Game Master Joel driving players away

[trash beast]

Frustration isn't fun.

It appears that HD is too popular and there are to many people playing. I understand that from AH's view, they already have our money, so it doesn't matter if they alienate the community. It looks like every bug planet now has a stratagem debuff, making hard missions unplayably frustrating. I don't know who at AH thinks that random death's, from meteor's and tornado's effects, to making stratagems, one of the core gameplay elements, unreliable, inconsistent, and random, add's to the strategic depth of the experience, but it doesn't. It appears that AH doesn't have any new ideas to improve gameplay, so they chose to reduce the tools we have, and take away from the released game, for "balance" instead of innovating with new difficulty levels, environments, missions, enemies......

Frustration isn't fun. If its not fun, players will move on to other things that are fun.

[Echo2Omega]

Originally posted by SKAPPELTON:

Game was already doomed when they released the balancing patches without testing them.

There are players doing extensive and exhausting weapon testing. (google it)

You would be surprised to learn that the game is far far more balanced than you would expect.

[Wiawyr]

Originally posted by Echo2Omega:

Originally posted by SKAPPELTON:

Game was already doomed when they released the balancing patches without testing them.

There are players doing extensive and exhausting weapon testing. (google it)

Yeah, us. The paying customers. That's the problem.

Originally posted by Echo2Omega:

You would be surprised to learn that the game is far far more balanced than you would expect.

I think most people would be very surprised, because that doesn't hold up in actual gameplay. But, perhaps you have an actual source for this claim? And no, saying "google it" is not a source for your claim.

[Glenn Gorblin]

People are still to used to having things handed to them eh? Good to know.

[Squishy]

Originally posted by Echo2Omega:

Originally posted by SKAPPELTON:

Game was already doomed when they released the balancing patches without testing them.

There are players doing extensive and exhausting weapon testing. (google it)

You would be surprised to learn that the game is far far more balanced than you would expect.

All of those "extensive and exhausting weapon testing" videos are all a few kills spent at specific enemies and you never see them actually play the video game in it's entirety on D7-9 (hell, debatably D4-6 with how absurd the spawns are on those, they feel the same as D7-9).

None of what they do is remotely relevant to actual gameplay. Anybody who spent more than 5 minutes in a mission can clearly see that they've been baited by "content creators" that get success through misinformation and clickbait.

I don't need them to tell me what is meta or not or what gun is better than another. Play the game yourself. Preferably higher than D1-3. You'll see very well just how many weapons in the game are flat out under-performing or useless. This community's desperate over-reliance on content creators and meta gamers are a severe meme and hindrance on discussion.

Think for yourself for once in your life. Play on D7-9 for once. Test every weapon in a 3-4 man mission like a normal person and actually do the mission rather than kill a couple enemies and call it a day.

[Marik]

Originally posted by ⬆➡⬇⬇⬇:

Don't you love it when the planet you work so hard to liberate last night just got take over again 6 hour later?

Afghanistan moment

[Ishan451]

Originally posted by Squishy:

None of what they do is remotely relevant to actual gameplay.

So you are suggesting higher difficulties introduce arbitrary stat differences in guns and their performance will widely differ from lower difficulties?

Have you actually listened to yourself or is the outrage high numbing your senses?

Originally posted by Squishy:

Anybody who spent more than 5 minutes in a mission can clearly see that they've been baited by "content creators" that get success through misinformation and clickbait.

I hope you do have evidence for your slanderous claims of misinformation.

Originally posted by Squishy:

I don't need them to tell me what is meta or not or what gun is better than another.

Comparing damage values and making inferences based on said values is not dictating the Meta.

Originally posted by Squishy:

You'll see very well just how many weapons in the game are flat out under-performing or useless.

Or maybe, just maybe, they don't gel with your playstyle? You are starting with a Primary and a Secondary for a reason. You can use the Secondary to cover the weakspots of the Primary, thus allowing you to swap between the two as situation demands and increase the usefulness of the Primary you elected to bring.

For example if you take a Senator along as Secondary you do have mendium armor penetration to employ against Hive Guard, allowing you to even bring a Liberator Concussive, and make use of the high fire rate and stagger to deal with smaller Bugs and Bots. While reserving the Senator for heavier targets. If you then add another weapon to this mix, like a Support Weapon, you will suddenly have 3 choices to pick from when engaging the enemy.

And mind you, i am not saying you should pick a liberator, i am saying that any weapon can be viable on Difficulty 9. Some work better with your playstyle than others. The Scythe, for example, works well if you do not play aggressive, but instead hang a bit back behind your team, where you can utilize the fact that you have infinite ammo and enough distance to the enemy. But it requires a change in playstyle and a lot of people do not like a more defensive playstyle, but rather perfer to run and gun.

