[Search] Search   [Recent Topics] Recent   [Hottest Topics] Hottest   [Login] Login
Messages posted by: glackattack
Forum Index Profile for glackattack »» Messages posted by glackattack
General Discussion » Helicopters nerfed alittle too much? » Go to message
When helis had a 2 repair and a higher defense people just spammed them. (I've been playing this game for well over a year.) There was almost no need to ever build a tank. Helis were hands down the best unit in the game. In a game v. bugs you could use them to clog up the front lines because the 2 repair rate allowed them to park and heal and bugs have weak options vs. aerial. Most bug v. saps games degenerated into these long strings of dragons facing off against long strings of helis. Helis always won that fight. Utility of the eclipse was limited because you could retreat the heli (over mountains, or water, or a tank blocker if necessary) and be back to full strength in four turns.

Nerfing them restored balance. They are still a great unit but only one piece of the puzzle, which is as it should be. You have to be careful how you use them and not expose them indiscriminately.
General Discussion » Attack and Defend calculatoins » Go to message
It's not a secret. Just very complex. Go to the topic/poll "Should the Attack Formula Be a Secret?" from a while back (that may not be the exact title but it's called something like that). In response to the poll somebody (I think one of the devs) posted the formula.

General Discussion » Stop Cheaters » Go to message
Respectfully, I have to point out that what you're suggesting wouldn't work. Any new accounts would start with a 1500 score, so "playing yourself" would not result in any increase in your "main" account score, once you were above a certain level. Also, sale has fewer games-played than you do. Sale is not brand new--I played a multi game against him at least 8 months ago and he was pretty good back then.

The only way to cheat in this game is to create multiple accounts and then set up "multiplayer" matches where you play more than one position. People who are "victims" of conduct like this can complain to the admins. There is also a specific forum thread where you can post screenshots of evidence. I don't see sale setting up a bunch of open multi games, although by no means am I checking every minute.

Congrats on your success at this game. However, you should be very careful about making accusations of cheating without evidence. Not everybody reads these boards, so you could wreck someone's reputation to the people that do, and they might never get to respond.

The thing I'm curious about is that aLoN was stuck at the top at 3000 for so long, and now he and a couple of others have busted through that barrier. I always assumed the 3000 was a hard cap of some kind imposed by the devs. Maybe I was wrong.

Cheers,

glackatta ck

General Discussion » Change Proposal for the Ratings » Go to message
These are both good ideas. I would consider making them a little stricter as another poster suggested, maybe increasing the number of rated games or frequency they have to be played. Also, should it really take 90 days to remove a person who hasn't logged on? I mean, if they haven't logged on for even 30 days they probably aren't coming back and their rating should be re-set.

The ideal solution to the ratings problem would be requiring players to accept challenges from any other player within say 100 points in rating. I.e., a 2100 point player would have to accept challenges from players in the 2000-2100 point range. Or you could require the player to accept X number of such challenges over Y period of time, although I can see how that would get complicated.

The only hurdle is you would have to eliminate or disable for this purpose the one or two maps that are seriously unbalanced in favor of the first mover. (Why montevideo is still in the game after all this time is a mystery to me.)

I love UniWar, but the online game needs a shot in the arm. The number of open games being set up has gone way down in the last month. And flipping through the profiles of many of the top players on the ladder shows that it has been weeks since some of them logged on.

A while ago someone suggested a paid upgrade with new maps. That's a great idea.
What's New in the Latest Updates » Random attack factors too extreme » Go to message
Right after the update I used a 10 heli vs. a 5 garuda, with a gang-up bonus. The result was -4 garuda, -3 heli. That result seemed anomalous to me. But one data point does not a survey make.

I posted on this on the main "update" string.

