Punkuser - another idea

Myrk · Post by **Myrk** » 26 Feb 2013, 23:22

NewMutator wrote: If puss did not dud, I don't know how a pussless trade could be made viable other than through significant alterations to the unit trading system.

Pusless trades aren't viable period. Even if they dudded 20% of the time. Pusless games would be boring back-and-forth artillery fights which noone wants anyway.

Zak · Post by **Zak** » 26 Feb 2013, 23:27

With this tagset, wights are 5 points, are 20% faster, and take 2 more hits to kill. This means that people will probably get less wights, and that sinking wights is more of an option,

punkUser · Post by **punkUser** » 27 Feb 2013, 00:26

GiantKillerGen wrote: You realize that morts only dud, and have no bounces? And dorf heroes have no bounces or duds? Has either of those affected the popularity of those units or positive gameplay of maps with those units?

I'd argue that it has made certain combinations less interesting. For instance, the float variant with tons of duff heroes is only interesting at all because of all the water... if you did that on a regular map it would be stupid.

GiantKillerGen wrote: What is the reasoning to have 1 dorf type that has bounces? and 1 that doesn't have duds?

Simple: variation! If all duffs were the same, why even bother making a "hero" unit? I honestly don't think the hero units are as interesting to the game overall and this is reflected by them being used in comparatively few maps, but they add a little spice now and again as long as there aren't too many of them.

GiantKillerGen wrote: Why shouldn't there be consistency? Lock fireballs don't bounce or dud either.

Why should there be? Like I said, why would we want to normalize all units and make them the same? If for some reason we had to decide and make it all consistent one way or another, I'd say get rid of the hero units vs. the regular ones, but there's absolutely no reason why we have to do this that I can think of.

Anyways, like I said I'll concede that pus duds might be a bit too crippling, but I absolutely don't think the logic should be applied liberally to all sources of randomness.

SamTheButcher · Post by **SamTheButcher** » 27 Feb 2013, 01:34

I am of the belief of making the game as true to life as possible. Even in a fantasy world like Myth. There are certain things that just make sense and things that dont to be true to that world. If we were to look at Myth as a real world these changes would need to be made to make it consistent. All of these changes put more weight on Player skill and reduce the handicap given to less skilled Players. They are just more realistic. I think duds were added for like GKG said, mostly for the solo levels and I also think to give less skilled Players more of a chance vs better Players because they can get lucky. Why wouldnt we want to put a higher value on Player skill and less on luck? Or why wouldnt we want things to more realistic? I think somewhat there is a fear of change. Why would someone be afraid of changes to the game that put more value on skill?

Here are some things that make the game more true to the Myth World or any World that could be in the known Universe. The would also put more value on skill. What do you think about these?

1) Leaving in the random chance for bottles to bounce but reducing the dud chance to very rare almost never: Duffs have been making bottles for 100's of years and they cant get better consistency than they do now?

2) Duffs stabbing-But low damage maybe lower than Bowmen stab: He carries a knife his life is in danger he's not going to fight back?

3) Duffs throwing duds purposefully: A Duff couldnt just throw an unlit bottle? Why wouldnt he?

4) Bowmen able to multi-target: All the Bowmen just telepathically know which unit they will all target? Or they never thought "Hey maybe we should each choose a target"? It doesnt even make sense for them not to.

5) Reduce puss duds to very rare almost never: Cant really say it is more realistic but it does but more emphasis on skill and less on luck.

To make those changes would be to remove handicaps and give more realism to the game. I really cant understand why anyone would not want to reduce the number of handicaps in the game and make skill more important and add realism.

As far as people saying randomness is part of all games. Thats not even true. There is no randomness in Chess (what Myth is most compared to). Also except for like board games and games of chance most games and sports they try to remove as much chance from the game as possible to put greater emphasis on skill. Fields are meticulously cared for to make them a consistent as possible. They dont leave random holes in a Football Field for the chance someone may trip and fall with the ball. Basket Ball hoops dont randomly move, they are all set to an exact height and size. In pretty much all competitive games and sports great care is made to make sure everything is as consistent as possible and as much as is possible chance is removed. Why wouldnt we want Myth the same way?

What about altering the damaged received values for some units like Trow. To help balance it out. If an arrow or a sword swing does 1.5x - 2x more damage and explosives also do more damage that may give more value to other units over Trow. Leave damage from other Trow and Myrks the same.

