|
|
On August 27 2016 06:07 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +I think all 3 of these games handle PVE in a PVP game very well. PVE in a PVP game is fine when you're contesting for a certain resource, or if it spreads you out, makes you vulnerable and plays with opportunity cost. This guy is getting a jungle camp hoping to accomplish something, leaving this tower or whatever behind, so im gonna pressure it, etc. The PvE elements in those games definitely have a purpose. But personally I still believe that if you could add the same type of confrontations with the opponent without adding PvE elements in the first place, that you would create a more enjoyable player experience for most people. For that reason I see the MOBA-solution as an old solution that could and should be improved upon from future game developers. Increase the amount of direct interactions on a per-minute basis while using the "gained time" for no time spent killing monsters to reduce game-lenght. .
While creeps served as a way to get players out on the map and to give them something to do, they had a lot of negative side effects. There were so many ways to exploit the AI so that Blizz had to constantly fix the AI and redesign the creep camps, and even now there are so many tricks for small armies to kill powerful camps. And you see those in every game and they are a huge part of the strategy, and while as an accomplishment of refinement of strategy it is kinda funny, it becomes silly also that you see the same tricks working every single time on the same creep camps and they never learn.
What Blizzard ended up doing at some point was to cap XP gain from creeps to level 5 so you wouldn't be able to creep to get an ultimate, since then you could get a game winning advabtage just by creeping. And they also made it so that units could creep while the hero was away, but that you would still get xp, promoting multitasking, even if that mainly works for strong players. Really, at a low level most games are just about creeping since it is the most reliable thing you can do.
|
The key is to let the AI be exploited and the players will figure it out. Just like Dota 2.
|
On August 27 2016 06:31 mammuluk wrote:
- The production sounds kind of automathic
You can disable automated production. In fact you should because there is no guarantee that it produces units you want or need. Just select the production building and press T at the start of the game. It is a feature for players who hadn't played RTS games before I suppose.
|
4 hours per day of live matchmaking from Monday to Thursday. That's an innovative way to keep the population as high as possible when not many are playing the game.
On August 27 2016 05:47 Hider wrote:
And they had years to develop them, but apparently they think the current type of "micro" is satisfactory. Otherwise they would have prioritized it higher.
its was dumb for Artillery to yap away with big public pronouncements while the product is in its embryonic stages.
lots of apologists here though 
|
Yes, 4 hours is a tiny range (it's two 2-hours gaps indeed, not so handy)
|
ya but for the matchmaker to set you up with a proper team and proper opponent you need a pretty high population. i think its an innovative compromise. these guys can't snap their fingers and make 100,000 start playing their game.
if its a big bother... just wait until the player population increases and they lift the 4 hour per day restriction for Monday-Thursday.
|
I just cannot get behind the whole 3v3 laning concept. It feels like every other Moba to me and ganking and farming makes by for far most of the gameplay.
|
I think the concept isn't that bad, the unit interactions don't seem super fun to me atm though. Not sure about it yet.
|
Out of curiosity. Has anyone who has tried the game found the unit interactions/micro to be fun?
|
I've played in the closed alpha and I really love the game. Wrote this post on the forums after a few weeks of playing if you don't mind the wall of text:
https://forums.artillery.com/discussion/748/tokowas-initial-impression-of-the-game#latest
It does take a bit to get used to the game, and if you go into it with interest and curiosity for figuring out the game, it will be a much better experience. Being excited for how the team aspect can play into different strategies and compositions is also really fun.
If you go in and have your expectations of a BW 2.0 esque thing dictate how you feel about the game, you're probably going to have a bad time. I was also disappointed with the game as first, but it just got fun to play and win against people. One of the good things is that you're able to progress towards higher levels if you attain the knowledge and strategic understanding. You're not really limited in any way by having to be able to probe and pylon or lasthit perfectly. That's really why I like it, I don't feel limited mechanically, I can spend most of the game working on actually interacting with my opponents and figuring out the strategic elements of the game.
There is of course quite elementary micro, but knowledge and getting used to things makes those micro stuff less of a bother as you play more.
|
I am not saying that i don't find it any fun btw, but some unit interaction i have seen so far seem to be kinda bland.
If i think about it more, pretty much all the highly massable units so far seem boring to me.
Only played like 5-6 games so far though, so there is that.
|
1v1 gaming is dead for the most part. Unless its Hearthstone, no one wants to learns the basics of some fighting game, or how to duel FPS, or manage an economy and learn build orders and matchups.
So going with 3v3 pseudolane mode makes sense.
I only got to play in one weekend, the other open weekends I was busy and couldn't play.
The instant gratification monkey is all up in this thread.
|
the game looks fun to say the least.
the hero and their spells could use better clarity visually.
the units movement looks weird, like they are floating.
I also don't really like the UI so much.
A little more polish and I think this could be a great game
|
Played the tutorial.
I can see the potential of this game as well as how it can be good. Not quite my cup of tea but if I keep hearing good things about it, then I'll bite more and more, I guess.
I don't know what to micro.
|
i played a couple more matches and i can say i really like the unit spawning system. very sc2 protoss like, but much more streamlined, and without the annoying proxy pylon shenanigans.
just wish there was more of a real economic system behind it. i don't mind a lot of the automated stuff, but i dislike how there's no real economic harassment opportunity besides just straight up fighting your opponent's army when they're trying to kill creeps, and no real economic incentive for permanent map control like taking expansions in starcraft.
also i don't like the map's color scheme, something about that muted green and brown is kind of off-putting. although the metallic/artificial parts look good.
|
What do you mean by automated stuff? If it is automated production, you can close it in game or from the options menu.
|
On August 27 2016 09:08 Hider wrote:
Out of curiosity. Has anyone who has tried the game found the unit interactions/micro to be fun?
Not yet... quite boring so far. I love the art style of the game though. I will continue playing the game but i doubt i will have fun in the long run.
I would love to see resource structures that can be captured. Maybe even with workers that can be harrassed. Right now its just "warp in" your army (i dislike this mechanic too) and ball your army and attack. Sometimes creep jack and sometimes kill the big monster in the middle...
|
Explore the mercenaries, there is a drop ship and a forward warp unit, also a long range siege unit.
|
Using the Reaver is pretty fun.
|
Magnus is somewhat fun in this. Jockeying them to skewer units into your army is pretty satisfying. I think the unit design is better than the initial impression gives, but not as good as it should be. The vast majority of abilities are either a slow, a damage mitigator, or a nuke. They could really use more abilities that mess with positioning or terrain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
