this would also be a positive change. This way you can chose for yourself to either powerlevel one character specificly through the passive XP gain or you can just play it alround and tone down the power current power of the hero deck(in my opinion is at the moment to frontloaded) while still maintaining the quality of life change that you no longer have to either build for afk and swap, or attaching a controller for splitscreen or having the need for an emulator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am glad that you seemed to understand where I was coming from in respect to the hero deck. I dont fundamentally disagree that reducing the XP of inactive heroes could be a solution. I am just not sure if it is needed in order to balance the game. I dont know if loot was inflated in stats to help us test insane quicker, I am not sure how Beta exactly was changed to get us to where we could test insane difficulty within a short period of time. It appeared at least to me they wanted as many players as possible farming Insane survivals. I imagine that they were more interested in stress testing the servers, defences and mobs etc than actually testing progression. I get this assumption due to the lack of levels on loot and no hardcore mode being present. It seemed to me they wanted to test certain aspects more than others. If the game has indeed become too easy to overcome difficulty spikes such as from going to Nightmare from Insane due to the hero deck in its current state, then I would agree your solution would be viable.

Edited by dizzydiana

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So from 1 to 70 takes ~3.2 million experience, 70 to 71 is ~800k experience, 71 to 72 takes 2.8 million experience. That's almost the same amount of experience it takes to get to 70.

If you are concerned leveling is too fast, and it will be too easy to hit 100, you are most definitely wrong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2019 at 3:42 PM, tehslippery said:

I think you are creating problems that don't actually exist.

Lets talk about how the current systems works.

You can put up to 4 heroes in the hero deck. Each of those 4 heroes gains an equal amount of experience. Characters level up to a level of 100. As you level, it takes an exponential amount of experience to level. I have ~45 hours playing in the beta, I'm level 70. It took somewhere in the 3-3.2 million experience to get to that point. To get to level 71 takes a total of a little over 4 million experience to get to that point. So a quarter of the amount of experience it took me to get from 1-70 it will take me to get to 71. That will only get worse as levels increase.

Max level will take a lot of time in this game. It is not a trivial thing. The hero deck does not make it less trivial, it allows you to play the game as you progress.

 

Lets move on to point 2. You are going to want more than 4 characters. Just like in DD1, you will want multiple of classes for different purposes. For example, I am currently leveling a second Monk to use as a Boost Monk, while my initial Monk can be used as a builder. That means I had to stop a character from gaining experience (in my case I took out my Huntress).

Further on from that point, we don't actually know what the important levels are going to be from gear, because right now we are leveling even faster than we will in live due to the fact that gear doesn't have it's levels on it. The only pseudo important level right now is 60 because that is when you get your last tower upgrade.

 

All making level taking longer does, is make you spend more time doing things you've already done. It doesn't increase the challenge of the game, or the playability, or the desire to play. It just makes it take longer. There is no net positive for making it take longer.

I am also lvl 71 and was going to post the exact same points, i'm doing another mage right now.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with solo exp becomes what map can I solo build that gives best exp while afk on a new character. So like in dd1 after campaign you could just solo build glitterhelm caverns then afk on next character your leveling and do that which adds nothing to compelling gameplay.

Shared exp allows you to progress much more naturally throughout the entirety of the game and might not have the need to farm lower ended content. Personally I dont mind exp share. It allows initial playthroughs to be better overall. Personally I'm good with fully shared exp.

 

In dd1 I remember by time I got to maps with bosses I ended up just brute forcing the bosses because it was easier then leveling a dps hero at the time. I played almost the entire game as a builder because towers are alot better then heros because you cant be everywhere.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, dizzydiana said:

I am glad that you seemed to understand where I was coming from in respect to the hero deck. I dont fundamentally disagree that reducing the XP of inactive heroes could be a solution. I am just not sure if it is needed in order to balance the game. I dont know if loot was inflated in stats to help us test insane quicker, I am not sure how Beta exactly was changed to get us to where we could test insane difficulty within a short period of time. It appeared at least to me they wanted as many players as possible farming Insane survivals. I imagine that they were more interested in stress testing the servers, defences and mobs etc than actually testing progression. I get this assumption due to the lack of levels on loot and no hardcore mode being present. It seemed to me they wanted to test certain aspects more than others. If the game has indeed become too easy to overcome difficulty spikes such as from going to Nightmare from Insane due to the hero deck in its current state, then I would agree your solution would be viable.

