The Negative Experience Cycle (race feedback)

"

nugiyen wrote:

3.

Can you just add class ladders already so players don't feel they are so far behind when they are in fact not. We have been wanting it for so long already and this clearly cannot be the hardest thing to implement.

Do you mean simply a /classladder command? Or do you mean to split up the firsts and first clears to award 2 points to the first person of each class? I believe it's the former but the 2 responses on the issue seem to imply they understood the latter:

"

Bawheidbob wrote:

I can agree on Hillock reward especially is kinda silly and should have been removed, If not then the suggested class break down would solve such things.

"

Double_Dare wrote:

2) Class ladders
The last idea filters into your idea of class ladders, which I agree are a necessity at this point. Especially in race events like descent having the players pooled together is really futile as your total ladder position has very little bearing on how skillfully you played.
And I agree, overall from a coding perspective this is not that difficult, just a minor restructuring of the way points are distributed and the ladder is viewed would fix this.

"

unsane wrote:

Do you mean simply a /classladder command? Or do you mean to split up the firsts and first clears to award 2 points to the first person of each class? I believe it's the former but the 2 responses on the issue seem to imply they understood the latter:

Well first of all we just need a separation ingame when racing the announcements should be for first and you class, with maybe UI options to disable either.
Should we have some sort of overall class ladder well it would be pretty cool. The important thing is that there is a line between how racing is done and how you gain points/wins versus how the ladder is setup.

Completely agree with the no nerfing cleave part. I think racing will become extremely tedious if cleave is nerfed. Also would like to see less variation with pack size across the board.

Also maybe make the boss fights more predictable, for instance Fidelitas, Brutus or Merveil slamming/meleeing multiple times in quick succession.

"

essau wrote:

Completely agree with the no nerfing cleave part. I think racing will become extremely tedious if cleave is nerfed. Also would like to see less variation with pack size across the board.

Also maybe make the boss fights more predictable, for instance Fidelitas, Brutus or Merveil slamming/meleeing multiple times in quick succession.

Not sure if I agree with the boss fights I do enjoy them being somewhat unpredictable. If anything the problem is the movement and desync issues that can occur with certain skills exacerbating the problem.

"

essau wrote:

Also maybe make the boss fights more predictable, for instance Fidelitas, Brutus or Merveil slamming/meleeing multiple times in quick succession.

Is fidelitas capable of anything else? If hes capable of doing anything besides spamming lightning strike, ive yet to see it.

The other two could definitely use work. Brutus skills dont get along with the netcode and merveils just a mindless gear check.

Monster Density inconsistency is something that should definitely be adressed. Ledge is really good example to this: sometimes you gain like 3½lvls, seeing only massive packs + alot of blues. sometimes you barely get 1-1½ lvls + the packs are scattered in the groups of 2-4

"

janimauk wrote:

Monster Density inconsistency is something that should definitely be adressed. Ledge is really good example to this: sometimes you gain like 3½lvls, seeing only massive packs + alot of blues. sometimes you barely get 1-1½ lvls + the packs are scattered in the groups of 2-4

Bro sometimes you can meet this kind of Ledge :

https://vimeo.com/74024860

I think they made it this way, only because of BOTS ( unpredictable areas ) a dev can probably confirm.

"

janimauk wrote:

Monster Density inconsistency is something that should definitely be adressed. Ledge is really good example to this: sometimes you gain like 3½lvls, seeing only massive packs + alot of blues. sometimes you barely get 1-1½ lvls + the packs are scattered in the groups of 2-4

grats on 3rd sig witch xD

In regards to monster density: I suggest the races all have fixed seed for all players on a given race, but that seed is not the same for the whole season. So event #160 would be the same layout for everyone, but that layout would not be the same as event #120. I used to think that's how fixed seed works but it turned out not to be the case. This modified version of fixed seed should apply to all races.

Loot could still be random, though.

"

boof wrote:

While I agree to a point (it is incredibly frustrating to lose a good run due to pack size rng),even if that were standardized, racers would just find the next rng element to pin their blames to. Map seed, pack sizes, pack positioning, loot... Where do you draw the line in what should be standardized for all players in a given race?

I think all these should be identical for everyone in a given race except loot. As long as each race has a different seed, racers wouldn't know whats coming so it shouldn't be a snoozefest. When you reach a bad density spot, you know everyone else has the same bad density and can adjust, which seems like it would be a good new feature of races.

The reason I separated loot is because it is hidden until after the player performs an action (kill the mob), nothing else is hidden that way. Equalizing that would make the race feel like they had greater dependence on luck, rather than less. Say a Silverbranch drops from some mob off a moderately small pack, everyone gets that Silverbranch. But only if they stopped to kill that one mob. The people who missed it essentially lost the race to a wave of Silverbranch users who didn't miss it. Since the result of the loot drop is hidden information, it would not be useful for it to be standardized across all players.

Anything which is not hidden information should be standardized, though.