Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Cuddles

  1. I've played a hell of a lot of D3. The seasonal rewards are pretty much hot garbage, the "new mechanics" are something someone put together in about 10 minutes and the "reworks" are them just upping the numbers on a set that used to be garbage until it's now the one build for a given class everyone has to play to actually progress. Christ, this seasons "mechanic" is straight up ripped from a PoE core mechanic that was a seasonal mechanic there 6 years ago. Right, and you very conveniently overlook the second part of my statement explaining how they're markedly different in progression style. DD1 would have been modeled around D2 - not modern day D3, and they're a world apart in terms of how they actually play out. It is for a lot of people which is why the player retention is so crap. And overall seeing as the entire point of seasons is to try and lure people into the game and help retention I don't know how you can go on about how great D3 seasons are while simultaneously admitting they're an abject failure. As I said, if you want to talk about seasons done "right" you need to look at things like PoE which have used seasons to actually increase their player base instead of just having ever-declining player spikes during the first few days of a new season. DD1 is a 10 year old game that a lot of people "beat" years ago and probably haven't touched in years either. After not playing something for years it's kind of logical that you'd want to start from the beginning and learn it all again instead of jumping into the game with everything beat and god tier gear. That's quite a lot different to something like AP where every few days you're undoing all of your progress.
  2. 95% of whom probably quit within a day or two because doing the exact same content for the 19th consecutive set of months with just a little more power creep loses it's appeal pretty quickly. If anything the fact you were able to breach even the 5 digit rank threshold on one of the most popular gaming franchises out there with so little playtime just speaks volumes about how shitty seasons can be when it comes to player retention. For seasons to actually be interesting and reel in more long term players they need active development like Path of Exile and Fortnite. "Play through the game again with all this new content and reworks and mechanics and rewards" is vastly more interesting than "here you go guys do the exact same thing again". On top of that serious anti-cheat is kinda important, and those are both things I doubt we're likely to see if there's no serious monetization going on. Plus D3 and DD don't really play the same. Playing an hour every other day it'd probably take you the best part of the 3 month cycle just to breach into endgame on DD which at least in my opinion is where the fun actually really starts to ramp up.
  3. I'd say that's only really the case if you're trying to make some off the wall true 50/50 hybrid between the genres and while that seems to be what you're interested in getting I don't really feel like that was ever what Trendy was truly chasing after. The way the two genres have been used in DD (adding RPG character growth and long term progression to a genre that generally lacks personal investment and serious replay-ability) is pretty far from contradictory and is the type of ingenuity the industry needs more of tbh. That's... Largely kind of the point of DDA, though. It wasn't pitched as reinventing the wheel, it was pitched as going back to the roots of a franchise that came around almost a decade/2 gaming generations ago and modernizing it. Of course, I get where you're coming from but I also don't really think there's as much inherently wrong with the old formula as you're trying to imply. At least in the current day heroes are strong in DD1 and pretty mandatory for success in the majority of the exceedingly long progression arc of the game - eternally so if you're farming non-survival and want to beat hard maps fast. Sure, you're secondary to your towers but after all it is a tower defense game so it's a stretch to say there's something inherently wrong with that. Personally I think massacre is the perfect chance to both evoke a big challenge and enforce more active mob slaying without essentially starting from the ground up and totally changing how the game plays overall. It could be kind of cool if the difficulty curve and gear progression became kind of disjointed in massacre so mobs had like 500% more HP and damage with significantly more tanky/special enemy types per wave than nightmare but gear drops were say only 15-20% better than in nightmare so you never really "outgear" massacre like you do other difficulties and you're rather always a bit undergeared for it. Of course those numbers are just off the top of my head and there's also a lot of other ways they could take it.
  4. That's how it is but it's worth considering that the beta isn't very much to judge the full game by seeing as it's only the easiest 4 maps and capped to insane difficulty which many people either start on or progress into within an hour or two. You're essentially watching people play the games tutorial section dozens of levels over-leveled and with overpowered gear. Something to remember is you should always take things like that with a pinch of salt, though, and that extends to any kind of design theory not just in the world of gaming. Something that sounds great, maybe even perfect on paper can pretty quickly fall to pieces when you introduce it to many other moving parts and systems like in a game. The randomly powerfully buffed lanes every wave is a pretty good example as on paper it seems great but in practice if it actually makes a measurable difference it creates issues and adds an RNG layer to progressing because the core tower aspect of DD games simply isn't really designed around constantly selling your towers after using them, meaning for it to be anything more than something that annoys everyone just because they got unlucky with chosen lanes a decent chunk of re-working and re-balancing needs to be done. It may not seem like a big deal to you because what you essentially want is an entirely re-done game anyway but seeing as this game is being born largely out of the general thirst for a slightly more modernized DD1, sweeping fundamental changes to core design probably aren't super high on CG's list. Especially seeing as a lot of the hate for DD2 is because it was, well, different.