GKG or anyone wanting to see how the random bouncing but dudless bottles and puss works you can try it on this map. http://static.livingcosmos.org/domains/ ... or-hg/gru/ "Blue Moon" I am all for this change. I would like to see a lot of support for it.

c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊ · 27 Feb 2013, 01:55

WTF no duds? Go play warcraft you fucks.

c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊ · 27 Feb 2013, 01:58

This is seriously the most retarded, megalomaniacal, half ass plug ever made.

Zak · Post by **Zak** » 27 Feb 2013, 02:09

Milk Man wrote:This is seriously the most retarded, megalomaniacal, half ass plug ever made.

Care to explain? the no duds thing was just an idea, and hasn't been implemented. The only changes to the game have been unit point costs in unit trading, wights being improved, and myrms/brigs having health reduced.

Zak · Post by **Zak** » 27 Feb 2013, 02:45

Would people be more likely to sink wights than get pus if wights cost 3 but only had 1 pus packet, or if they cost 5, had 2 packets, but also were faster and took 2 more hits to kill?

adrenaline · Post by **adrenaline** » 27 Feb 2013, 03:08

GiantKillerGen wrote: fetch increased from 8 to 10
wights increased from 4 to 5. Wights also slightly increased movement speed and health (for sinking)

I definitely support the idea of increased trade values for power units... but I think 5 is too much for wights. Wights are *usually* used on light maps... I think an increase to 4 makes more sense, when you consider trade alternatives... i.e.:

3 wights vs 4 bows - 12 points
2 wights vs 4 warrs - 8 points
etc.

Having wights set at 5 would leave many trades with that 1 pesky leftover point, I'd think.... which will prolong many games, as people are usually inclined to leaving that lone thrall behind.

Fetch set at 10 is a solid idea, same with the increase for dorf hero, trow, fg, etc.... could definitely lead to some interesting games... something sorely lacking as of late.

Giant Killer General · Post by **Giant Killer General** » 27 Feb 2013, 03:45

hey milkman how about stay the fuck out of the thread then. Everyone else is contributing to this conversation except you. Myths is 15 years old and its beautiful that we still get to have these conversations as a community. If you don't like it then get the fuck out.

Giant Killer General · Post by **Giant Killer General** » 27 Feb 2013, 03:51

punkUser wrote: Simple: variation! If all duffs were the same, why even bother making a "hero" unit? I honestly don't think the hero units are as interesting to the game overall and this is reflected by them being used in comparatively few maps, but they add a little spice now and again as long as there aren't too many of them.

Ah, but they are very different. They have different ranges, splashes, attack speeds, etc. That is what makes them different. Why should they be different with bounces and duds? You didn't answer my question though, you said that you think dorf heroes are less interesting, so are you suggesting that dorf heroes should have bounces and duds just like normal dorfs?

Giant Killer General · Post by **Giant Killer General** » 27 Feb 2013, 04:00

NewMutator wrote:Also, I stand by what I said earlier, which is, go ahead and build the plugins for testing, and see how you like it. I'm not a priori against reduced randomness, but neither do I think it represents a clear improvement because, as PunkUser already alluded, duds factor into the risk/reward of trading for puss. If a player duds and it loses his team the game, that is a function of the risk associated with trading for a strategy that relies on puss for its rewards. That's just how I'm inclined to see it right now. If puss did not dud, I don't know how a pussless trade could be made viable other than through significant alterations to the unit trading system.

Wrong wrong wrong. As the captain of both of the championship mwc teams of the last 2 years, I can tell you that in the hours of time I spent formulating team trades and strategies for finals matches, not one second of thought was spent contemplating pus duds as a risk factor into my trade for pus on any game. This is a huge steaming pile of bullcrap. I don't even know if this was really what punkuser was saying, but if it was, it was dead wrong. You can't predict this sort of thing, so its a waste of time to even try.

Pus not dudding only gives a minor buff to pus, which has already been debuffed significantly by increasing the wight costs to 5.

NewMutator · Post by **NewMutator** » 27 Feb 2013, 04:06

That's interesting. I didn't know one could be "wrong" for seeing the game differently than you.

punkUser · Post by **punkUser** » 27 Feb 2013, 04:08

GiantKillerGen wrote: Why should they be different with bounces and duds?

Why should they be the same? Just because they both have "dwarf" in the title?

I see the variation on duds, etc. as similar to the variation on ranges, splash or any other parameter.

