| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
Kohtar wrote:
The problem lies in the fact that new players are assumed to have the same skill as bots, which is clearly untrue. A way to correct this minor problem without distrupting anything would be to slowly increase (maybe by 1/day?) the ranking of new players until it reaches something like 2000. Of course, the active players' rating will climb in the same way, which will make the problem disappear.
If what you're saying is that people's scores should be time-limited, that is, they should just rise over time by virtue of their being members, well, that would just throw off matchmaking completely. One of the nice things about Uniwar is that anyone can start playing multiplayer at any time and their score will quickly rise to match the level of their skill so that they will be placed against people with similar skill. If you introduce something super artificial like this, that people's ranks automagically rise over time without even winning, matchmaking would be just about pointless.
I see from your profile that you are one of those players that has played less than 100 games and already risen to score 2168. Bravo, that's quite impressive! (Assuming you're not one of the aforementioned cheaters (kappa)) I just want to point out that if time-ripening (if you will) to 2000 was such a big part of a person's score, you would right now be matched with players that had been playing for a long time, rather than players of a similar skill level. And there are a lot of players that have played hundreds or even thousands of games but are still at <1700 score. So it really is a good thing that you are not matched with them.
|
|
|
Yeah, we do have a wiki, but it doesn't really say much of anything useful now anyway 
|
|
|
|
Corrin wrote:Let's assume I spent the time to create an essay on each unit idea I imagine and argue its boons and feasibility while proving evidence it's balanced... what are the odds my idea will be actually used inside UniWar?
Seems like, as long as your ideas fit into the 6 new units for each race that Xavi mentioned, your chances are actually pretty good. Xavi's probably being vague on purpose ... Although only he and/or Simsverd and/or anyone else in that "inner circle" can answer definitively.
|
|
|
Is there any way we could have a feature to skip campaign missions? I like the current campaign, I think it's fine for learning the units, but it is pretty boring if you already know how to play. And it resets if you reinstall the game. For me, I installed the game initially in March, played through the Sapien campaign, and then got interested in other things and deleted the game. I came back to the game in June and started playing multiplayer. I wanted to play the other race campaigns too but couldn't skip to them, so I just started playing through the Saps one again, but it was too boring so I skipped to multiplayer.
I don't think this'd be TOO big of a turn off to newer players, but it'd just be a nice idea.
On another thought, could we change the intro screen? Instead of "play online" and "play offline" as your first 2 choices, maybe we could make it:
1. Single player (campaign)
2. Local multiplayer
3. Online multiplayer
and maybe have a note for beginners that they should start with the single player.
On that note, I think local multiplayer isn't as fun because the only maps you can use are the ones in the campaigns -- any way we could be able to download some other awesome maps? Or get assigned a random 1v1 map like most ranked games are?
|
|
|
Hi everyone,
I love Uniwar and I think it is a wonderful game. One thing that I've noticed about Uniwar is that there is a shortage of online strategy tips about the game. Sure, there have been some guides in the forums about how to play different races, but these guides are inevitably typo-ridden and somewhat-out-of-date.
I've started updating the Uniwar Wikia unit articles, starting with the Marine, and I'd love it if any or all of you (who I know love Uniwar just as much or more) would be willing to help. The wikia articles are largely useless right now, unless you for some reason want to look up unit stats online instead of in the game.
My goal is to have helpful strategic information on every unit in the game, to help beginners and experienced players learn how to play multi-player better. So instead of just re-phrasing what the stats say, write down which tactical situations are best for this unit. For example, under Marine I wrote about how even though they're a weak unit overall, when they stand on mountain & forest tiles they become incredibly stat-efficient, especially against units like Garuda and Helicopter. People who are new to the game or new to Sapiens can use this information to start trading efficiently in their games and win.
When I started playing Starcraft II a little while ago, I would always look up unit strategy information on liquipedia. The most useful thing to me on that site is that it has strategic information AND unit counters (like which units are strong against which other units). So for an example of a useful article, see this one.
If you'd like to help out with this endeavor, please take a unit article or two and do the following:
- Write which situations the unit is strong in
- Write which situations the unit is weak in
- Make a list of 3 units (one from each race) that the unit is strong against & weak against
- Delete some of the more useless entries from the "Stats" table (such as "underground mobility" for all units except for Underling)
Again, the most useful thing you can do for less experience players is to show them which situations the units are good in. Unit stats are abundantly available -- what new players need is the knowledge of how to decide whether to make a Wyrm, or a Pinzer and one Underling. Thanks all!
|
|
|
I agree that you guys should bring in a UX design person sometime. If you have the money, I suppose, although I think that with a few aesthetic improvements and a decent campaign/tutorial rework, the game could easily double its player base. I personally don't think that the game UI is unintuitive, but I do think that a little work on it could go a long way. There are plenty of people that are tired of the actual pay-to-win games (Clash of Clans, Game of War, Mobile Strike, the list goes on and on and on...) that would gladly come over to the Uniwar community if they knew how awesome it was. If new players were coddled a bit more and had some better guides and tutorials, there'd simply be more players.
You're probably going to want to make a new tutorial for the new units, so why not take some time to improve the old one as well?