  5. Well I know for a fact this approach to DD2 is a reason a decent chunk of people didn't really vibe well with it originally and there's been many complaints about the hero-reliant additions to it over time. Personally I kinda found 2 issues with the whole hero-centric thing. Firstly it's pretty much impossible to create that balance "naturally" for lack of a better term so it's pretty much artificially done by making a bunch of enemy types annoying or turning everything into annoying damage sponges. The first is well, annoying - and the second is just tiring and massively enforces whatever is "meta". And secondly map design takes quite a hit because when the hero is the focus it's important they can very quickly traverse across the lanes. DD2's maps are largely very compact, easy to navigate and well... Boring especially compared to the DLC maps of DD1. There's also a bunch that can be said about moving out of an interesting niche and more into the path of a half-baked version of something else. For example Epic pushed the PvE version of Fortnite less out of it's "base defense looter shooter" niche and more into just the "looter shooter" genre before the holidays and it hasn't really gone too well which isn't very surprising given there's much better established and much better developed looter shooters out there. Eh, I kinda disagree. On one hand, yeah, it feels cool when you're zooming through maps. On the other... The faster you're doing maps the more time you're spending on loading screens and setting up the same builds over and over. Maybe it's just me but personally I think it's a real drag when you realize that like 25% or more of your playtime is spent not really even doing anything. The return of choosing a starting wave could be pretty nice though. DD2 had (I think it still has but it's been changed a bit) this and it was kinda meh. At the beginning when balance was a bit off so the game was pretty hard it added an annoying element of RNG when it came to actually beating a map which obviously shouldn't be present and if it does still exist at this point in the game it's barely noticeable. That's because it's not a "benefit" it's a drawback. Controlling a character and moving around is cumbersome and time consuming compared to a more "classic" TD view and approach. This means anything that comes mid-wave needs to be announced (or else it starts becoming RNG over skill) and dumbed down a bit to account for the time it might take you to run all the way across a map. In contrast to that throwing fast curve balls at the player mid-wave is a big and very fun part of something like BTD6 where you can build on a whim freely across the whole map. In fact selling and re-building your defenses on the fly is a pretty common necessity in the challenge maps there. Never seen? Path of Exile is quite literally the exact game you're talking about and substantially more. On top of that there are other very developed content rich RPG's out there with good defense elements like Warframe.
  6. DD1 leveling was just AFKing your way through maps you could easily stomp all over I'm not entirely sure how that's remotely a showcase of skill lol. It also kinda went a step above with Onslaught. From what I recall only 1 person managed to "beat" it before it got reworked and no one seems to have done it since. It also has a functionally infinite leveling system which everyone seemed to trash when it came around despite it being exactly what a bunch of people seem to want now ironically. All this talk about showing off your prowess is making me even more bummed out that the game is likely to be a cheaters paradise.
  7. "If people want to tear their game apart offline, cheat their way through everything, by all means, they are more than welcome to." A direct quote. Obviously you might be drawn to the "offline" part there but offline play will now apparently be carrying over into online and while there will undoubtedly be precautions in place to stop speedhackers and other absurd stuff online there's not much that can be done about lesser stuff like editing your level/generating "legit" items which is why online only/separating online and offline started to become a thing.
  8. That's not entirely true unless you think it's even remotely likely that a relatively small studio that's absolutely busting their asses off just to create this game for us to begin with has also found the time and ingenuity to completely revolutionize the world of anti-cheat.
  9. Extremely egregious hacking like speed hacks and infinite damage, yeah. But that's a world apart from generated reasonable items/level setting etc in terms of detection.
  10. Not really. You were very much against endgame being easy to reach and people being able to level quickly - because in your words a very long leveling process and game progression supposedly ensures people are good at the game and dedicated to it. Yet you also apparently can't figure out why some people take issue with everyone being able to pick the game up and essentially starting it in perfect gear and max level? Yeah, that's exactly it, largely, you can't. If cheaters were labeled as cheaters they'd stop devaluing things by proxy and no one would care that they're just ruining the game for themselves in the long run.
