Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sn/+/per

  1. I didn't take it as an ad hominem attack. Was simply stating it was an attack against my premise, not my personal character. Au contraire, in DD1, we could level up to 4 heroes simultaneously through the use of split-screen. Each hero was awarded the same exp, not a fixed divided amount like in this game. If players decided to play with others, they would get the full map exp for the hero they were playing, not 1/4th. If they ran split-screen with or without other players, they'd still get the full map exp per hero in their split-screen session. In DDA, once people have two sets of heroes (1 builder and 1 dps) maxed and have only one new hero to level up every several months, the grind will always take 4x longer than it should. Does it have to be that way? I'm sure if enough people voiced their opinions on the matter, it could get changed. I personally don't mind exp being divided between the non-maxed heroes in the deck. However, there really isn't a reason why more than 1/4th the map exp couldn't be distributed evenly among <4 non-maxed heroes in the deck. It's a simple enough change that would make this game more unique. I can understand the reasons they'd have for dividing exp; I can't understand why it isn't divided better. I'm not sure if you're aware but those pictures in my original post are from solo Glitterhelm NMHCMM waves 18 - 25. I appreciate the gesture but I'm further in the game than you may think I am.
  2. Notice: If you're going to ignore the issue to only attack my premise, don't bother posting. If you're going to argue my premise is false without proof, also don't bother posting. Whether I'm right or mistaken on how things were in this game is irrelevant to the point I'm trying to make - it's an unwelcome change that wasn't present in DD1, so why should it be this way in DDA? If it means so much to the people reading this that my premise is false, I'll admit I'm mistaken but it doesn't change the issue I'm trying to point out. If you agree/disagree with the point, please comment; otherwise, I'll ignore you the same way you ignore me.
  3. I never tested how much exp individual heroes got before when heroes were taken out of the deck because there was never a need. However, I did notice exp was divided equally among the non-maxed heroes when I had maxed heroes in my deck prior to the patch. Unfortunately, there isn't a good way to prove it even with my past screenshots of my match exp as it wouldn't show how many maxed/non-maxed heroes I had in my deck. In any case, the exp shouldn't be divided the way it is. We should have some choice of how many heroes we want to level up at a time without having to trade-off our exp. This was never an issue in the first game. Isn't this is supposed to be the better game?
  4. After playing a few games of NMHCMM earlier this evening, I found that exp is no longer divided between non-maxed heroes equally. Rather, we're now awarded 1/4th the map's exp per hero regardless whether we have other maxed/non-maxed heroes in our decks or not. I'm not sure why the change but I feel it really needs to go back to how it was. The exp grind was already slow before, especially if soloing but now it's just ridiculous that we can't focus more than a quarter of the map's exp onto specific heroes. What this means for split-screen (should it ever be a thing) is that we'll be earning exp per hero at 1/4th the rate as we did in DD1. Here are some screenshots of my exp soloing from waves 18 - 25 (with the first one being 19 - 25). Exp with 1 non-maxed hero in the deck Exp with 2 non-maxed heroes in the deck Exp with 4 non-maxed heroes in the deck
  5. Can we get more contrasting colors within the UI please? Before, it was easy to tell apart Legendaries, Mythicals and Transcendents. Now, with these black/red backgrounds and colored outlines, telling the difference is gonna be hard on the eyes. Here's what it looked like before: https://i.imgur.com/2RpNk3d.png And here's what it looks like now: https://i.imgur.com/qk43AnP.png The majority of the items in the after screenshot are Transcendent, not Legendary. Even before, it was difficult to tell the difference between a Legendary and a Transcendent drop based on color alone but at least when you picked them up, you could tell them apart easily.
  6. My favorite memory was finding games where people were respectful and wouldn't expect you to build unless you offered to. I often resorted to playing as lower level characters to experience these good times again. https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197963358811/
  7. Current favorite item since returning from my 4-5 year hiatus: My Ult++ Classic's Eagle Crested Standard New favorite item: TBD https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197963358811/
  8. Does that include the old veteran user ranks and defense council titles? Not to mention the inflated post counts.
  9. Not necessarily; just have a mode you can toggle into where you highlight the items you want to move and after selecting them all, choose another bag to move those items to. The highlighting could be done one at a time (with 'A' and 'X') and in the same manner as 'Shift + Click' where you highlight one item and go across a few items/rows/columns to highlight another item to mass highlight items. The 'Shift + Click' action could let you set a range for as long as you held in a button. I'm all in favor of adding a transfer system like this. It would save a good deal of time when managing my inventory every time I'm moving shards around. Currently, I don't even bother keeping my bags tidy (save for a couple) for the very reason why this thread exists. If the idea does get passed, I feel there should be a 'Shift + Click' option available in addition to 'Ctrl + Click' as the former enables one to highlight faster given most circumstances.
