[Search] Search   [Recent Topics] Recent   [Hottest Topics] Hottest   [Login] Login
Two New Ideas
Forum Index » New Feature Request
0james0

Messages: 6,
Joined: Jan 19, 2019,
Offline

0james0

Messages: 6,
Joined: Jan 19, 2019,
Offline
1) not sure if it would totally screw with balance, but I like the idea. The healer units for each race that can also capture a unit from a certain race, engineer against mech etc. Would it work if they had the ability to convert any race, not just one? I feel it would add balance, especially on small maps with lots of trees and mountains where engineers can ruin titan. But also plays with the uni story nicely that each race has evolved and learned how to capture and convert more than just one race.

Not sure how difficult it would be to do, but I would happily pilot a load of test games with this feature to see how well it works.


2) again with the repair units. This time for team games. It would be great to be able to share and use each others repair units. Could be restricted to same race, but would be an interesting dynamic if an ant could go next to a team sap engineer and use the team mates unit to repair.


3) so many random matches I play have flawed maps, either a harsh choice of race for that map, or a blatant player 1 advantage that any good player will take advantage of. Yes you can revenge and win back, but it's not as fun as a good even and well earned win. Not sure how to even fix this, currently it's just luck of the draw if the random pick is kind to you or not.
duaneski |TT|

Messages: 22,
Joined: Aug 09, 2018,
Offline

duaneski |TT|

Messages: 22,
Joined: Aug 09, 2018,
Offline
1) Infantry capturing on all races.... honestly it is an interesting idea I hadn't considered. My best guess is that it wouldn't break the balance at the highest levels of play... BUT I think it might be a problem at other levels of play where players are already struggling with particular matchups.

I hope that makes sense. In truth, giving it fair consideration I am not opposed to it. But it would take work to mock up 3 new iterations of units (I'm having fun imaging a khral infested mecha haha :p I imagine that thing just self destructing when a player tries to teleport. Should even keep the button as teleport :p them BAM explosion hahah)

2) this has been suggested MANY times over the past few years lol. I think most players agree with it. I'm not sure if it's a coding nightmare or there are some balance concerns somewhere prohibiting this from happening. Either way it's been brought up a good deal over time

3) this is obviously more of a statement of opinion versus an idea. This continues to be an area of concern (ish) for the community at large. We aren't sure what the best way to truly fix this is. But there were sweeping changes to the way maps become ranked about six months ago.

I imagine that those changes (including: players can not vote on maps until they play them) reduced the total number of new maps getting into the map pool. This should improve the quality of maps making it. Not sure if either of those have happened though.

A long time ago I asked for the following stats to appear for maps:
P1 win %
P2 win %
Sap win %
Khr win %
Tit win %
Total plays

Ideally additional breakouts too, most importantly player score ranges! (>2200 might be wildly different than <1700..... and maps should be made for BOTH of these player groups!!)

With the idea that this information would allow map makers AND players to more objectively look at a map and see where it's unbalanced.. what matchups... and for what players.

Personally I see too many maps being congested now. And it kinda bothers me haha. But it's up to the players to vote on the maps the right way too heh

No easy fixes here. BUT I will say this. You can get involved in the map making community too and voice your opinions in through map making chat in game. We love to see new voices and ideas there.

----

Thanks for your post. Nice to see a new voice here. I'm not a moderator or game dev just another player catch me in game if ya wanna chat more or want a friendly game.
[Avatar]
wookieontheweb

Messages: 485,
Joined: Jan 27, 2016,
Location: Southampton, UK
Offline

[Avatar]
wookieontheweb

Messages: 485,
Joined: Jan 27, 2016,
Location: Southampton, UK
Offline
in response to point 3. That is exactly the point of revenge and the rating changes. You get crushed in a clearly unbalanced matchup so you down vote, map gets -1. You revenge and return the crushing. This time you down vote as winner and i think the vote is worth -2. If your opponent thought their victory was caused by the map and also down votes in both cases that's -6 for the map. Won't take long before that version is never seen again, but might come back with tweaks.

However spare a thought for the poor map maker that puts their heart and sole into a map, tests it meticulously and finally releases it only to have it pummelled into oblivion without a hint of an explanation.

My best solution to this (and I'm going to repeat it in the hope it gets picked up )is to automatically change the map from random races to matched races i.e. all titan or all sapiens. First player bias is far rarer imho than race imbalance especially if the races are the same.

Android 9. Samsung Galaxy A50
The Impaler

Messages: 147,
Joined: Jun 07, 2017,
Location: 221B Baker St.
Offline

The Impaler

Messages: 147,
Joined: Jun 07, 2017,
Location: 221B Baker St.
Offline
if you look deep enough into 1 and 2 you realize that it is just simplifying the game, rather than improving it. for 1, it takes away a unique dynamic between races, and for 2 it is just simplifying team games, when really we would rather keep them difficult.

for 3 this is a problem that cant be solved because part of the game is mapmaking. i would however say that people vastly (VASTLY) overestimate the amount of times the map makes them lose. generally the better player moves on up.

Wookie was close. for upvotes/downvotes that correspond to wins/losses, we /1.5 i think (or maybe just divide by 2). if you vote against the outcome (lose/upvote or win/downvote) you get 1.5x votes.

votes increase with rank, max being 10 for 2500+. my upvote on a map i lose is 10*1.5= 15, and down vote i think is 10/2=5. not 100% sure yet on the /2 modifier, but i have tested the other.

Member of the balance team
Moderator
Highest Score: 2685
Highest Rank: #4
Current Rank: N/A
Highest Championship Ranking: 4th
Highest Tournament Ranking: 4th
Current Record: 131W, 14D, 4L
Winner of Duaneski's mapmaker challenge
Winner of Angkor's 2v2 Grand mapmaking challenge
Winner of Lkasr's 3-Minute Tournament
[WWW]
Forum Index » New Feature Request
Powered by JForum 2.1.9 © - 2020-04-14 v124 - UniWar website