  11. Except... It is. Lawlta stated just the other day people will be able to do what they like and while there'll be online checks to stop the super egregious gazillion stat modding from ruining online sessions it's hard to believe they'll be able to stop things that're done within the confines of what's actually possible. Well I get what you mean to an extent. Although seeing as the experience curve seems to be the same as DD1 looking back at that you start getting into NM around that point and the experience reward from maps makes up for the jump quite well. Although there certainly was a bit of a huge slowdown/wall going from 70 to 74 or whenever it is you can equip Mythical to really start pushing into NM. Hopefully things like that do get smoothed over a bit. As I've said in another thread, yeah, people being able to cheat for god tier items does remove a lot of the point for a lot of people. A large amount of people parading around with hacked gear and levels devalues achievement by proxy. Obviously there's people that don't care and that's cool too. But it definitely has an effect on perception. The thing is that basically the sole point of a very drawn out grindy leveling process is to provide prestige and accomplishment to the people that make it to the end or if there is no end then those at the top. And yeah, I get it, I've been there it's cool and I'm not completely opposed to the concept in general. But the more drawn out, arduous and unrealistic that process is the more people want to try and bypass it whether it be with bots, modding, account sharing, boosting or whatever else they can think of. In the context of a game like DD:A where there's seemingly going to be very little stopping people from cheating then trying to make levels a prestigious grind is completely self defeating. And worse than that it'd likely burn some people out by sending them down the path of cheating.
  12. Except in this case if leveling takes forever everyone that sees your level is just going to assume you cheated for it like everyone else did. Trying to impose lengthy grinds that only really serve to show how "dedicated" you are is a completely pointless task in a game where modding and hacking is totally allowed. I'm failing to see what's wrong and "unbalanced" with lower levels being faster to obtain than higher levels, it's entirely logical. Plus in the live game you'll be doing more than just the easiest map in the game on insane so that experience hike isn't that awful. Yeah even as someone that doesn't mind seasons they don't really fit into a game like this. They work well in a) competitive ranked games where peoples' ranks and MMR totally stagnate after a while and it gets tiring I.E Rocket League and Siege and b) in games where the most fun part for the majority of players is a race to progress up to the top and progressing through the more mid-game content I.E Path of Exile and D3. DD doesn't have a competitive portion that stagnates and it's not exactly the type of game that's fun to race through over and over as it requires too much investment.
  13. Yeah which is why it's kind of bad for the game overall. Speaking from personal experience even as someone that enjoys grinding once you hit the end of progression in a game (or at least end of reasonable progression) things can get a bit dull and you can burn out really easy. I'm sure most people here have experienced it in one game or another and as someone that's played a ton of RuneScape I've watched it happen to literally hundreds of people upon "maxing" their account or achieving enough currency for BiS gear. Being able to jump into the game with maxed everything is something a lot of people are likely to do and it's something that's likely going to kill the game for them. Even more so seeing as the defenses at least seem to scale similarly to DD1 which means going from max gear to starting over legitimately is going to feel absolutely horrible. Although granted CG probably aren't that concerned with how long people actually stick around after their purchase but it'd be nice to see the playerbase and community grow a lot because the games deserve it. It's also seemingly going to totally dumpster the trading aspect of the game which I find a little bit sad. I guess it's just a situation where everything can't be perfect. At least offline play not being a waste of time will finally give me a reason to actually use my Switch again.
  14. It does actually affect a fair amount of people because many people value their personal achievement relative to public perception. I posted in another thread the other day about how back in Gears of War 2 being max level went from "holy crap they're gonna be good" and inducing enough fear to make people preemptively quit matches to being completely meaningless in almost no time at all because people found ways to cheat for it and bypass the several hundred hour grind. It also pretty much completely invalidates any potential leaderboard or any type of semi-competitive element like onslaught in DD2. Although I doubt many people are really all too bothered about that. Also weren't you one of the guys that was adamant leveling should be a super stretched out arduous grind to "prove people are dedicated"? Slightly conflicting.