To be fair, insane and DD1 wasn't much harder than this. It didn't take long until the only thing people that had an idea of how the game worked were running nothing but Insane. I don't think the beta was inflated much at all, not least as that seems the sort of thing they'd specifically mention. Though I very well could be wrong, the other argument against it is it prevents us from actually being able to talk about whatever is inflated due to the fact we have no idea how it'll feel come launch, and that doesn't seem to be what they want. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, tehslippery said:

So from 1 to 70 takes ~3.2 million experience, 70 to 71 is ~800k experience, 71 to 72 takes 2.8 million experience. That's almost the same amount of experience it takes to get to 70.

If you are concerned leveling is too fast, and it will be too easy to hit 100, you are most definitely wrong.

 

11 hours ago, Doondoons said:

I am also lvl 71 and was going to post the exact same points, i'm doing another mage right now.

This both in my opinion doens't say the current system is good. the beta is now out for about 1.5 weeks the fact that in that time you already leveled up to 71 says quite a bit with the limited amount of content available. also it's not 1 hero that is level 71 it's a total of 4 heroes because of the hero deck funtcionality. Imho the speed we reached insane and the higher levels of insane survival was far to quick.(this also because of the gear not having any level requirments at al)

Also what you might be forgetting is that with 2 more difficulities coming that the xp gain will be much higher than that and i'm not even mentioning the more xp rewarding levels later down the road. (also this is based on my thought that 100 is the cap same as in DD1)

 

In my opinion the game should be segmented in 4 different parts of the game.

  • Early game: get to know the game learn the maps/characters. Almost no challenge to exist since this should be easy and accesible to all players(easy and medium difficulity)
  • Mid game: Should still be easy on the experienced defenders. There might be a map that you need to complete twice/trice for some extra gear but should not really be an issue all together. you can either complete this by bruteforcing bosses with towers or have 1 character able to dps to some degree(hard difficulity)
  • Late game: here is where some more grinding should be in place. You'll gonna need several characters at the same powerlevel and you will have to grind quite a bit more at the end of the lategame. If you were to have 4 builder heroes in your hero deck as it is currently you'll skip such a big part of the game where you would only need to do a few maps for gear but that is it.(insane and maybe halfway into nightmare?)
  • End game: ?????????( We have no information or testing samples of this yet maybe the hardest maps on nightmare in DD1 as comparison) I hope this will be as challenging as the devs said it would be. At this point levels become useless since you would probably be around the level where you can just equip the second/third best gear and proceed through those levels where the challenge lies in maps and stat checks only.(second half of nightmare and massacare)

My fear for how the current system works is that the mid game will be the same as early game. Also making late game a big time shorter of a grind because you are able to have all 4 heroes leveled up at the same time so the only need is for gear. (yes you probably need a DPS for the boss maps but leveling up 1 hero is a joke since you just play a map 3 times on repeat and tada there it is while you already had to do so for the gear)

 

In my opinion because of the 100% xp share and therefore having 4 heroes leveled up at the same pace makes to much of the game to easy. We shouldn't be rushing through the game just to get to end game and burn out in a few days. It should be a journey nice and relaxing/easy at the start and a good progression towards the true challenge.

Not dull,dull,eh somewhat challenge, OMG THIS IS THE CHALLENGE.