As for IAP, it does seem that despite best efforts, if one side has new units and the other doesn't, people will have a negative experience. Even if the new units are balanced, it seems like any players that don't have them and are supposed to compete against them will perceive that they have a sizable disadvantage.
|
|
|
|
Duaneski wrote:Stated that that was the goal. It isn't like we are starving orphans and our care takers promised us a loaf of bread. We are talking about more toys here.. the guy is working his hardest
^ exactly
|
|
|
|
LkASr wrote:at least make some of them come out quick, it's already october, man
Give the man some slack ... He's basically a one-man team in charge of everything in this game. Game design, balance, multi-platform (not to mention both client and server side) development, testing, stability, and current maintenance all take a lot of time, and 6 new units for each race is a HUGE number. Plus, there's quite a bit of backlash whenever anything is released that breaks the game for anyone, so be patient with Xavi, he's making sure everything is functional before releasing it! We've received a lot of features lately and we are lucky to be getting a bunch of new units as well!
|
|
|
|
TheDragon wrote:Gemo, Try communicating with those you play with. Many players will give time if you let them know you may have things coming up. I find most folks are o.k. waiting a bit longer when I post something like "I'll be vending at Arisia Sci Fi con this weekend so may be late making my move"
Yes you will get the few 'win at all costs' types that will take any shortcut for a rating status, but most of us just want to know you will be back.
^^^ True that!
|
|
|
I don't like not being able to see buried underlings. They are already quite powerful, since you can't attack them when they are buried, and they can move past the enemy line of defense without any trouble at all. GH's do a little bit of damage but even that is negligible (1 damage per turn to an underling with 10 health? Not a big change .... And GH's are nowhere near as cheap as underlings, so trying to damage them this way is VERY cost-inefficient.) PLUS, whatever 1 or 2 points of damage you do manage to do to the underling before it pops up again are pretty meaningless considering the bonus attack it gets when unburying.
I'm only around 1950, so not a super high level player or anything. So maybe it's different for the top players. But at my level, it's already hard enough to protect your batteries/walkers from buried underlings in a siege situation, and making them only revealed at the end of the turn basically means there's no hope at all for combatting them. On low- and medium-income maps, it's already hard enough to get a tank line AND a walker so you can do some damage as Titans, and basically with the underlings' bury ability, you have to spend even more of your money spamming mechas just to stand on them.
I'm not saying underlings or the bury ability need a nerf, I just think that not being able to detect them with undo's is a HUGE unnecessary buff.
|
|
|
|
Works perfectly, very quick update, thanks Xavi!
|
|
|
|
I agree with this... findx2 would be super interesting for a mirror matchup, but Khrals have a big advantage and Titans have a HUGE disadvantage. It'd be fun to play in a mirror tourney but not in regular ranked unless you're the same race.
|
|
|
|
strikemanNT wrote: I've been skipped, I skip others. I've won games where I was skipped, I've lost games where I skipped
Skipping is just part of the game that may offers variable amount of advantage. Until it is changed by the developers it is up to the skipper's own discretion, but it is really pointless for skippees to whine. Don't play the game if you don't like the way it is
Giving fellow players the ultimatum of shutting up or leaving the game isn't very helpful ... I agree with @gemo, I think that some amount of lenience would be very nice for players. It's stressful when you are in a bunch of close games and you go on a trip and didn't realize that you're not going to have wi-fi or a cell signal for the next 3 days, and so you lose all your current games.
I don't think that raising the "regular" time limit is a good solution. 24 hours seems like a really nice number to keep games always going. Games that I've played where people can wait 3+ days to play their turn have a much slower feel to them and aren't as fun for me. (Words with Friends, Outwitters are both awesome games but the default time limit on taking your turn is a reeeeally long time)
Although I do disagree with @gemo on the system he proposed. Anything you have to post a math formula for is more likely to be unintuitive and misunderstood, and I think simpler solutions would be just as beneficial. For example, a mercy system -- for each minute that your opponent goes over his/her time limit, you get a minute of "allowance" during which you cannot be skipped, the next time you go over your time limit.
Perhaps these amounts could carry over (perhaps on a diminished scale) from game to game, up to a maximum limit, maybe another 24 or 48 hours. For the situation I mentioned above, where you're going over your limit on multiple games and you're not able to log in at all, perhaps we could just say that going over the time limit on concurrent games just counts the same as going over the time limit on one game. That is, you can use your "allowance" on multiple games at once for the same cost.
I think this solution would provide a bit of protection against being skipped to those who are lenient in skipping others, and it would also allow those who love to skip others to do so, at the risk of being skipped themselves.
|
|
|
|
Xavi, has there been a final decision about what the new units will be?
|
|
|
I personally think the status quo is fine. One thing I really like about Uniwar is that I can experiment, see how things go, and then undo the whole turn and see if I can get a better outcome another way. There was lots of discussion in this thread about this very topic, and most of the solutions for trying to keep both undo and FOW were unintuitive at best, and weird and hacky at worst.
The status quo allows new people to understand the game quickly--it's what they'd expect from playing other strategy games. I would hate to turn off dozens of new players from playing the game simply because the vision system is confusing.
However, this situation does bear quite a resemblance to the situation earlier this year when it was decided just to show buried underlings. (See this post.) It does seem like the ability to scout into FOW and then undo your move is something every experienced player does, and it's a bit of an annoyance. So along that precedent it would make a lot of sense to just remove FOW. I personally feel that this option keeps the game the most similar to what it is now, since in most maps, after the first couple rounds, there are enough units that the entire map is revealed.
On the other hand, the recent change to remove vision from teleported Mechas definitely is a victory for FOW.
|
|
|
![[Search]](/templates/default/images/icon_mini_search.gif){kind=icon}
![[Recent Topics]](/templates/default/images/icon_mini_recentTopics.gif){kind=icon}
![[Login]](/templates/default/images/icon_mini_login.gif){kind=icon}
Login
