| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
legia wrote:
It's solar panel!
Oh, thank you. But it just doesn't look like so.
|
|
|
The Walker's model has a black area on it's head.
It seems that there is a cockpit in walkers, and someone inside manipulates this unit.
It is not consistent with the settings of Titans. I think it should be changed.
|
|
|
|
LkASr wrote:
The primary function of undo is to prevent inconvenient screw ups (ex: you accidentally tapped a tile because fingers slipped or misreading), but then..
Would you really like to move on even a massive screw up will cost you a win? I was in there before the undo was added. I didn't like it. Games are suppose to give us something fun to play with, not to stress us more and not a lot of people make perfect decisions.
The game is meant to be a simulation of what would an outcome can be
I want to win, so I always try.
1 or 2 damage will make a big difference in many occasions. After I got 2200, I have to do this.
Some play just for fun. Some take it seriously.
But I really wonder whether the random factor bring more fun. If not, we can create a win-win situation.
|
|
|
|
Oh, trying different attacking sequences and finding the best may be our way to win. But this is NOT STRATEGY AT ALL !
|
|
|
Now, the damage has a floating range.
It depends on some random numbers.
6 numbers will be generated automatically for each attacker's hp.
For example, when 10 hp helicopter attacks 5 hp garuda, 60 random numbers will decide the damage the helicopter makes( 4 or 5 or 6), and 30 random numbers will decide the damage the garuda makes( 1 or 2 or 3).
If we increases the random number, the probability of 4 and 6 damage (the helicopter could make) will be lower than it has now.
|
|
|
|
legia wrote:For now randomness wouldn't be removed.
For me I would like to have little bit less random factor because sometimes (1-2%) it gives a huge difference in fight result.
So how about making every hp 10 random numbers ( now it has 6 ) ? It can reduce the probability of weak or critical hit.
If you like this idea, please tell xavi. I'm not sure whether he can see my post.
|
|
|
|
Duaneski wrote:
Maybe if they refuse the rematch, the points get refunded to both parties (kind of like accepting peace). This would prevent hard feelings where someone never offers peace or says anything about the map being imbalanced, then goes for revenge after. And the other player KNOWS it was imbalanced but now doesn't have much of a choice?
You can just surrender the rematch, and the scores won't change.
The only difference is that you will add one lose in your profile. I think it doesn't matter. So both are acceptable for me.
|
|
|
|
Snipe2004 wrote:I like it, but I can see one major problem.
Imagine I win against a guy really more ranked than me, because for example he made me wait for hours before getting dismissed, or he made a mistake I was able to take profit of, or any other bad or good reason. Then, he forces a rematch, and I have very few chances to win a second time...
Well, in another hand, when you play with someone less skillful than you and lose for being skipped or making mistakes, you can also use revenge to take a second chance.
In fact, rank score should be a symbol of one's real ability. It requires stability. So if one is really less skillful, there's no reason to have a higher score because of luck or else.
|
|
|
Imbalanced map is a big problem.
Developers planed to set up solo pro rank long long ago, in which every random ranked game would be mirror. It's a good idea, but seems that it will never be online.
Now developers change the map feedback for collecting data.It will help. But it works slowly and the imbalance of map can't be eliminated.
So I'm looking forward to the revenge mirror. If you lose a ranked game which you think the map is imbalanced, you can propose a mirror rematch that can't be refused. If you win the rematch, both sides' score won't change no matter how many turns you spent to win. But if you lose the rematch again, you have to take a 300% score punishment which means you totally lose threefold the score you would lose in the first game.
|
|
|
|
Nice idea, developer should make a proposal collection of new units or abilities with unicoin awards, and inform in app to encourage all players to post and poll. Then adjust according to top players' suggestions before bring it to unrank games.
|
|
|
|
Porphyr wrote:
No, I think this problem does not really exist, it is already prevented by the way the turn timers work.
Example (let player B be the weaker player that wants to copy player A):
- Player A makes first move in game 1
- Player B waits for that and makes hist first move in game 2
- now the timer for B's first move in game 1 (i.e. his reply to A's first move there) expires before the timer for A's move in game 2
-> So B cannot copy this
So as long as the stronger player takes care not to move as fast as possible in all available games, he can prevent being copied.
Doing so would be recommended anyway, so the games don't get out of sync.
(it also works if B makes the first move - e.g. because it is obvious like capping initial bases - and attempts copying from second move -> this is also prevented)
Yes, you're right. It can be prevented if we make moves and don't end until opponent ends.
|
|
|
There is one problem. As randomness removed, every attack has the certain result, then players can make the same moves in the mirror game if they have enough vision. In this way, weaker players copy their opponents' strategy, and make the match meaningless.
To prevent these happening, tournament rules need change. Only when both players end turn, can they see what opponent did last turn.
If player A end turn in advance, player B cannot see what moves did A make before B end turn. When B end turn 4h later, he can see it now but only 8h is left for him to make his decision.
|
|
|
|
Thank Porphyry for bringing up this topic in chat room. Seems many players want to maintain status quo.
|
|
|
|
This new feature has profound significance. Developers should consider it seriously. You can even charge for it and I'm willing to pay.
|
|
|
This post focus on damage formula with no random factor, discussing the alternatives for current random damage. If you want to say randomness is good and can't be changed, please do it in other posts, such as http://forum.uniwar.com/posts/list/2455.page , thank you.
Alternative A:
Double the HP, the damage and the repair. So that all unit have 20HP and the damage formula will be as follows:
A = Attack strength of the attacking unit
Ta = Terrain modifier for the attacking unit
D = Defense strength of the defending unit
Td = Terrain modifer for the defending unit
B = Gang up, re-surface, veteran bonus
H = The attacking unit's health points
Full Damage = A+Ta-D-Td+B+10
Real Damage = Full Damage*H/20
If Full Damage > 20, then Full Damage = 20
If Full Damage < 0, then Full Damage = 0
For example, if 20hp garuda(9/8) attacks 20hp helicopter(9/10) with no bonus, there remains 9hp garuda and 11hp helicopter. Another example, 20hp speeder(10/8) can kill 20hp engineer(0/0) on plain, but cannot do the same when the engineer is on base or the speeder only has 19hp.
This alternative is mainly based on the current damage formula. So there're no obvious differences in the combat outcomes between old and new formulas. No worry about the effects on balance. And because of the simple formula, we can calculate the damage without calculator or software. But 20hp is little different, which needs some time to adapt.
Alternative B:
Don't change the current formula, and always make sure the combat outcomes will be the one with the highest probability.
So, if 10hp garuda(9/8) attacks 10hp helicopter(9/10) with no bonus, there remains 5hp garuda and 6hp helicopter.
This alternative is easy to be understood and adapted as it changes the least things.
There must be other alternatives, welcome to share you ideas. Maybe a good alternative can persuade more people to support removing randomness.
Thanks for reading.
|
![[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
