Jump to content

gigazelle

Community Development Team
  • Content Count

    2,126
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

gigazelle last won the day on August 17

gigazelle had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

120 Excellent

1 Follower

About gigazelle

  • Rank
    CDT Artist

Converted

Recent Profile Visitors

2,070 profile views
  1. 1) This was exactly the same way in DD1. No clue why CG copied this flaw. 2) This is what happens when multiplicative mechanics scale with tower stats. You get a 100% worthless tower early game, and a blatantly overpowered tower late game.
  2. HOLY FREAKING GUACAMOLE THEY LISTENED There's still the whole issue of buff beam (ahem... overclock beam) stat scaling making the towers worse, but I anticipate that's a pretty easy patch. The fact that we're not getting a broken cloned DD1 buff beam with multipliers has really restored some of my faith in this game. There are still a lot of other issues that require attention, but I genuinely enjoy and appreciate that they are trying, and listening, and I can tell that they are putting their all into it. I'm personally still waiting for the Switch version before jumping in and playing with my family. I look forward to trying out EV:A!
  3. I liked their post for you Patch notes are now live. Looks like they were just a little bit late getting it into the hands of the community. However, no mention of DU changes...
  4. (Sigh) We just had to take it there, didn't we. Is it a remake, or is it not? Oh, so it's a new game then? Not a remake. An up-to-date experience for DD1? So it is a remake? Okay, so definitely NOT a remake. Now remind me which heroes are in the game? What weapons they use? Their summoned defenses? DU and mana cost of said defenses? Abilities? Stats on gear? Armor types and set bonuses? XP and leveling requirements? Surely those aren't the same? ...They are? So this surely is a remake then! You can't just say "not a remake" and then copy literally every single game mechanic from the game. This has to be a remake then. It is quite literally Schrodinger's DD1 remake. It is both simultaneously a DD1 remake and not a DD1 remake. There are tons of claims from CG themselves that it's not a remake, and yet everything that is DDA indicates that it is, indeed a remake. I have tons more of these, btw. For both sides of the coin. "Is DD1 a remake?" is a question that cannot be answered, because there is so much contradictory evidence supporting both sides.
  5. I'm not gonna rag on your definition of fun - if you enjoy the brokenness of buff beams, more power to you. But as for me, I take enjoyment in my choice of what towers, heroes, abilities, and pets I use to beat waves. Introducing a copy of DD1's buff beam removes that choice, because the game has already picked for me. The balance of the game dictates that I use it in every map, or else I'm severely gimping myself and making the game much more difficult than it needs to be. This is the importance of balance - it allows players to pick their favorite ways to defend without making the game unnecessarily difficult. Pets, heroes, and their abilities can be tweaked to be properly balanced. Buff beams acting as a multiplier that scales with stats, no matter how they're tweaked, cannot be properly balanced. Don't bring over the summoner because: If I want the DD1 summoner experience I can just play DD1 I would rather those development resources be dedicated to a new and unique hero, and not a rehashed one that everyone has already played Introducing the summoner is yet further proof that DDA is just a copy of DD1 (as if it needs more proof lol) If minion units are a thing, then that further boxes players into a single type of gameplay, especially if buff beams in their current state are released While an RTS in a tower defense game is a pretty novel and interesting concept, is not the most efficient way to play that hero. Instead, effectively doubling your defense units with minions and plopping them on the broken buff beams we're talking about here is the most effective way. Doubling your DU with minions, once again, removes the choice of building. I digress though, as the summoner in DDA is not confirmed. I don't plan to bring it up until a) it's announced; and b) we have an opportunity to see how it plays, and specifically if the hero uses MU or not.
  6. This is clearly a superior implementation to the buff beam than DD1 and what we've seen of DDA so far. Instead of acting as a multiplier, it simply passes some of EV's builder stats to each affected tower. It still makes EV gear progression important, because you'll want her to pass as much of each stat as possible to affected towers. However, the ratio (or percentage boost) would remain about the same from beginning to end. CG could then balance it by determining how much of the builder stats get passed to the towers. Buff beams getting used in every build when they pass 30% of EV's tower stats to defenses? Reduce it so it's only 20% of EV's stats. Buff beam feels worthless and never used? Increase the portion of EV's stats that get passed to towers. Eventually you'd hit that sweet spot where it would be advantageous in some builds, but not a requirement everywhere.