  10. No , shards gives same. Dryad world tree just have 3500 max range. My apologies if I didn't make what I was saying clear enough. I wasn't saying the shards were changed but rather the defense's internal range value itself (which would water down the effect of the Vicious Strikes). Tooltip range is different from the range in the inventory. You could call this internal range. However, after doing some math and checking past range values with current range, I found that: Nigiri is right in saying 'almost' every defense has a range cap.Tree range is calculated differently than other defenses.With that said, I'm changing my guess from the range value being tweaked to a solid confirmation of a range cap. With Max Gambit, Deadly Strikes & Vicious Strikes, the cap can be reached on certain defenses (i.e. Ramsters and now Trees). I don't remember what the old value was but without the cap, the Tree would probably be at 4027 tooltip range.
  11. I noticed a difference with the range as well (it's about a 25% reduction). The base range and the Deadly Strikes range look normal, it's just the Vicious Strikes range that seems to be affected. My guess is the defense's range value (not tooltip value) was tweaked to go up in value causing the Vicious Strikes to have less of an effect overall.
  12. ^ I second that. Assassins got nerfed enough since they were first introduced. Skarnash is the only tough assassin around, imo.
  13. Just need to bring back the "Any" Mode and "Any" Difficulty selection options we had before. I'm not sure why they were taken out unless it was because we could find unavailable game modes as in the case of Onslaught before it got revamped.
  14. Tbh, frame drops are normal for this game, so don't expect it to perform as optimal as other games. As far as dropping into the teens, that's abnormal. However, that is not something that should be connection-related. You may have two problems on your hands, just one is more apparent. With regard to the plummeting speeds, it's hard to say what could be causing that given what little info you provided. Are you on a wired connection or Wi-Fi? Are you experiencing this only when the game is running or is it happening all the time? Do you have anything going on in the background (streaming, torrenting, etc.)? Is there anyone else on your network using up the bandwidth? As for the low fps, have you tested any other game for low fps since this has been happening? How are your CPU and GPU temps during these fps drops? When was the last time you updated your video driver?
  15. I'm not sure if this thread is for improvements over DD1 or things we love but I'll do both. While I can't say that I love the current Co-op experience, I did love DD2's past Co-op experience: The ability to join a match up to the last wave.Using the server browser to show all available games in one list.Having friends rejoin games they disconnected from.Joining friends anytime they wanted or needed a friend to join. The following are ways I feel this game improved over the first that haven't been mentioned: The ability to freely move around while placing/repairing/upgrading/selling defenses.Increased mana carrying capacity and pickup radius - Particularly useful for larger maps and getting mana stuck behind spawners.Ascension system - Progression beyond the level cap.Weather system - Changes the town and some maps to reflect the season outside.Defender Medals - The ability to buy heroes and other cool things just by playing.
  16. I'm not sure if this bug has been reported but I lost some items after splitting them in my inventory. Sometimes it happened right away while other times, it happened when I logged off. I found out later that each time, the missing items would go to the Scavenger with a 30 minute time window to claim them. I already put in a request for a roll back but haven't gotten any reply yet. Kudos on fixing this. While I was splitting items, I experienced this nonsense. I kept getting dupes of stuff I didn't need and they sometimes permanently took up a space. That is, selling it wouldn't remove it from my inventory.
  17. What's the point of the 'Transfer All' button when it can't even transfer locked items? All my items are locked! Is there a reason we can have 12 Vaults and only 8 Bags? The only conflict I can think of is the 'Max Your Bags Bundle' but it doesn't explain why we all can't have 10 (or more) bags. I noticed there's now a delay when loading the gear of each hero. Is this intended or a bug? In Elandrian's Check-In last week, he mentioned "With the introduction of the Sky City Bank, we were aiming to improve all aspects of our item systems in some way, shape, and form." I thought of a few ideas that could help shape the item systems down the road: An option to auto-sell specific items in our bags - Much like how the current auto-loot system works, we could specify which items we'd want sold right away in each bag. They could be sold when items are picked up thus allowing for faster load times and less downtime between games.An option to adjust/disable the 'sell all' wait time - The 'sell all' wait time does nothing (in my experience) to prevent items from being sold if the player doesn't lock items beforehand. It just takes time (and even more time if a party invite cancels it out).A 'sell all' bags option - As an alternative to #2, having the option to sell all bags at once (even with a wait time) would be highly favorable. If we were to use our current 7-8 bags for loot and the 'sell all' bags wait time was 3 seconds, we would save about half a minute selling items every time our inventories were full.
