Punkuser - another idea

[SamTheButcher]

Shut the *cruiser* 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, *cruiser* 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."

MM theres no need to be an ass and get all worked up about it. All this is, is a discussion about and testing out new things. To add some variety and realism to the game. There are no permanent changes about to happen. Its just trying some ideas out.

I think at the least the amount of Bottle Duds should be reduced. I agree that Duds on the ground can add another dynamic to the game. So let Duffs throw purposeful duds maybe a limited amount. Then you can still bounce them have Ghols pick them up whatever. Think of a Duff battle where you could throw purposeful duds. That would open a lot of room for creativity.

With the Trow and other units being over powered what GKG is trying to do is add variety to trades. So that isnt always get Max Trow on every map. Right now there isnt much of a counter to Trows except other Trow. If the UT points for a Trow is increased enough maybe the number of other units you have to trade for a Trow isnt worth the trade off every time. For example if a group of Bowmen can do more damage to a Trow maybe there would be times you get the Bowmen instead. Right now you can get 8 Bowmen for the cost of 1 Trow. 1 Trow can easily just walk up to and destroy a group of 8 Bowmen the Trow doesnt have to dodge or anything just walk right up to them. So your always going to take the Trow over the Bowmen. But if that same group of Bowmen could kill a Trow that just walked up to them with out dodging or anything you may sometimes get the Bowmen. The amount of power you get for 24 points on a Trow is a lot more power than you get for 24 points of Bowmen. If the amount of power were equal that gives you reason to maybe get one over the other in different situations. If the Power to Points ratio is the same maybe on some maps you want the power concentration and speed you get from a Trow. On another map maybe you want that SAME power spread out over a group of units. The thing is you have an equal Power to Points ratio. Right now for the amount of points you get so much more power out of a Trow theres no reason to get anything else. So that reduces the variety of viable trades on any map with Trow.

[Dantski]

Can we just refocus a second?

We are looking to make changes to unitcosts so that a few more units are viable choices, at least thats what I thought the purpose was here. Make small changes first 1 at a time so we can judge their effectiveness clearly. Trying to change dozens of things at once is likely to result in some unbalanced stuff.

GKG your boss analogy is terrible, winning a video game tournament is not equivalent to various professional qualifications. As for why mortars and heroes shouldn't bounce, its partly a matter of range because those dwarfs throw/fire further than a regular dorf. Imagine a dorf hero throwing at max range vs a unit running away and then getting a bounce on top of that, dorf heroes are pretty bullshit already (I make use of this BS more than anyone) with a bounce it gets dumb. Also heroes bottles bouncing will make them even worse vs units in water. The other reason not to give them bounces is the effect that will have on hero/mort vs other artillery fights. Suddenly morts might be better than warlocks on Trow because with a bounce they have potentially more range than a Warlock in a duel.

Zak I'm not sure that changing wights is the way to combat pus strength on light maps. However if people want pus to never dud (personally I'd prefer duds in general stay as they are) then the pus itself would need to inflict less damage or freeze for a shorter duration IMO.


Instead of talking about every conceivable alteration we should nail down what needs to be changed instead of personal preferences like duds etc. I think virtually everyone can agree on Bre's/Brigs/Pus/Giants needing a tweak or two.

[c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊]

Dant is relatively reasonable.

[SamTheButcher]

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.

Ren I did know for sure 7 yrs ago what the dud rate was because I went through this too many duds thing then. Thats why I made that map. I think though it is like 10% but I cant remember if that is every time it hits the ground or bounces or in total.

If you throw a dud then bounce it into the enemy. You are being rewarded for superior play because you took a negative and turned it into a positive. But what would that dud have done if it didnt dud? Would that dud had it not been a dud killed the enemy sooner?

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.

Yea I won the race but it doesnt make me faster or better than the other guy. I may have just got lucky he didnt show up. If I have raced this person before and they have beaten me. My win that day he's not there isnt going to mean as much to me. Cause I am either going to know I only won because he didnt show or I wont know for sure if I am better than him or not. What I would want is to win far and square. Hell when I play Gimble CTF I almost never try to win with a flag steal. I want to win because I out fought my opponent. Thats my number one goal is to win in a straight up 1v1 fight. I always (until the last minute of the game) let people finish their fight before I attack. Most of the time if I have finished my first fight and I am waiting for someone else to finish theirs, I'll let them finish and ready up before I attack. Often I will use only the same approximate % of units they have if I so happen to have more. Thats how I feel about it. I want to win the fight by superior play not luck or greater numbers.

[Renwood]

yes sam, in dry conditions, a dorf bottle has a 10% chance to dud every time it bounces. But then there is some shit where the longer the bottle has been active (on fire) the greater the chance is it will be closer to detonation, untill a certain point where it starts to become more likely that it will just stop burning on its own. Its get pretty techincal around this point and is when I just ask oogabooga these questions.

