Massive Assault Official Forum
   
It is currently Tue Aug 21, 2018 4:30 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 12:22 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 3:00 pm
Posts: 693
Karma: 0

Location: University of Tennessee, USA
And I'm afraid of an MA version of BGH taking over.

_________________
Q: How many ADHD people does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: Oooh look, a kitty!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 1:07 pm 
Offline
Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2004 5:49 pm
Posts: 157
Karma: 0
Artanis.. what is BGH?

Quitch... you're saying that gameplay options(I almost said 'more,' but there aren't any to start with) will make the game less popular?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 5:57 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 1:26 pm
Posts: 821
Karma: 0
No.

_________________
"Massive Assault is a game for those, who like to think. In this game random factor exists without doubt, but it doesn't play a decisive role." - Tiger


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 6:55 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 3:00 pm
Posts: 693
Karma: 0

Location: University of Tennessee, USA
BGH is short for Big Game Hunters, a StarCraft map.

One of the multiplayer maps in StarCraft was called "The Hunters". It was an 8-player map (which was as big as SC maps got), and was pretty well balanced. At some point, somebody decided to use the map editor to increase the resources in each node by a couple orders of magnitude, rename it "Big Game Hunters", and play it on the 'net.

Playing on Big Game Hunters took out most of the strategy and virtually all of the micromanagement while vastly unbalancing the races. Unfortunately, it became so widespread that it was virtually impossible to find a Melee (regular) game on anything except Big Game Hunters, which really sucked for those of us who didn't like it.

_________________
Q: How many ADHD people does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: Oooh look, a kitty!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 25, 2004 12:34 am 
Offline
Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2004 5:49 pm
Posts: 157
Karma: 0
Artanis... thanks for the response. I understand what you mean, although I confess I didn't consider that point of view prior to your response. The situation with BGH must have really suc*ed.

Quitch... sorry, not sure what you meant then. I'm just a gamer, never been involved with development of a game of any kind and I don't claim to understand all of the intricacies of successfully marketing an entertainment product, but I still think offering added value in the form of gameplay options designed to let gamers tailor game instances to their particular tastes would increase the popularity of the game. I know you disagree, and I respect that. Unfortunately, if you weren't stating that the addition of gameplay options would be detrimental to the popularity of MA/MAN I'm not sure what you mean. Would you please explain?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 17, 2004 5:36 am 
Offline
Tough Nut

Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:19 am
Posts: 20
Karma: 0
Lots of advices as for balancing PL.

1. More resources for first 2 disclosed FNU countries +1 for Low (9$) +2 for Med (14$) +3 for High (21$)
2. +2 hitpoints for guerilla LAVs during the first turn (but as normal at later turns)
3. More guerilla resources as responce on the first attack.
4. PL can not deploy on border during the first turn.
5. PL can not deploy transport during the first turn.
6. Better secret allies configuration for FNU.
7. -1 HP for units that cross border during the first turn.

Pick one.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 17, 2004 9:37 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 3:00 pm
Posts: 693
Karma: 0

Location: University of Tennessee, USA
Or just give FNU slightly better units in MAPR. That'd work too.

_________________
Q: How many ADHD people does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: Oooh look, a kitty!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 6:17 am 
Offline
Tough Nut

Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:19 am
Posts: 20
Karma: 0
Artanis wrote:
Or just give FNU slightly better units in MAPR. That'd work too.

It's unfair as for large maps...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: I have 1 idea about this but dunno you all like it or not.
PostPosted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 8:21 am 
First, we already have random side to set in game. Which after start the game, server will random give someone to play as PL while another is FNU.

So now I want to suggest that beside that, the developer can easily change something on it.
That is PL will not always move first.
That mean after both disclose 2 place and end that phase. The game only start choosing who to move first(NOT always PL move first, so PL will not always have that advantage)

With this, each one when planning to put units at first time in 2 disclose place, they have to plan carefully because until that time, you still dunno whether you are going to move first or not. (so from normally safety thing, I think both players will plan in defending first) if someone plan in attacking, then I sure that he/she is gambling. :D

If both players start defending in first turn, then I think it is quite balance for both side, when reach 2 turn, both side already have at least 1 turn to do something (defend more/attack/ move some units to gain some advantages)

so how is this idea?
Is that acceptable by developer and all players?

I know that if developer want to change this GAME rules, it is very easy, but dunno you all like it or not.

Hope to listen from you all about it.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 11:20 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 3:00 pm
Posts: 693
Karma: 0

Location: University of Tennessee, USA
Having one side or the other go first every time has its advantages...like me, I prefer a double-challenge over random anyways, ensuring that each person gets the first-turn advantage once. Also, because there's the option of challenging as a random side, it lets the players decide whether to let the computer pick who goes first.

Sure, there will be more differences than just turn order in MAPR, but that just means that double matches will become even more so the fairest way to do things.



And q is right, I hadn't thought about big maps when I mentioned giving FNU better units.

_________________
Q: How many ADHD people does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: Oooh look, a kitty!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 22, 2005 5:51 pm 
Offline
Levy

Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 12:31 pm
Posts: 3
Karma: 0
The problem has been observed...

Why hasn't anything been done?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 28, 2005 4:22 am 
Offline
P.L. Marshal
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 11:14 am
Posts: 1065
Karma: 0
btw..in the upcoming MA-Netwars during initial disclosure phase FNU will be able to see how PL discloses.This feature not only completely eliminates any kind of so called "first turn advantage" (about which here was so much whining) but also gives great advantage to FNU and makes PL restrained in their initial disclose planning.I personally was against such a feature but i suppose now all those anti-PL whiners will have to shut up.

_________________
Vestigia nulla retrorsum!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Karma functions powered by Karma MOD © 2007, 2009 m157y