| Author |
Message |
|
|
I do have to scroll a little on my "My Friends" page.
I have 9 friends listed (not including "loser").
I believe I had 2 fewer friends when I added him.
"loser" is the only one that does not appear.
"loser" also does not appear under my friends section of the ladder page of uniwar.com, but all of my other friends do.
Is it possible that by trying to add an account that didn't exist, that a shell of an account was created? Just a thought.
|
|
|
I recently had a friend buy Uniwar and was wondering if he had signed up for online play yet. I thought the easiest way would be to go to my friends list and add a friend by name. I typed in his usual user name "loser" and the request went through without any message, but "loser" did not show up on my "my friends" page. However, on my profile page, "loser" is listed under my friends.
I have no way to remove this entry from my friends list on my profile, as the only way to do this is to go to your "my friends" page and then remove them and "loser" does not show up here.
It is also an extra "friend" that I have to scroll through when setting up games.
Now that the bug is reported, what can I do to get rid of this fake "friend", that I assume isn't even a real user.
Thanks!
~Jeff
|
|
|
|
Anonymous wrote: Forget it, the devs have all but abandoned the game.
They just released the 1.0.4 update. I hardly call that abandoning it.
|
|
|
What I did that made it pretty easy is to teleport your first 4 mechas to the middle (allowing each to capture a base during round 3) and then teleport to the corners with 2 of your mechas in the 2nd round, with the 3rd blocking the underlings advance. Then keep pumping out mechas and teleporting to the middle to block off the computers advance and you should be able to prevent them from getting any of the middle bases, with you having 3 corners and all 4 middle bases. Then simply pump out walkers in the middle and both corners and converge, using mechas as meat shields. Quick and easy.
~Jeff
|
|
|
Well, they are using infect because I assume they mean they are inserting some parasite into the marine to take over it's body and therefore control it.
A plague is a sickness that spreads and makes people sick and ultimately results in death in most cases. A plague would in no means imply taking over. So making a sapien sick and that sickness spreading makes complete sense.
I think the names are fine.
|
|
|
If you're talking about random games, they need to be random and assigning a default would defeat this.
If you're talking about normal games, you are free to choose whatever race you wish, which I would hope you would take into account the map and race(s) of your opponents when doing so. So a default does not make sense here either.
This seems like a 'feature" that would be illogical to implement.
|
|
|
|
They simply need to load the chat messages sooner. I think it is a safe assumption that they don't know there are messages when you first load the game, so they can do nothing extra there. As soon as the message data reaches the game, the icon appears. I believe they did this because they believed that game data is more of a priority to send than chat data and didn't want prevent you from being able to see/play the game by having to wait for the chat. They simply need to change the design so that the game doesn't finish loading until all of the chat data is received as well.
|
|
|
I have tried to pay attention to this since I read this post and it does seem like it is possible that the random seed factor for determining damage could be consistent per turn, instead of per attack. But I haven't had anywhere near enough data to determine this for certain. It would be nice if the devs could speak up and settle whether the random factor is per turn or per attack.
I believe the random factor needs to be there, but if it is really true that it is per turn, that it needs to change. It needs to be per attack to even the playing field. A bad random turn followed by a good random turn for your opponent could essentially decide a game. If it were per attack, this reduces the chance for such lop sided battles.
|
|
|
As I said above, it's because your rank (which I assume was 1500) was much higher than the bots (which are usually between 1100 and 1200). All Bots have horrible rankings and if you lose to them, your rank will take a hit.
If you were to play another person who was 1500, you would either gain or lose 20 if you lost or won.
If you play someone who is 2000, they would lose a lot of points if you beat them and gain very little because your skill is so much lower than theirs.
Think of it like a guy on the PGA (2000 ranking) playing someone in High School (1500 ranking). The PGA player is supposed to win almost every time, so he should gain almost nothing for beating up on the High School kid and the High School kid shouldn't lose much either, because he is expected to lose. Now, if that High School kid actually beats the PGA player, he should gain a lot, because it was a great challenge and the PGA player should lose a lot because he should have mopped the floor with the High School kid.
So, assuming rankings are accurate assessments of skill level and your skill level was 1500. What should you get the most points for, beating up a guy whose ranking is 1100? 1500? 1900? The 1100 guy shouldn't be much of a challenge for you, so you shouldn't get much for beating them and if you happen to lose, you should lose a lot (which you do), because you can't beat someone 400 points lower in skill level than you. Now, the 1500 guy, you should supposedly be evenly matched with them, so if you win or lose, you should gain or lose the same amount of points (which you do). Finally, the 1900 guy is 400 skill points above you, he should beat you almost every time. If you lose to him, he shouldn't get much for beating you and you shouldn't lose much either because he is supposed to win. But, if you happen to beat him, the skill between you shouldn't be as much, so you gain a lot of points and he loses a lot. All of these are what happens and it is logical.
Now, if the bots skill level were 1500, you would have seen a similar gain/loss in your games. But because the bots are easily beaten (as you can tell by their records), their skill levels have dropped very low. They did start out at 1500, but just like anyone else, they have gone down over time by losing games and rankings.
Hopefully this clears things up and helps you understand how the scoring system works.
~Jeff
|
|
|
|
I just started playing a couple weeks ago and used to message people with no reply. The first time I actually had a message, I saw the icon on the page and it was very obvious. Once you know the icon exists, your mind will always look for it when taking your turn and you won't miss it again.
|
|
|
|
Well, now you know and knowing is half the battle... In theaters everywhere August 7th... =)
|
|
|
|
I've only been playing for a few weeks, but from what I've seen, you can't infect/assimilate/transform an enemy unit that is capturing a base. This is not a bug and is part of the game play.
|
|
|
Is there a reason only a few of the maps are available when playing single player and/or pass and play? It would be nice if they could all be available for offline games.
Thanks!
~Jeff
|
|
|
|
All of the bots are fairly easy to beat and therefore have really low ratings. For scoring purposes, they are treated just like real players. If you are 1500 and lose to an 1100, you lose a lot of points. If you win, you only get a few. The logic behind this is obvious.
|
|
|
|
Ok, I'll comment for ya. I think it's a bad idea and could easily be abused in many ways and for many reasons. =).
|
![[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
