Sorry El Capitano I will be sure to outline, draft, edit, re-draft, and then submit my posts to a Literature professor before posting them here. Really though considering some of the butchered posts on this forum, mine is barely one of the bad ones, but meh thats really not important. Getting right down to it my sucky language, spelling, or grammar doesn't blanketly invalidate my point. It might make it less clear (therein causing you to invalidate it) but it doesn't make it "wrong."
El Capitano the majority of the posts in the AA thread are people saying (this is a rough translation/summary) "don't change/change this because im a high level player" or "i have done the math" or "because IMO it sucks". Especially the high level player argument which gets played way too often. Some relative unknown will post in that thread and "high level players" will come down from Mount Olympus smack the "noob" around and tell him that his way is wrong & their way is "right" cause of their "playstyle" (as in the competitive, for the glory people, the ones who believe that Speedmetal can't be fun and that games shouldn't last 4 hours). I can't believe you don't see that. Not to mention the number of people who go "well in one game my or my enemy's XYZ did ABC and i think thats not right and u should change it." Caydr's goal isn't to tailor make a game for certain groups or specific people (except maybe himself) its to create what he wants the game to do/play like. Granted i don't think Caydr has this massive indepth Design Doc he is running off that has a clear set of goals as to what he wants but i think he has some sense of how he wants AA games to play.
In the end whether or not my post is "right," "wrong," or somewhere in between, i can't be sure you'll agree or much less even care about my point. Arguments on the interent generally have one consistent handicap: The participants can look at the screen and think "Man this asshole on the other end of the internet has no idea what we are talking about. I on the other hand do." This allows people to easily cast aside arguments with little to no thought. When it comes down to it, we all have our opinons and nothing except maybe the threat of physical violence is going to change them.
Oh and the reason im spelling ad hominem right (though i don't see where i spelled argument wrong) is cause i just did fallacies in a class of mine. And to be honest i hate fallacies because sometimes people end up arguing about fallacies rather than the actual subject of the argument.
Question for Caydr and other stuff
Moderator: Moderators
-
El Capitano
- Posts: 156
- Joined: 13 Oct 2006, 10:48
Seriously, j5mello, composing your post in the way you just have really does make it that much easier to read and it does make people more inclined to read it.
Personally, I think you're misinterpreting the people in the AA thread. The AA threads are there to solicit user feedback. There are some people who go over the top, but for the most part, each point is debated and there's nobody sitting there demanding Caydr make changes, they're providing the feedback they have. There are quite a few people being abrupt and using poorly thought-out ways of saying things, but you yourself have been just as guilty of not thinking through your wording.
Additionally, the high-level players really do have a lot of weight behind them. You may not like it, but the best players really do know the mechanics of the game and can tell if something's broken, largely because they've probably just found a dirty maneuver that owns all. I'm not saying this because I think I'm one of those players, I've just spent the past few days getting schooled by them
They really do know their stuff and they should be listened to. The ones you do have to look out for, though, are those who have their pet strategies that they don't want to see nerfed 
Personally, I think you're misinterpreting the people in the AA thread. The AA threads are there to solicit user feedback. There are some people who go over the top, but for the most part, each point is debated and there's nobody sitting there demanding Caydr make changes, they're providing the feedback they have. There are quite a few people being abrupt and using poorly thought-out ways of saying things, but you yourself have been just as guilty of not thinking through your wording.
Additionally, the high-level players really do have a lot of weight behind them. You may not like it, but the best players really do know the mechanics of the game and can tell if something's broken, largely because they've probably just found a dirty maneuver that owns all. I'm not saying this because I think I'm one of those players, I've just spent the past few days getting schooled by them
They really do know their stuff and they should be listened to. The ones you do have to look out for, though, are those who have their pet strategies that they don't want to see nerfed -
SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
"each point is debated" in the AA thread? Not the last time I read it, it's basically a bunch of retards raging anything that looks like it may lead to a change until caydr states that he'll make the change at which point the majority of them begrudgingly start believing it's a good idea.
The best players finding errors in the game is exactly why I said listen to players. As a game designer you should be able to look and see what problems are presenting them selfs and address them in your own creative way that still keeps the soul of the game intact. Just because one strategy involving a unit is too strong does not mean that that unit should be nerfed, it may mean that the counters are too weak, or the economy at that point is too slow, or various other game changing factors. Frankly only the game developer and a very small percentage of the players are able to understand a game in that depth.