Another proposition to make the current system more balanced is locking the XP share of each of the slots 2-4 behind campaign completion. (all the 4 slots will be available at all time but do not get passive xp on start)

After completing the game on easy slot 2 will be unlocked for the XP share. Slot 3 on medium and slot 4 on hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It bears repeating that you will at a certain point need more than just 4 heroes, you will not be able to complete higher difficulties without having more focused heroes available to use. You will still need to level heroes in addition to the strongest 4 you currently have. The main problem is for you it seems that you can level 4 equally at any one time. There will always be a way to level more than one hero regardless of hero deck, since split screen exists. Even if you are only able to level each individually it still becomes nothing more than an AFK grind.  How much grinding for nothing more than XP should be required to reach the next step in progression 10% 30% 50%? I did not find it satisfying to build on my squire in Glitterhelm then go to the forge and switch to another hero and do virtually nothing until the map has finished.  I would go find a spot where I could not get hit and basically sit there then run around between waves picking up items from the chest. Once you have done that for 7 different heroes multiple times for each (waller apprentice, tower apprentice,DPS apprentice, trap  huntress, tower boost monk, hero boost monk, DPS Huntress) it is just mind numbing beyond belief. I never saw the AFK XP grind as difficult - if my squire could build out Glitterhelm it didnt alter if my towers would last or not if I sat on a new hero or on my squire, it only added time in which I could of had more enjoyment trying out new difficulties and builds in higher difficulties. In other words I only ever saw it as a time sink, whether you feel that time sink adds ACTUAL difficulty to the game or not is a personal opinion and many will differ on that. We will still need to grind out new heroes for XP in the present system, we will still have to grind new loot for them, the main difference is we do not need to have the level 1 hero during combat in a map to do so in the most efficient manner, this means we will be using a stronger hero, who will more likely be able to upgrade/repair defences and attack enemies. I see this as a positive as it increases the possible engagement in the map over sitting in a corner hoping no enemy sees you.

Overall i agree with how you see what defines each level of progression. Where perhaps I see a difference is the huge dififculty spike between Insane and Nightmare compared to Hard to Insane. Insane introduces the player to build timers, but by then you have already worked out for the most part a build that works and its not much more than how well you can memorise them. getting from Insane to Nightmare was something else entirely, suddenly you are faced with enemies that counter your existing strategy- Spiders would also spawn behind the crystal slowing down you or your towers, Djinns would despawn defences, Sharkens would move walls out of the way and Goblin copters would drop ogres on to the floor. It made you have to stop and think and adapt. this may also hold true going into Massacre from Nightmare we as yet dont know if additional enemies will be added or what. Nightmare became easier with heroes like the Ev and the reflect beam or the summoner with his self healing walls. We will not have those upon release, even with current experience of DD1 we will be restricted in how we deal with these challenges and will require allot more strategic thinking. 

Edited by dizzydiana
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything that forces you to afk a map (bringing a level 1 character to a map a level 70 can solo build) is bad. Unfortunately this will likely be the path nearly all players take if dd1 style takes place. The hero deck is also an option. You can make 1 character at a time if that's what YOUR preference is. Give us the option to level the 4 characters at a time and leave the ability for solo exp (maybe even a bonus to exp?) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, vosh said:

Anything that forces you to afk a map (bringing a level 1 character to a map a level 70 can solo build) is bad. Unfortunately this will likely be the path nearly all players take if dd1 style takes place. The hero deck is also an option. You can make 1 character at a time if that's what YOUR preference is. Give us the option to level the 4 characters at a time and leave the ability for solo exp (maybe even a bonus to exp?) 

Like 1 hero you get 125% xp  and 2 heros get 100% and 3 heres get 75% and 4 heros get 60%   then let you pick how many you stick in there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After actually looking at the numbers I really don't think it's that big of a deal.

It very much seems as though DDA is using the same experience per level formula as DD1 but we're getting less experience per map. Seems like I'm getting roughly 2/3 of the experience I did on DD1 although the experience per map on DDA seems a bit more erratic so it's hard to perfectly tell. 

If you're just looking at people leveling characters one at a time on DD1 then yeah, this is quite a bit faster. But given that realistically very few people maxed all the DD1 characters one by one and most used multiple controllers or emulators to run 4 characters per map anyway this is actually likely to be a bit slower overall. 

