Askora
06-29-2017, 05:02 AM
I originally posted this in the July 2017 Tuning Discussion - PRELIMINARY thread (http://forum.ironmaidenlegacy.com/showthread.php?6366)
Two things that would probably help the defense immensely in pvp, probably wouldn't be too hard to implement.
#1 - Probably best if this one were implemented when there are far fewer bugs plaguing the game. Quit showing the attacker my talisman setup. It makes it much easier for the attacker to identify which toon poses the greatest threat based on talismans. You'd still need to show the buffs that are applied, so some would be obvious, but for the ones that don't apply a buff you'd only find out after that toon attacked and it triggered.
#2 - This one might be easier and shouldn't keep people from being able to tell if something is a bug or not. Don't show what toons I have on defense. When the attacker goes to the battle screen, show them something like a relative strength for defense instead of what toons I have on defense. They'll find out what they have to fight once they go into battle. I know it was mentioned that NF is working on being able to show what team your defense faced, but that will always be after the battle is over. Offenses and defenses are not always the same. So, a revenge becomes a much greater risk and tailoring an offense to a particular defense can only be done after you've battled them at least once. Then switching up defenses makes a lot of sense because you don't want people to always know what you have.
Nice part about these is there is no scripting, only changes to the display. I think it would make pvp a lot more challenging.
A number of long time players and forum members have weighed in on that thread. It was suggested by Sparton that I move the discussion to it's own thread as it really isn't relevant to the coming update.
A synopsis of the discussion is that it seems most people are opposed as they feel it would be more RNG in the arena. I disagree as I feel it forces you to have a more balanced offense that is prepared for anything. I also suggested that maybe have it apply to only the top 250 or even 100 as I feel that would give a lot of incentive to stay in those positions throughout the week and potentially make the last few hours before reset less of a race.
Arguments against include more time involved playing pvp, but if a lot of people are taking longer than it doesn't really change rankings all that much. Less coins earned, although prices in the store could be adjusted to better match what people are earning. A greater chance of losing a battle in pvp, but isn't that why most of us don't have a level 1 3* Eddie as our sole defense?
This thread may die on the vine, but at this point it doesn't much matter. Sparton stated that the dev team really doesn't want to take the game this way. Apparently debuff and taunt are far less RNG than actually having to make a balanced team.
Putting this up so that maybe people can find it easier and give their opinions.
Some of my arguments for this type of system:
Defense becomes a lot more important. Not changing your defense could cost you.
A balanced offense becomes more important as you don't know what you'll be facing.
You might lose. So, as a result, some defensive hold rates might improve.
I don't think it would make a huge difference as I know I use one primary team for most of my pvp battles. I assume for most long time players it's about the same, so it wouldn't affect game play that significantly. I think it could actually help some of the more recent (smaller roster) players compete. Then there might be some new names on the pvp lists.
Two things that would probably help the defense immensely in pvp, probably wouldn't be too hard to implement.
#1 - Probably best if this one were implemented when there are far fewer bugs plaguing the game. Quit showing the attacker my talisman setup. It makes it much easier for the attacker to identify which toon poses the greatest threat based on talismans. You'd still need to show the buffs that are applied, so some would be obvious, but for the ones that don't apply a buff you'd only find out after that toon attacked and it triggered.
#2 - This one might be easier and shouldn't keep people from being able to tell if something is a bug or not. Don't show what toons I have on defense. When the attacker goes to the battle screen, show them something like a relative strength for defense instead of what toons I have on defense. They'll find out what they have to fight once they go into battle. I know it was mentioned that NF is working on being able to show what team your defense faced, but that will always be after the battle is over. Offenses and defenses are not always the same. So, a revenge becomes a much greater risk and tailoring an offense to a particular defense can only be done after you've battled them at least once. Then switching up defenses makes a lot of sense because you don't want people to always know what you have.
Nice part about these is there is no scripting, only changes to the display. I think it would make pvp a lot more challenging.
A number of long time players and forum members have weighed in on that thread. It was suggested by Sparton that I move the discussion to it's own thread as it really isn't relevant to the coming update.
A synopsis of the discussion is that it seems most people are opposed as they feel it would be more RNG in the arena. I disagree as I feel it forces you to have a more balanced offense that is prepared for anything. I also suggested that maybe have it apply to only the top 250 or even 100 as I feel that would give a lot of incentive to stay in those positions throughout the week and potentially make the last few hours before reset less of a race.
Arguments against include more time involved playing pvp, but if a lot of people are taking longer than it doesn't really change rankings all that much. Less coins earned, although prices in the store could be adjusted to better match what people are earning. A greater chance of losing a battle in pvp, but isn't that why most of us don't have a level 1 3* Eddie as our sole defense?
This thread may die on the vine, but at this point it doesn't much matter. Sparton stated that the dev team really doesn't want to take the game this way. Apparently debuff and taunt are far less RNG than actually having to make a balanced team.
Putting this up so that maybe people can find it easier and give their opinions.
Some of my arguments for this type of system:
Defense becomes a lot more important. Not changing your defense could cost you.
A balanced offense becomes more important as you don't know what you'll be facing.
You might lose. So, as a result, some defensive hold rates might improve.
I don't think it would make a huge difference as I know I use one primary team for most of my pvp battles. I assume for most long time players it's about the same, so it wouldn't affect game play that significantly. I think it could actually help some of the more recent (smaller roster) players compete. Then there might be some new names on the pvp lists.