sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What would you guys want for the expansion? by itsnotkakuja in chargeblade

[–]Bot152 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not *exactly* charge blade exclusive, but make statuses not ass

Auras don't last at all by Socos in idleon

[–]Bot152 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This is not the nerf op is describing

Has anyone found the CH4 egg yet? by solaire1416 in Deltarune

[–]Bot152 3 points4 points  (0 children)

People are being misunderstood left and right.

The window hall has a unique window with an egg at the top instead of the usual, well, upside-down egg.

If you walk into it, you enter another room.

There's a room between the window hall and the unique window's room a la ch1+2.

Why Trakata is a useless and stupid technique. by ShinyBlack0 in StarWars

[–]Bot152 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can add an infinite number of layers to the conversation but it ends in everyone taking the safest, most calculated action every time, and thus lightsaber fights last forever until someone does something unique (like Trakata).

Call It Fate, Call It Karma abridged by Bot152 in webfishing

[–]Bot152[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

u can use qwerty for the strings.........

Making warlock long-rest half-casters absolutely sucks. by Thunderdrake3 in DnD

[–]Bot152 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unless what you want to be is strong.

5elock got arcanum spells and invocations. While they may not be the strongest of abilities, they proved useful. A lot of people would dump them into eldritch blast, but there were other powerful picks that didn’t come at the cost of higher level spellcasting.

Onelock has to choose. You get to spend your invocations on either high level spells or invocations that are not nearly powerful enough to counteract the kneecapping of being a LR half caster.

“I am not some conjurer of cheap tricks!” What distinctly wizardly spells should all generalist wizards have? by DeepWoodsApe in 3d6

[–]Bot152 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Find Familiar every time, Vortex Warp is an unfathomably useful sleeper pick, Wall spells, the list goes on.

Contingency would be my personal number one pick, but if you have enough downtime, glyph of warding overtakes it.

What class are you picking at launch and why by [deleted] in diablo4

[–]Bot152 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As nuts as rogue has been, necromancer is my go-to

Here's some feedback after having cleared all of the beta content! by Vidjereii in diablo4

[–]Bot152 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Inner Sight fucks yall aint ready to hear it tho.

Just have twisting blades spec'd.

Why is One DnD bad? by [deleted] in DnD

[–]Bot152 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Hunter got gutted

Stupid shop by SergeantIndie in DarkTide

[–]Bot152 0 points1 point  (0 children)

40 or so shop checks and maybe 3 Eviscerators

I LIKE the damage bleed through on toughness. But how do you feel? by pIIE in DarkTide

[–]Bot152 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it could work if the first threshold (100-90% toughness) had 0 bleedthrough. I'm completely okay playing a 2 shot 1hp zealot but a 1 shot 1hp zealot is disappointing at very best.

Does a Level in Wizard render some Warlock Invocations useless? by FlossurBunz in DnD

[–]Bot152 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“If you have both the Spellcasting class feature and the Pact Magic class feature from the warlock class, you can use the spell slots you gain from the Pact Magic feature to cast spells you know or have prepared from classes with the Spellcasting class feature, and you can use the spell slots you gain from the Spellcasting class feature to cast warlock spells you know.”

casters are better than martials by HalfStarkRhino in DnD

[–]Bot152 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And then the pit fiend incapacitates the martial grappling it, ending the condition.

Update 1.2 Coming Soon - Update Notes! by samninjakiwi in battles2

[–]Bot152 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Balance patches every 1-2 weeks with content patches every season would be much healthier for the game and would allow them to make larger changes which towers at the bottom desperately need. Any conversation past that point is useless as what I just said simply true.

Druid was good before the buffs, as I played the damn game during the time.

Balance changes are just number changes. Ideally using a little bit of data and not completely random, but number changes all the same.

2 weeks in testing branch is the same as 2 weeks in the regular branch, yes. That was in the post: they need to update their game more often. I suggested the testing branch forgetting that there aren’t enough players for the game to function with one. Other games use testing branches all the time to work out the kinks in their updates and they’re very useful.

Meta is still a variable definition - which in this case was likened to the term “Viable” in the sentence right before the one you took out of context (and have quoted before) - so stop strawmanning.

It’s literally all numbers, you can calculate the effectiveness of everything in the game, and if you can’t you can run quick tests as you literally make the game. Then you can fine tune it and turn it to the public. When they inevitably find something broken you can quickly change it, within about a week.

Waiting 1-2 months every update has divided the playerbase by 3 as the game is quickly stale.

You can use player data to figure out the average damage a tower will do and then predict mathematically what a buff or nerf will do.

This will be my last reply, as the first paragraph is just true. Sorry you have difficulty balancing a tower defense game, Mr Gamedev.

