Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - SeraphZ

Pages: [1]
1
I believe the Main purpose when implementing changes is to benefit the whole community, Problem being peoples perceptions and ideas do not always match so there is always this disagreement of who's way is best.

The main goal is majority are happy, and the trend on all forum topics with suggestions are Person 1 offers suggestion person 2 rips it apart and suggests their idea, person 1 then feels offended and then a cycle of disproving begins when both people make very valid points why can both ideas not be merged then changed? A lot of time very good ideas are brushed over because of one point in some case 7 paragraphs of explaining is missed.

No matter what change is made some people will always feel it was not needed or don't like it, others will feel it is needed and do like, then it gets tweaked so both are satisfied.

I tend to go on near enough every thread and look over the ideas and try and find a solution for both party's. or a general idea or theory that might suit the majority.

As mentioned Before one of the best ways to suggest something is to email feedback, Make it brief and understandable no need for great amount of detail, just general idea, then 9/10 someone will get back to you with why it can/can not be achieved.

Or perhaps a new format, of in suggestions you just put your suggest explain it breifly then add a poll to the thread? i relies you may get a situation were most people will vote for there own idea, but this may be a streamlined version then majority idea becomes the topic and then we can tweak it to suit everyone, perhaps add ideas from other suggestions.

Thoughts?

I appreciate your sincerity here, however honestly you Muse as a team are better coming to a consensus as a team rather than leaving this exact change to public opinion. While the majority might be OK as is, we can all appreciate the contradiction of motives that is inherent in the current level system. Whether XP is awarded for basic actions or for objectives is up to the team, however I think that achievements being tied to rewards could still be a great asset to the game.

The honest truth is no one knows the game better than you guys - as you prove in game on a weekly basis. I only made this thread to bring up an issue - we need your help to resolve it.

2
yes, more achivements open at one time would solve a lot of frustration. having to concentrate on using burst rounds while other similar ach. are locked off doesn't feel organic. if i have already destroyed with a flametrhower, why don't that count?

I totally agree - as you said in your first comment the result is a grind. Why would you ever do that to your player base? I just want to have fun & shoot stuff.

3
I disagree, currently in this game matches won is no indication of skill, merely an inclination to play with other good players against worse players. This game is far too team-based for win/loss ratio to mean anything.

That's true, which is why XP would be based not on the ratio but number of matches.

you have taken my comment out of context, I was replying to a post that suggested xp be taken from the ratio.

That was my post, but no one was suggesting that. Just that with wins giving more XP a higher Win/Loss ratio will mean you level faster. It would still be mostly a stat used for pissing contests.

4
I disagree, currently in this game matches won is no indication of skill, merely an inclination to play with other good players against worse players. This game is far too team-based for win/loss ratio to mean anything.

That's true, which is why XP would be based not on the ratio but number of matches.

5
Rebuilding hull armor is one of those things that will happen to you very soon no matter if you agree to it. Forcing a situation like this seems pointless to me. Also, you should always remember that an engineer should have higher priorities with repairs than doing achievements (maybe you don't deserve this level after all if you don't see it :P).

Certainly - it was an oversimplified example just to show importance of motivation. I'm much lower level than everyone else in this thread but I can see these small issues at my level becoming major later in the game - which is consistent with the response to this thread.

no, it would stand as a combined indicator of the number of matches you have played and the number of matches you have won - and thanks to matchmaking, this would be only victories against roughly equally matched opponents.

I completely agree, matches won over matches total is indicator of skill, though volume of XP might be due to just straight persistence. I think this is overall good - to level you either work hard or you work well.

I'm very pleased this topic has taken off and I hope Muse takes some time to consider the subject!

6
Velvet I think you're absolutely right - a normal XP system is the only thing that motivates players appropriately.

7
Feedback and Suggestions / Why the current level system is not good
« on: May 16, 2014, 08:10:01 pm »
Hypothetical situation:
I'm an Engi on Dunes in the middle of a battle, and our hull armor is just about to go down. I hit Q and see 'Rebuild 30 Hull Armor on Dunes 29/30'. Rebuild Hull Armor... not repair... repairing this will do me no good. But if I let it get destroyed first... then I could level up.

While ideally a player would say "I'm sure this will be destroyed soon enough" and repair instead of rebuild but it's an issue of motivation. As a game designer you never want to motivate your players to not do the right thing.

I do appreciate that the game doesn't have a boring simple XP system. I really like the idea of leveling being for what you do in game instead of just playing. But it only supports achievement hunting, instead of playing the game because it's fun, which is a shame. Take care, I really do like the game a lot.

Pages: [1]