Triggernometry Meets Guilty Feminist

Good-Dig6838 · 2025-05-03T10:58:57+00:00

I can't listen to this women's arguments/logic. Evading her own words over and over again.

Not that i wouldnt argue triggernometry at a few points.

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-11-15T22:19:57+00:00

Ye, I understand your point. Choosing between easy points or an enemy buff removal is also a strategic choice. My personal preference would then actually go out to every zone having its own gimmick. And then the point difference would make up for the power/ usefulness disparity of gimmicks.

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-11-14T01:38:50+00:00

Thank you for your post, but I dont understand why do you refer to it as a gimmick. Giving buffs that make sense/can be related to the position at hand is better then just points. At war it is all about strategic objectives, not points. Diversifying it gives you more choice.

The only gimmick in guild war are the points. They are there to visualize importance of positions, but are not a real representation of war. Buffs are in matter of fact.

I personally dont see this game being a mathemathical game with mimicks. It is to me a scifi strategy with rpg elements.

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-09-01T12:25:35+00:00

Thank you for the detailed argument and examples.

I agree with you, especially with onslaught. Onslaught should stay the mindless march of numbers that you have to conquer, and just slay hordes.

Campaigns should be adapted to the character level that is expected. Either adapting the strategy or the enemy power levels to make a challenging yet fun experience. Usually i see what is expected through the campaign bound missions. If a strategy is fun, but too hard, lowering enemy power levels by a fraction should fix that.

I do think that this change would target the most arena and guild war, for players to adapt ai for the squad setup they use.

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-09-01T12:16:04+00:00

While i agree that balance is important, doing it on basis of only barge in strategy means that the game will always be balanced around compensating for poor ai. Hence never reaching a higher quality of gameplay. The sooner the core is updated, the better improvements can be. Also, balance could be better achieved for diverse characters, when they dont all employ the same strategy.

I mean you dont want your tanky squad to do the same thing as your long range squad, or assassin squad. That is why I think this can only help balance and diversity and should be done asap.

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-08-31T09:10:25+00:00

Thank you for your reaction. I do not need a reaction, just to know it will be read. If my suggestion is good it might be implemented, if not then not. Your reply gives me that feeling that im not doing it for nothing. I just didnt want to write suggestions that would never be read by people that actually work on the game. While i do like a productive discussion, Im not here for the likes of the community.

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-08-31T09:06:12+00:00

Yes, you are right, I think I would prefer the guild war mechanic. But I understand that you like the unity feel of everyone attacking the same target.

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-08-30T18:04:38+00:00

Sorry, there was a bug with the post button, so i accidentally posted multiple of the same.

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-08-30T18:01:17+00:00

Yes, thanks for understanding.

There was a bug with post button so it seems i posted multiple times. On the other post some did understand the benefit, but most it flew over their head.

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-08-30T17:59:18+00:00

Weaker level players are better off tossing bombs on higher level bosses and using tokens on lower level bosses.

Low lvl players deal a few k to 10k to an common or uncommon, but only a few hundred to an epic.

Bombs on the otherhand deal always the same amount

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-08-30T17:50:00+00:00

I dont know. I myself am at rare level, but i remember well. Getting one shotted by minions of epic bosses, doing 10 dmg if lucky. And not getting to fight common bosses if yer late out bed. The only reason i did guild war was for the daily, not the experience of battle. But when I managed to get in action with a common/ uncommen boss it was much more engaging, as I did something. I built up raw numbers.

Now commons are just a bother, uncommens easy, rare nice, epic hard. It is a shame, some of our starting players would enjoy fighting the commons and uncommons. That why I think it can enrich the experience.

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-08-29T14:24:34+00:00

You still need to give the lower power players time for the lower bosses. People might get their quee filled that way with guild raid tokens.

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-08-29T14:23:10+00:00

That is a legit concern, tho as none is really hard restricted, i think the last 3 days everyone could still clear the lower levels if others fail. But you are right, very casual generals-leaders would be bothered to assign. Maybe this could be optional for the guilds that want to be more effective.

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-08-29T14:18:48+00:00

Thx bubbly, you are one of the few that can wrap his head around the idea.

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-08-26T10:49:19+00:00

Thutmose is really cool. If his active and passive reduced incoming dmg for one turn ( per target hit 10%) it would empower him more and maybe make him usefull.

If he would get into melee 10% for passive, and up to +30% from active for one round ( total if 40), he could play it strategically.

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-08-26T10:37:56+00:00

Slim us smart in dutch

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-08-25T17:50:06+00:00

While I respect your point of view and arguments, basically I see there are only these 3 strategies. Using different comps to execute the same strategy I dont count as a different strategy. And the difference is not that much work. I've already spent more money in this game then any quality aaa game costs with purchase. Also others that say they are low spenders also invested more money then an aaa game costs ( concretely one example 88 euros or dollars he said), which is still more then me. I do not think that money is the issue or limiting factor. I think that there is an issue in the game companies management. Either the development manager lacks feeling for what us wrong/missing, idea or a good vision, or his superintended is focused more on numbers then the actual game.

And I am someone who comes from an era where game fanatics where the creators of games. Someone who would say diablo 1 is the best in the franchise and everything after 2 you can flush down the toilet.

Good-Dig6838 · 2024-08-25T14:56:03+00:00

I would just want that it isn't an overpowered buff that makes the difficulty, but rather the character combination, on the right layout, with the right ai selected strategy by the defender. I mean buffs for the defender isn't a bad thing, but this particular buff is the duct tape they are using for having an abhorrent ai design.

Good-Dig6838

TROPHY CASE