  15. That's kinda what does happen, though. There may not be a physical barrier stopping you from trying a certain map on a certain difficulty but you're still essentially restricted in what you can and can't do by your gear and how strong you are, and while there may be a disparity between a knowledgeable player and a newer one the removal of semi-broken things like stacking and minions should massively reduce it. I think most people are aware enough of the gaming industry to know that if level 100 took 2000 hours or any other extremely large amount of time 99.999% of the people that would ever have it would be people that're botting/glitching/modding and thus it becomes something that isn't really very impressive or meaningful and in fact could even become something you don't really want to achieve. I remember a similar thing happening during Gears of War 2 for example. When the multiplayer leveling system came around the max level (100) was a pretty significant task, you were looking at around 600-1000 or more hours spent across thousands of matches depending on whether you were a top tier player or more average, and thus for a while it was a pretty impressive thing, if someone was sitting at 100 you kind of knew they were real good. A lot of hilarity resulted from it as me and my team all hit 100 fast and almost every match a person or two on the other team would eject their disc or turn off their Xbox upon seeing they were matched against us to avoid playing (there was no option to "leave"). But then people started boosting to level up. And not long after that people started outright modding as that had taken off quite a bit, and the final nail in the coffin was a glitch being found that allowed you to essentially copy your level onto someone else. Within a couple of months the most impressive (and for average players, the most fear-inducing) thing you could see in a pre-match lobby became the only thing you saw in a pre-match lobby. Outside of MMO's (and even some of those aren't really immune) that's kind of how things are always destined to end up at this point. I think everyone gets the allure of there being some monumental achievement that shows off dedication but in this day and age all it really does is encourage impatient people to cheat.
  16. Trying to use games where a huge chunk of the playerbase literally pays to bypass the monotonous lesser content grind on the way to endgame as a point that people enjoy that grind? Nice. And, again, even if that weren't the case - the grinding in these games is very much different to a DD game. They're all either games that require active playing or they're firmly in the realm of an idle game. I mean... Your own literal words are that you want the leveling process to take "way more than 100 hours". So yeah, you're talking about an excessively long leveling process. Except it wasn't really cheating just blatant use of an intended mechanic. It was also incredibly damaging for the health of the game even more so these days as a lot of people become more and more focused on being "efficient" in farming based games. Yeah you're either completely out of touch or just being ignorant to try and enforce your own beliefs. Outside of late endgame and when you're stuck behind a level threshold for stronger gear the majority of game progression is done whilst undergeared and as a result of that you're not just gonna AFK everything. Doesn't matter how "good at the game" you are it doesn't make up for large disparity in your gear and what gear you need to trample over a map with a meta setup. Although by all means, I'd be down to watch you go from a fresh start on DD1 all the way up to absolute endgame whilst you have to solely AFK after the initial build if it's really that easy. While actually progressing forward there is things to do even on one character, though. You need to monitor your defenses, upgrade, repair etc. You can only really forego those things when you're a fair bit stronger than the map you're playing and outside of being gated by your level you're generally pushing into a stronger map by that point all the way up until you run out of content. Even just needing to loot mana and upgrade is a welcomed bit of engagement because it keeps you actually interacting with the game. My issue with the way the level gating occurred in DD1 is that it kind of left you being substantially more powerful than the content you needed to farm to level up. When I was doing Glitterhelm to level up to be able to progress further I could build during the first build phase and be guaranteed to beat the map without touching anything after that, and there was no excitement of potentially getting any good gear so it just became as dull as watching paint dry. We all get it. Personally I've sunk thousands of hours into leveling on games like RS and many others. It can be enjoyable. The leveling process being too drawn out just... Feels bad in the context of a game like DD1 where your level directly determines your progress but the curve is such that you hit big slumps. Granted there are ways to help it such as smoothing at the level requirements for gear to be much more in line with where the player will actually be when getting them but I guess we'll have to see what happens.
  17. There's so much wrong with what you're saying it physically hurts. Unless the balance and progression is absolutely flawless (unlikely) or the game is far too easy (I'm hoping not) you're pretty much always going to hit multiple instances of your progression being blocked by you needing to level up doing lesser content to equip stronger gear. This is generally a pretty common thing in ARPG's for example and it generally isn't a huge "problem" per se. The problem here though is that the gameplay dynamic in something like DD is a lot different to say Grim Dawn or Diablo. In those games even when doing easier content you still need to actively play the game and thus it's engaging to an extent - but in something like DD there's pretty much no point in being "active" whilst doing easier content because you're essentially just jogging around watching your towers hit stuff. It's the equivalent of intently staring at an idle game. And to answer your question, in DD1 yeah for the most part I AFK'ed my first character, and second, and third, and so on. And no it wasn't because I was "bored of the game" but rather because I was absolutely forced into doing content that provided no challenge and I don't derive much enjoyment from sitting there watching a game play itself without a hitch for dozens of hours. And a whole bunch of current day progression based games say you're wrong and your head is stuck back in 2005 when devs knew much less about creating a good endgame and masked it by making leveling a pointless 2000 hour grind. Something you also really seem to be overlooking is that very few people have hundreds of hours to sink into very unrewarding, unengaging content that they can trivialize just so they can reach the part of the game that's actually difficult and challenging. Thing is while leveling and farming gear may seem the same on paper there's undoubtedly a substantial psychological difference. I'm no scientist but it becomes blatantly obvious when you look at a game like RuneScape and see how few people truly enjoy grinding out skills and how almost all of the playerbase spends a massive amount of their play time farming mobs for rare drops. I'd imagine it has a lot to do with farming for gear being essentially a form of gambling. And well, overall, as I've said leveling probably isn't going to be a much different to DD1 anyway at least pre-massacre. And as for the complaints about the hero deck making it "faster" almost all serious players were leveling 4 characters at a time on DD1 anyway as well as receiving 4x the loot they were supposed to. This just puts everyone on an even footing and depending on how split screen is handled may actually slow overall progression down ironically.
  18. Despite what you adamantly seem to believe DD games aren't decidedly "multiplayer games" they're solo games that happen to have co-op functionality and trading, something that should be abundantly clear now with the inclusion of the Switch and saves carrying over both online and offline. Yeah it'd be super great when you really want to play but your friends are busy/don't want to play/quit playing so you have your singular hero building the exact same couple of defenses on every map you play with basically no variations. And funnily enough... Even with the absurd experience increase leveling still took a long time in DD1. You don't just boot the game up, create a character and do 2 Glitterhelm runs and you're at 100. It takes hours to get to the point where you can run it on insane (substantially longer if you choose a "bad" hero from the start), then it takes hours of grinding it to reach the next gear threshold, then many hours leveling up the other heroes you need to progress especially if you're not running an emulator, then hours for the next threshold blah blah. I started another account with the DD1 code I got from KS and it's around 60 hours and my most used character is at around level 90. You may be able to power level fairly fast through leeching but naturally leveling as you progress through the game normally is pretty slow and it's mostly just boring as hell afking. Ontop of that from what I recall the leveling curve in DDA seems to be either the same or very similar to the one in DD1 and experience gain actually seems a bit lower. Unless there's a significant change or the balance is so terrible people have late NM/massacre maps on farm by level 60 I doubt hitting 100 is going to be all that trivial.
  19. Maybe I'm wrong but the beta content was/is crazily unbalanced, perhaps they're taking another look at it because if it stays how it is pre-nightmare will be almost completely irrelevant unless nightmare is absurdly overtuned and requires borderline perfect gear from insane which would create a pretty terrible progression curve. Games still in EA missing large swathes of content have actually gone up for physical sale in game stores - most notably Fortnite StW which was I believe 70 dollars if not more and made even more hilarious by the fact it's meant to be a f2p game that's still in the same state it was back then over 2 years later. That aside, it's not like it's uncommon for games to go into EA and be up for full or near full price - especially from smaller studios so I'm unsure what you're actually getting at. It's basically the norm these days. It's not really DD2 specific, plenty of games seem to end up like that. And while I'm aware it's not always purely the fault of the developers themselves the result is still the result, the game and the situation don't magically become better or worse dependent on what the cause was. I'm aware - but my point still stands the same. It's very obvious in a lot of cases that everyone in the process of creating and polishing a game just doesn't quite get what it is everyone loves about their product. Sometimes it comes in the form of strange tweaks, sometimes it comes in the form of content that's just wildly out of place and sometimes (notably with Warframe) it comes from the dev team directly saying something and even incorrectly telling the community what the community wants. Of course it's their product and they can do what they like but it's most certainly puzzling when a dev team tweaks something or releases content that basically just goes against whatever it is that's making their game good and enjoyable in the first place.
