Death Warrant Forums

DW_Ant wrote:As bad as this may sound, I've been seeing positive results from this.

positive results????????? really? like real-really??? [no sarcasm here] btw, does it beat the very purpose of weapon masteries or not?

DW_Ant wrote: High levels can't breeze through the maps like before.

sounds like an accusation... is that "all high-levels rush maps" a rule?
because if it is, you should have thought of it earlier....
if its not (which it is not), then you penalise all high-ranks
because you cant state as correct the ""all high-levels rush maps" (as it is a false statement)
its better to understand that some "high-levels rush some maps sometimes"
which that makes it an exception.....and some other kind of enforcement should be consider (by you) to stop this phenomenon would be just/fair
so, makes pointless the Weapon Masteries

DW_Ant wrote:High levels can't breeze through the maps like before.

DW_Ant wrote:The low levels actually have a chance of encountering monsters.

they always did [fullstop]....ps: you might consider low-ranks rushing the maps

DW_Ant wrote: And the high levels are still able to kill monsters at a decent rate.

decent? is it fair or not?


Here's a video demonstrating the difference between a high level Paladin and a low level Berserker at Frigate. I do hope that this demonstrates that doing half damage at a high level is still tolerable.
[youtube]http://youtu.be/hsuAMFkZfvY[/youtube]

video was on, now its removed
ok, video is on.....scratch that....copy -> paste-ing link on address-bar shows it removed

DW_Ant wrote:for example, some relics are impossible to get at certain levels. I'll revise the requirements so that it'll be possible for all levels

that should have been a priority (no personal gain for me btw)
but if we want to use words like decent, fair, right,
its un-fair (by every angle anyone can see it) to not be able to get relic because you dont meet req due to high-level ....something that was in in-effect for as long as I am around

DW_Ant wrote:I want to get your opinion before I come to a decision if this should stay or not.

my opinion is, this will cause more problems than it will solve since there are many more high ranks than low ranks....
expect re-voting,
expect poor-motive for a high rank to play a low rank map, since he is not getting any xp (or win-xp) doing all the job, now you wanna do that too.....
and what happens if all low ranks die, and only the high-ranks left alive in the map? will they re-gain their full weapon-masteries potential (which they earned and didnt steal) ?
what happens with xp? are xp for high-ranks related to their true weapon masteries or the reduced masteries?
and if you wanted to do something, it would be better to make a system that would balance difficulty with the average level of players online
meaning, if AS-cubes4all is played by 4 level 200 players, then
monster difficulty should be adjust to lvl 200 player
monster spawn frequency should be proportional to 4 players
that would make all maps both playable and enjoyable
and not playing only very certain/specific maps because of the level you are
I hope you get my point here

christmas wrote:

DW_Ant wrote:As bad as this may sound, I've been seeing positive results from this.

positive results????????? really? like real-really??? [no sarcasm here] btw, does it beat the very purpose of weapon masteries or not?

What I've meant by decent results was that high levels are still able to rush through the maps, but not to a degree where the low levels only encounter 1-2 monsters throughout the map. This serves as a happy medium between the two extremes where both low and high levels are able to contribute to the assault.
This doesn't defeat the weapon masteries since they do have an influence on your overall damage.

christmas wrote:

DW_Ant wrote:High levels can't breeze through the maps like before.

sounds like an accusation... is that "all high-levels rush maps" a rule?
because if it is, you should have thought of it earlier....
if its not (which it is not), then you penalise all high-ranks
because you cant state as correct the ""all high-levels rush maps" (as it is a false statement)
its better to understand that some "high-levels rush some maps sometimes"
which that makes it an exception.....and some other kind of enforcement should be consider (by you) to stop this phenomenon would be just/fair
so, makes pointless the Weapon Masteries

DW>Ant wrote:...it just takes one player to rush the map to spoil it for the rest of us...

christmas wrote:

DW_Ant wrote:High levels can't breeze through the maps like before. The low levels actually have a chance of encountering monsters.

they always did [fullstop]....ps: you might consider low-ranks rushing the maps

When low levels rush through the maps, they would often get killed.

christmas wrote:video was on, now its removed

Youtube cut my resolution where the text would go off-screen. You've must have made that post while I was uploading the fixed version.

christmas wrote:

DW_Ant wrote:I want to get your opinion before I come to a decision if this should stay or not.

my opinion is, this will cause more problems than it will solve since there are many more high ranks than low ranks....
expect re-voting,
expect poor-motive for a high rank to play a low rank map, since he is not getting any xp (or win-xp) doing all the job, now you wanna do that too.....

Or conversely,
expect poor-motive for a low rank to play a low rank map, since he is not gaining exp for exploring. Or expect poor-motive for a low rank to play a high rank map, since he is not gaining exp for dieing in a map they're not prepared for.

christmas wrote:and what happens if all low ranks die, and only the high-ranks left alive in the map?