GiantKillerGen wrote: You didn't answer my question though, you said that you think dorf heroes are less interesting, so are you suggesting that dorf heroes should have bounces and duds just like normal dorfs?

No, I don't mind the variation in the odd case, that's what makes them a separate unit. I like the way they are... a mapmaker can choose one or the other depending on play style that they are looking for. And yeah, I would be opposed to most maps having the hero units, but I don't mind them on a few.

Anyways, I'm not discouraging you from testing any changes you like - that's what's awesome about Myth

I'll even participate. I just want you to realize that it's crossing a line to start changing stuff beyond UT values... it's not a holy line or anything, but you'll get more disagreement the further across you go.

Giant Killer General · Post by **Giant Killer General** » 27 Feb 2013, 04:26

LN - you can see the game differently just like any newbie can. It doesn't make them "right". Under that argument, the next time I want to tell my boss how to do his job, I'll just conveniently ignore all his qualifications that I lack and tell him "well I just see it differently than you".

punkuser - im not changing anything, I want to hear arguments for both sides. just a conversation. everyone is freaking out over me asking questions when I haven't even changed anything yet. and I want to try it, which is the one thing no one here has done yet. All this talk but some people are refusing to keep an open mind and just TRY it before they even decide, which is what I am doing.

As far as you not wanting to change dorf heroes either, that just leads me to believe that you don't really have any real logical sense to why you want to keep it the same. It is just a matter of sentiment for you because that is the way it always has been. Which in my eyes weakens the argument to maintain it the way it is.

No one has yet addressed the fact that Bungie essentially designed these units with their single player campaign in mind, and the design had no consideration for multiplayer pvp. Someone please address that for me as to why we should maintain bungie's flawed design for something it wasn't designed to do. We should not increase or decrease the values for anything, ever? Really? bungie got it 100% perfect at release? We don't know any better than they did after 15 years playing the game? Seriously?

punkUser · Post by **punkUser** » 27 Feb 2013, 04:30

GiantKillerGen wrote: As far as you not wanting to change dorf heroes either, that just leads me to believe that you don't really have any real logical sense to why you want to keep it the same.

The logic you're applying to reach that conclusion doesn't actually make sense. You're assuming there's some sort of single design direction that is "optimal" for a given class of unit, rather than providing variation and options. I've said three times now that variation is valuable else we wouldn't have hero units at all... that's precisely what they are meant to provide. If you make them too homogeneous, there's no point in them.

I could likewise use that logic to say something like... why are soulless allowed to hover over obstacles? If that makes it better/more skillfull, why don't archers do that too?

And I don't think Bungie's design is holy or anything (although people use that argument whenever it suits them in other contexts...), but to say they didn't consider unit design for multiplayer at all is simply untrue. It may not have been their to priority, but they clearly didn't do anything to absolutely break the game in MP, as the fact that we're arguing about this 12+ years later testifies

Tons of people have made plugins and mods over the years to make the game "better" as well, but the reality is the single thread that ties what remains of this community together is the Myth gameplay as it has played for the past 10 years. Changing that will alienate some people. It may conceptually bring even more others in, but at this stage there's going to be a problem just in the marketing department to that end

c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊ · 27 Feb 2013, 04:32

GiantKillerGen wrote:hey milkman how about stay the *cruiser* out of the thread then. Everyone else is contributing to this conversation except you. Myths is 15 years old and its beautiful that we still get to have these conversations as a community. If you don't like it then get the *cruiser* out.

NO!

Giant Killer General · Post by **Giant Killer General** » 27 Feb 2013, 04:36

they already have things that are different about them, I already said this. range, hitpoints, attack speed, accuracy, etc. There is no reason why to add this "additional" variation. If you want to maintain the variation just for the sake of keeping them as different as humanly possible, why don't we make other units as different as humanly possible? Instead of having heron guard heroes with more dmg, hit points, attack speed, and heals, let's also give them a chance to block attacks, and/or a special attack. it is even more different than the original heron then as it is now. that is what your logic sounds like to me.

Or let's swap it, maybe giving regular dorfs the ability to not bounce or dud, and have dorf heroes bounce and dud instead. They are still just as different then. Maybe that was really more optimal than the way it is now, who knows? You can roleplay it as "bottles thrown beyond a certain range start to lose their fuse and may bounce from their velocity". You aren't giving any logic as to why the EXACT way it is now is really the most optimal though.

c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊ · 27 Feb 2013, 04:39

I mean no new models, maps, anything? Not one drop of creativity, just minor fucking with fear numbers as if the touch of your stinky fingers turns this shit to gold? Worthless, boring, yawn.