Well pitched battles are what it sounds like you prefer Sam. Sun Tzu was NOT a fan of pitched battles, and as a student of The Art Of war, and how it applies to myth, I dont see it your way. Skill and luck are all part of the bigger picture of warfare on the battlefield.

[Giant Killer General]

fair enough renwood, you're right, I don't know. I am curious though, how do you know that bungie designed the game around multiplayer first? I find that interesting since only a fraction of the 800,000 or so units sold of the game were players who actually played multiplayer. Most of them only played the single player campaign and never really saw the light of bungienet. and I certainly don't care to do any modding myself, doesn't interest me. In any case, I can retract that statement then, and I instead stand by the statement that bungie made 0 changes to the balancing after the initial release of the game. Besides, whatever changes they did make between singleplayer and multiplayer seem pretty negligible to me. They seem more like sweeping changes that were made just to make all melee units consistent, or things of that nature.

think what you want about my "analogy" dantski, I disagree. When I play a game, I concede that the players who have won tournaments know more about the game than I do. Like I said before, the community at large can judge for themselves whose opinion holds more weight on this matter. And for the record, does that mean you are agreeing with LN's statement? Please, do tell.

As far as "non unit trading point" changes, yea we need to test them, simple as that. No one in the history of the game has truly tested it in this manner before. I find it interesting that people can come up with conclusions on these so quickly without ever actually trying it.

Every change can be undone, so stop getting your panties in a bunch, just try it. Or don't and let others try it.

[Renwood]

GKG, I have talked to many Bungie staffers over the years and picked their brains about myth's development.
I also have read a LOT of articles and interviews with bungie about myth's development.

Here is something more tangible for you to read GKG, if anybody has NOT read this, its a must! The Bungie Post Mortem http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3 ... h_the_.php

Bungie wrote: Myth took approximately two years from start to finish. It began as a six-degree of freedom engine that allowed you to fly around a landscape. Soon, troops were added, heads started flying, blood was made to destructively alter the terrain's color map, and the network game was born. Most of the first year was spent developing the initial network/multiplayer game play. Almost the entire second year was spent developing the single-player game, refining the levels, and testing bungie.net, our free online service.

Here is just one of the things I have read from TFL about the myth community being involved in multiplayer testing. Bungie reached out much further and to a great many more members of the myth community when Myth 2 was in development.

Bungie wrote: To rigorously test our server load capacity and the bungie.net code, we released a public beta of the network game. We were initially apprehensive because it was our first public beta test of a product, but it was an amazing success. When errors occur, Myth alerts the player, logs the error messages, and usually allows the user to save a replay of the problem. Testers submitted these detailed bug reports via e-mail and chatted about features and improvements to levels on internal newsgroups.

Best of all, the testers used bungie.net to give instant feedback to the developers. This interaction allowed us to gather even more useful information about bugs, and it made the testers really feel involved in the final product. By the end of the beta-testing cycle, we not only had a clean product, but also had a loyal following of users who sang our praises when the NDAs were lifted.

[Giant Killer General]

touche then. seems very ahead of its time, I would think most similar games of that era would have started with the campaign first. still very interesting considering the vast majority of players only played the single player campaign. thanks for linking that.

btw I also want to mention to everyone about the dorf stabbing: Yes it is a very minor attack that may mostly not matter that much. However, isn't it the things that usually don't matter that much, also the same things that are pretty awesome when they do matter? That is why people like the duds, but the difference in this case is that the stabbing attack is utilized by the player's skill, not luck. I think it adds a whole new skill element to the game, just like the archer stabbing did. It gives the player another tactical decision to make. Personally I would love to see some dorfs desperately trying to win a critical and close melee fight by getting in there and stabbing some when they can't get a good throw in. Or players deciding when to try and stab to beat a chaser, or run to another unit for help. Another player decision to make, another chance to make a mistake or make a big play.

[Renwood]

"Dwarf stabbing shocks community"

This sounds like its from one of the front page articles on yahoo news.

just make sure to keep the dorf's 1/5 chance of a miss while stabbing in. Thats how we have made dorfs stabb in the Our Farewell tagets for years, and I think we based that on Lichen's values.

With the dorfs short range, and high-ish miss fraction for melee, his best bet is still to run to a friendly unit for help, unless the enemy is like a red ghol or a warrior with only 1 or 2 hits left.

[Giant Killer General]

yea pretty much. the dorf stabbing values are based entirely off of the archer stab. we made them identical. so yea that 1/5 chance to miss is still in there.

[SamTheButcher]

GKG since you started this plug testing new ideas. What do you think about the Multi-Target Bowmen and trying it out? I've tried it and I wrote about how it works and the effects it has in a previous post in this topic. Its not an "over power use it all the time thing." Its "a smart skillful Player uses at the right moment to their advantage thing" Like what you said about the Duff stabbing. It seems from your comments that you think a lot like I do. That the more control and options you give a Player the more room for skill.