Then there will be little need to vote for low rank maps.

I primarily vote up low ranking maps whenever a new player joins. Last month, all new players (6) decided to quit. All of the low ranking maps were rushed, then they would get killed in a high rank map where they would encounter their first monster. Jumpship is an exception for the friendly player monster part.

DW_Ant wrote:

christmas wrote:

DW_Ant wrote:As bad as this may sound, I've been seeing positive

results from this.

positive results????????? really? like real-really??? [no sarcasm here] btw, does it beat the very purpose of

weapon masteries or not?

What I've meant by decent results was that high levels are still able to rush through the

maps, but not to a degree where the low levels only encounter 1-2 monsters throughout the map. This serves

as a happy medium between the two extremes where both low and high levels are able to contribute to the

assault.
This doesn't defeat the weapon masteries since they do have an influence on your overall damage.

yes, it does, long and short term, direct and indirectly....
since a high-rank loses his advantage for which he spend his time for....
making the (not-bought) weapon masteries reduced to any percent
I mean, a high-rank's commitment to his character and server is re-payed by...-50% masteries (doesnt sounds

nice at all)
(dont stick to the -50%, i just put a number there)

an experienced/mature/adult or whatever you wanna call it low-rank player will
1: acknoledge that his contribution as a low-rank will be smaller than that of a high-rank
(thats the way the RPG system is)
i didnt implement the rpg-system, its a typical cRPG system that anyone that plays pc games knows that....
as you grow old, you grow strong, end of story....
and thats what makes rpg system unique....
otherwise you could grant all players max weapon masteries since day 1
then it wouldnt RPG, right? oh well
you get my point....

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

christmas wrote:

DW_Ant wrote:High levels can't breeze through the maps like before.

sounds like an accusation... is that "all high-levels rush maps" a rule?
because if it is, you should have thought of it earlier....
if its not (which it is not), then you penalise all high-ranks
because you cant state as correct the ""all high-levels rush maps" (as it is a false statement)
its better to understand that some "high-levels rush some maps sometimes"
which that makes it an exception.....and some other kind of enforcement should be consider (by you) to

stop this phenomenon would be just/fair
so, makes pointless the Weapon Masteries

DW>Ant wrote:...it just takes one player to rush the map to spoil it for the rest of us...

so, you acknowledge the problem, then FOCUS on that....
or as you said dozens of times in-game,
[glow=red]"there is a majority map-voting and kick-voting system, use it"....[/glow]
make proximity-triggers for monster spawns or blocking volume.....
you must understant that -> you cant penalise a high-rank for being.....a high-rank
trust me on the following statement: afk's, hoarders, majority of necros DO spoil the fun and can cause bad reaction to other players, visible in the chat window

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

christmas wrote:

DW_Ant wrote:High levels can't breeze through the maps like before. The low levels

actually have a chance of encountering monsters.

they always did [fullstop]....ps: you might consider low-ranks rushing the maps

When low levels rush through the maps, they would often get killed.

not always the case since, rushing is rushing as not in a crowded-by-monsters area always
it can be:
rushing objectives
rushing relics
rushing ammo/weapon that not respawn .........etc
but I didnt see you looking into the above issues
are these of minor importance? trust me, they are of much major important since assault could become

humiliating defeat from a bad call

you can alternative, since I see your issue is with rushing monsters,
double the monster spawns.....if you do that then the problem will be solved.....
there will be adequate monsters for low ranks to kill......or die trying
and you dont penalise the high-ranks masteries in that case.....
its a WIN-WIN situation......
dont you agree?
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

christmas wrote:

DW_Ant wrote:I want to get your opinion before I come to a decision if this should stay

or not.

my opinion is, this will cause more problems than it will solve since there are many more high ranks than low

ranks....
expect re-voting,
expect poor-motive for a high rank to play a low rank map, since he is not getting any xp (or win-xp) doing all the job, now you wanna do that too.....

Or conversely,
expect poor-motive for a low rank to play a low rank map, since he is not gaining exp for exploring. Or
expect poor-motive for a low rank to play a high rank map, since he is not gaining exp for dieing in a map they're not prepared for.

a low-rank gets xp anywhere, winxp anywhere....if not, tell me what maps to go test them....
the only good-thing you had in-effect once was that r1-r2 players in AS-ResidentTexas would get only 400

winxp (instead of 700), simply because, for once, you did something which was in favor of high-ranks
I mean, its not in favor of a high-rank if a low rank gets less winxp, of course not....
but it gives a "fair" xp distribution to the actual contribution of each rank to the Assault
and that's why this map is un-beatable for r1-r2 only players...

i didnt understant the second thing/sentence, what you are saying there....
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

christmas wrote:and what happens if all low ranks die, and only the high-ranks left alive in the map?

