Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 38

Thread: Compilation of suggestions & remarks (just small- & medium-scaled ones, this time!)

  1. #1
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444

    Post Compilation of suggestions & remarks (just small- & medium-scaled ones, this time!)

    Hello again. This is compilation of issues, small & medium (no big ones this time! ), that I'd like to see "fixed" or "addressed" in some manner.

    A. Easily-implementable suggestions/remarks. Most concern UI-aspects, not gameplay mechanics.
    1. Strand: The "Banners" and "?" buttons in Strand-menu have considerably different usage than in the rest of the UI/menus.
    2. Strand/PGs: Units' rank circle-icon should be in purple (not red), no?
    3. Matchmaker: Display unit-ranks (kills are not really that meaningful, imo), or at least team-power.
    4. Matchmaker: Display enemy Elo-Ranking, too?
    5. Matchmaker: Ranked-vs-Quick matching. State it clearly when an RM is playing against a QM!
    6. PGs-vs-Battle / Unit attributes order: In PGs, the rank-attribute is first up. In battle-screen it comes last. Why?
    7. Battle: Pillage Font Color. I'd like to see it in Blue/Red when the last is enemy/ally, respectively.
    8. Battle: Rain-of-Arrows landing-icon (when not triggered) is not very clear as to where it was placed. Why not use a purple-tile-box or something?
    9. Friendly-Match: The UI is kinda confusing. Generally, options selectable by both players (map) should be separate from those player-specific (timer, "Ready"). Also, back-and-from the PGs should not pass through Strand. Finally, a clear indication about whether the friend is already in the MM-screen waiting...


    B. More complication suggestions/remarks.
    1. Art/Battle: "Special" unit animations at the beginning and at the end of the battle (victory). Some sort of cheering, for example.
    2. Battle/Initial deployment: Display enemy-deployment area & empty-zone, with the grid activated.
    3. Battle/Initial deployment: Display enemy initiative-order too!
    4. Gameplay/Battle: Dead-bodies. How about the tile(s) they occupy hindering movement? E.g. reducing movement-span by 1. When two bodies lie on the same tile, this tile becomes an "obstacle"...
    5. Gameplay/Battle: Display of total team STR/ARM/WP. Its a fast estimate of "how healthy" each team is. *** Also suggested by Yth, Kletian,...
    6. Gameplay/Battle: A button, similar to the "Banners" button, that highlights the entire movement-range possibly covered by the enemy units on the grid (taking into account EX, and assuming max-WP). A similar button for the possible attack-range, factoring WP+EX+Horn and archer-range, would also be useful. Actually, the most difficult aspect of entry-level and mid-level play is counting the tiles and quickly calculating movement and attack ranges . Many a times I've found myself putting fingers on the screen to avoid placing a varl on-the-line...


    Thanks for considering & commenting!



    EDIT:Appendix

    C. Suggestions by other posters on this thread.
    1. Matchmaker: Indication of queue-size or wait-time for Ranked/Quick/Tourney matches. Or some other indication of how many people passed through MM in the last 10mins (per power-level?).
    2. Match-Types: Underdog-mode, for QMs. When activated, the MM searches for stronger opponents. This would reduce the stress of not-finding any opponent at all. Fighting difficult battles is better that not fighting at all.
    3. Battle Renown: Secret Challenges (e.g. finish battle with >X units alive or >Y stars in Horn, use abilities of all your units at least once, kill >Z enemies with a single unit), that when fulfilled they grant a bonus Renown (e.g. +2). There could be a set of 10-20 such challenges, and each player is secretly assigned a random one per-battle; he/she can't know which one it was, unless it was fulfilled.
    4. Proving Grounds: Button for "clear roster". It helps when having large barracks and changing through builds a lot.
    5. Proving Grounds: Being able to save team/builds & unit-stats button, e.g. with 2-3 slots per 6/12/18 power-teams.
    6. Proving Grounds: Left/Right buttons (in edit-unit menu) scrolling through whole barracks and not 6-character-team.
    7. Strand: Daily-Login-Streak renown left. Perhaps make the respective banner "sticky"?
    Last edited by Aleonymous; 05-06-2013 at 11:09 AM. Reason: typos & minors

  2. #2
    Superbacker mindflare77's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    63
    This is probably a stupid question, but regarding A3, wouldn't you already know what rank your units are? Or is there a way to see the kills of the enemy units (that I've apparently not found)?