[Giant Killer General]

sam i have been ignoring you about this because there was already a 20 page thread about it before, and I don't want to create another one. If you don't remember what I think about it, go read what I said in that thread.

[Renwood]

I allways liked archers being able to target multiple units. It works with SHIFT+Click to target multiple right sam? And normal click still targets just 1 enemy like before.

I will sum up what GKG said before. "Archers shooting at each other with multiple targest per side, = less dodging and skill in archer fights." Something like that.

I think it would be cool, but I think about 3 people in the world even care sam.

We will add this multi target to the newest Our Farewell and Myth IV HD tagsets sam, I allways wanted to but kept forgetting to.

[SamTheButcher]

Well pitched battles are what it sounds like you prefer Sam. Sun Tzu was NOT a fan of pitched battles, and as a student of The Art Of war, and how it applies to myth, I dont see it your way. Skill and luck are all part of the bigger picture of warfare on the battlefield.

Thats mostly true Ren but if my life was on the line or even in a Tourney I will take a win any and the easiest way I could. Most of the time though I enjoy the challenge of a good well fought fight. I would rather eek out a victory after a tough fight than to run somebody over with an easy win. Sometimes I enjoy a tough fought close fight that I lost over an easy win. I like to be challenged.

[SamTheButcher]

sam i have been ignoring you about this because there was already a 20 page thread about it before, and I don't want to create another one. If you don't remember what I think about it, go read what I said in that thread.

Ok fair enough. I didnt remember your response to it. I knew a lot of people didnt like the idea. Since then though I have tested it out a lot and the issues people thought there would be just werent there. Dodging isnt really harder it actually sometime easier. Reason is that when the enemy Bows launch arrows one at each of yours the arrows are evenly spaced apart (relative to the spacing of the enemy Bows position and the position of your Bows) So when you move your line of Bowmen to dodge, each of the enemies arrows miss each of your Bowmen by the same amount. They land basically where each of your Bowmen were standing when fired at. Basically because the arrows are so spaced out each of your Bowmen just move in between them. The times that it is harder to dodge is if you had your Bowmen clumped. When the enemy Bowmen each target one of your Bowmen that are clumped the arrows are spaced so close together it becomes harder to dodge in between the arrows.

So most of the time the normal all Bowmen targeting one enemy is harder to dodge because they will sometimes come down in one big mass that you cant completely move out from under and you get hit by a few of the arrows VS the arrows spread apart that you can move in between.

Like I said it is something that you would only want to use occasionally at the right moments.

Anyway since you were testing ideas and this one didnt have the negatives people thought it would have I thought would mention it again. I didnt know if you or anyone had read my post in this thread or not. I'll leave it at that if you dont want to try it.

[SamTheButcher]

I allways liked archers being able to target multiple units. It works with SHIFT+Click to target multiple right sam? And normal click still targets just 1 enemy like before.

I will sum up what GKG said before. "Archers shooting at each other with multiple targest per side, = less dodging and skill in archer fights." Something like that.

I think it would be cool, but I think about 3 people in the world even care sam.

We will add this multi target to the newest Our Farewell and Myth IV HD tagsets sam, I allways wanted to but kept forgetting to.

Yea Ren shift+click. Normal click is the same. I would like shift+double click to target multiple enemies of a type but as far as I know that cant be done in Fear. Yea it is cool and just more real and its nice to have an additional option to use at certain times.

I am glad you will add it to you tagset. It would be nice to have more maps with that option.

[par73]

it also works to multi task the units yourselves to do such things -______-

[Giant Killer General]

other keypoints you missed: 1) flame arrow volleys would become overpowered. 2) melee squads would have a more difficult time dodging archer volleys. It creates more of an overpowered "shotgun blast" with large archer volleys. 3) You could give 20 archers to 1 person and it would be nearly as effective as having 4 different people micro 20 archers. That isn't right. As it is now it encourages you to break off more archer squads for more micro.

im not saying anything more on that matter, i don't want to talk about it really. I wouldn't include something like that in my tagset.

[SamTheButcher]

it also works to multi task the units yourselves to do such things -______-

I dont want to start the debate all over again. Like I said I tested it out it didnt have the negatives people thought it would.

I would like to see someone effectively take 6 Bowmen and individually target 6 enemy Bowmen in a duel and also dodge arrows. I dont think it could be done. Thats why people usually just either all target one enemy Bowmen at a time or Gesture click which has a slower reaction time and isnt very effective.

Anyway the Multi-Target most of the time isnt better than an Individual-Target. Its only better vs clumped units, just to change up your attack or other specific times. Its just another option to be used occasionally at the right times.

People dont want to try it, thats fine. I'm going to leave it alone from this point.

