Jump to content

CollectorOfBolts

Defender-In-Training
  • Content Count

    159
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About CollectorOfBolts

  1. Check the article again... Unfortunately, Epic Games says it was an "error" and have turned the feature off.
  2. Pfft... Always trying to stay alive is overrated. Real skill comes with knowing when dieing is worth it. (If you're unsure if this is meant to be sarcastic, it's okay; so am I.)
  3. I measure myself with other defenders by height.
  4. So far, the numbers reported in this thread have about 11 or 12 Deadly Strikes out of about 250 total C3 shards collected (note that the total started was 249, but I rounded as I am assuming that everyone who reported a multiple of 5 was rounding their own numbers). That is approximately 1 in 22 which is better than the 1 in 25-35 listed in the 19.5 patch notes (I don't know how many C3 shards there actually are). Take this information however you like and remember that the overall sample size is probably too small to be basing any major judgments on it.
  5. It is my understanding that you want to have all of the heroes in your deck fully geared (just equip junk gear with high stats if you're not using something) as the stats on drops are currently determined by the item power of every hero in your deck and an empty gear slot counts as a zero in the averaging calculations. (You might want to see if someone else will confirm this as I have yet to try out the trials update myself; I've just seen this discussed a bit here on the forums.)
  6. ^ this is the lazy type i was referring too which ruined a big part of the game industry (jrpg's for example), because western people complained about grinding. Sena and a big f|_|ck you too calling me lazy. Go sit on your monk polearm a few times and swivel. thank you :D well if they would do what you want, everyone would stop playing the game after 3-4 days, because there would be nothing left to do. so a big no no :D and sadly it's true :P First off, drop the hostilities, both of you. They help noone. Secondly, this is an issue of balance. Make progression too much of a grind and people will leave from becoming discouraged and/or annoyed. Make progress too easy and people leave after running out of goals. And, ultimately, one person's idea of perfect balance will differ from another's, so Trendy has the wonderful job of trying to find what works for enough people to make and keep the game profitable. So please calm down and realize that the solution likely resides somewhere other than any one of our preferred balance states. If you don't agree with someone's balance solutions, I suggest offering a compromise or thinking about how Trendy might accommodate both of you. Or, if you can't find anything constructive to contribute to the discussion someone is looking to have, just state your opinion on the current state of things and move on. If you can't do any of that without resorting to insults, please just don't say anything at all.
  7. Just to be clear, I do like being able to hot swap during Combat phases. My issue with the hero deck is that it looks on the surface (particularly to new players) to be a build limiting mechanic, while actually doing nothing of the sort. I think I wouldn't have such a problem with it if there were more slots (I mean hey, we have 8 more F-keys...), or there was some other way to swap characters for building from the Forge like in DD1. As it is now, it just makes builds that use more than the 4 heros in your deck feel really clunky to actually set up. Fair enough. Especially the points​ about it potentially giving new players the wrong impression and being clunky to use when trying to build with many heroes. I've just seen a few posts recently that seemed to want the old hero deck back and felt the need to remind/inform people that it was terrible.
  8. That's quite a lot of well-written feedback. On the note about the hero deck, it originally did limit players to just those characters in the deck and did not allow swapping any out after loading into a map. You might be able to come up with an argument that that could work okay now, but it was terrible at the time and I, for one, do NOT want to see that restriction return. I also like the idea of it actually allowing greater player freedom during combat phase, but understand that there are valid arguments against the combat phase hot-swapping feature. If you'd like to read some of the discussions about it (there were plenty) and don't mind wading through old forum posts, I believe the update that changed it came out about this time last year with discussions going back as far as (I think) about 3 years ago.
  9. For me the whole concept of upgrades linked to your gear is dumb. It should be linked to map difficulty imho. The problem with linking drop quality solely to map difficulty is that you'll get fewer upgrades as you near the edge between two difficulties. For example if a difficulty gives gear in the 4000-6000 range, then as your gear approaches a 6000 average, most of the drops will be terrible in comparison to your current gear. This can be mitigated somewhat if there's enough overlap between difficulties, but it will always result in a period of slowed progression as a player starts looking to advance to the next difficulty due to not getting upgrades very often in the current difficulty and/or not quite being able to handle the next difficulty. (Assuming there are caps on what can drop on a given difficulty under the current system, this might still be a problem, but at least the current system should allow for concentrating drops at just below that cap rather than spread out over a huge range of which only a small percentage is comparable to what you have.) Basing gear stats on difficulty also encourages leeching (as others have noted). Basically, the current solution and the (most obvious?) alternative both have downsides. Perhaps basing gear drops on equipped gear (ignoring empty gear slots altogether) could help with the issue of not wanting/needing some pieces of gear without requiring too much effort on Trendy's part. I'm sure there's some way to game such a system, but it would probably help without causing any worse problems.
  10. I definitely appreciate the hard work Trendy is putting into this game and am generally optimistic about the final product. That said, I want to provide honest feedback and suggestions to help contribute to the process when I feel I can. Given that I have not played in over a year, however, I'm thinking I might just back off completely and wait for it to come out of EA if the next update or two doesn't offer something to draw me back in (see some of my other recent posts if you want to know what I'm looking for). Keep going, Trendy. I'm looking forward to seeing where this game ends up even though I might not be rejoining the party on the way there.
  11. I feel like this, ultimately, is why I have not bothered to actually play a DD2 match in over a year now. They keep making changes that restrict players to a handful of defenses, wait a few months, make changes that restrict players to a different handful of defenses, wait a few months, etc. And the real kicker is that most of the time, they do this by making good changes and additions that should improve this aspect, but accompany them with changes and additions that force the new meta. I was hoping that this update would be different and liked the look of the shard system and some of the other changes. But after hearing that most of my defenses were still going to be (mostly) useless, I just logged in to take a look at the interface changes and check out the shards system and then logged out again.This update had enough good changes in it to keep me from giving up on the game entirely. Here's to hoping that Trendy can figure out how to change from having a handful of effective defenses to a rich selection of effective defenses with at most a handful of ineffective ones (because, unfortunately, the balance will never be perfect).
  12. Fair points. At the very least, it sounds like either solution would be better than what is currently in place. I wonder if a combination of the ideas would work... Perhaps limit it to 2-3 (more on higher difficulties?) special enemy types per lane so that the players have to figure out the best combinations of counters to use in each lane, especially if one enemy counters the best counter of another enemy.
  13. Speaking from a purely personal level, I like this idea. This would be close to what they did with the Resists, where one lane was resistant to Magic, and one Physical, its a great concept. I never cared much for the lane resistances. They just encouraged taking 2 setups and applying them to the appropriate lanes. I have a feeling this idea would do the same just with more setups. I would much prefer Gigazelle's idea as it would (theoretically) encourage creative mixtures and placements of defenses depending on the terrain and what hero DPS you have available.
  14. Blaze balloon Really, any tower involving explosions and/or fire; I just also enjoy playing as the huntress.
  15. Windmill boss and a new character based on Don Quixote! Let's kill some "giants"!
×
×
  • Create New...