Giant Killer General · Post by **Giant Killer General** » 27 Feb 2013, 04:39

great, don't play it then. everyone is free to play whatever the hell they want to play in this game.

cry about it some more though, really, please.

punkUser · Post by **punkUser** » 27 Feb 2013, 04:40

GiantKillerGen wrote:they already have things that are different about them, I already said this. range, hitpoints, attack speed, accuracy, etc. There is no reason why to add this "additional" variation.

You seem to be coming at this from the point of view that I somehow have to defend why they are specifically the way they are... you've got some sort of unstated assumption here that - what - heroes should only differ in range, HP, attack speed, accuracy? Why is duds special to you and not a valid variation? Why are the others valid but it isn't?

I really don't get your argument at this point, so you're going to have to spell out your assumptions. As far as I can tell, you're arguing that one branch of the design continuum isn't valid for units, but why is unclear to me. Maybe come chat online... I'm not sure we're making progress here in understanding one another.

Giant Killer General · Post by **Giant Killer General** » 27 Feb 2013, 04:43

yes clearly we aren't. not going to bother trying anymore. I want to hear from others on this still because there could still be some good reasoning out there that I haven't thought of yet. Otherwise as of now I feel this is confirming what I thought of.

NewMutator · Post by **NewMutator** » 27 Feb 2013, 04:45

GiantKillerGen wrote:LN - you can see the game differently just like any newbie can. It doesn't make them "right". Under that argument, the next time I want to tell my boss how to do his job, I'll just conveniently ignore all his qualifications that I lack and tell him "well I just see it differently than you".

GKG-

Actually that doesn't make any sense. You're the one claiming that you're seeing it right and I'm seeing it wrong. I actually don't ascribe to such brusque dualisms as a matter of principle. My boss can think I'm wrong all he wants, but he should expect to be challenged for saying so. If he cannot defend his position, or if he simply makes an appeal to authority, then I have no reason to respect his opinion, personally. His "authority" in that case has merely gone to his head, and I am free to shop around for a different boss under different circumstances, or even become one myself if I'm so inclined. You're analogy doesn't seem to hold under scrutiny.

c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊ · 27 Feb 2013, 05:00

He's just delusional, what a relief

c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊ · 27 Feb 2013, 05:01

GKG HD

Giant Killer General · Post by **Giant Killer General** » 27 Feb 2013, 05:02

my analogy holds just fine in my view. if you don't see it that's fine. I just defended my position by telling you very relevant facts about how I captain top level mwc matches and that you are wrong in this regard. captains in mwc matches do not do this, that is an undisputed fact. in all the dozens, maybe even hundreds of hours I have spent in strategy sessions with other captains and players for mwc matches over the past 15 years, not one second was spent discussing pus duds. Nobody goes, "well let's get a bit more or less pus because some of those will be duds." maybe you do this, but the community can decide for themselves whose opinion has more weight on this matter.

Giant Killer General · Post by **Giant Killer General** » 27 Feb 2013, 05:05

by the way, one example of actual logic I was looking for in the reasoning why dorf heroes should not be allowed to dud or bounce is so that they can be viable as tools in blocking lock shots, just like fetch can. That is an actual gameplay dynamic, a concrete logical reason behind that game design. i just thought of it right now, others should chime in with similar reasons if they think of any.

wwo · Post by **wwo** » 27 Feb 2013, 05:20

Generally applicable, Myth is a game. Games, by definition, have arbitrary rules. This means the rules don't need to be justified by logic or balanced by consistency.

If the above is not true, it is not a game; it is a simulation, which can still be fun and competitive, but not a game.

Honkey · Post by **Honkey** » 27 Feb 2013, 05:31

too much crazy shit happens because of duds. and they can also add to skill by having to dodge them when they are under you. It sucks that sometimes they can decide a game, but it is a calculated risk and you figure you are on the good side of it as much as the bad. Adding an element of surprise and variation makes the game more fun. Bottle bouncing etc is also pretty cool. Advice: no point in taking away the unique elements of myth such as duds.

There may be a point with some of the ut stuff because it could open up a lot of doors for new trades and strats. But you also need to consider that there really isnt enough of a community to test them all and balance the maps properly.