I would appreciate some clarification about the changes to the random factor.
What's New in the Latest Updates » v1.0.5 iPhone » Go to message
Also I am fine with the iPhone not making noises when it is my turn in UniWar. I have a job.
What's New in the Latest Updates » v1.0.5 iPhone » Go to message
I appreciate the new push notification. However, can someone explain precisely how the changes to the random factor work. Right after loading the update, I took a turn in a saps v. bugs game. My 10 helo attacked a 5 garuda. The result: -4 garuda, -3 helo. Anyone who's played this game a lot would know that in the "old" system that would never happen. I'm not a crybaby--I just want some insight on how the random factor plays so I can plan accordingly. For instance, on an attack will the same random factor be applied to both units? Or do they both get a different random factor? Ironically, this change actually increases the randomness of the game in some ways. If you value predictability, the result is to make low-value units more valuable, according to the law of large numbers. Any insight appreciated.

General Discussion » Ranking Poll: Separate Ranking for 1 vs. 1 and Team matches? » Go to message
I agree with a prior suggestion of only including games played within a prior period of time. It would require top players to keep playing to preserve their ranking.

Tennis, golf and NASCAR re-set everyone once a year. That's not the right approach for UW, unless we want to have "seasons", but only including games played within the last 3 months (or 4 months) would have the same basic effect.
General Discussion » Ranking Poll: Separate Ranking for 1 vs. 1 and Team matches? » Go to message
Splitting the ratings is worth a try. The system is obviously broken.
New Feature Request » Separate income from # of bases held » Go to message
I have won games after losing bases. It depends on the cred value of the bases. For instance, Laguna Niguel has low cred value per base. If sacrificing a base lets you kill a high value unit, it's worth it assuming you can re-take the base in a few turns. The low cred value maps are interesting for that reason.
New Feature Request » Heli Re-Balancing and Balance suggestion: Artillery » Go to message
The rebalancing of helis has been excellent. The heli problem highlighted what should be the two goals of a balanced game: (1) making each faction balanced versus the others and (2) within each faction, requiring the player to be proficient with all of the units in order to win. In other words, a unit may be over or underpowered either not only because it unbalances the faction, but also because it is seldom/never used, or because it is always used.

The heli had both problems. Spamming helis was an auto-kill on certain maps. And a heli would on most maps be the saps player's first-choice unit. (Still is, as far as I can tell, though less so.)

According to those principles, a case can be made that the cost of artillery should be reduced. The trucks are very expensive and vulnerable so they are seldom used. In my view they are clearly inferior to the Wyrm, which costs the same. The wyrm can move and attack, giving it the same effective range as trucks and the ability to attack and re-position. It also isn't helpless when attacked. Against all those advantages, trucks only get four additional attack points, which basically means an average of one more damage point against any unit.

So I wonder if there's a case to be made that the cost of trucks should be reduced from 550 to 500. Thoughts?

By the way, kudos again on the re-balancing of helos.
General Discussion » Is this normal? Krals and Titans in Naval War map » Go to message
And to clarify I have see a helo do that damage many times w/o the benefit of a gang-up bonus.
General Discussion » Is this normal? Krals and Titans in Naval War map » Go to message
The "base" damage of hydro vs. garuda is 4, which means the question is can the "random factor" allow a full-health unit to deal four more points of damage in addition to the base. I don't do a lot of hydro/garuda fights, but I have seen a helo do 5 damage to a garuda lots of times. The helo only has a base damage of "one" (9 attack minus 8 defense) so it's getting 4 more damage from the random factor. So it seems entirely plausible to me that a hydro could deal 8 to a garuda.
General Discussion » About the Recent Unit Balancing Changes... » Go to message
The best way to judge the "balance" of the races is to look at the relative frequency with which players select them. If each race is selected about a third of the time, the races are balanced. If any race is selected half the time, thta race is too powerful.
General Discussion » Cheating in multi player games » Go to message
Why not? Is there any other way to deter it?
Forum Index Profile for glackattack »» Messages posted by glackattack
Powered by JForum 2.1.9 © - 2020-04-14 v124 - UniWar website