Then there will be little need to vote for low rank maps.


i didnt understant that too......

I asked, what will happen if in a low-rank map, all low-ranks die, and only 1 high-rank player is left

alive...will he re-gain his true masteries, or will he play with his reduced masteries?
since all low-ranks dead, he cant rush against others, so he should re-gain his true masteries....

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DW_Ant wrote:I primarily vote up low ranking maps whenever a new player joins. Last month, all new players (6) decided to quit. All of the low ranking maps were rushed, then they would get killed in a high rank map where they would encounter their first monster. Jumpship is an exception for the friendly player monster part.

yeah, I noticed that, we have fun with that......
at least acknoledge that and show some respect to high ranks.....
not because, they are the majority
not because, they are not hoarders
not because, they are high-ranks
not because, they prove how commited they are, from the time spend to build their characters on server

but because, although they are at all instances (in server) the majority, AND YET, they vote low-rank maps, they play these maps, they give advice, assistance, they help.....BLAH BLAH BLAH
not ALL high-ranks, but THE MAJORITY of them....

a person who joins today, is he informed that even low-rank maps are impossible to beat?
because, that is so true.....[MonsterEvo education]

where is his commitment when, the moment he dies, he leaves the server?
I mean, i didnt join the server and become r4 in a day....
server is hard [fullstop] for a low-rank who is not familiar with enemy types, maps
and this knowledge is gained with time....when he is not commited, and he leaves at the first instance, dont expect anything by him.....
and yes, server-difficulty is a detergent for newcomers, simply because with 75hp and -25% resistances you cant do jack-shit even in easy maps(i dont even know who came up with this expression)

did you carry out a survey to see, if these 6 people, what they didnt like adn why they quit?
they were too good, too skilled, but they couldnt killed any monster because of their masteries?
or (maybe) they died in a flash???????????
oh well, I believe the latter......

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
maybe make a system where, as a high-rank kills, his weapon masteries will decrease slowly
so if he doesnt kill anything, he will have full masteries

1. I find it really difficult to read your posts Christmas because you are expressing yourself in this fragmented way. I think your argument would be more effective if you clearly and concisely state your perspective rather than cutting out quotes and responding to quotes. I find it hard to follow your perspective as you're expressing it because it's disjointed.




2. Now I recognize you're trying to be constructive in your suggestions here. One specific thing you mention is you suggest that rather than reducing player damage to monsters, you increase the number of monsters that spawn across the map. Unfortunately this isn't really possible to do in an intelligent way, however, because there are side effects to spawning more monsters.

For example, when I think of a relatively low level map I think of Frigate. But spawning more monsters in Frigate won't really work. The spaces are too enclosed (inside the ship) to make much difference. In other circumstances, there might be triggers tied to the number of monsters -- This could potentially break maps.

Besides these obvious issues one of the overall design objectives I wanted for Monster Evolution was to give the mapper more control over map difficulty. In Monster Mash, the game rules provide the vast majority of the game difficulty. Monster level is the single most important difficulty factor and it applies equally to every map. Monster Evolution can have easy maps, and it can have hard maps, and that is all totally up to the map author. My Forgotten Fane level is designed to be defeatable even by players with no RPG abilities. (I did all my testing for this map on a player with no RPG whatsoever.) It'll be somewhat harder for sure, but the monsters are not too difficult and there are resources in accessible locations through the map.

DW_WailofSuicide wrote:1. I find it really difficult to read your posts Christmas because you are expressing yourself in this fragmented way. I think your argument would be more effective if you clearly and concisely state your perspective rather than cutting out quotes and responding to quotes. I find it hard to follow your perspective as you're expressing it because it's disjointed.

after the 3rd quote within a quote, I get headeaches....
and i'm sure you got an idea of what i'm saying....

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DW_WailofSuicide wrote:2. Now I recognize you're trying to be constructive in your suggestions here. One specific thing you mention is you suggest that rather than reducing player damage to monsters, you increase the number of monsters that spawn across the map. Unfortunately this isn't really possible to do in an intelligent way, however, because there are side effects to spawning more monsters.