    Other than that question, a hearty +1 to most of these.
    Last edited by mindflare77; 04-23-2013 at 09:18 AM.
    Avatar/banner done by StandSure.

  3. #3
    Battle/Initial deployment: Display enemy-deployment area & empty-zone, with the grid activated.
    I'd put this in the "easy" column. It's something I'd like to see, too.

    PGs-vs-Battle / Unit attributes order: In PGs, the rank-attribute is first up. In battle-screen it comes last. Why?
    Rank describes who a character is and how he/she can be customized. Arm/Str/WP describe the character's status in the battle... Anyway, with rank at the bottom during battle it's still quite quick to see.

  4. #4
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by mindflare77 View Post
    regarding A3, wouldn't you already know what rank your units are? Or is there a way to see the kills of the enemy units (that I've apparently not found)?
    I was referring mainly to the enemy units. Seeing their kills too would be a helpful bit of additional info. And, no; there's no way to see enemy kills!

  5. #5
    Senior Member Butters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Tokyo, Japan
    Posts
    303
    Most are very good suggestions which I would like to +1.
    B-4 I think would be too disruptive so I am against, and B-6 would be too confusing IMO (although not compulsory in any way so why not).

  6. #6
    Developer raven2134's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Manila, Philippines
    Posts
    1,061
    My thoughts,

    A4 is not advisable. This may promote queue dodging.

    A5 is also not advisable. This may cause the competitive player to again queue dodge, in favor for a R-R matchup.

    A6 because rank was the last mechanic implemented in factions, probably.

    A7, well seems more like a preference. You want it to tell you whether it is a Pillage for you or you being pillaged? That's one way to look at it. Another is it's a set phase in the game, so it doesn't require the distinction. I suppose it couldn't hurt, though.

    A8, it was probably animated this way to accommodate striking Varl who straddle 4 squares. I am not for a purple square, it breaks immersion when action is animated immersively (without movement tile highlights and etc.)

    A9, I agree, those would make FM much better.

    B1 Alex said way way back in the beta they wanted to do this. I think it's a good idea, but there are bandwidth (3 devs) and financial limitations to consider. Maybe when they rake in the moolah after saga? We can hope .

    B2, B3 Cool and useful

    B4 is a bad idea (I'll say it outright). Varl occupy 4 spaces, making dead units block movement means archers are much harder to reach, varl are much less useful, and you severely hamper the strategic choice of eliminating a unit to clear up space to reach the backline. Movement loss seems complicated too, when the game balance is fine as is.

    B5 is cool. Maybe it would be nice as an overlay for replay in the future. I'm on the fence of whether I want it during a battle. I think it's a good line to draw for player skill and intuitive judgement.

    B6 similar to B5. You'd likely still suffer from information overload. It would probably be best used as a tool to learn in hindsight.

    Don't get me wrong though. I really liked this post/thread. Constructive suggestions always welcome!

  7. #7
    A small addendum, display how many people are in the queues for quick and ranked (maybe with power level too), or some indication at least as to how many people are online other than friends.

  8. #8
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Butters View Post
    B-4 I think would be too disruptive so I am against,
    That's the idea! Having that bulky varl killed in your front lines should not just mean "ok, the way is clear to charge". In my opinion, it would add some more sense to the waypoint-clicking and general positioning of the squad, adding another "layer" of strategy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Butters View Post
    B-6 would be too confusing (although not compulsory in any way so why not).
    My initial though on this was just seeing a "union" of what you see when clicking the six enemy units to check their movement range. Nothing more. (Watching Slimsy's stream, clicking on enemy units all the time is kinda stressing!) As for the attack-range, OK, this is more complicated, factoring the archers in (EX,WP,BoP) etc.
    Last edited by Aleonymous; 04-23-2013 at 08:44 AM.

