OK, I need to revise this.... I'm just gonna say I like things the way they are....
Thank you Ironclad... I absolutely love Rebellion!
Agreed
Again, Seleuceia demonstrates his ability to quote only what is convenient...
I never said SP and MP were inherently opposite. What the post as a whole was meant to point out, is that there is no reason the entire game should be changed just because the MP community is obsessed with grabbing hold of an aspect of the game and exploiting it to the point that they break it. Every single balance issue that comes up is not necessarily the fault of the game developer. This thread, and its predecessor, were posted to point that out. Just because there is something you CAN do that is all-powerful-game-ending, doesn't automatically make it OP if it's obvious the game was never MEANT to be played that way. At this point, it becomes the fault of the player, not the developer.
...It's becoming increasingly difficult not to start slinging insults at this particular topic, so I'm done here.
-Twi
Twilight_Storm - have you ever actually played on ICO with people before? Your comments show that you really have very little experience with RTS games and balance. By your logic, in chess, if I employ any advanced strategies, I am "breaking" the game. Who are you to tell me how the game is "meant" to be played? Games have a life of their own and people develop their own strategies. This does not mean people are "breaking" the game so please stop using that ridiculous description. And stop talking about whose "fault" things are. That has nothing to do with anything. Balancing a game has nothing to do with anyone's "fault" - it's just a discussion as a game evolves over its lifespan and develops it's own meta-game. The devs are perfectly free to disagree of course but that shouldn't stop people from trying to point out balance issues. With most games like this, there is a continual dialogue between players and the developers over the course of the game. Of course, it does drop off after a few years and there is a final balance patch at some point but people want to at least try to influence the game for the better up until that point.
somehow I knew I wasn't gonna be able to drop this...
1) I've stated multiple times all over these forums that I do not play MP. Exploitation of a game mechanic really gets to me, to the point where I refuse to play online. The way MP has become scripted reduces the game to simple "x beats y" and completely ruins the expierience for me.
2) Chess is the absolute worst analogy you could use here. I already stated earlier that exploits do not exist in a game where both sides are identical. Chess cannot be broken. Strategy and exploitation of a game mechanic that was meant to add flavor and diversity are not the same thing.
3) Fault is exactly what why this entire discussion exists. It's not being said, but the implication of there being game-breaking balance issues is assigning fault to the game developer, even if its intent is not malicious or trollish. It comes down to someone thinking the devs made a mistake, which is assigning fault. Again, it's not wrong to point out a legitimate balance issue. I'm just asking that people ask themselves whether it really is a balance issue, or childish exploitation mascaraded as strategy.
4) I am not saying real balance issues should not be pointed out, I'm saying people should think before they look at the game and say "oh look, I can do this, that means I should".
I'm trying REALLY hard to see this from the MP point of view, and I do get part of why you all believe some of these changes need to be made to the game, most of which revolves around the fact that every thread I see regarding MP leads me to believe that 80% of the entire online "strategy" revolves around who can execute the same tactic everyone else uses the fastest.
I really can't put this any simpler and stay nice about it.
And I'm getting tired of people picking through my posts and half-quoting what I'm saying to make their point sound better.(Mostly directed at Seleuceia) For example, I have yet to see anyone post anything meaningful about why exploitation is the same as game balance. OR try to prove me wrong that MP revolves around everyone doing the same thing and hoping they have it done first. Yes, there are people who come up with their own strategies, and sometimes they work, but when a "strategy" calls for spam of anything, all I hear is "exploit this unit". All I've seen is people saying the same "your opinion is ridiculous, if we all think it's OP it must be true" variants over and over. No counter-arguments, no attempt to prove your side is right. I've explained multiple times, and again here, why I don't agree with all of the balance issues...
How about this? What are the TOP complaints the MP community has. Jumping Orkies of course being near the top, if not number 1. Let's just put it all out on the table and try to go from there. Be specific, don't just say "Ragnarov and Eradica are the best Titans" or whatever, say what the issue is directly.
And, one more time, I have never stated that actual criticism is a bad thing. People seem to think I have, even though I've posted the opposite multiple times.
If, as you contend, the ability is only ridiculous when MP players "grab hold of it and exploit it", then that offers a very simple avenue of fixing it: identify what dedicated MP players are doing with it that others aren't and then change the ability to prevent or hinder those specific things. For instance, if MP players are bringing Orkulus Rex out too soon, you can drastically increase the research time, or if they're making dozens and sending them all over the map, make jumping require an upgrade that uses a capital ship slot, or otherwise restrict the amount of active, jumping starbases.
One thing I'd like to clear up - do you really think that balancing a game would require removing anything cool from it? Because really, all the MP community wants is a way to viably respond to the cool stuff - and if the responses are also cool, then that's awesome!
To be clear - we do NOT want this. The reason it gets brought up so much is that we want to see the game where the guy who goes for a diverse lategame fleet is favored against the guy who went for a high level titan and huge numbers of bombers, rather than almost guarenteed to lose. Indeed, after Orkulus Rex, I'd say the lack of many viable lategame MP fleets is the primary issue right now. We WANT to have ways to keep capitalships reasonable safe against massive bomber swarms, and WANT to have a way for non-carrier subcapitals to contribute, rather than just dying to Titan AoE.
You seem to think we want the game to be about rushing to finish a predetermined strategy first - far from it, we'd be really happy to go for diverse strategies - problem is, now that means losing to the guy who went for the boring high-level titan + carrier spam.
It's the nerf/buff mentality that I'm opposed to. If a counter is needed, it could easily be implemented in a new tech without resorting to altering current abilities. Sometimes nerfs and buffs are necessary in the early stages, and we're still technically in that stage with Rebellion, but this sort of thing has been going on from the start. (at least, since I joined.)
I do not think the game needs to lose all the cool techs to be balanced, I think it mostly is, with the exception of a few minor tweaks to Titans, and a fix for Jumping Orkies.
And thank you for explaining why you disagree.
@Twilight_Storm
1) MP is not scripted. The AI is scripted. This is why it is boring to play against. If you haven't played online, please don't try to describe it or dismiss it like you understand it.
2) Chess was not an analogy for balance issues, it was an analogy about people exploiting certain tactics somehow being "bad" or "breaking the game" or "not playing the game how it was intended" or various comments like that.If you were just referring to abusing broken things that need to be balanced, then I agree, chess doesn't apply. In this case though, it isn't players breaking the game, it's them discovering things that are grossly OP and alreadybroken. This has little to do with SP vs MP. Many SP players also feel/have felt there are OP aspects to the game. It's just more stark or immediately apparent in MP.
3) I suppose if you want to look at that way, it is the dev's "fault". Seeing as we have had many many patches since release, we could use your wording and say they have made many "mistakes" that needed fixing. My point was that it is assumed no game will be released as perfect and that for games like this it is assumed that balance needs refining over time once it has been released to the masses. No one expects a perfectly balanced game from the start.
4) I don't understand your "ok look, I can do this, that means I should". This implies that if something is broken or OP in the game, people should just not use it? Some people might agree and do this, but it still remains that it needs to be fixed/rebalanced.
As far as what the top balance issues are - they've all been covered multiple times in many other threads. There really aren't a ton of pressing ones but there are a few. Honestly though, I have little interest in discussing Sins Rebellion balance at this point unless the devs are interested. Most games like this involve a discussion between devs and players. Or the devs will explain their reasoning for balance decisions. Or leave their own comments/feedback in balance discussion threads. Or ask what the playerbase feels are the most pressing issues. If there is just silence, then thepoint of balance discussion threads starts to disappear after a while and people either make do or move on.
The Sherman Antitrust Act was designed to combat monopolies and cartels...it turned out though that the legislation also made labor unions illegal, an effect that many supporters did not intend...while the legislation was intended to dismantle monopolies and cartels (ie what the devs wanted), in practice it was used to break up unions (ie what goes down in MP games on ICO)...
If one were to take Twi logic and apply it to this parallel, they'd end up saying something like this:
"Just because you CAN break up unions with anti-trust laws doesn't automatically make the laws flawed if it's obvious the law was never meant to be used that way."
That is completely non-sensical and makes for an absurd argument...certainly you are entitled to your opinions, but it is quite clear you know virtually nothing about MP play...my issue is not that you don't play MP...my issue is that you don't play MP yet continue to critique it like you understand it....and then that's compounded with Twi logic that makes no sense...
The devs need to have these discussions to maintain the profitability of their forum community.
If we don't get effective intel direct from the source we are operating on smoke and mirrors and won't assist in providing effective feedback.
a little input would yield a vastly larger output.
I've stated where I got my knowledge of MP, and nobody has even remotely attempted to try to tell me that information is wrong.
And since at this point Tohron and sareth are the only ones here who aren't coming off as trolling, I'm not even going to bother responding to what you seem to think is a relevant analogy.
Why don't we just call this thread quits and start more productively? It's getting rather heated and the relevant points are being lost.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
