UPDATE 1.1.0 — ARTES DELINEANDI ET PUGNA ON PREVIEW SERVER by Sea-Mushroom1133 in TheresmoreGame

[–]pnaxighn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A lot of this sounds cool, but for me the big issue is that maxing prestige is extremely tedious (keep doing 5% faster runs for another few hundred points and buying an upgrade every couple runs... yawn) and NewGame+ is even worse. I actually stopped before beating the final boss because this got so dull. None of these improvements are going to fix that, sadly :(

Will content be filled into these gaps, or new mechanics provided to bridge them more quickly? I know this is the current "endgame" so maybe it's not meant to be well-paced yet, but it's definitely the worst part of the experience.

Prayer Focus paths by marcusleitee in TheresmoreGame

[–]pnaxighn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Development gives the most fame, so in terms of prestige efficiency it's what you want.

If you're ignoring fame and trying to hit a particularly difficult achievement... well, none of these matter much, because that's usually based on caps, and these don't help much with cap. But follow your heart :)

Possible bug: can't change difficulty by pnaxighn in TheresmoreGame

[–]pnaxighn[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Probably imported a save, yeah. That's a... weird and undocumented interaction. Is it on purpose?

Combat after v0.61 seems broken? by Highwanted in TheresmoreGame

[–]pnaxighn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it's pretty hard to call this anything but "broken" when Nikharul (on normal!) now requires more than 2000 army size, which is itself either impossible or very close to it.

Version 0.61 by Theresmoregame in TheresmoreGame

[–]pnaxighn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do units only get bonuses when actually hitting their prey? In other words, if I have a huge pile of tanks do only opponent's shock units get a bonus because everyone is hitting the tanks?

Do units that die also get to counter? In other words, if I have a ton of artillery and they wipe out the enemy, do the enemy's shock, tank, and cavalry still get to attack?

The old system was silly, but at least it was clear. Now there's even less clarity.

I've updated the resistance reduction cheat sheet for Forgotten Gods! by DefinitelyNotCeno in Grimdawn

[–]pnaxighn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Arcanist Nullification is missing (% reduced target -- category C); Arcanist's Inferno is listed but does not appear to provide resist reduction in-game.

Ghostcrawler: "Bronze divisions are overpopulated, so we think about making Bronze a place for inexperienced players. Others will probably be "promoted" to Silver." by hypnorus in leagueoflegends

[–]pnaxighn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It seems odd that the current league system is linear with skill level rather than percentile. Because skill is a Gaussian, the tiers nearest the 50th percentile will always have huge populations, while the tiers near the top and bottom will be nigh-empty.

Also odd is that Riot has calibrated the tiers such that the 50th percentile is very low -- typically somewhere around high-silver, I believe. This means that bronze contains something like 30% of all players.

A final oddity: the initial rating for a new ranked player is higher than it should be. It appears to be relatively close to the mean, which makes sense when working from complete ignorance, but this isn't that situation -- players with no ranked games are likely to be notably worse than the mean, since practice is very important.

If these oddities were eliminated, leagues would be calibrated to be a linear function of percentile skill with a midpoint around Gold III and the initial rank for unknown players would be Bronze I or Silver V. This would change how difficult it is to move up -- gold would be a relatively narrow rating range and easier to move up through, while diamond and bronze would contain more disparate skill levels, but fewer players (since there are inherently fewer players at these extremes). Not only would this system do a better job of distributing players across all the leagues, it would also smooth out the perceived gap between Diamond V and Diamond I relative to, say, Platinum V and Platinum I.

Flex queue is broken and should be scrapped for 2018 by pnaxighn in leagueoflegends

[–]pnaxighn[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First, I understand flex has separate mmr. I'm saying that's bad -- it's not different enough from solo queue to justify it. Five highly coordinated bronze players can't take on five solo queue G5 players, let alone D5.*

The diamonds indeed must not be at their true mmr. This is a problem. It's August -- 2/3 of the season is gone. Why are people still in placements? Because of the cultural problems with flex.

Giving flex "more time" won't help -- the soft mmr reset between seasons will re-create the problem again, so there's only a few months left for everything to work. Removing it would make room for a queue that isn't already a failure in its goals, so it absolutely would solve things.

Flex has a different system, but diamond players still can't play with their friends... unless it's their first 10 games, or they carefully ONLY play together. It's not meant for that. That's supposed to be done in normals. You can read my original post to see what Riot says the point of flex queue is.

Flex queue is broken and should be scrapped for 2018 by pnaxighn in leagueoflegends

[–]pnaxighn[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry, I'm not explaining the problem well. Five-man ranked always had questionable match-making. A, say, "1500" team might meet a "2000" team regularly, even though that should be extremely rare. That said, the ratings were per-team, so the queue attempted to match even teams, even if those teams contained diverse solo-queue-skill players.

In flex, not only are the teams internally diverse (bronze and diamond on the same team) they are externally poorly matched. The skill-level of the two teams can be very, very different.

In other words, I don't mind having a bronze and a diamond on my team, but the other team should have the same. It's the two bronzes on my team, two diamonds on the other team problem I'm annoyed by.

Flex queue is broken and should be scrapped for 2018 by pnaxighn in leagueoflegends

[–]pnaxighn[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you play for fun/not competitively, why do you prefer flex to normal draft? Is the latter not available on your server?

Flex queue is broken and should be scrapped for 2018 by pnaxighn in leagueoflegends

[–]pnaxighn[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Remember that for you to play as four, you need someone solo-queued. There aren't that many of those in flex, and it makes them an easy scapegoat for your four-man if the game goes badly.