  9. #9
    Member Yth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    70
    I started the practice of documenting my games by taking screenshots. I realized it is actually a pretty big advantage to have a picture of the loading screen showing the enemy team's lineup / initiative order. I could figure out if my warriors will go before theirs or after theirs, and do my initial placement accordingly. This can only really be done if you know their unit order AND know if you are going first or going second in the game.

    If you don't take a screenshot and just try to memorize their heavy hitter's turn order position, it is hard to visualize how it blends with your own turn order unless you have the picture in front of your face.

    Personally I think the initiative order should be displayed during team deployment in some way...

  10. #10
    Member SeraphimLoki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Aleonymous View Post

    A. Easily-implementable suggestions/remarks. Most concern UI-aspects, not gameplay mechanics.
    1. Battle: Rain-of-Arrows landing-icon (when not triggered) is not very clear as to where it was placed. Why not use a purple-tile-box or something?


    Thanks for considering & commenting!
    I second you that. I can never figure out where my enemy put an arrow cuz its always something in the middle of the 4 tiles. Would be helpful to predict his next arrow placement.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Butters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Tokyo, Japan
    Posts
    303
    RoA placement is not exactly rocket science either. The arrow always falls on the lower extremity of the trapped square.

  12. #12
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Butters View Post
    RoA placement is not exactly rocket science either. The arrow always falls on the lower extremity of the trapped square.
    Yeah, but when the units are closely packed, banners-on and everything, its difficult to see & remember the tile (the immersive animation, as raven puts it , lasts for 1-2 sec). Check this image for instance:



    (1) The tile is nicely marked, and the arrow-tip points in the center of the tile. Everything is fine.
    (2) The tile is not marked, the arrow tip is on the lower-extremity. If it didn't hit, I would be inclined to think it hit the square just south of the raider...

    Now that I know its better; but I've had some issues from this, that's why I'm expressing my thoughts.

  13. #13
    Superbacker trisenk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Aleonymous View Post
    Now that I know its better; but I've had some issues from this, that's why I'm expressing my thoughts.
    +1 to this. It's probably done to not overlap with unit unit animation. So the solution is to leave it as it is when it hits a unit - the unit is stopped on the tile so there's no confusion where the RoA was. But when it falls down on an empty tile, make it land in the center.

  14. #14
    Superbacker netnazgul's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Belarus
    Posts
    456
    Strand: The "Banners" and "?" buttons in Strand-menu have considerably different usage than in the rest of the UI/menus.
    That's the thing I'm arguing about right from when Strand was introduced

    Matchmaker: Display unit-ranks (kills are not really that meaningful, imo), or at least team-power.
    kills are useful for promoting, but ranks would be a nice addition/

    Matchmaker: Display enemy Elo-Ranking, too?
    And that's the second thing I'm desperately requesting. Even not just Elo-Ranking, but other stats possible here.

    Gameplay/Battle: Dead-bodies. How about the tile(s) they occupy hindering movement? E.g. reducing movement-span by 1. When two bodies lie on the same tile, this tile becomes an "obstacle"...
    I'd say no

    for other options suggested I have a "don't care" oppinion.
    If you don't know where to put it - put it in the pillage

    Steelhammer Tribune issues collected here
    Some of my Factions games can be observed here
    Also possible streaming at http://www.twitch.tv/netnazgul

  15. #15
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    TL;DR : Why are archers so strong? What led to this particular balancing?