Giant Killer General · Post by **Giant Killer General** » 27 Feb 2013, 07:20

there should be logical reasons for why a gameplay dynamic is designed a certain way. right now the logic that it is the way it is now is because these were the units bungie created for its singleplayer campaign. All they did was slap some unit values on them. There was no re-balancing done after the very initial release of the game. there were no changes made to the units to account for multiplayer gameplay. there was no testing by the community. this is just what they happened to slap on them for multiplayer. don't be fooled.

Zak · Post by **Zak** » 27 Feb 2013, 07:21

http://hl.udogs.net/files/Uploads/%20Us ... luesv4.zip

Increased dwarf stab damage

removed duds but kept bounces. Side affect is wight pus packets always have gas coming off of them, which is annoying but you will never forget pus at home again.

NewMutator · Post by **NewMutator** » 27 Feb 2013, 07:22

GiantKillerGen wrote:my analogy holds just fine in my view. if you don't see it that's fine. I just defended my position by telling you very relevant facts about how I captain top level mwc matches and that you are wrong in this regard. captains in mwc matches do not do this, that is an undisputed fact. in all the dozens, maybe even hundreds of hours I have spent in strategy sessions with other captains and players for mwc matches over the past 15 years, not one second was spent discussing pus duds. Nobody goes, "well let's get a bit more or less pus because some of those will be duds." maybe you do this, but the community can decide for themselves whose opinion has more weight on this matter.

I'm pretty sure football teams don't discuss fumbles either. That's more or less the point--they're unanticipated. But that's the risk of say, rushing the ball as opposed to going for a sidelong pass. Each has different associated risks/rewards given its unique context. If it's not overtly stated, that does not negate its potential relevancy. Another way to say this is "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." That would be an argument from ignorance.

Myrk · Post by **Myrk** » 27 Feb 2013, 07:28

Honkey wrote:too much crazy shit happens because of duds. and they can also add to skill by having to dodge them when they are under you. It sucks that sometimes they can decide a game, but it is a calculated risk and you figure you are on the good side of it as much as the bad. Adding an element of surprise and variation makes the game more fun. Bottle bouncing etc is also pretty cool. Advice: no point in taking away the unique elements of myth such as duds.

There may be a point with some of the ut stuff because it could open up a lot of doors for new trades and strats. But you also need to consider that there really isnt enough of a community to test them all and balance the maps properly.

I am pleased that someone of Honkey's caliber is pro-dud.

par73 · Post by **par73** » 27 Feb 2013, 07:31

dwarves' shouldn't have a stab ability

Myrk · Post by **Myrk** » 27 Feb 2013, 07:37

GiantKillerGen wrote:there should be logical reasons for why a gameplay dynamic is designed a certain way. right now the logic that it is the way it is now is because these were the units bungie created for its singleplayer campaign. All they did was slap some unit values on them. There was no re-balancing done after the very initial release of the game. there were no changes made to the units to account for multiplayer gameplay. there was no testing by the community. this is just what they happened to slap on them for multiplayer. don't be fooled.

Stygs and mauls are different in the campaign - they never flinch when attacked.
The regular mortar is just a multiplayer unit too, since the campaign just has mortar heroes.

Zak · Post by **Zak** » 27 Feb 2013, 07:47

par73 wrote:dwarves' shouldn't have a stab ability

Any particular reason?

They won't be winning any battles against regular melee units with their stab.

Zak · Post by **Zak** » 27 Feb 2013, 08:14

http://hl.udogs.net/files/Uploads/%20Us ... gsetv1.zip

This should be a functional bug free tagset ready for testing.

browning · Post by **browning** » 27 Feb 2013, 08:36

thisforumsucks wrote:
par73 wrote:dwarves' shouldn't have a stab ability
Any particular reason?

They won't be winning any battles against regular melee units with their stab.

Agreed with par, I don't think the dwarves need a buff. They shouldn't be able to stall by disrupting a ghol's slow attack for example. Get rid of the duds, already enough crazy stuff happening with the bounces.

Giant myrk should be 18 without the special, unless he gets +50% dmg output to be able to 3 shot zerks/myrk and 1 shot arty. That guy used to be able to pick off individual units spread out to avoid his special, but he is as fast as the small myrks, can't kill 4 of them, and has no resistance to arty.