  7. Be careful what you wish for - once the buff beam is introduced, it will unlikely ever leave the meta. Ever. I can quite literally personally attest to this. As part of the CDT we wanted to incrementally nerf DD1's buff beam in hopes that it wouldn't be a requirement in every build. The community was super divided on the topic, and we couldn't make any changes unless the community was in full support of a change. So, the buff beam remained a requirement for every nightmare build. DDA is a new game (at least it's supposed to be), and the buff beam isn't in the game yet. There's still a chance to avoid the same meta that DD1 has. The pet that boosts towers is much more manageable - as long as the DPS increase of the towers it boosts is (relatively) on par with the damage output of a regular DPS pet, you have an element of the game that is relatively balanced. Monk boosts are a little bit more difficult, but I feel with balance passes could achieve a hero that feels good without being completely broken. I'd personally balance monk so he has a little less DPS than other heroes without boosts, and a little more DPS with boosts active. Monk boosts are also temporary and isolated to a single location; buff beams are not. I'm afraid that's not how the buff beam (at least in its current state) is going to work. It's going to be 100% worthless in every situation until a magical arbitrary point in the game to where it's then a required defense in every build. That magical arbitrary point is dependent on how CG scales the buff beam multipliers, and how well it scales with stats. I would absolutely love for a buff beam be for "a few select towers", but from a game design perspective, that's not going to be the reality.
  8. This is the third time I'm raising this conversation over the course of this series. Please do not bring the buff beam to DDA! Buff beams are unmistakably and undeniably BROKEN. Not just as its balance in any Dungeon Defenders game, but as a core game design and balance concept. It is literally impossible to balance correctly. That's not just opinion; it is the equivalent of attempting to force an exponential curve to match a linear line. It is a mathematic impossibility. The mathematical concept (and paradox) behind the buff beam Kay, so, you've got this beam that buffs towers. It multiplies damage, attack rate, damage resistance, and range. As you increase its stats, the multipliers increase. There are three huuuuge issues with the concept behind the defense: Its a damage multiplier. This alone is more than enough to completely skew the entire balancing of the tower. It's also an attack rate multiplier, which exponentially increases damage output. On top of that, you can further increase its effectiveness by dumping stats into it. Altogether, you have the buff beam's damage multiplier, attack rate multiplier, and your gear making this insane exponential curve. In DD1, the exponential curve was approximately equal to the (relatively) linear defense damage curve in the ballpark of level 30-40. This means that if you had a choice between summoning, say, 2 harpoons or 1 harpoon on a buff beam, you'd get approximately the same damage output. Beyond that, the buff beam's damage output skyrocketed. In full trans gear, a buff beam multiplies a single tower's damage 6x-8x. 4DU for that kind of multiplier means that every defense should be on a buff beam or it's 100% worthless. DDE's started out a little tiny bit better, but a balance patch made it even worse. The attack rate on some towers was just absurd. Ended up exactly in the same position as DD1. DD2's buff beam is literally worthless until you have mostly C8 relics, and only if you have exactly the right mods and shards on it. They learned from DD1's mishap, but made it irrelevant to 99% of the players. The exponential curve meets the linear defense power curve at very end game, so it sees virtually no use. 60DU for a super minor increase in stats isn't worth it. In almost all scenarios, you might as well just summon a second tower. It also only increases damage and not attack rate, which helps alleviate the exponential curve that buff beams conceptually have. From what we've seen so far, DDA's buff beam is much closer aligned to DD1's buff beam, and since they're balancing stuff, they get to choose where the exponential buff beam curve meets the linear defense power curve of other towers. Gut the buff beam so it's 100% worthless early game and relatively balanced in massacre (similar to how DD2 did it) Keep original balancing, making buff beam a 100% required defense for literally every build (similar to how DD1 did it) Mathematically speaking, there is no middle ground. Either it's 100% worthless early game and balanced late game, or it's balanced early game and 100% broken late game. You could also make it worthless early game, balanced mid game, and broken late game. How would you balance the buff beam here?