I suggested something I came up with within 1 ms (=1/1000000 of a sec)
I am stating above that
1. that is not the biggest issue on server
2. there are bigger issues on server that need immediate attention (like a year ago) [and its not only me saying that, its the majority of "active" players saying that"]
3. I believe a system like that would cause more problems than fix
4. always consult (the target group) for these type of implementations, to know their thoughts/suggestions
they can give you an insight...Ant gives the impression he will implement it no matter what
5. locate the problem, try to resolve the problem....
if 1 high-rank is rush-killing all monsters, focus on how to penalise than 1 specific player, and not the corresponding group
I mean, you dont kill a whole pack of sheeps because of a black sheep
6. server needs to provide some form of "MonsterEvo server education"
because server is too damn hard for newcomers
I can build easily (and any high-rank player) a new character from lvl 1, but thats because I have the map experience and server knowledge, i know all monster types, their damage, I know all monster spawns, all triggers, I know when I can procceed or retreat...... which I gained through the time spent in the server.....
a newcomers, will die within the first minute, even in frigate....that will discourage him, and he will quit.....
that is how the server was built
let me go back in time, and recall, when I joined server, didnt I die? all the time
was I playing easy maps? no, because majority of active players were r3, so I played average maps, or impossible maps for the level I was, yet I didnt give up....I stick to it.....
trust me, a person who wants to level up, will try harder next time, wont give up
a quiter will just quit.....no matter what you offer him...even if you offer him 100 free levels....he wont have the actual "experience" to know how to make good use of these 100 levels....because that experience is gained by time
and dont forget that UT2004 is a fast-paced fps, so someone's expectations wont be met

let me provide with another suggestion here.....
give 3 lifes per map to each r1 player
and a low-rank (newcomer or not) deserves a second chance (or even third) [he will learn faster]
although un-fair to the rest, i dont believe anyone is going to complain, simply because this is not in expense of others.....


make a video walkthrough of a map
take a map, make a video walkthrough showing a low rank how to beat a low rank map
somebody will say here, oh man, who will be arsed to sit down and watch 1-hour video to learn how to play a map on the server
oh well, then how do you expect from this person to commit to the server, if he cant be arsed spending some time, when its prequisite, from this very server, to spend time

this server has many problems.....
well, everything in life has flaws

and 1 major (in my opinion) is the gap between a lvl1 player to a lvl200 player
how can you bridge this gap? oh well, you simply can't!!!
but you can instead, decrease the distance of this bridge, of the time needed/required to get to the other side
and I'm in favor of this, simply because, it will give all players the opportunity to build more characters (other classes) and experiment with that, instead of sticking to one character
I mean, personally, every time I tried building a new character, I was discouraged, and quit, because its just a long journey, that requires big amounts of time and patience....would I like like to have more characters??? yes, because it will provide re-playability and fun playing a another character, but not go through the whole process.....

I would advise:
1. to make a few video playthroughs as a low-rank for the first 10 minutes in the few low-rank map that are now on server....
i could do some....when I get some time....

2. to convert some existing UT2k4 Assault maps into monster evolution....
there are more than 200 out there, on web....yeah, thats right....so, converting a few of them, meaning, adding DWMonsterSpawners and removing the defending teamplayers' start... it cant be that hard.....
especially for small maps, maps that will run for 10-15 mins max.....and these maps can be created for average player level 1- 75.....(low-ranks basically)
this will both provide more options for low-ranks, and help reduce the replayability of the existing maps

DW_Ant wrote:

I think the biggest problem most players have with the damage adjustment is the fact that their character is weakened when playing easy maps. They're right, I should not be penalizing them to play easy maps. I propose to reward the players for playing maps within their level range. If you're playing a map that's within your level range, all of the monsters' resistances are halved for you. If you're playing beyond the map's level, then the monsters' resistances are normal. If all players are beyond the map's level, then the monsters' resistances are halved for that player, too!

i didnt understand that part.....
do you mean that, if an r4 player plays an r4 map, then monsters will have half the resistances than before???

DW_WailofSuicide wrote:1. I find it really difficult to read your posts Christmas because you are expressing yourself in this fragmented way. I think your argument would be more effective if you clearly and concisely state your perspective rather than cutting out quotes and responding to quotes. I find it hard to follow your perspective as you're expressing it because it's disjointed.

I started out reading from the beginning thinking I could get caught up to the current conversation, but then I said, "eh...nvm."

christmas wrote:I would advise:
2. to convert some existing UT2k4 Assault maps into monster evolution....
there are more than 200 out there, on web....yeah, thats right....

That just might excite Ant since I'm sure he never knew that.

christmas wrote: it cant be that hard.....

Sounds like you're volunteering yourself.

christmas wrote:2. to convert some existing UT2k4 Assault maps into monster evolution....
there are more than 200 out there, on web....yeah, thats right....so, converting a few of them, meaning, adding DWMonsterSpawners and removing the defending teamplayers' start... it cant be that hard.....

That is where maps like Abyss, Argento, Frigate, Grand Canyon, Iguazu, Acatana, Jumpship, Vindication, Nano Clean, Nocturne, Resident Unreal, Seraphim Falling, Thrust, Torlan, Use of Weapons, and Wangara came from.

I would encourage you to convert a map first. No one is stopping you.

christmas wrote:do you mean that, if an r4 player plays an r4 map, then monsters will have half the resistances than before???

Technically, monster with 95% resistance is now 90%, and a monster with 50% resistance is now 0% (doubles the gap between 100% and current resistance).