Giant Killer General · Post by **Giant Killer General** » 27 Feb 2013, 09:01

just try the tagset first browning. save your conclusions until then. Have an open mind, do your own testing, then give me your feedback.

browning · Post by **browning** » 27 Feb 2013, 09:53

Considering all the changes are pretty arbitrary, I'm just trying to discuss the rationale behind them, but I should be on this week-end for some games.

Zak · Post by **Zak** » 27 Feb 2013, 09:55

browning wrote:
thisforumsucks wrote:
par73 wrote:dwarves' shouldn't have a stab ability
Any particular reason?

They won't be winning any battles against regular melee units with their stab.
Agreed with par, I don't think the dwarves need a buff. They shouldn't be able to stall by disrupting a ghol's slow attack for example. Get rid of the duds, already enough crazy stuff happening with the bounces.

Giant myrk should be 18 without the special, unless he gets +50% dmg output to be able to 3 shot zerks/myrk and 1 shot arty. That guy used to be able to pick off individual units spread out to avoid his special, but he is as fast as the small myrks, can't kill 4 of them, and has no resistance to arty.

The dwarves have a 1 in 5 chance of not hitting the ghol, and even if he does, he still loses that fight 1v1. What is the difference between fighting the ghol and running away? Archers are often killed in groups by 1 ghol, even with that same stab ability and a short range arrow option as well.

The giant myrk is going to be bought by everyone at 22, and while not buying it is a viable option, I still see the team with the giant myrk at an advantage due to its superior warlock blocking abilities.

browning · Post by **browning** » 27 Feb 2013, 10:11

If you don't think it will alter the balance of the game, why add the dwarf stab then? It's not a matter of continuity because no other heavy arty unit has a melee attack. Groups of archers are almost never killed by a single ghol, but red ghols are regularly killed by the archer stab. I like to think the stab + flame arrow are there to offset the soul's mobility, because I agree that those units were made with the campaign in mind (light/dark balance).

Anyway, let's just try out the current settings.

Zak · Post by **Zak** » 27 Feb 2013, 10:17

The dwarf stab has been a feature on lichen for a decade, with no complaint so far.

It now just takes a little more skill to kill a dwarf, thats all. If you consider that pus will never dud now, I think that this is fairly balanced.

SamTheButcher · Post by **SamTheButcher** » 27 Feb 2013, 12:08

I like what WWO said about theres a difference between a game vs a simulation. That was a good point. I am for it being more of a simulation and more realistic than a game with rules that go against logic and common sense. It seems that some other people would like it to be more of a game with random events rewarding less skilled Players. Or compensating for mistakes.

The reasoning that I always applied to the Hero Duff bottles not bouncing in like a real world sense was that. They threw harder and had better quality bottles. Just like in real life the military is going to give better quality weapons to Special Forces. There is no logic for the number of duds regular Duffs throw right now. Its a clay bottle that Duffs have been making for 100's of years. There should be at most a 1% chance for a dud. Duds are a handicap and all they do is allow the Player that made a mistake, is less skilled ect get lucky. I would rather win by skill not luck.

Zak can you add this to the Plug to try it out since you are testing different things?

Multi-Target Bowmen. This just makes sense. I have tried it and it doesnt make Bows overly powerful or anything. It adds realism and an occasionally used option. This is something I cant understand why it wasnt always this way. Yes they could launch a bunch of spread Flame Arrows but that isnt like some huge over powered thing either that Players would always be doing. For one thing once you've done that your out of Flames and its nearly as easy to avoid as it currently is when all of your opponents Bows launch Flames at once anyway. Most of the time launching all of your Flames at once is a desperation move or like a Hail Mary. Its usually better anyway to use your Flames more selectively at the right moments. Basically Multi-Target Bowmen doesnt change the whole dynamic of Bows. It is a realistic option that adds another element of strategy Players can use at the right moments.

Also no one commented on it but what about try changing some of the damage values Trow receive from different damage types? This might help with the balance. If an arrow or sword swing does more damage to the Trow this is going to reduce the amount of damage a Trow can do to a group of lower power units and make the Trow a little less of a juggernaut.

I agree also with the people they say way not just try some different things out, Bungie didnt get it perfect the game is 15 yrs old so why not try some tweaks ans see what might work better. Its not like you cant remove something that doesnt work.

Renwood · Post by **Renwood** » 27 Feb 2013, 12:17

The new UT trades are an interesting Idea that I could see catching on GKG.

