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 - Hoja Lateralus

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 69
61
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: How to Fix Skyball
« on: September 21, 2016, 07:48:25 pm »
At the end of the long matches people were mad, people quit, people said "fuck this game". The other matches were around the 15-30 minute mark and everyone had a lot of fun. I'm not sure if a timer is the way to go, or if implementing some other changes would make it shorter, but something does need to change so that people who love this game are not rage-quitting at the end of a Skyball match.
(..)
In most of my matches, from what I could see, its been basically a free for all- with everyone grabbing at the ball, noone working to escort ball carrier, not enough disable ships on the team, no blocking, strategizing etc. Each individual ship has a plan, but noone seems to be planning as a whole team. My shorter matches have been as a result of a well coordinated, highly communicative team. I feel this has a lot to do with the game mode being so new, but I fear that peoples reluctance to play any Skyball matches will only perpetuate this problem. Like Bob said- who in their right mind would vote Skyball, when half your matches are an hour long?

So it's similar to the case of the old Crazy King. We obviously see that players are set on matches taking 20-30 minutes in general - Muse should take a notice of this for the future.
And as Crazy King we have a potential problem of two very similarly skilled crews not progressing at all. You could change that through decreasing map size and capping time, so it's generally easier to get a goal (with rising the ending limit). If distance was less of an issue maybe we could see more slower ships in the mode.
This is a wicked problem though, because, as you said, the difficulty may come from lack of experience and lack of knowledge and coordination, then Muse can only shrug and say "Well, you suck at our game, what can we do". On the other hand this calls for long needed GAME MODES (mandatory?) TUTORIAL.

62
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Voice chat icons!!!!!
« on: September 21, 2016, 07:36:52 pm »
The letters are fine too, but figured that colours could be more visually appealing overall I guess?
As I said 'I' consider it as a bug (or a 'designing mistake'). I've e-mailed Muse right after starting the thread too.

63
Feedback and Suggestions / Voice chat icons!!!!!
« on: September 21, 2016, 07:25:41 pm »
This is riddiculous. Why we still can't see what voicechat are everyone using in lobby? Just make the mic icon be white for general chat, have team colour on team chat and be green for party.
I consider it a bug and it needs to be fixed ASAP.

64
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: How to Fix Skyball
« on: September 21, 2016, 10:49:17 am »

65
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: An Open Letter to the Devs
« on: September 19, 2016, 06:35:26 pm »
I would like to underline the fact that despite GOIO being on sale we don't have noticable influx of players. I have an impression that you think that sales can solve player retention problem (at least in the short run) but this is not really the case and since a while every new sale is less and less effective. Since July '15 the chart of player population is basically a flat line, slowly dropping down.

No Ayetach, re-sized deathmatch Refinery or maps with changed names for VIP are not really new maps. Since I've got here in summer '14 there was no new map added despite community pleading for it, even offering Muse money just so they do it. Claiming GOIO has new maps is being intellectually dishonest at best and I don't appretiate that. 

And you say new guns are adjusted, just as minotaur that nobody uses anymore? ;] (oh, also rip flamer, sniff)

I would like to reformulate the dlc argument: in multiplayer-based game (which GOIO obviously is) it is expected of the developer to support the game through (preferably) free updates or at least paid dlc. If the game is polished and has enough content, players can be fine with no support or paid dlc's option (i.e. Battlefield series). But GOIO, as we said before, is a game that horribly lacks content (why players think this way and what quality content it has today is a different discussion) so players obviously would like game to be supported, developed. Instead Muse decides that they are going to make a new game (because, let's face it, alliance has a PvE focus so it's very different) which old veterans may or may not like. Especially that given kickstarter and pre-orders Muse still requires more money to do it (they once claimed that in-game shop gains pay off the art team - which is currently working on Alliance). Muse is willing to patch Skirmish once in a while, but we all know they don't put the same resources and patches don't come out as often as they did earlier.
Also "oh, new maps? we can't, we're working on Allia- OH WAIT HERE'S A NEW GUN MATE HOPE YOU LIKE IT" ;] minotaur anyone?

66
Release Notes / Re: Version 1.4.8 Release Notes
« on: September 19, 2016, 11:24:29 am »
Do novices get experience/achievements for playing against AI?

And what about map choosing method? Three map choices having five game modes doesn't sound right.

HOLY SHIT A NEW 4v4 MAP. WHAT IS GOING ON!?

67
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Muse should prioritise what?
« on: September 12, 2016, 04:42:55 pm »
Quote
UI/lobby/custom options/optimisation
So much this. Ugh. I consider GOI the least optimized game I've ever played.

Do you want to know a dirty secret? Optimalisation always comes as a last part of developement cycle, when the game is finished.
And GOIO is never finished. It's like that one street that has always something happening on it, somebody is replacing the pavement, street gets narrowed down, then broaden up again, one lane is tore apart due to some leak of a gas pipe below and we're keep getting promised how awesome it will be when all the work is done. Well, it's never going to be done, and we're keep on driving on that one lane that is suprisingly untouched (yet) and cursing under our noses. But more people decide to avoid the street whatsoever, and they surely have reasons for it.

I'd say number one thing would be to drop Alliance developement (for now?) so they have any resources for Skirmish updates ;]
And before doing anything they should have a reaaaallly long THINK about what is not working in their game, why they keep on losing population, why practically everyone loses before hitting 500 matches rank and where to even start cleaning this mess. I think Muse is sometimes just wasteful, for instance think about how many times the interface have been changed and how people reacted. Remember when people rioted to fire the interface guy? And we know it's going to change again, because Alliance. At the same time, still no maps, which is like number one complaint I think.
Oh, and fix the Duuuuhhhhrrrns please.