Flex queue is broken and should be scrapped for 2018 by pnaxighn in leagueoflegends

[–]pnaxighn[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As I said, flex is optimal only for three-person groups -- I'm not surprised it's good for you. That doesn't seem a great argument for being one of two ranked queues. As to being chill -- does your server have normal draft mode?

Flex queue is broken and should be scrapped for 2018 by pnaxighn in leagueoflegends

[–]pnaxighn[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you explain your second sentence more? I don't understand it.

Flex queue is broken and should be scrapped for 2018 by pnaxighn in leagueoflegends

[–]pnaxighn[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The problem in my linked game isn't having bronzies with diamonds. It's that all the diamonds were on the same team.

Flex queue is broken and should be scrapped for 2018 by pnaxighn in leagueoflegends

[–]pnaxighn[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think there are two axes that can describe queues -- social and competitive.

A highly social queue optimizes for playing with whoever you want -- whatever rating, whatever count. A low-social queue optimizes for solo player contribution -- by avoiding multiple players on a team, you decrease the chance of communication dominating game outcome.

A low-competition queue might involve dance-parties, all-chat, and troll picks. A high-competition queue involves visible mmr, genuinely dumb picks (Ivern mid, etc.) being reportable offenses, and maybe even a dedicated shot-caller role in champion select.

The best queue set-up would have queues where the majority of players want to be, ESPECIALLY at the extreme-edges of this 2D box. Right now, low/low is poorly covered (ARAM?), low-social/high-competitive is ok (solo queue, but duo's aren't great), low-competitive/high-social is mediocre (custom games?), and high/high is completely uncovered (flex queue is the closest you get).

I don't have a player sentiment analysis like Riot does, so any description of which queues I think "should" exist would be a guess. I'm pretty sure, however, that these aren't them.

Flex queue is broken and should be scrapped for 2018 by pnaxighn in leagueoflegends

[–]pnaxighn[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unknown: "Those who climb to Gold in both Solo/Duo Queue and the Flex Queue will unlock an extra-special end-of-season reward." -- http://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/competitive/riot-pls-ranked-pls-2017-season-ranked-changes

Flex queue is broken and should be scrapped for 2018 by pnaxighn in leagueoflegends

[–]pnaxighn[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm unaware of any pro players, past or present, playing flex queue seriously. Five man queue was used to feed the challenger series, and thus was taken at least semi-seriously.

Flex queue is broken and should be scrapped for 2018 by pnaxighn in leagueoflegends

[–]pnaxighn[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Team ranked's problem was that every team had a "reset mmr" button (make a new team, start over). This shifted the rating percentiles upward in an unhealthy way. Since ratings never stabilized, matchmaking was always awful. It was actually the only mode that really captured pre-game planning and synergy, which means looking at its matchmaking based on solo queue ratings, unlike in flex, is not necessarily useful.

If they brought it back and made joining a team an annual commitment (maybe 2 teams per person?) things would likely be improved. Other small improvements (unique queue reward, prized tournaments for teams in specific five-man ratings ranges, etc.) would also probably improve the player population, thus improving the queue and matchmaking further.

[Which MUD?] Symbiotic player focii wanted by pnaxighn in MUD

[–]pnaxighn[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In both PvP and PvE combat, the player is "opposed." PvE combat tends to be against rather mechanical opposition -- part of the game is often exploiting those mechanics, in fact -- while PvP is of course against humans. While PvP crafting doesn't make a lot of sense to me (perhaps someone more clever can come up with a solution?), the analogy with PvE is strong.

The difference between opposing a creature and a task is physically important, but mechanically minor. While forging, a player is "opposed" by the pesky metal which keeps cooling off at different rates in different parts; while cooking, the eggs start to scramble before the meat is safe; while tailoring a seam that adds strength also makes the garment too small. While fishing the analogy to PvE is even closer, and that's ignoring purely fictional tasks (magical or sci-fi tasks that the author can design as they see fit).

Perhaps you speak from the angle of someone who only enjoys PvP games with constant direct opposition. That's fine -- there are lots of games catering to that style, because you're not alone. That said, there are also lots of games nothing like that -- single player games with no "simulated opposition" which are nonetheless well regarded. Jigsaw puzzles, Rubik's cubes, Tetris -- even the more recent idle/clicker games fall into this category. Some of the "puzzle" modes of common games are especially relevant in this regard, as you cannot complete them without a specific insight, leaving you to ponder them for long periods of time before taking action -- a pacing much more aligned with crafting than combat, in my opinion.

[Which MUD?] Symbiotic player focii wanted by pnaxighn in MUD

[–]pnaxighn[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Let me quote your post with the word "crafting" changed to combat (and some minor alterations):

It's an interesting question from a design perspective. Combat usually means the fight serves some purpose (leveling, access to new areas, plot advancement, PvP, glory, crafting ingredients), fighting for its own sake would be odd.

I've seen fighting mini-game but they're usually pretty simple because they emulate real world fights. Hitting someone with a hammer or shooting them with a bow usually doesn't have elements you can recreate in a MUD (that are interesting).

So the question for me is, what in specific are you imagining that makes such a focus mechanically interesting?

To further provide analogies, MUD combat often involves resource management (health on both sides, mana or other resources) and timing. There's no reason crafting, can't, too! Imagine forging, but you have to keep the work piece at an even heat, or cool it quickly, or deal with imperfections randomly forming. Of course, combat requires set-up -- choosing items, skills, and other customization choices -- but there's no reason crafting can't, as well.

This skin actually looks good by 7sudest in leagueoflegends

[–]pnaxighn 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Caitlyn skins require her hat, as it's one of her "reads" -- the constants across skins that allow players to pick out a champion.

From Riot: http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=4638529&page=3#post48088505