Edit: I posted this and then saw your comment GKG. In practice it doesnt really happen like you are saying. It just doesnt. Also even when it is used you are trading damage amount for a possible better chance for a hit. So it balances. Still you dont want to try it I understand and I am done talking about it.

[adrenaline]

It is already possible to target multiple units with bows/flames. PK (i think it was PK) has seen me do it. Not telling you how, though!

[SamTheButcher]

It is already possible to target multiple units with bows/flames. PK (i think it was PK) has seen me do it. Not telling you how, though!

Yea I know a way it could be done. Should I say? Or maybe we are talking about different ways?

[Giant Killer General]

My guess is that it would be by selecting multiple melee units with your archers and then attacking. The same way you used to take 5 trow and 1 soulless in a preset to be able to do what double shift click does right now.

[Renwood]

Adren killed me with this before on gimble CTF, so I have seen it done. At least all his archers fired their flame arrows at my archers on a hill all at the same time hitting multiple targets. Though I figured he just told his archers to each target one of my archers when they where out of range at the time with fire arrows 1 by 1, and then when his archers got in range, they all fired at me in what seemed like the same moment. Yea, my archers all burnt to death

[SamTheButcher]

My guess is that it would be by selecting multiple melee units with your archers and then attacking. The same way you used to take 5 trow and 1 soulless in a preset to be able to do what double shift click does right now.

I'm not sure on this exactly what you mean.

Adren killed me with this before on gimble CTF, so I have seen it done. At least all his archers fired their flame arrows at my archers on a hill all at the same time hitting multiple targets. Though I figured he just told his archers to each target one of my archers when they where out of range at the time with fire arrows 1 by 1, and then when his archers got in range, they all fired at me in what seemed like the same moment. Yea, my archers all burnt to death

This would work.

The way I was thinking of and it works sort of like what Ren said Adren did but you dont have to select your Bows individual but they dont fire at exactly the same time either. If your Bow are in a line formation but at an angle to your opponents units so that your first Bowmen in the line is in range and your second is just out of range and so on. You leave all your Bows selected hit T target the enemy Bow at the end of the line closest to your units. Your first Bow that is in range will fire at that one. As your second Bow is moving into range select the 2nd Bow in the enemy line as soon as he fires and before your 3rd Bow is in range select the 3rd enemy Bowmen in the line your 3rd Bow will switch targets and target the 3rd enemy Bow. So on. So you have a lines of Fire Arrows landing one slightly after the other. I havent perfected this yet but I built a Plug that I could test different Bowmen tactics on and it does work.

[adrenaline]

definitely did not click them individually. much closer to what GKG said.

[browning]

On another note, I think bungie did tinker with the balance after the release of the game. Can anyone confirm that the cost of a giant myrk was changed from 24 to 32? I don't remember it clearly.

[Myrk]

rings a bell.
As a result, the myrk giant is a well-balanced unit as we all know

[c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊]

WTF adren i saw you do this the other day and you all just fucked with me like i was too high to know but I knew man, how do you do it? Spill the beans dude.

Also... you're making duffs dudless and giving them stabz and you saying this would make ARCS overpowered? Really? What about the fuckin rambo-duffs you creatin on light GKG?

I've decided... reinstate bungie duds and I will lend my eminence to your project.

My fuckin eminence man, think about it.

[Giant Killer General]

oh so this is what your butthurt is really all about milk man, how interesting.

you can lend your "eminence" to the project by testing it like anyone else.

yes i made rambo dwarves just like bungie made rambo archers. actually bungie really made the rambo dwarves too. I wonder how many more times you are going to whine about it.

[Giant Killer General]

so yea just figured out adren's top secret flame arrow attack in about 1 min, which ended up being exactly what I guessed it would be. You just need as many or more melee units selected with your archers when you do the flame arrow.

some top secret stuff there adren.

I guess Sam should be satisfied then, his idea is already in the game.

[Renwood]

Funny, after we were playing a big 2 team game, and then dumped to lobby. I went afk, came back and saw GKG ask wwo to help him test to figure out the archer trick.

I thought, damn, I need to get on this and figure this out as well.

Took me 1 min to figure out how to do it, but didnt notice its gotta be at least the same number of melee to archers ratio to work.
As in you can have more melee, but not less then the archer number. pretty arcane I think, no wonder in 15 years only adren even noticed.

Though GKG suspects it was only made this way in a new-ish update or at least after 1.3

Your wish has been granted Sam, and just think after all the the BS people gave you over wanting this multiple targeting archers on that archer thread on the MWC 2012 forums.
Just proves, never give up your myth dreams....one day they might come true!

[wwo]

It's not as useful as one would imagine if the unit you want to attack (archers) is near enough to his other units that they get included as potential flame arrow targets. Still, pretty cool trick for this late in the lifespan.