68
Schwalbe solo-queued for our sins.

69
So far Devs have countless times stated that there will never be 8-man playable ship or any playable ship with different crew member count than 4, so the discussion will be rather barren.

Also, most importantly: why? Protip: " 'coz its keewl " is not a valid answer.

70
No.

71
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Guns of Icarus VR and Adventure Mode
« on: September 01, 2016, 06:10:18 am »
If walkable towns or shops are in the future
Hahahaha

Personally, I think the whole idea of Adventure Mode is long dead. Devs have run kickstarter with Adventure Mode goals and failed, and they refuse to make any other kickstarter since Alliance (formerly known as Co-Op) is not released yet, so they don't want to make another promises before fulfilling that one, even with some people's approval to do the kickstarter for so needed skirmish content. Not even mention the horrifying perspective of PS4 release (PS4 neo maybe?) which is at works since forever
Talking about VR support is just stupid at this moment.

72
General Discussion / Re: #BANSQUIDVIPS
« on: September 01, 2016, 06:05:11 am »
I think the best way is to NOT count a VIP kill that the other VIP has dealt no damage to. You want to chickensquid off in a corner? You get no points for your team.

But that still makes match long and annoying for the opponents. Also possibly game breaking.
Ban 2v2 vip. Just do it.

The possible solution is to add that 1 point per kill on escort ship.

Do it. 1 point for escort kills, 3 for VIP kills, 5 for VIP-on-VIP kills, winning threshold set to 15.

The idea is sound. I think the basic reluctance is due to the fact that it may be "too complicated" to grasp at first(vide: youtubers promoting the game). You can always minimize the damage of those matches through implementing a global match timer of 30 minutes.

73
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Ability to see the time
« on: August 21, 2016, 04:58:42 pm »
shift + tab?

74
When I think of it GOIO world always seemed like just steampunk air-pirates free-for-all, so it would be cool to actually have a zone which no faction controls, a kind of "What about this dark spot there? Never go there, Simba" place, an outer rim territory. It would be neat if some semi-random (low force) raid attacks could happen from that area, but that's probably not going to happen.

Well, newspapers is just an idea, it can be just explained as a kind of meeting with some of your faction higher-ups who makes a quick briefing (assuming: right before you move out to battle). It also gives opportunity for fluff exposition (hint hint, devs said that whatever happens in open beta is canon now). Anyway some kind of algorithm for creating short notes about the world, I think many forum witers can help with that.

About "marking" your ally being captain and knowing their hull - probably not going to happen, this is a design choice, such us unclear colours of sails/flags or whatever there is there.

Speaking of, the macthmaking..... ughhhhh....
I have no idea how queues are formed, but it's usually single ships, the extended search time probably overrides your preference of server (even when t plops you in solo with an empty lobby), it ususally not even against the faction you originally set out against (and sometimes not even WITH your faction), and they take up the majority of queues so making 2vE or higher more difficult. Though I believe you will still be gaining the war effort in your deployed area, it's confusing and makes forming crews with friends in enemy factions more difficult. Making Custom Games is really the only way to play with your faction and friends. Is it even necessary to show the fighting parties, or could we do away with it altogether so that the war effort you gain goes to your deployed territory regardless of "where" you fight with your (enemy faction) friends?

This is a huge problem for two reasons:
Firstly, we should assume that people would want to be loyal to their factions, because that's the point, to get more territories, to get faction rewards etc, so it creates a quick division. I am a Guild player - I want to play Guild matches only if possible. Then if situation is sticky I may consider being a mercenary. Match against my faction? Never. And at first, when hype was still there and population reached 700 it was fairly easy to find a good match, but when it dropped to 300ish (didn't play last 2 days, probably even lower now) it was really difficult and this is WITH most matches being one ship, which I think should be forbidden. At this point I am wondering if it wouldn't be smart to just scrap one faction entirely and leave it at 3.
Even bigger issue would be when people frustrated by not being able to find a match (and also by getting constantly whopped on the map) changed factions to the winning side. I'm willing to bet that this was at least partially the case in this 8-day alpha with Chaladon's domination (perhaps devs could check the 'active' members). I mean, we all want Alliance to succed, but what if? I think to avoid this devs would have to either:
a) implement a purge, map reset feature once in a while with borders going back to their default state (frequency up to debate)
b) implement a system of handicapping the factions that grow too strong (remember pirate raids?)
c) perhaps implement a system where territories further into core lands are harder to conquer (supply lines, more population solidarity and willingness to fight, etc) OR at least take longer to conquer. Or just every territory further has additional bonus-free fortifications?

Also, one thing that bothers me in world progress. The rewards sound like warfare is mostly through land (defense = palisades and stuff, and soldiers as attackers) which makes no sense to the lore. I thought that battles are mostly through ships, in the air and then whoever is left takes the city (people care about their lives so they don't revolt when literally at gunpoint). In game we see a lot of turrets, planes and ships OUTSIDE OF HIGHLY POPULATED AREAS. Land attack sounds like suicide. I think the defences (like palisades) should be replaced with turrets and offensives should be replaced with ships or sth like that.

And my pet peeve, while on assault it always frustrates me that every time there is something small blocking the view (and shots) in front of the generators (or whatever we are destroying on the towers). Like some small pipe, or rope or something. Not sure if it's on purpose or not.

75
World / Re: What faction will you fight for?
« on: August 08, 2016, 09:57:27 am »
Though I agree that forcing 2GB patch on everyone is kind of...not cool. Though I understand it's the simplest solution for devs.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 69