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 - knoxi

Pages: [1] 2
Steam Workshop / Re: Decal: Chaladon of the Crescent Moon
« on: April 17, 2017, 10:50:51 am »

Steam Workshop / Re: Decal: Chaladon of the Crescent Moon
« on: April 16, 2017, 02:14:08 pm »
Cheers @Huskarr and thanks for the info.

Would a mod be able to edit the link in the original post to ? As the original link is broken.

Steam Workshop / Decal: Chaladon of the Crescent Moon
« on: April 16, 2017, 11:19:45 am »
I made a decal to allow Order of Chaladon members to represent. I figure there's probably one in game already - but I haven't come across it yet, so decided to jump the gun and make a simple variant of the Order of Chaladon crest.

It's on the steam workshop: Here.

Chaladon of the Crescent Moon (Chaladon Covella)
As you sow, so shall you reap.

Community Events / Re: "The Cogs" Ruleset
« on: May 17, 2013, 07:13:54 pm »
I am very convinced it is an exploit

Therein lies the problem. I'm not convinced yet. The arguments I've heard against denial all go back to the same point. That "It's an exploit" or that "It's unsportsmanlike".

I'd say that flying around someone while spouting flame and harpoons into their airship is fairly unsportsmanlike, and as for it being an exploit, I addressed that above.

No. Im pretty sure I posted a wikipedia link validated by industry professionals regarding free suicide being removed from deathmatch rule sets 20 years ago.

You then posted free suicide and denial was still allowed in games. When this is infact not true, you cannot suicide un punished in a deathmatch, you lose a kill or gain a death. Neither can you self deny in a MOBA without losing gold, gaining a death and losing any stacks or buffs.

You claim to be keeping an open mind, but have continually ignored information and gone so far as to make incorrect statements to validate your position on this matter.

I hope you can understand that this is very frustrating. As this issue is in reality very simple on every conceivable level when all correct information is considered in its entirety.

Community Events / Re: "The Cogs" Ruleset
« on: May 17, 2013, 12:37:56 pm »
I apologise, I didn't realise stating the community standards or refering to my big shiney Junker was against the Community standards. I'II avoid making unwelcome sexual advances in future.

Community Events / Re: "The Cogs" Ruleset
« on: May 17, 2013, 11:07:44 am »
Knoxi, it's because of this:

Go to 1:40:30 and you'll see the first time in a competitive match it was used. I don't think anyone's saying "Black Flight shouldn't of done it", but the question that people asked is "should this be allowed?" Swallow recently said in this forum the answer is "Yes, it is allowed", and so people are questioning that. That's what this thread is for.

So that's why!

Yeah, I've watched the match. I understand that it's impossible to punish a team for something that isn't against the rules of a competition, not sure if I somehow implied that, if so it wasn't intentional.

And I've been listening to people asking the "...should this be allowed?" question a lot...

My retort is, "Why is, in any sane world, the question even being asked?", let alone being dragged out for this long.

Deliberately suiciding to bypass hull damage is against the spirit of the community, the spirit of sportsmanship, the spirit of competition, and allowed or not it's still an exploit by any definition.

And the sad fact is, everyone knows, having seen that video, that this was not the first time Black Flight have done this. It was calculated, planned, and well executed with intent knowing they needed to suicide and knowing they needed to do so whilst hidden, whilst avoiding damage to not be penalised a death. How many public games was this used in prior to this ... and how many after? In other games we're all familiar with, not reporting and then exploting is a bannable offense.

Yet seemingly intelligent and respectful people are "asking" whether this should be allowed... whilst others defend it or try and validate it. To what end? Why?

The only reason I can come up with is, it made a stream and competition narrative seem a little more exciting. At the cost of what? Everyone rushing to suicide after each engagement to try and get the upper hand on permahull that's exploited to no longer be permanent.

Stop asking whether it should be allowed and thereby validating it. Ask whether you want to be taking part in a competition where exploiting is not only condoned but heralded as intelligent and innovative. Sure, don't punish Black Flight for exploiting, but to then create a situation where teams will be punished if they don't ... with no intention to offend, I find that disgusting and I doubt I'm the only one.

