Enemy Cascade Limiting (6/12/18)

1235»

Comments

  • Brigby
    Brigby ADMINISTRATORS Posts: 7,757 Site Admin
    *Just as a friendly reminder, please keep all comments civil and constructive. Thank you!
  • purplemur
    purplemur Posts: 454 Mover and Shaker
    edited June 2018
    The OP and DemiWill have both explained the solid reasoning and motivations behind this change. To continue to claim this is pointless or deride new players experience is not helping. There is no conspiracy theory. Just because in general human perception is not based on facts; their experience still matters. It is not catering to a group without validity. This isn't isolated incidents; it is true across all their games, and all games in general I would wager. 
    Doing re-balances and these QoL changes are not mutually exclusive. They didn't update {insert-name) because of this update is false causality and leaping to conclusions. 

  • grenadier
    grenadier Posts: 137 Tile Toppler
    edited June 2018
    purplemur said:
    Just because in general human perception is not based on facts; their experience still matters. It is not catering to a group without validity. This isn't isolated incidents; it is true across all their games, and all games in general I would wager. 
    It literally is catering to a group without validity.  Their belief that the game is cheating is incorrect and therefore invalid.   What they're doing here is validating this invalid opinion, rather than reinforcing the facts.
    Doing re-balances and these QoL changes are not mutually exclusive. They didn't update {insert-name) because of this update is false causality and leaping to conclusions. 
    No one said that. What was said was that they spent time on this (they did) when they could have been working on something else. Unless they hired a developer in off the street specifically to make this change (unlikely), then someone on staff spent time on this that could have been spent elsewhere, on something, ANYTHING else.  This is not jumping to conclusions.  It's just basic logic.

    I feel like this somehow dumbed down the game.  The AI already feels a little stupid at times, when it refuses to make 5-matches that are not in a straight line, or tramples on its own special tiles.  Now, I do understand why that was done, and did read the article linked to earlier about what happened when they tried changing the behavior.  But just as making the AI too smart seems like bad and un-fun idea, so does making it too stupid.  Letting the game cheat on the player's behalf seems to fall into the same category.
  • Heartbreaksoup
    Heartbreaksoup Posts: 356 Mover and Shaker
    "Nothing is so good that somebody, somewhere will not hate it." - Frederick Pohl
  • AXP_isme
    AXP_isme Posts: 809 Critical Contributor
    edited June 2018
    Heartbreaksoup said:
    "Nothing is so good that somebody, somewhere will not hate it." - Frederick Pohl

    Fred’s quite cheeky, isn’t he.🤗

    //Removed Profanity -Brigby
  • broll
    broll Posts: 4,732 Chairperson of the Boards
    JHawkInc said:
    broll said:
    sirwookieechris said:
    crackninja said:
    So we are now catering to the tinfoil hats who feel like they have been wronged by a fair system, by implementing an unfair system.  At least it's not a conspiracy, it's totally out in the open...
    As noted, this inadvertantly acts as a subtle nerf to several characters, all for the benefit of what exactly?  There will still be mistrust, conspiracies, etc., and seeing code like this is part of the game honestly makes me less trusting of it overall.  Maybe there really is an "if im40 = true, set yellow_tile_nerf = true" statement in there somewhere.
    The one positive is that if new players were actually quitting because of this, then they may stay a little longer.. until they decide that it's unfair that they pulled 4 straight red 2* wolverine covers from heroic tokens, and of course that's the only color of any 2* character they couldn't use.
    So we shouldn’t cater to people who feel the game is unfair? And then you go on to mention that the game must be purposefully giving you useless covers?
    If their feelings aren't valid, no we shouldn't.  The point is that people have an unrealistic and non-factual perception, yet they are being catered too.  Where's the line there?  I feel the game should give me $20,000 for playing it, why isn't it catering to me?  
    The game isn't catering to you because you're rooting your argument in hyperbole. I mean, you're not even trying to have a rational discussion here.

    Nevermind that the root of this is that the game doesn't feel fun, which is wholly subjective and not something you can call not valid in the first place.
    I'm having an extremely rational discussion using methods of debate that have been around since Ancient Greece...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum
    In logic, reductio ad absurdum (Latin for "reduction to absurdity"; also argumentum ad absurdum, "argument to absurdity") is a form of argument which attempts either to disprove a statement by showing it inevitably leads to a ridiculous, absurd, or impractical conclusion, or to prove one by showing that if it were not true, the result would be absurd or impossible.
  • Brigby
    Brigby ADMINISTRATORS Posts: 7,757 Site Admin
    *Please keep all comments civil, constructive, and specifically on the topic of Enemy Cascade Limiting. Thank you!
  • Rockwell75
    Rockwell75 Posts: 268 Mover and Shaker
    Heartbreaksoup said:

    Showing my age here, there was a game for the Atari 2600 called Warlord, and the three computer players had a special move that the human player couldn't do.  It was throwing the ball *behind* them at their own castle and occasionally killing their own king.  That use to madden me - it was less fun when the computer players did something so stupid.

    I'm reminded of Warlord every time the AI matches its own special tile as soon as it places it.
    I used to have that game...you had to use the paddles for it.   One of my faves.
  • Rockwell75
    Rockwell75 Posts: 268 Mover and Shaker
    HoundofShadow said:
    Can we make the AI more intelligent?
    I like the idea of fighting a smarter opponent however the way this game is set up--  often having to grind 80+ matches daily-- doesn't lend itself to that.  Smarter opponents would mean longer matches and more losses and probably a lot of rage quitting.
  • Moon Roach
    Moon Roach Posts: 2,863 Chairperson of the Boards
    Rockwell75 said:
    HoundofShadow said:
    Can we make the AI more intelligent?
    I like the idea of fighting a smarter opponent however the way this game is set up--  often having to grind 80+ matches daily-- doesn't lend itself to that.  Smarter opponents would mean longer matches and more losses and probably a lot of rage quitting.
    Then make it optional, maybe with a range of AI stupidity, the less stupid the AI, the bigger the multiplier used against the base points for a win.
    It would be up to the player to make the risk/reward decision.
  • Pants1000
    Pants1000 Posts: 484 Mover and Shaker
    At first I thought this change was silly and unnecessary, but I appreciate the developers trying to counteract common CS complaints, whether they are valid or not.
  • bluewolf
    bluewolf Posts: 5,824 Chairperson of the Boards
    First, thanks for trying to make the game - I was going to say “appear to be more fair” but they have made the game more advantageous to the players. I’ll take it.

    IMO, it may not have been absolutely needed, but it’s been done.  I look forward to more changes now that help me as a player, such as rebalances or being able to favorite characters.  Or making a “replay” button for pve.  

    We all need new players for the game to continue, and this helps that issue. 

Categories