  18. It's because no one is against it. Only one person in this whole thread mentioned they'd rather Trendy put their time elsewhere and explained that lower floors (after completing them hundreds of times) can be done in under 45 minutes. You should change your argument from higher floor players to Trendy, whom this whole thread is targeted toward. I posted a solution to this problem back in December and while not ideal, it was a solution. It's been over 4 months since and they already fixed many of the issues with Onslaught. Mutator/enemy combos were removed, a replay/reroll system was added, servers were tweaked to reduce disconnects, optimizations were made to minimize crashes and now games can be finished even if connection to the event server is lost. A lot of these changes weren't mentioned in Elandrian's Thursday Check-In so who's to say they aren't already working on this?
  19. Going to? A lot of us are burned out because of their changes to co-operative gameplay and all the social gating that exists. I think my friends would agree that a meta isn't the problem.
  20. I like this idea but I've an idea that would save more time getting yourself to the floor you want. A trade-off system: For x floors you want to move ahead, that's x floors you'd need to complete before you could prestige. That is, x highest achievable floors. - For example, if you're on floor 100 and decide you're going to grind to 200, you could jump to 150. Then you'd just need to complete floor 200 before you could prestige. While my idea doesn't solve the '3 map problem' per se, it does address multiple related issues: Time - It cuts down on it.Difficulty - It allows you to start playing Onslaught at a challenging level faster.Co-op - If friends/randoms wanted to (and you allowed them), they could join you on your trek. There are three drawbacks I can think of: What if the floors can't be completed? A failsafe system could be put in place to revert the person's progress back x floors from their current floor. This way, they'd have gotten to enjoy the challenge of Onslaught x floors ahead (with or without their friends) and still gained the number of floors they achieved.How would the leaderboard be affected? Any person using this trade-off system would be a ghost on the leaderboard until their debt in floors is paid off. This way, players can't abuse the system to advance their rank.How would flair be affected? If Flair sets have yet to be gotten, they'd still have to complete the difference in floors. For example, if they jumped from floor 65 to 100, they'd still need to complete 27 floors (or floor 127) to obtain floor 92 flair and 49 floors (or floor 149) to receive floor 114 flair.
  21. Or better yet, when x enemies are left and y seconds have passed, all enemy spawns instantly kill anything inside them. This way, if any enemies take a while to exit their spawn (i.e. siege roller), the timer could account for that. The current spawn kill system is probably set up in a similar way but the 5 minute timer is much too long. It should at most be 1 minute but preferably 30 seconds as everything should be out of the spawn by then. As for 'x', that should be 20 - 30 as there are often as many as 15 - 20 enemies camping spawn (typically on Lost Temple).
  22. Like Public Trials of the past with iPWR, social gating in Onslaught should be limited to Champion Score so you can play with friends/randoms on any floor!
  23. In time, I'd like there to be a checkpoint system for Onslaught and even something that enables you to play your highest completed floor upon completing floor 65 each prestige. Both are good ideas to keep motivation up for pushing Onslaught, not just for anyone getting burned out but also for those with less time to play the game. For now, this system should be sufficient for reducing anxiety players face with Onslaught. It certainly is gonna improve my experience, having lost well over a dozen floors to Playverse expiring.
  24. Sn/+/per

    MAP XP

    The reason Lost Temple doesn't reward as much exp as other maps is because it lacks sub-cores. For whatever reason, maps with sub-cores reward more exp over maps without them. Also, the Win Streak exp bonus that Trials has doesn't seem to affect Onslaught. It doesn't really make much sense why this system is set up the way it is but it is what it is. Imo, they should really rework the whole map exp system. Do something like rewarding varying amounts of exp for different maps where main cores yield more exp over sub-cores or just more cores equals more exp (so maps like Buried Bastille or Lost Temple would be more rewarding).
  • Create New...