Community Events / Re: "The Cogs" Ruleset
« on: May 17, 2013, 05:54:16 am »
Anyone else starting to wonder how this (the issue of suicide) is ... or ever was even a discussion? Seeing that there are obviously a hundred one reasons why it shouldn't be allowed and no good reason why it should be, other than to be disrespectful or create drama or a plethora of other negative things that this community has done so amazingly well thus far to avoid. My mind is beginning to boggle.

Gameplay / Re: Achievement system flaw
« on: May 16, 2013, 06:12:24 am »
I haven't jumped in before now because I'm interested in getting a variety of different perspectives on this, but I should say something before we all retread the same ground over and over too many times.

The leveling system is definitely unusual in that it's a hybrid of achievement and mission systems, and for the most part I'm satisfied with how it's working. It's meant to encourage experimentation HOPEFULLY without requiring any behavior that's outright detrimental, and while it's meant to take a while to progress through, you shouldn't have to go too far out of your way to do it, and you shouldn't have to grind. In other words, it should nudge you toward varied but not unnatural play. The system itself is not likely to change.

What I do want to hear about though are the points of frustration where a particular achievement is a roadblock to progress, or encourages unnatural or detrimental play. Sometimes this is due to a bug (ramming, anyone? Sorry...), sometimes it's due to balance changes and the evolution of meta, sometimes it's just down to a bad guess, and I've certainly made plenty of missteps before. I'm always collecting feedback and have made frequent adjustments to the achievement objectives, and I'm working on another pass right now in preparation for new levels. (Also sorry about the gunner extinguishing...again, down to a bad prediction about balance. I can't remember when I looked at that one, but if it's not removed already it'll be gone in the next update.)

So please, tell me about the achievements like that one that you feel are unfair or broken, and I'll take a look and do my best to address them.



You might want to check your future achievements, I think I remember Muse saying you can earn points towards future achievements before you get to that achievement.

Nope, this is incorrect. All of the progression achievements are gated and you can only progress on the currently unlocked one.

Some future non-progression achievement tracks will be un-gated, though, so you can complete them in any order. The only one that currently works like this is the Tutorial track.

In a perfect world ... you'd have achievements classified to each peice of equipment and each ship, each weapon and each role. You'd maintain the current "Role Rank overview" to give a curt "How good are you at the role you're planning to take on...", as well as having a percentage score that showed how adept you were using the current ship, with it's current weapon load out, with your current equipment load out, that showed what percentage of all the achievements related to these currently selected things you have achieved (you could even obfuscate this value to show a simple, Bronze, Silver, Gold or 5 Star rating).

You'd then gate every ship, weapon and peice of equipment achievement progression separately. Whilst gating a lot of the required ROLE achievements into the ship, weapon or equipment progression as achievements that are both classified as both Role AND Ship, Weapon or Equipment related.

And ontop of that you'd add in Medallions that would reward a seemingly eclectic mix of achievements from different progression paths ... for example, a person who had gained ALL the initial Weapon and Gunner and Engineer Equipment achievements might well receive the Bronze "Gungineer" Medallion. These medallions would help add larger collections of achievements which would further deepen the achievement meta and potentially encourage variety.

Why would you do all this? Because competitive game communities can thrive on statistics, they provide a sense of investment and visualisation of the learning curve you and others comparatively have progressed. They tell a very personal story.

On a similar note, some statistics after each match would go a long way towards reinforcing each match as a different experience, whilst giving you an opportunity to expose players to the some of the information that drives their progression, encouraging people to get involved with progressing, thereby encouraging people to continue playing and encouraging players to improve, thereby creating a more competitive community. Showing statistics of other players would further the competitive edge, again driving people to both play more and improve etc etc.

Community Events / Re: "The Cogs" Ruleset
« on: May 15, 2013, 12:10:08 pm »
This isn't an easy tactic, nor should it be jeered down. It's innovative, and that's exactly what we want to see from teams in The Cogs.

Lol. Sorry, I've never heard anyone call Suicide "innovative" with a serious face before. Continue.

