Alex & Adam - Getting +1 Wit for Kills: Why it's a really poor change to Outwitters

[Go Time]

(10-26-2012 03:12 PM)Promicide Wrote:  Oh and for those of you threatening to leave the community due to the change you can and WILL be replaced. I hate to put it like this but OML has probably gotten the money they needed from you, so financially they aren't missing out. I don't think many of those players will leave anyway until there is a resource-asynchronous-TBS game for iOS that can measure up to this one. Ill say it too, easily the best app on the app store.

If players were as easy to come by as you suggest, the devs wouldn't be doing everything they can to increase the user base would they?? And no reason for you to get all pissy about it either. Calm down

[=) Random Task (=]

(10-26-2012 01:23 PM)CombatEX Wrote:  This is a similar to the point above, the game doesn't seem to need fixing. At least, not with such a major change to the fundamental gameplay. Maybe things like some minor unit balancing *cough* non-predeployed Heavy *cough*, but not a major overhaul like this.

I imagine the wit for kill rule may increase the heavy units tactical value as it is more likely to achieve a kill if within reach to attack. Also it is a unit which is more expensive to be killed (in wits terms) than all other units.

I'd be interested to play wit for kill as an optional/alternative game style while retaining the option to play classical games as well.

[ArtNJ]

27-4 against is more than a knee jerk reaction against change; most people just dont think its a good idea.

Alex & Adam have to put their own opinion over that of the masses to some degree, but 27-4 against is pretty striking.

Respect, but why push this on your faithful players if they dont want it, and you dont think it will help your bottom line?

[joelduque]

(10-26-2012 11:42 PM)ArtNJ Wrote:  27-4 against is more than a knee jerk reaction against change; most people just dont think its a good idea.

Alex & Adam have to put their own opinion over that of the masses to some degree, but 27-4 against is pretty striking.

Respect, but why push this on your faithful players if they dont want it, and you dont think it will help your bottom line?

I guess the devs have every right of game direction or future.

[GreatGonzales]

I still haven't voted, abstaining from judgement until I can test it myself.

[bmike]

This is a long thread, but one mistake I see being made is that many seem to be forgetting that the game mechanics are a bit like a putting green.

We all learned on greens with certain attributes and changed our swing, tools and style to adapt to that baseline. Most have found success in using the pieces with the rules in place to become confident when to make piece X and when to attack, how to defend and such.

Taking this change in isolation is impossible since no-one has played with just the +1 AFAIK. (yes, you could make paper pieces - but the fog of war is hard without two sets of paper and someone to be the referee to let you know what you can see on your next move).

My impression is that if you are on the fence in the old rules - you don't attack since a counter attack is generally easier to make than the initial attack - especially in the first 30 turns of a game when you might not know what the defense has done.

This change will loosen that up a bit and also make it more subtle to make your defense, since both the attack and counter attack can reach further than in the past. This clearly is an anti-turtling change and I support it.

Even if it is a mistake, they can't really test it without letting everyone play with it, adapt to the changes and then get 100 games in on the new style. Only then will we (and they) know if this was a good change. At that point, they could reverse it, change it (perphaps fractional wit bonuses and/or more bonus for killing a more robust piece) if needed once enough people have adapted their play style to the "new design of the putting greens".

With less friction on attacking - sometimes you'll want to back off and be more gentle - other times, you will be able to swing harder - but it depends a lot on the board, the pieces and also the relative WIT balance between you and your opponent at the moment.

I've played a lot of beta games and one thing is certain - I feel it will make the game more fresh and fun - even if it's something that needs further tweaking, I am happy the developers are looking to make it more fun and let us play with some modified rules to see if it's better.

[oneadamleft]

Let's all love each other. There's a Super-Titan inside each and every one of us.

We're listening, and being very thorough in our observations. You can trust us. We make games for a living. If you're here, I think you might've even liked one.

If kill bonuses aren't doing what we intended (more interesting momentum shifts, less stalemate, less predictability), or if it has a negative consequence that's demonstrated in the data (not in just in theory), we won't go through with it.

Beta testers: send us replays. Invite us to games (oneadamleft). Show us what's wrong.

[=) Random Task (=]

(10-27-2012 12:47 AM)oneadamleft Wrote:  Let's all love each other. There's a Super-Titan inside each and every one of us.

We're listening, and being very thorough in our observations. You can trust us. We make games for a living. If you're here, I think you might've even liked one.

If kill bonuses aren't doing what we intended (more interesting momentum shifts, less stalemate, less predictability), or if it has a negative consequence that's demonstrated in the data (not in just in theory), we won't go through with it.

Beta testers: send us replays. Invite us to games (oneadamleft). Show us what's wrong.

Adam, I think what you do is pretty cool. Including the process to making changes to the game. Showing up in this thread and explaining your rationale is highly appreciated!

[Harti]

(10-27-2012 12:47 AM)oneadamleft Wrote:  Beta testers: send us replays. Invite us to games (oneadamleft). Show us what's wrong.

I'll do my very best, then :O

[Promicide]

(10-26-2012 04:06 PM)Go Time Wrote:  

(10-26-2012 03:12 PM)Promicide Wrote:  Oh and for those of you threatening to leave the community due to the change you can and WILL be replaced. I hate to put it like this but OML has probably gotten the money they needed from you, so financially they aren't missing out. I don't think many of those players will leave anyway until there is a resource-asynchronous-TBS game for iOS that can measure up to this one. Ill say it too, easily the best app on the app store.

If players were as easy to come by as you suggest, the devs wouldn't be doing everything they can to increase the user base would they?? And no reason for you to get all pissy about it either. Calm down

I would like to apologize to you and the community if I came across as "pissy". It's hard, for me to comprehend why someone would make such empty threats and ultimatums. I do respect everyone's opinion, but if someone says "well if they change the game then I'm leaving", then I can only assume that person is so ego-centered, so full of themselves they can't see past their own two hands. It's negativity that spawns more negativity. Ill be the first to admit that I am an expressly passionate guy..and I see how it can be taken as such.

I'm not saying players are easy or hard to come by. However I agree retainability of players is key in any marketing strategy. Know what else is? Keeping it relevant, and change is the proponent of that. Being the FIRST person in this poll to vote "this change will improve the game", I stand by my opinion that this is just the change we need. From the most skillful ST's (and Masters ) to the most squishy of the Fluffies.