I would keep your plugin to just that and ONLY your new UT costs.

If you want to make other whacky changes, like removing DUDS (BLASPHEMY BTW) or...making wights 20% faster + more health, lowering brignads health and other stuff, then make that a Seperate plugin that you can turn on at the same time you have the new UT trade plugin on. They can work in tandem like that.

Making them both as 1 plugin is most certainly going to make the community never adopt it.

The randomness of Myth is what sets it apart from other video games, and Certainly other RTS games.

Hell why not make archers never miss every time they target somebody and fire? With the only a random chance where the game says if the arrow "missed" Most other RTS games work like this.
But that isnt MYTHY. I am always dissapointed by the larger amount of randomness that was removed in myth 2 that was present in TFL.

BTW duds, mostly pus duds are NOT purely a random skilless happening. A pus has a 50% chance to dud EVERY time it bounces. So ctrl clicking on the ground in a manner that will make the pus hit the ground near the target and get in a few bounce WHILE still being at a close enough range if it goes off for the blast radius to hit/freeze the target. This IS the way to maximize and reduce the dud chance IN game with the players own skill involved. i.e. always use pus in a manner where you throw the pus in such a way to maximize its bounces while in range of the target.

This notion of feeling you get less credit for a win due to the enemy gettings duds is rather strange indeed.
So is a win worth less with this same logic if you won a fight because the enemy archers kept missing a dorf that was just idle standing there at a key point? Would you say "Gee I really did not win because the other guy had archers that randomly missed a lot"

Renwood · Post by **Renwood** » 27 Feb 2013, 12:30

GKG wrote: there should be logical reasons for why a gameplay dynamic is designed a certain way. right now the logic that it is the way it is now is because these were the units bungie created for its singleplayer campaign. All they did was slap some unit values on them. There was no re-balancing done after the very initial release of the game. there were no changes made to the units to account for multiplayer gameplay. there was no testing by the community. this is just what they happened to slap on them for multiplayer. don't be fooled.

ALMOST Everything you said here is false, GKG.
And there are records to prove you are wrong. The only part that is true is bungie did not change gameplay related things post release with patches and stuck mostly to bug fixes.

For example, before bungie ever made 1 single player level, they tested the gameplay in multiplay for about a year.
Its not as you suggest, where the singleplayer was made first then the multiplayer was an after thought.
You are also not correct about the units being made for the singleplayer game are the exact same in the multiplayer game with no changes to them. This is very amusing GKG, you are well schooled in multiplayer indeed vs humans, but as a plugin and myth content creator you are a total noob, you need to go to kindergarden for modding myth and get up to speed. For example the Myth 2 singleplayer Stygians and netplay stygians are NOT the same. With one HUGE difference.

I do encourage you GKG to work at learning how and making new myth content, with your understanding of how myth works in multiplayer, I bet you could come up with some great stuff and get some cool NEW ideas out there for mythers to enjoy.

SamTheButcher · Post by **SamTheButcher** » 27 Feb 2013, 13:11

Yea but Ren some of that randomness like Bottle Duds just reward bad play. How many people say "Yea I just lost because I threw a dud. Thats cool!" Its always the other way around. "I got lucky he threw a dud or I would have lost." So right there it rewarded the less skilled play. I really cant understand why Players would want to leave in things that reward inferior play. Most games and sports (except games that are centered around chance) are set up to avoid as much chance as possible so that as close as possible it is skill that wins. You dont play Chess with a random number generator that random removes pieces from the board.

I think Myth should be more of a Battle Simulation game. Thats what it is designed to be especially in PVP.

Hell why not make archers never miss every time they target somebody and fire? With the only a random chance where the game says if the arrow "missed" Most other RTS games work like this.
But that isnt MYTHY. I am always dissapointed by the larger amount of randomness that was removed in myth 2 that was present in TFL

Archers never missing wouldnt be realistic. In a real life scenario Archers do miss. There is wind, fletchings, the shaft ect that can effect the flight of an arrow. There isnt a such thing as a self guided arrow.