    Concerning the "dead-bodies-occupy space" suggestion, in conjunction with Raven's point about making archers more hard-to-get:

    Can you guys, that have been around every since the beta, provide some input as to why the archers are so OP? It feels out-of-proportion that archers can cruise at 8STR/8ARM, when decent Raiders feel satisfied with only 10% larger values than those. It even looks odd: If a shield-varl is at ~15ARM and a shield-raider at ~10ARM, then archers should max at 5ARM. The same goes for Strength. If it were on me, I'd nerf archers at 5STR/5ARM-max and buff the Puncture (e.g. +1STR per 1ARM lost, not per 0.5ARM). In this way, archers would very reasonably be glass-canons: they'd need just one hit to kill and they'd only be "good" for finishing-off broken units. High EX (3) also seems too much on archers.

  16. #16
    Senior Member loveboof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    137
    Why shouldn't archers be powerful? Do you think you could handle an arrow shot at your chest any better than an axe being swung from close range...

    What you're proposing (@ Aleonymous) would only really make them effective in the late game - I'd much prefer them to be fairly well rounded like they are now. You could argue for lower armour I suppose, but lower strength too? Nah.

  17. #17
    Senior Member Kletian999's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    258
    Definately don't like the idea of Dead bodies affecting movement. I would argue it's already too disruptive that they can hide Siege archer coals.

    Otherwise a reasonble list.

  18. #18
    Senior Member roder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    215
    Quote Originally Posted by Aleonymous View Post
    1. Battle: Rain-of-Arrows landing-icon (when not triggered) is not very clear as to where it was placed. Why not use a purple-tile-box or something?
    2. Battle/Initial deployment: Display enemy-deployment area & empty-zone, with the grid activated.
    3. Battle/Initial deployment: Display enemy initiative-order too!
    These are my favorite suggestions, definitely should be considered. Especially RoA animation is sometimes ambiguous.

    I also wouldn't mind extra modes other than Expert, possibly Underdog Mode (increase search range by looking for higher powers from the start), Challenge Mode (gives +2 if complete random challenge ie. win with 3 units left or win with full horn)
    State it clearly when an RM is playing against a QM!
    Does this happen? Never knew.

  19. #19
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by loveboof View Post
    Why shouldn't archers be powerful? Do you think you could handle an arrow shot at your chest any better than an axe being swung from close range... What you're proposing (@ Aleonymous) would only really make them effective in the late game - I'd much prefer them to be fairly well rounded like they are now. You could argue for lower armour I suppose, but lower strength too? Nah.
    Here's where it comes back to RNG!

    I believe that a well-placed arrow can (and should be able to) directly kill a unit. I also believe that such expert shots are extra-difficult (need a little luck?) to make. But, a heavy axe swung at you, could most definitely cripple you, and, then, you would need the luck on your side to survive!

    What I'm saying is that, with luck decidedly off the scene, Stoic have somehow "averaged" the hit/damage/block-chances in order to come down to these "effective" values of STR and ARM (+EX,WP,AB) for the units. So, comparing these values, it feels "wrong" to me that archers are on-average much more lethal compared to varl warriors. I don't know about you, but my archers are easily the units with the most kills in any build I've tried.

    As a conclusion, I admit that the game is very well balanced in the present form. Also, I would be very reluctant to change anything, so as not to break this balance. It's just that I believe that there could be other balance-points that would be more intuitively realistic...

  20. #20
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by rodereve View Post
    I also wouldn't mind extra modes other than Expert, possibly Underdog Mode (increase search range by looking for higher powers from the start), Challenge Mode (gives +2 if complete random challenge ie. win with 3 units left or win with full horn)

    "State it clearly when an RM is playing against a QM!" Does this happen? Never knew.
    Interesting ideas, and I guess they do no harm to the Matchmaker search-engine. However, challenge-mode should have some sort of price-to-pay, i.e. like the Expert-mode (shorter thinking time).

    About QM-vs-RM: yeah, it does happen. When the MM can't find a match of the same-power and similar-ranking from the RM-queue, it might get you faced against a same-power & similar-ranked player from the QM-queue. In this case, your Elo-ranking changes just a little (+2/-2), but it also counts normally on your win-streak. You can't know unless you check w the opponent, or check your HoV ranking pre and post match and notice a +/-2.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •