|
On March 13 2014 02:34 And G wrote:
I know that's what you think, but we don't need a poll to find out your opinion, do we?
Going by the poll, people currently seem to prefer spells designed for smartcasting (8 vs 6). But that's obviously not statistically significant.
Well i don't think the polls make much of a difference, but if you are happy we can use yours.
I just would like to see the overall opinions, but i guess there is no real place where more than 50 people would vote regardless..
http://strawpoll.me/1301301
|
Well the only thing this poll shows is that there isn't an overwhelming majority for either side. I don't think it really matters whether opinions are split 60:40 this or that way, because in the end:
- Kabel - Creator, main designer, developer, and ruthless dictator of Starbow.
|
The poll shows nothing right now, and personally i think more people will vote for your option regardless cause you have "kinda 2 for the same" with one extremely vague so in the end anyone can vote for the redesign^^
Well yeah i know that the developers do what they think is best in the end, but it can't be bad to see the opinion of the community.
|
I think the polls are bad because they don't have options that say: Some spells should have smartcast, others shouldn't. You can't just say smartcasting is good/bad. That's a dumb way to look at this. Each one should be designed to maximise fun and skill, whether that means smartcast or no.
|
On March 13 2014 16:22 Fishgle wrote:
I think the polls are bad because they don't have options that say: Some spells should have smartcast, others shouldn't. You can't just say smartcasting is good/bad. That's a dumb way to look at this. Each one should be designed to maximise fun and skill, whether that means smartcast or no.
I think this would actually be the worst idea of all of them. Sure it might be good for balance, but modifying the UI itself for different units is just about as unintuitive of a mechanic you can possibly put in a game.
|
On March 13 2014 16:34 -NegativeZero- wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 16:22 Fishgle wrote:
I think the polls are bad because they don't have options that say: Some spells should have smartcast, others shouldn't. You can't just say smartcasting is good/bad. That's a dumb way to look at this. Each one should be designed to maximise fun and skill, whether that means smartcast or no. I think this would actually be the worst idea of all of them. Sure it might be good for balance, but modifying the UI itself for different units is just about as unintuitive of a mechanic you can possibly put in a game.
Blink has no smartcast though, but I guess it's not really a spell.
|
On March 13 2014 16:34 -NegativeZero- wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 16:22 Fishgle wrote:
I think the polls are bad because they don't have options that say: Some spells should have smartcast, others shouldn't. You can't just say smartcasting is good/bad. That's a dumb way to look at this. Each one should be designed to maximise fun and skill, whether that means smartcast or no. I think this would actually be the worst idea of all of them. Sure it might be good for balance, but modifying the UI itself for different units is just about as unintuitive of a mechanic you can possibly put in a game.
The UI wouldn't be modified at all. In fact, the game is already like this. Some spells, like Spider Mines, Blink, or Stim, don't have smartcast. Others, like Scanner Sweep, Yamato, and Dark Swarm, do. Does it feel unintuitive to you?
|
On March 13 2014 17:41 Fishgle wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 16:34 -NegativeZero- wrote:On March 13 2014 16:22 Fishgle wrote:
I think the polls are bad because they don't have options that say: Some spells should have smartcast, others shouldn't. You can't just say smartcasting is good/bad. That's a dumb way to look at this. Each one should be designed to maximise fun and skill, whether that means smartcast or no. I think this would actually be the worst idea of all of them. Sure it might be good for balance, but modifying the UI itself for different units is just about as unintuitive of a mechanic you can possibly put in a game. The UI wouldn't be modified at all. In fact, the game is already like this. Some spells, like Spider Mines, Blink, or Stim, don't have smartcast. Others, like Scanner Sweep, Yamato, and Dark Swarm, do. Does it feel unintuitive to you?
In the old days those were referred to as techniques/abilities, and they were the ones that didn't require mana to expend. Never heard them referred to as spells.
|
I think just like there is this notion of designing the game around smartcast, you should similarly design a game around not having smartcast. This would also allow consistency, where you would not need to resort to enabling different casting methods for individual abilities.