  9. Skyward challenges look and sound super fun! Glad to see some unique content actively developed. Looking forward to playing all of this on the Switch with my family when it's released for consoles!
  10. Considering that DD2 has more concurrent players than DD1 and DDA combined, and considering that DD2 has a better review score than DDA, I wouldn't call DD2 a failure. Sure, it didn't reach critical acclaim like DD1 did, but neither has DDA. In fact, I'd submit that DDA's lack of critical acclaim is precisely because it refuses to stray from DD1.
  11. Just watched Juicebags video on EV, and I'm really disheartened to see that it is basically a tit-for-tat copy of DD1's EV. No improvements or lessons learned, including the most disappointing part: an immediate shift to a buff beam meta. It is another direct copy from DD1 without even any attempt at something original. This gives continued evidence that DDA is in fact just a copy of DD1 minus 90% of the content. Instead of CG using their valuable dev time to create unique and original content, they are squandering it to attempt to play catch up with DD1, who is still many years ahead in terms of content. I don't want DD1's EV. I don't want a meta centered around a buff beam. Instead, I want an EV that combines the best of both DD1 and DD2, and tosses her own unique flair in the game. Reflect beam is a great defense, and a staple to her arsenal. Maybe have another go at the weapon manufacturer. Instead of making it a damaging tower, return to its original design of being a pickup-based defense. Crank up the damage of the nukes and let EV shine at burst damage. How satisfying would that be to have a weapon manufacturer build a nuke throughout a wave, and give you the ability to one-shot a couple ogres no sweat? Give us a brand new tower that we've never seen before Give EV her own weapons, otherwise EV will always be at odds with apprentice and huntress at who uses staves/guns better. If THIS was the EV that was announced, I would be a lot more excited. I don't want parity to DD1. I want a new take at a tower defense RPG with DD1 core game mechanics.
  12. Just caught up on this thread. I haven't been involved in the DDA scene for a while, but allow me to share my perspective on a few different things. Bottom line (TL;DR): DDA played it too safe by copying too many elements of DD1, and it suffers from the exact same flaws that DD1 has. They had an opportunity to improve upon the original design of the game, but didn't. Fun fact, when DD1 was very first released, nightmare difficulty was not initially on their roadmap. Due to the success of the game, they wanted to introduce more content, and more difficult content. However, there was a major problem: the stat scaling and number crunching was designed for insane difficulty being the cap. If they wanted to allow stats to go higher, those stats had to be treated differently. This is why in Nightmare you have hugely nerfed projectile speed, crazy different health scaling, pet buffs, DPS nerf, and a whole slew of other major balance changes compared to insane. One of the most confusing game design decisions I've ever seen is why CG opted to intentionally include these tacked-on balance changes in DDA as well. They had an incredible opportunity to rebalance this game for a smooth progression curve from start to finish (easy to massacre), and they instead opted to include the awkward insane to nightmare transition again. This is just one of the many red flags that indicate that CG is just trying the whole "you can copy my homework answers but change it up a little so it doesn't look like you copied from me". DD1 and DDA are just too similar - you can't avoid comparing them. On one hand, you have all the same core game mechanics down to the precise amount of XP gained per map being identical between DD1 and DDA. On the other hand, DDA isn't technically a remaster of DD1, so they left out almost a decade's worth of content. So you have DDA in this weird limbo of "It's DD1! ...But it's sorta not", creating this never-ending controversy. If DDA was different enough from DD1, we wouldn't see the content comparison argument. But the fact stands: DD1 and DDA are too similar not to be compared. CG tried straddling the two sides of "remaster DD1" and "make a brand new game", and honestly ended up getting the brunt end