Info > Feedback and Suggestions

Ally ship name display

<< < (3/6) > >>

HamsterIV:
If I recall correctly Muse intentionally made the telling the difference between friendly and enemy ships difficult to encourage communication between Captain and crew. Since the captain will almost never carry a spyglass, they have to rely on their crew to spot ships and identify friend/foe. It makes the information exchange between captain and crew a 2 way thing even before combat starts.

Kamoba:

--- Quote from: OverlordEgg on March 03, 2016, 01:23:29 pm ---I don't see this as a horribly bad idea. Maybe the design of how the "spot" looks would be up for question, but that could go either way. At it's essence, it would really just be a quality of life kind of thing. Sure, as max level mlg pro super vet players, WE all know we can cover our screen with the map, give away our position by firing a test shot, or click a dozen times to see if the spot mechanic is broken cause they're near a cloud or working fine and they're our ally. Perhaps stare at that threesome of hwachafish and compare it to the compass for a bit to see which one has your color's dot. Or squint really closely at that red-ballooned ship to see if they actually have your team's blue flags. Maybe even "communicate" with our silent lvl 1 who probably turned voice chat off so he can't hear you shouting at him to stop flying off the map.

Alright yes this is some very heavy-handed sarcasm, but the point I'm making is just because we've found ways around the game to make it work for us, doesn't necessarily mean a little quality of life like showing your ally's position is such a bad thing. It might even help the lower levels who don't know anything stick closer to where the fight's at if they have a more obvious indication of where you're going. It wouldn't change anything about how we play in the slightest, just help people see a bit better.

--- End quote ---

It would be an additional change towards what is already looking like a multitude of changes being made to the game for the simple sake of dumbing it down....

Hwacha jitter reduction because people couldn't figure out how to use heavy ammo, hwacha becomes the weapon that dominates the skies because it is idiot proof.

Squid balance changes suggest Muse want to make Squid easier to pilot by turning the side gun forward, because knowing gun arcs is not idiot proof enough.

The more the list gets added to, the less appealing the game becomes to some of us who have been here for a long time.

Now I agree player retention is low but if the game continues to become idiot proof and get dumbed down, then some vets will leave and the core player base will get smaller... There would be no one to welcome the annoying lvl 1 pilots that we play with.

Oh and to reply to your heavy sarcasm, Egg you know me, and you know damn well I play with novices and pub matches a lot more than I play with other higher level pilots, I know how annoying all the situations can be, so you need not treat my point of view as if it is coming from someone who only ever looks at the end game play.

The game has a learning curve, it can seem steep at first and most vets will say it's steep, but too much "quality of life" changes (read dumbing down changes) could do more damage to the game than good.

OverlordEgg:

--- Quote from: Kamoba on March 03, 2016, 06:24:51 pm ---It would be an additional change towards what is already looking like a multitude of changes being made to the game for the simple sake of dumbing it down....

Hwacha jitter reduction because people couldn't figure out how to use heavy ammo, hwacha becomes the weapon that dominates the skies because it is idiot proof.

Squid balance changes suggest Muse want to make Squid easier to pilot by turning the side gun forward, because knowing gun arcs is not idiot proof enough.

The more the list gets added to, the less appealing the game becomes to some of us who have been here for a long time.

Now I agree player retention is low but if the game continues to become idiot proof and get dumbed down, then some vets will leave and the core player base will get smaller... There would be no one to welcome the annoying lvl 1 pilots that we play with.

Oh and to reply to your heavy sarcasm, Egg you know me, and you know damn well I play with novices and pub matches a lot more than I play with other higher level pilots, I know how annoying all the situations can be, so you need not treat my point of view as if it is coming from someone who only ever looks at the end game play.

The game has a learning curve, it can seem steep at first and most vets will say it's steep, but too much "quality of life" changes (read dumbing down changes) could do more damage to the game than good.

--- End quote ---

All those things you listed are very major balance changes though. Not even close to just being "quality of life." Just adding a name to your ally's position hardly affects anything. To be honest, I agree that Muse should and probably does have much higher priorities than this, but for the sake of arguing whether or not it's a good idea to someday implement given they have free time it's hardly fair to put it in the same category as a Hwacha buff and a gun arc change.

What I mean by "quality of life" is something that doesn't affect gameplay balance at all, but makes the game feel more convenient and polished to play. Small examples would be allowing players to enter queue by pressing play just once, instead of twice. Or letting people quit the game from lobby instead of having to press several different "back" and "exit" buttons.

Imagine for a second a world where when engineering there's no indicator of the cooldown of a component. You just have to count to nine seconds to know if you can hit something with the mallet again. Definitely a bad idea to implement a cooldown indicator. People should just communicate that they've hit the engine. Noobs these days should just learn to count to nine. Obviously Muse just wants to "dumb down" the game for noobs, by adding this cooldown indicator and we're going to lose all our vets and core playerbase.

Also, whether or not you agree with the changes they make, saying they're doing it "for the simple sake of dumbing it down" is an insulting exaggeration that is undoubtedly not true. Then again, I don't work there. Maybe they have a monkey sitting at a desk that they use for testing and if the monkey goes "ooo ooo aa aa" in dissatisfaction because it can't figure the game out they decide it's time for a patch. Anyone from Muse wanna chime in on that one?

As far as losing players over this, perhaps if the balance changes previously mentioned ruin the game so badly that the apocalypse comes and guns of icarus is ruined forever I can see why people might leave it. But to leave over a small thing like "ugh I can see where my team is now" is so petty that I'll send them off with a smile and throw a party to celebrate their departure.

VidyaBro:
OverlordEgg really hit the nail on the head for what I've been trying to get at for a while now.

Pure "quality of life" changes do nothing but remove unnecessary tedium/convolution. The argument that making things less intuitive 'encourages players to work together more' is a huge stretch in terms of logic, considering many if not most players would rather just stop playing if things were needlessly complicated than be forced to try and constantly communicate with their teammates.

If anything I'd say quality of life changes actually encourage teamwork by allowing players to coordinate their efforts without having to manually communicate every waking moment, especially since people often talk over each other in voice chat and text chat/orders leaves them unable to do anything else momentarily.

Kamoba:
I'm sorry to say I disagree with this being a cha ge to encourage team work..
What I see is "Let's encourage team work by adding a feature which removes the need to communicate ship positioning."

The more "quality of life" features which get added to "encourage team work" would simply result in much less communication required.

Correct me if I'm wrong but, when training team work and cooperation, the encouraging of communication, especially essential and potentially essential information is a strong part of that.

So sorry guys, I disagree, I think this "quality of life feature" is just another "let's make this less team play" and I very much doubt any amount of debating, arguing and disagreeing will sell me to like this idea.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page