One thing that has always been an issue with me with the BW casting model is that for some spells there really is no situation where you would even want to stack them on top of each other, so it feels very punishing. I think if the abilities were designed in such a way that there was some benefit to stacking them it would have been better, conceptually speaking. (if it's realistically feasible I don't know)
To use forcefield as an example: let's say you have the ability in a world without smartcasting, then it might feel really silly to cast 10 forcefield stacked on each other simply punishing you for inferior mechanics. However, if forcefields were instead neutral obstacles with hit points, the spell could be made in such a way that by casting five at the same time, they would have 5x the hp. It would still be better to spread them out, but you wouldn't feel like you were punished, it would feel like you had a choice.
|
Pfort lurker bug still hasn't been fixed  . Lurkers don't take dmg. Think I reported this back in December, hopefully in next release?? 
|
OK have had two people PM me asking what I meant by my last post - I thought it was fairly self explanatory, hehe.
Lurkers are immune to a planetary fortress firing upon them. You can activate the Planetary Fortress, scan the lurker (or have other detection), and the planetary will continuously fire not inflicting any damage on the lurker.
|
On March 25 2014 12:37 FabledIntegral wrote:
OK have had two people PM me asking what I meant by my last post - I thought it was fairly self explanatory, hehe.
Lurkers are immune to a planetary fortress firing upon them. You can activate the Planetary Fortress, scan the lurker (or have other detection), and the planetary will continuously fire not inflicting any damage on the lurker.
Burrowed Lurkers were given immunity to splash so you can hold chokes with a lurker under a dark swarm vs tanks.
Its easy to fix, we'll just need to give the PF a single target direct hit for the primary target plus its splash (the splash won't hit the primary target).
|
On March 25 2014 17:32 decemberscalm wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2014 12:37 FabledIntegral wrote:
OK have had two people PM me asking what I meant by my last post - I thought it was fairly self explanatory, hehe.
Lurkers are immune to a planetary fortress firing upon them. You can activate the Planetary Fortress, scan the lurker (or have other detection), and the planetary will continuously fire not inflicting any damage on the lurker. Burrowed Lurkers were given immunity to splash so you can hold chokes with a lurker under a dark swarm vs tanks. Its easy to fix, we'll just need to give the PF a single target direct hit for the primary target plus its splash (the splash won't hit the primary target).
How come lurkers are immune to splash under DS? :o. How about you just buff DS directly instead  . Increase cast range and size of cloud!! Feels a lot less awesome than the BW counterpart did.
|
|
|
Could you maybe set the default Search-width to high or maybe extend the search-width the longer you search for a game?
Kind of frustrating when you don't find a game for 10 minutes although there are 3 players searching.
|
On March 27 2014 02:26 Glewart wrote:
Could you maybe set the default Search-width to high or maybe extend the search-width the longer you search for a game?
Kind of frustrating when you don't find a game for 10 minutes although there are 3 players searching.
Let me explain how this works. Regardless of the search range it always start to search for opponents nearest your skill level. The search range will just tell the search engine to stop at some point. So if you want to find opponents your level first, but not stop expanding you choose "5 division". 5 divisions will never let you play vs too good if someone closer to your skill is available unless you have searched for a long time.
|
So SB is free to play now? Did you guys see a big increase in people?
|
On March 30 2014 08:16 DemigodcelpH wrote:
So SB is free to play now? Did you guys see a big increase in people?
Not a huge sudden burst but we see more and more people try it. I think very few still know that it is f2p and that there is a ladder up. Also, this game is very demanding and does not appeal to the casual player.
|
Would prolly help to grow the community if ppl are willing to practice with new players, and even give them a chance to learn some stuff before rolling over them. Don't bother making the point about how beating someone completely is the best way to help them learn. This is a brand new game and new players can't even learn the full tech tree if all you do is kill them in 2 minutes every match.
I heard something similar happened to JD? Someone told him it was BW, and nothing else, threw him in a showmatch, ofc he lost, and now he thinks game sucks? Yeah, the SB community can't make moves like that and expect to survive.
|
So how much dmg do stalkers deal? It says "8 damage" and "50% vs light" however they definitely aren't dealing those amounts. It deals 12 dmg to drones, I'm guessing 8 dmg to lings?
Just struggling heavily with blink stalker expand openings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