The best players finding errors in the game is exactly why I said listen to players. As a game designer you should be able to look and see what problems are presenting them selfs and address them in your own creative way that still keeps the soul of the game intact. Just because one strategy involving a unit is too strong does not mean that that unit should be nerfed, it may mean that the counters are too weak, or the economy at that point is too slow, or various other game changing factors. Frankly only the game developer and a very small percentage of the players are able to understand a game in that depth.
-
Felix the Cat
- Posts: 2383
- Joined: 15 Jun 2005, 17:30
But if you look at a game (AA) as a product and the players as its customers, the creator of the product should create the product so as to appeal to the customers' needs and wants.
You argument is like if a perfume manufacturer decided to bottle skunk odor and sell it on the market. By your argument, when the people start complaining that the stuff stinks, the perfume manufacturer should look down its collective nose at them, adjust its monocle, and proclaim that the people do not understand the perfume business.
I guess it all depends on for whom a mod maker is making his mod. If he's making it for his own benefit, then he should do whatever makes him happy. If he's doing it for the players' benefit, however, then he should do whatever makes them happy. I contend that the latter type is played the most, while the former ends up in the "we need a dedicated server for this mod to get people to play it" category.
You argument is like if a perfume manufacturer decided to bottle skunk odor and sell it on the market. By your argument, when the people start complaining that the stuff stinks, the perfume manufacturer should look down its collective nose at them, adjust its monocle, and proclaim that the people do not understand the perfume business.
I guess it all depends on for whom a mod maker is making his mod. If he's making it for his own benefit, then he should do whatever makes him happy. If he's doing it for the players' benefit, however, then he should do whatever makes them happy. I contend that the latter type is played the most, while the former ends up in the "we need a dedicated server for this mod to get people to play it" category.
Felix you cannot compare strategy games to purfume, purfume has a specific well defined purpose, and is used only for that specific purpose. A strategy game has a much broader purpose. Yes it is a product and yes the players are the customers but within that product are a myriad of strategies and tactics available to the players. So in essence a strategy game is a collection of products, each appealing to a different play style. The problem of listening to people is that people even without realizing it, are going to request changes (even after consideration on their part) that tilt the game towards their playstyle whatever that may be. If you consistantly listen to one group of players or any group of players and implement their changes, you are either going to take the game to far towards one playing style and alienate all others. Or you may end up taking the game all over the place and end up with a very random balance set up that is not palatable to anyone.
As the mod maker you should have a design doc, or at the very least an Idea of how you want the mod to play and what hardline areas are not going to be altered significantly. Within that you should listen to player feedback of course, and get first hand experience yourself playing/viewing a variety of games to see all aspects of situations. However you should not always implement all these changes, and sometimes you shouldnt even implement changes people suggest. You need to maintain the balance between all the various available playstyles, your overall design goal, and fun. Alot fo the time this means ignoring what people tell you, even if they are "elite" players.
Im not trying to be insulting to caydr, but It seems to me that he has no clear plan/design/overall goal for how he wants AA to play. Because of this it seems at least to me to yo-yo through balance changes all the time, and swing back and forth, especially on some key issues. The overall game doesnt seem to be heading to some specific goal or method of gameplay. His latest decision on the spur of the moment to change the name and some other stuff only further illustrates this point. I think eventually AA will become disliked simply because it has no overall goal and so evolves in a random pattern that slowly alienates people from its gameplay as certain playstyles are weeded out by the people who play the most and get listened to.
As the mod maker you should have a design doc, or at the very least an Idea of how you want the mod to play and what hardline areas are not going to be altered significantly. Within that you should listen to player feedback of course, and get first hand experience yourself playing/viewing a variety of games to see all aspects of situations. However you should not always implement all these changes, and sometimes you shouldnt even implement changes people suggest. You need to maintain the balance between all the various available playstyles, your overall design goal, and fun. Alot fo the time this means ignoring what people tell you, even if they are "elite" players.