of both sides. If CG had simply stuck to one side or another of "DD1 remastered" or "Brand new game with new heroes, towers, enemies, and maps", we would see a lot more pleasant reception from all parties. CG could have stuck to the core mechanics of DD1 and given us a new defending experience with new abilities, towers, enemies, and maps. I feel like this would have been the best of both worlds. This is what I also communicated in my review of the game, which aggravatingly got a literal canned response from the developers (still salty about that btw). Unless CG makes some major revisions to their roadmap, I don't expect much progress here. In fact, the only reason why DDDK exists is because Trendy had a bit of extra time prior to DD1's initial release. While I would absolutely love a DDA SDK (enough so that I'd consider getting back in the game to take a crack at making content), I don't think it's very high on CG's priority list.
  13. I've always wanted an item of mine in the game!
  14. I would actually like to see more towers in the game have more shards than shard slots. With a couple balance passes, you could create multiple viable strategies for a single tower. I'd also submit that a lot of these shards are in fact not 100% worthless (don't get me wrong though, some of them still are lol). They're by no means reflect beam caliber, but I still occasionally will use a ballista on floor 350+ in onslaught. You're forgetting the increase you get from gilding these shards as well. Empowered bolts (gilded): 40% chance to deal full damage to all pierced enemies for the next 52 seconds. This effectively removes the damage penalty for piercing entirely. Probably don't even need to gild it to keep the 100% pierce uptime. Power bolts (gilded): 40% chance to deal 72% bonus magic damage. That's a straight-up 29% increase in DPS. Not as good as a gilded destruction shard (42%), and pretty close to non-gilded destruction (34%). But, you can stack power bolts with destruction. Puncturing bolts (gilded): You can now pierce 6 additional targets, bringing the number of pierces to 12. I don't think I've ever seen 12 enemies lined up for a shot before, so I don't anticipate seeing this shard getting used that much. Splody harpoon (gilded): 34% chance to deal 920% defense power in an explosion around the enemy. This procs for every enemy pierced. As mentioned above it also works with rollers from the front sometimes. Oily harpoon (gilded): 100% chance to oil target for 7 seconds. Ignite is worthless, unless it's against drakenlord. The valuable thing about oil though is that it slows. Stack this with boosted grasp, frostbite tower, or frosty beams, and you have enemies who are effectively pinned in place. I currently run splody harpoon + oily harpoon + defense rate shards, with unique power + unique critical + unique CD mods. The relic is currently c8 0/5, and my tavern dummy DPS is sitting at a comfortable 6.5M DPS (tier 1 with dest. pylon and boost aura, pretty standard setup). It scales pretty bad with upgrades; 9M DPS at tier 5. If I wanted to prioritize damage, I could very easily crank that up further if i replaced oily harpoon with destruction, but I use it in combination with flame auras to AFK drakenlord bosses.
  15. Here are my thoughts on boosting: Boost aura (40DU) and buff beam (60DU) are not worth it unless they are boosted by destructive pylon. I would advise against putting destructive pylon on boost aura or buff beam. If you equip destructive pylon on the boost tower itself, it's convenient to have a single boost tower but you're missing out on a chunk of DPS. Even then, buff beam at 60DU isn't worth it a lot of the time. However, I have found that equipping unique power and unique CD mods on a buff beam gives it enough kick to make the 60DU worth it. The downside is that you only get one. But at 60DU a pop, you typically can't afford more than one anyway. It's definitely not part of my cookie cutter build, but rather an onslaught build where different lanes need differing amounts of attention. Overall, be cognizant of the DU you spend boosting vs the DU you spend placing towers. Two flame auras + buff beam will drastically underperform compared to just summoning 4 flame auras. However, If you have 4 earthshatters and 2 skyguards that cover two different lanes, a buff beam would do a ton better than just adding another earthshatter. Radiant power not only applies to DPS towers, but also applies to boost aura and buff beams. If you use both a boost aura and buff beam in a build, you get even more of a damage increase. Destructive pylon works best on inexpensive towers. Examples include proton beam, serpents coil, snaking sands, or LSA. I personally use proton beam for trap/aura/node builds, and serpents coil for tower builds (e.g. PDT, earthshatter, skyguard, etc).
×
×
  • Create New...