  20. There's a pretty substantial difference between a full release and early access especially if you accept what early access is actually supposed to be - which is basically a glorified slightly more advanced beta. If you're expecting a flawless game in EA then your perception has been jaded by games like Ark abusing the title. A large part of what makes or breaks a game like this is the balance and progression both of which take a lot of tinkering to get right, and segmenting the content will at least give them time to tweak progression individually up to late nightmare pre-release based on actual player feedback which is something to actually be glad about. Are there flaws? Of course. But it's a whole lot better than them fully releasing an unpolished, unbalanced barely finished slog of a game just to meet a deadline that they then need to spend 2 years revamping and updating instead of a few months because pushing updates to a live game requires far more forethought and consideration. And how are they truly going to know the game is perfect and ready for release if there's no one trying it to tell them? Developers are a) very often in an echo chamber when there's no direct feedback and b) generally don't see their games in the same way the player base does. I play a ton of games and it's crazy how often even the most obvious issues slip by even great developers when they have no feedback reaching them to the point where they'll regularly make the exact same mistakes they've already had to fix previously. The fragmented content isn't really my cup of tea either but personally after seeing the myriad of small issues in the beta that need to be tweaked I'm glad that we'll be able to test things out as they go instead of just having to pray it all got noticed and dealt with on top of anything else that popped up before release day rolled around.
  21. Personally I'd say the exact opposite. Seems as though they've learned from DD2 that releasing a game in a "good enough" state and then reworking it over and over just doesn't work out. You alienate most potential players with bad first impressions and the constant uncertainty of what will and wont change makes people hesitant to really invest in the game. Yeah, it sucks that the wait is now even longer but on the plus side it shows that they're likely actually listening and trying to produce a quality game. They undoubtedly could have just ignored all of our feedback and released the game in a "good enough" state within the next couple of weeks to cash out but chose instead to try and give us what we want. I understand the disappointment but talking about how they "can't do their jobs" when they're pretty clearly going above and beyond just to give us what we're asking for is a bit douchey.
  22. I assume the chatbox is supposed to go on the left but it looks seriously strange having the UI elements so biased to one side. The defense upgrade/sell/repair hotkeys being displayed in a d-pad formation while on a PC seems kind of odd especially when the other hotkeys are displayed in a more normal way. It looks like the wave progress bar depletes down as you progress through waves, but honestly I think it looks far better if it fills up as you progress through a wave like it does in DD1. And I guess since it's just pictures I may be missing it but the bar seems very blocky and static where as the DD1 bar was very "fluid" and animated. The indication of what level your defense is upgraded to doesn't seem to have changed (?). If that's the case it's still a pretty serious visibility issue. As others have said, the prompt when hovering over a tower are both really unaligned and look kind of obnoxious and out of place. And while it's a bit off the UI topic - I'm hoping you guys have looked into the auto-targeting on repair/upgrade as having to manually target everything is incredibly cumbersome. Maybe it's the ARPG addict in me but overall I think UI's that are center-biased are much better looking and more functional.
  23. Cuddles


    Yes, I'm aware why you get a boost early on. But the thing is the distribution of mana across waves still just feels slightly jarring and unpleasant and it doesn't exactly need to considering DD1 and 2 both did it fine. I wouldn't put too much stock in this being a "starter map" issue, since while I could be massively wrong I doubt they're individually handcrafting every maps mana distribution and instead it's done via some type of formula based on DU limit. Yeah, but A) you're massively overleveled on an easy map on a difficulty that really still needs rebalancing and B) again, the total amount of mana gained in a map isn't really the issue. Even then, if you want to mostly rely on traps and auras mana is fairly tight. Thing is, while it's really just something that feels a bit odd at this point there's a serious potential for it to become an actual issue on harder maps and higher difficulties. It's easy to sit back and say everything's fine when you're crazy overpowered so your towers 1 hit everything so you don't need to really repair walls or use auras etc. It's a bit of a different story when you need walls and aura stacks in 5-6 different lanes and the difficulty is actually threatening so everything needs to be repaired multiple times a wave. I'm glad CG seem to be at least somewhat aware of it being a bit off.
  24. Cuddles


    Unless something's changed since I played (doesn't seem to be the case) it's not really the overall amount of mana per map that's a bit of an issue but rather the way it's distributed. at least in survival. You get a large chunk in the opening waves but as you progress you seem to get less and less per wave despite killing substantially more mobs which just doesn't feel right.
  25. 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. 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. 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.
  • Create New...