Im not trying to be insulting to caydr, but It seems to me that he has no clear plan/design/overall goal for how he wants AA to play. Because of this it seems at least to me to yo-yo through balance changes all the time, and swing back and forth, especially on some key issues. The overall game doesnt seem to be heading to some specific goal or method of gameplay. His latest decision on the spur of the moment to change the name and some other stuff only further illustrates this point. I think eventually AA will become disliked simply because it has no overall goal and so evolves in a random pattern that slowly alienates people from its gameplay as certain playstyles are weeded out by the people who play the most and get listened to.
Agreed. The high level players as you put it understand the dynamics of the mod, the intricacies which at a high level do make large differences when combined to the way the mod plays balance wise.Additionally, the high-level players really do have a lot of weight behind them. You may not like it, but the best players really do know the mechanics of the game and can tell if something's broken, largely because they've probably just found a dirty maneuver that owns all. I'm not saying this because I think I'm one of those players, I've just spent the past few days getting schooled by them They really do know their stuff and they should be listened to. The ones you do have to look out for, though, are those who have their pet strategies that they don't want to see nerfed
Then why does Caydr despise threads about changes to AA outside of the AA thread? I personally agree with you on this one swiftspear, but i dont see what alternatives we have so far as making suggestions goes if we cant post outside of the AA thread."each point is debated" in the AA thread? Not the last time I read it, it's basically a bunch of retards raging anything that looks like it may lead to a change until caydr states that he'll make the change at which point the majority of them begrudgingly start believing it's a good idea.
I dont think "high level" players should be granted special rights over opinions on AA as a mod, but i DO think that they have more reasonable and realistic suggestions to offer so far as the balance front goes (which seems to be Caydr's main priority with each AA version)
e.g.
Spring player who has played 30 hours of AA: Repeatedly spams demanding that the orcone be put back into the arm build list because without it "AA is totally unbalanced"
Spring player who has played 500 hours of AA: Asks for the radar to be reverted to OTA range, giving an explanation of why and how the current nerf makes an impact on the way games are played (radar becomes far less useful in many circumstances and lots of high level players simply dont build it anymore because the range nerf and cost buff means it simply isnt worth building in a lot of cases.)
Second spring player with 30 hours of experience in AA: Thinks that mavs are an abomination and are completely unbeatable, demanding that they "get fixed" with no specific suggestion or example of how or why.
Second spring player with 500+ hours experience in AA: Proposes that most games are currently majority ARM based, not many players are using core anymore. Gives reasons for this - Arm tech 1 and tech 2 vehicles are now at least on par with those of core (lightning tank is debatably overpowered and has no real substitute in the core vehicle list, considering speed and size, its new found rocket ability, which doubles as anti air, and low cost and build time. Goliath is no longer as effective as it used to be and bulldogs make as an easy substitute.) Core kbots can't compete with arm kbots (no good substitute for the maverick, for example) and ARM air is superior (arm fighters have more hp, for example) thus there is no core lab which is definately superior to that of arm (core vehicles used to be considered superior which encouraged more core players) Goes on to summarise how arm vs core plays out in general (why is everyone suddenly using arm on comet instead of core?)
So basically, the experienced players have enough knowledge and experience with each release of AA, and comparisons to previous releases to put forward some specific and informed judgements about the balance of the mod, and on top of that, decent suggestions.
The lesser experienced players dont know and perhaps dont really care about the finer details - they just want to see a particular unit or entire set of units "fixed" or "removed" because it keeps killing them in a game and they dont know how to deal with it.
I dont mean this for ALL cases, there are exceptions, but that to me at least seems to be the general trend. I think that when the high level players do post in the AA thread their posts are overwhelmed by dozens more from the lesser experienced, almost like a general "mob" and then key points get missed or forgotten, or simply Caydr cant prioritise them due to the huge masses of spam and flamebait.
-
Felix the Cat
- Posts: 2383
- Joined: 15 Jun 2005, 17:30
Fanger, again, it's the difference between making your product (your mod) to specifications set by you because you think they are right, or to specifications set by the customers (those who play the mod).
You say that I can't compare strategy games to perfume, because perfume has a specific, well-defined purpose. So do strategy games. They are made to entertain people. You can make a design document and stick rigidly and unfailingly to it, but in the end, if you fail to entertain people how they want to be entertained, your mod will have very few players. (See also: all of the Final Frontier drama.) No amount of whining about how AA steals all of your players, or begging for a dedicated server or free advertising in the Spring lobby, will gain your mod players.