Suiciding is something that goes beyond the intention of the game, to kill ships to score points and survive to not give them away. Deliberately not surviving because killing yourself doesn't count as a death (or counts as both a Kill and a Death eg. "Ship 1 killed Ship 1"), is obviously counter to the intentions of the gameplay mode ... this has been WIDELY known since the days of Doom and the rules for what constitutes a deathmatch were changed to reflect this, christ, it's even on wikipedia . It's something that shouldn't need to be fixed within the ruleset of "The Cog", it should be fixed within the ruleset of the game itself, we're in the days of suicide tracking to give kills to the factor that most contributed to a death, how is a literally 20 year old view of how legitmate "deathmatch" works in any way "innovative"?

Even when specifically confined to GoIO gameplay, lyravega nailed it.

This is completely against the idea of permanent hull. It's not a trick, it is an exploit. Something in the game is abused to bypass another part of the game; suicide to bypass hull damage.

Gameplay / Re: Achievement system flaw
« on: May 15, 2013, 11:48:24 am »
Please, I really want to hear from a dev on why they make people complete frustrating achievements to make progress in ranks. It is not fun to do and that completely defeats the point of playing a game.

(EDIT): I just wanted to also add that I feel sorry for the people who have to crew with me while I toil away at getting achievements. It can not be very fun for them either..but what choice do I have if I want progress?

Erm, you can't rank up, therefore there is no point to playing the game? Yet you really enjoy playing the Spire ... ... ... then play the Spire, as obviously winning is whats important to you, not learning how to win in the various ships that are available. If you cannot learn to use the weapons available and the different attributes on the Goldfish then why should your rank which measures your capabilities across ALL ships go up?

If anything you should be petitioning for ranks to be "ship specific", for those people who only want to use certain vessels. But then you'd simply hit the objection that the game isn't made for the minority of people who have ship preferences, it's made to be played with other people and Role Ranks serve as a way to judge capability across all ships ... no crew wants to find out their rank 10, can only pilot, gun or repair a limited number of ships.

When that arguement failed, you could then try arguing you cannot complete the Goldfish achievements because the ship is bad, or the achievements are too hard. But then you'd hit the objection that this could not be, because many other people have clearly managed it.

Instead you've gone with the argument that the Achievement system is flawed because it stopped someone who couldn't achieve from ranking up. Really...? Because to me that sounds like it's doing a stellar job of accurately maintaining a valid record of a Crewmens overall capability.

I can understand that it would be awesome to have a system that tracked Time spent, or Wins and incremented a statistic to reward people for their dedication or success. But you're trying to suggest that a system which tracks your capability as a Gunner, Pilot and Engineer should not be based on proving that you have certain capabilities to fufill those generic roles - totally defeating the point of role ranks, for the sole purpose of not frustrating you.

I'm sorry, but life is hard, and being good at things is difficult. Don't expect to be rewarded because you can't or don't want to do something.

How bout making a positive suggestion ... like a title system that rewards infamy? Or ship skins based on kills with a given vessel? Or simply describe how the "ROLE RANK" system can be improved without having to make it appease people who just arn't good enough in their roles without relying on a certain ship or a certain setup.

(EDIT:) If you'd had spent the time you had on this thread to instead ask for help and gather a capable crew who could've imparted their experience onto you, you'd probably already have the ranks you're grinding for. You ask what choice you have if you want to progress ... the blunt and simple answer is, "improve".

... how bout a nice simple button press to lock the wheel in place? Add in an animated lever on the wheel and a green locked wheel icon over the helm as per the damage indicators and no one would ever know it was an after thought.

Any small additions to expand the role gameplay and learning curve are probably going to be good imo and potentially increase longevity.

Gameplay / Re: Suicide - risk/reward option or cheap tactic?
« on: May 14, 2013, 11:54:32 am »
Perhaps someone has already mentioned this, and I've missed it whilst trying to take in all the post thus far...

But Deathmatch is a ruleset that's been around for a very long time and in all my experience Deathmatch has always meant.... Killing someone else gains you a point. Killing yourself loses you a point.

This would still allow for very small amounts of suicide meta, (you could force a 2v2 fight rather than being picked off one by one) but would actively punish Death and reward Kills, which is what Deathmatch is all about.

Right now killing yourself for a fresh respawn seems more of an "open" or "sandbox" match up.

Gameplay / Re: Achievement system flaw
« on: May 14, 2013, 08:09:49 am »
You say Potato ... I say Tomato.

You say Flaw ... I say Feature.  ;)

Pages: [1] 2