13 hours ago, SaintsBC said:

In my opinion because of the 100% xp share and therefore having 4 heroes leveled up at the same pace makes to much of the game to easy

Gonna be honest, after reading a few of your posts you really seem way too attached to the idea that this game will be literally nothing more than a straight up rip of DD1 with DD2's deck lazily tacked onto it. 

Give CG some credit. 

13 hours ago, SaintsBC said:

It should be a journey nice and relaxing/easy at the start and a good progression towards the true challenge.

Not dull,dull,eh somewhat challenge, OMG THIS IS THE CHALLENGE.

Yeah, and that's actually the exact flaw in DD1 that the hero deck and experience share can potentially fix.

DD1 was real easy and dull all the way up until the moment it becomes literally impossible and you have to revert back to the dull and easy levels. I've played many, many progression based games and I struggle to think of one with a more jarring progression than DD1's. 

The experience sharing of the hero deck softens the extremely jarring transition between needing one character to beat a level and needing multiple if not all of them. And contrary to what you seem to be set on believing, it doesn't mean the game has to be innately easier or that the grind will be gone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, SaintsBC said:

 

This both in my opinion doens't say the current system is good. the beta is now out for about 1.5 weeks the fact that in that time you already leveled up to 71 says quite a bit with the limited amount of content available. also it's not 1 hero that is level 71 it's a total of 4 heroes because of the hero deck funtcionality. Imho the speed we reached insane and the higher levels of insane survival was far to quick.(this also because of the gear not having any level requirments at al)

I can tell you since getting level 71 I have done about 4 labs 25 a few mines 25 and some wells to 25 I am barely even a 5th of a bar. 

12

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Cuddles said:

Gonna be honest, after reading a few of your posts you really seem way too attached to the idea that this game will be literally nothing more than a straight up rip of DD1 with DD2's deck lazily tacked onto it. 

Give CG some credit. 

 

To be fair, that's more or less what we've seen of the beta. Not saying that's a bad thing, but it's certainly looking like DD1 with a handful of DD2 aspects and one or two small new things such as doublejump. They have to earn credit. I gave them cash and am watching, but beyond that? We'll see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Xurtan said:

To be fair, that's more or less what we've seen of the beta. Not saying that's a bad thing, but it's certainly looking like DD1 with a handful of DD2 aspects and one or two small new things such as doublejump. They have to earn credit. I gave them cash and am watching, but beyond that? We'll see. 

I think many share that feeling, what is our money getting us? DDA is in a difficult position to be fair, it cannot just appeal to those currently playing DD1 it also has to appeal to DD2 players and totally new ones. How do we get those playing the F2P DD2 to buy DDA? Is it possible to bring the community together and stop this Us vs Them mentality that seems to exist in our community. All I want is a game I find fun and worth my $$$ and hoping DDA will be.

Share this post


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

I think many share that feeling, what is our money getting us? DDA is in a difficult position to be fair, it cannot just appeal to those currently playing DD1 it also has to appeal to DD2 players and totally new ones. How do we get those playing the F2P DD2 to buy DDA? Is it possible to bring the community together and stop this Us vs Them mentality that seems to exist in our community. All I want is a game I find fun and worth my $$$ and hoping DDA will be.

It's not possible to please both crowds as tons of DD1 playes hate DD2 more than slipping on dog poop and falling right in it.

Share this post


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

I think many share that feeling, what is our money getting us? DDA is in a difficult position to be fair, it cannot just appeal to those currently playing DD1 it also has to appeal to DD2 players and totally new ones. How do we get those playing the F2P DD2 to buy DDA? Is it possible to bring the community together and stop this Us vs Them mentality that seems to exist in our community. All I want is a game I find fun and worth my $$$ and hoping DDA will be.

Unfortunately no, I don't think it's possible. DD1 and DD2 were simply vastly different games. Everyone I know that loved DD1 tried DD2 and gave up on it quickly, because it simply was not what we wanted. That's the reality that a lot of people are dealing with/looking at for DDA, and we're wondering how far towards DD2 is DDA going to go + what new things we'll get. If it's too close to DD2, we won't buy it. 

  • Like 2

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...