Now, the players want a balanced game that is fun to play. However, they shouldn't determine the exact details of how the game is balanced. It is, again, like perfume: the customers want something that smells good, but they don't tell the people who run the perfume-making lab to add three drops of this, two drops of that, four drops of that, and one drop of the other.
You say that I can't compare strategy games to perfume, because perfume has a specific, well-defined purpose. So do strategy games. They are made to entertain people. You can make a design document and stick rigidly and unfailingly to it, but in the end, if you fail to entertain people how they want to be entertained, your mod will have very few players. (See also: all of the Final Frontier drama.) No amount of whining about how AA steals all of your players, or begging for a dedicated server or free advertising in the Spring lobby, will gain your mod players.
Now, the players want a balanced game that is fun to play. However, they shouldn't determine the exact details of how the game is balanced. It is, again, like perfume: the customers want something that smells good, but they don't tell the people who run the perfume-making lab to add three drops of this, two drops of that, four drops of that, and one drop of the other.
10 days is a month nowadays? ^^
sorry I went away for a while and this thread particularly intrested me thats all.
I like to read peoples views on game balance etc I find it really interesting, im a bit sad really hehe
sorry I went away for a while and this thread particularly intrested me thats all.
I like to read peoples views on game balance etc I find it really interesting, im a bit sad really hehe
Last edited by rinkydink on 17 Nov 2006, 23:44, edited 1 time in total.
suggestions, ideeas have the same effectSeveral of Your sycophants seem to think that criticizing any of Your work is tantamount to heresy
exactly"each point is debated" in the AA thread? Not the last time I read it, it's basically a bunch of retards raging anything that looks like it may lead to a change until caydr states that he'll make the change at which point the majority of them begrudgingly start believing it's a good idea.
since AA thread prolongs into the AA forum its the same stuff
i quit that path to darkness
especially because most of them don't know what are they talking about, and thats the part that rages most in those threadsPardon me for the sidetrack, but this cannot be allowed to pass.
MrNubyagi, you were the individual pushing a number of points, refusing to modify your own views when confronted with logical arguments and then closing all your threads whether they were generally supported or not in a burst of passive-aggressive activity which culminated in direct insult to an array of your peers.
I cannot think that there is any comparison between you and Felix, and I am shocked that you would have the audacity to imply such with so little experience with him or the matters at hand.
The fact that some of your ideas were met with resistance does not stem from the fact that they were ideas or suggestions. Nor did it stem from the fact that you posed them - there was no inherent resistance to you in the AA thread or Caydr's forum until you insulted and alienated your peers. The ideas which were actively thrown out were countered because they were either directly detrimental or insufficently delineated, and others could explain why.
You are free to take criticism of your ideas personally and demonstrate a considerable amount of arrogance, but understand that you only harm yourself in doing so. You are free to judge others on a single experience, but you only narrow your own world in doing so. You are free to paint yourself a victim while denouncing and denigrating those who disagree with you whether they do so with or without civility, but you will be the only person fooled by the charade.
MrNubyagi, you were the individual pushing a number of points, refusing to modify your own views when confronted with logical arguments and then closing all your threads whether they were generally supported or not in a burst of passive-aggressive activity which culminated in direct insult to an array of your peers.
I cannot think that there is any comparison between you and Felix, and I am shocked that you would have the audacity to imply such with so little experience with him or the matters at hand.
The fact that some of your ideas were met with resistance does not stem from the fact that they were ideas or suggestions. Nor did it stem from the fact that you posed them - there was no inherent resistance to you in the AA thread or Caydr's forum until you insulted and alienated your peers. The ideas which were actively thrown out were countered because they were either directly detrimental or insufficently delineated, and others could explain why.
You are free to take criticism of your ideas personally and demonstrate a considerable amount of arrogance, but understand that you only harm yourself in doing so. You are free to judge others on a single experience, but you only narrow your own world in doing so. You are free to paint yourself a victim while denouncing and denigrating those who disagree with you whether they do so with or without civility, but you will be the only person fooled by the charade.