This notion of feeling you get less credit for a win due to the enemy gettings duds is rather strange indeed.
So is a win worth less with this same logic if you won a fight because the enemy archers kept missing a dorf that was just idle standing there at a key point? Would you say "Gee I really did not win because the other guy had archers that randomly missed a lot"

These two things cant be compared. Duffs throwing the amount of duds that they do now is no where near realistic. For Archers to miss would be realistic. Also a single Bottle Dud can be and has been a bigger game changer than some arrows missing. This is especially true when you have less and less units. When I made that Blue Moon map it was when I was playing Gimble CTF all the time and I would get so frustrated to lose a fight to a very poorly done melee charge because of a dud or 3 in a row. Its absurd. Whats the solution people say "Well dont get Duffs." So Myth can be centered strictly around Melee fights? That would be boring as hell. Everyone gets max Melee and it comes down to some microing and who brought the most melee to a fight? On a map like Gimble CTF especially after the first fight if you had a tougher opponent than someone else and finish your fight with 40% and the other Player had an easier opponent and finished with 60%. A lot of times the only chance you have if is you have a Duff. If you both just finished with melee you really dont have a chance even if you are 2x better than the other Player.

For example if I were to go up against GKG he has 4 Warrs and I have 8. I'm going to win that. Im not better than he is and me winning that fight doesnt make me better either. Its just a numbers game. If I have 8 Warrs and a Duff and he has 4 Warrs and a Duff. Well now there is room for his superior skill to win for him, because of the Duff. If we both had 8 Warrs and a Duff pretty much my only chance to beat him is for him to throw a dud at the wrong/right time. If he does and I win does that make me better than him? No. I just got lucky. I know that so its not a true victory. Personally I would rather there be no duds and lose that fight every time until I got better.

Duds are nothing more than a handicap. Thats it. You cant plan around that. Its often in a fight that you are attacked by superior numbers and your only chance is to use your Duff effectively. You cant say "Well you should have had a contingency plan for a dud." What if I only had 4 units and I am attacked by 8? How exactly am I supposed to plan for a dud? Without duds I could outplay my opponent and win that situation. Throw in random (overly frequent) duds and my opponent could do nothing more than a single click target my Duff with all of his units and win. I could be moving my Duff blocking with some of my other units throwing perfectly place bottles, throw 1 dud and lose. To where if I didnt throw that dud I would have won. If I throw the dud and lose who in that situation used more skillful play? My opponent who did nothing more then single click target my Duff with all of his units? Or me who was dodging, blocking, throwing perfectly placed bottles but 1 or 3 duds and lost? Obviously it would be me but even though I played better I lost because of an UNREALISTIC element of luck gave my opponent a handicap. Duds do nothing more than reward or cover for mistakes and poor play.

c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊ · 27 Feb 2013, 13:29

Shut the fuck Sam jesus please just go play some shit Blizzard game.

Duds are fun... they sit on ground making it a sort of obstacle course, provide for bigger explosions, you can bounce them with other shots, they allow for more impromptu foolin around with the awesome physics, they make people yell NOOOOOO when their duff or pus was their last hope, they make people yell LOL when a desperate ghol picks up a random dud and turns the game around somehow, and they add drama and color.

Trow are SUPPOSED to be overpowered... they are the eternally-living master race made by a different god... they KIK THINZ... its fun...

Myth isn't an e-sport, good, fuck those games, they're full of douches and nerds.

Myth also isn't a sport. Please stop with the stupid fuckin analogical thinking.

The better player wins 95% of the time in myth. What you can't stand that 5% for the sake of gore and hilarity? Go play fucking ping pong then.

Do you idiots really think Bungie just "overlooked" the fact that duds could effect outcomes?

Don't know if I want to laugh or vomit at GKG's claims about bungie "just putting values to single player units."

Renwood · Post by **Renwood** » 27 Feb 2013, 14:01

Im just wondering sam, since you are sooo sure. Are you even aware of what the chance for a dorf to throw a dud even is?
If thrown in dry enviroment (not raining) like on desert, do you know what the chances of a dud are? Please tell me since you know myth gameplay so well.

So If I throw a dud or my enemy throws a dud, and then later, I hit the dud on the ground with a bottle and send it flying, then it lands and kills an enemy later, who exactly is getting rewarded for bad play?

Answer me thsese 2 questions sam or your punishment is hosting 10 Hot Springs Lmoth games in a row.

Renwood · Post by **Renwood** » 27 Feb 2013, 14:06

Also sam your logic and others that share this "True win" "Logic" are looking at it from a very shallow point of view. You like to use sports examples. Here is one for ya, Any time in a race, if the other people had car trouble and you did not, and you get 1st place, you did not REALLY win, because they had bad luck and you didnt.