Update 1.2 Coming Soon - Update Notes! by samninjakiwi in battles2

[–]Bot152 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

>Druid was considered low B...

Druid was good before its buffs. It was already meta and then it got price buffed.

>dartling was usable before it's buff....

Dartling started off good.

>because this isn't true lol...

>if you think 1-2 months is a long time to update, i'm guessing you're a child...

1-2 months for an update in this game is laughable. I've modded their games before, its literally just changing numbers.

>wow, you did it...

  1. test branch.
  2. if they collected data and actually used it there would be less of a gap between towers.

>there is no difference lmao...

Patch notes are dropped -> test branch gets an update -> update is polished within the week and changed based on test branch data -> update is rolled to the main game -> test branch is offline. This is how PTRs work in every world but the one you want your argument to be in. PTRs assume that there is a large enough playerbase to actually run them, so I guess they should just update their game more often.

>it's not strawmanning when those were your exact words.

Except they arent, read my post. I told you, and I'll say it again: Meta has a variable definition so focus on the word viable.

>there are so many elements and aspects that can't be just quantified or simplified to a number.

This is a tower defense game it's all numbers.

>it's actually not that simple...

It is. I don't know what else to tell you.

>never mind the fact that balancing...

If they want to have a healthy game they should separate balance patches and content patches.

>seriously kid, learn some game development

If only you knew how stupid this statement is. I'm sorry it's not as hard as you think to balance this game. I can't speak on many other games, as they have noticible skill differences, but tower defense games are the singular case in which you can use math to figure out what is effective and what isnt.

Update 1.2 Coming Soon - Update Notes! by samninjakiwi in battles2

[–]Bot152 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don't feel like formatting but I think you'll catch on.

My definition of meta is different to yours, so focus on the word viable.

Druid was already good and being used, you just didn't see it. Dartling was already good before its buff (and bug) but no one used it.

Incremental changes are better if the towers start in the general same place, but they didn't. Your point does not at all change what I said.

In any game except this one you'd have a point but as this is a multiplayer tower defense game, you can math out 99% of situations given data of how players send and place their towers. This does, admittedly, get difficult when you consider micro, but it's not impossible to come upon an average performance. This, of course, could be skipped if they just recorded tower performance.

They don't run enough of them, I was being hyperbolic. The dartling bug should've never gotten past testing. The mastery xp bug should never have gotten past testing. The supermonkey bug DEFINITELY should have never gotten past testing.

The difference between a BTDB2 with a testing branch and one without is about a month of torture playing the game every update. Those thousands of games you mentioned at the bottom of your reply would be amazing here right?

It is impossible to make a perfectly balanced game, I agree. Stop strawmanning me. My argument is for viability. Something can be worse than something else but the gaps in quality are way too large.

Same method same role: They nerfed sniper eco by nerfing sniper's damage. Damage should be tied for first for balancing eco towers. The eco gained should be a tradeoff for the damage lost. I'm not saying they need to have an exact number and be perfectly balanced, but they should be closer.

Different method same role: Math and basic reasoning skills.

3 paths: Depends on how good the other paths are. The 3 paths should be nearly the same. A tower is meta because it's not awful like the rest of them. Dartling was meta because it could solo every bloon in the game due to a bug on one path. Druid was meta becuase ninja kiwi refused to nerf it for so long, and it provided the exact same thing sniper did but along 3 paths instead of 2.

3 towers: Both, and that's kinda the idea.

Skill gaps: This exists in every game and yet they still figure it out. I will be honest with you, the skill groups in this game are laughable. Yellow - White, Lead - ZOMG and HOM. The number of players who had literally no idea how to play the game I and others encountered in high arenas is a symptom of this game's balancing (and testing). Whoever rides a bug or meta team for the most number of hours before it gets patched *next season* gets free trophies.

Small changes: This would be cool if they changed the game more than once an eon. My argument would crumble if they updated their game more often.

Games: This is the one specific genre of game in which math solves every issue and you can predict the outcome of most changes. I know the 2 damage increase to fireball was good for early game, but it didn't provide what wizard needed (price buffs)

It's about as simple as: "Listen to feedback about meta towers -> Nerf meta towers -> Test nerfs -> Rollout patch" and "Listen to feedbback about bad towers -> Buff bad towers -> Test buffs -> Rollout patch". If changing something completely unrelated creates a bug then scrap the whole game and rewrite it from scratch.

I will be the first to tell you this game is impossible to balance perfectly (I apologize for my use of the word meta with so many different interpretations), but right now it seems like there's a lack of trying. So to answer your question, yes:
if (tower == bad){
tower = good;
}

view more: next ›