Originally posted by Squishy:

This community's desperate over-reliance on content creators and meta gamers are a severe meme and hindrance on discussion.

What discussions? You are railing against content creators that compile weapon stats by testing them. Without someone running these tests, there is no discussion to be had because all it boils down to is "i feel this gun under-/overperforms". Nobody needs to or wants to hear you discuss feelings outside their therapists office.

Having content creators spend hours and hours to test say Laser weaponry, to gather some actual data on the Laser weapons we have in the game, and not just a brief "i feel like this is a bit weak"... is what actually enables us to have discussions.

Originally posted by Squishy:

Think for yourself for once in your life. Play on D7-9 for once. Test every weapon in a 3-4 man mission like a normal person and actually do the mission rather than kill a couple enemies and call it a day.

And then you will have found a weapon that works for you and you alone. You definitely should do this, but there are no discussions to be had. Especially not when they are being had like you do right now, where everything that does not meet your taste is trash. You can't make it work, thus it is trash. And people that collect objective, empirical data are bad.

Yeah, content creators that just release "Tier lists" are useless, but those aren't the content creators that were reference. We know about the Patrol Mechanic because content creators spend hours testing it on their live streams. Way more time spend on this than we could ever do, while having an actual job.

A couple days ago we got a video comparing all the Laser weapons in the game, with exception of the sickle. With actual numbers to go along with it. And for example showing how ineffective the Orbital Laser is against Brood Commanders. That isn't some tier list telling you their feelings about what should be the flavor of the month.

Those are just as pointless as people on the forums proclaim Gear X to be trash, because they tried it 1-4 times and didn't like it. Some weapons require specific playstyles to be good.

[Saint Jimmy]

to me the presence of game master is suspicious

1. the game promises collective progress, yet that progress can be easily erased by instant invasion
2. there are troll kicking problems in the game, yet the game master is silent

the game master tend to do what he shouldn't and not do what he should

[Namethatworks]

Originally posted by agps44:

to me the presence of game master is suspicious

1. the game promises collective progress, yet that progress can be easily erased by instant invasion
2. there are troll kicking problems in the game, yet the game master is silent

the game master tend to do what he shouldn't and not do what he should

The game master can't control players, they control where & when invasions happen.

[Ishan451]

Originally posted by agps44:

to me the presence of game master is suspicious

1. the game promises collective progress, yet that progress can be easily erased by instant invasion

The presence of a GM that would influence the gameplay was a big selling point of the pre-release hype.

You knew what you were getting into, if you did a little due diligence about the game.

Originally posted by agps44:

2. there are troll kicking problems in the game, yet the game master is silent

Not that kind of gamemaster and the Devs already said they are looking into the situation. But they can't just remove the Kick feature, because it exists for a reason. You'd just shift the problem from an easily rectified situation via "hosting yourself" to a situation where you can have grievers join your game and you have no recourse against them.

[Namethatworks]

Originally posted by Ishan451:

Originally posted by agps44:

to me the presence of game master is suspicious

1. the game promises collective progress, yet that progress can be easily erased by instant invasion

The presence of a GM that would influence the gameplay was a big selling point of the pre-release hype.

You knew what you were getting into, if you did a little due diligence about the game.

Originally posted by agps44:

2. there are troll kicking problems in the game, yet the game master is silent

Not that kind of gamemaster and the Devs already said they are looking into the situation. But they can't just remove the Kick feature, because it exists for a reason. You'd just shift the problem from an easily rectified situation via "hosting yourself" to a situation where you can have grievers join your game and you have no recourse against them.

Like I've said in all the "vote to ban" posts. Hosts will just start closing their game if that change was made.

Fixing the ingame friends list would fix alot of the kicking issues as friend groups could finally play in private games.

[RobeRonin]

Well not really! I mean its how they intend the game to be driving people away lol its so easy to see he {Joel}is just delaying players in between battle pass`s and any one can see a main progression of guns is in the battle pass and this never in history of game creation has gone well for the consumer no matter how it seems now lol the game is poorly made barely works has barely worked since it came out and at best is broken fun with friends!

As far as the game goes it lacks content and the design choices are everything wrong with modern gaming. Yet some how people have been confused by kids yelling democracy and content creators who just do what ever the mass`s say for clicks !

Go to nearly any other game in this genre and look at the horrible reviews and then actually compare the content etc to this and its mind blowing and is a prime example of how misinformation is hurting things we love!!!!

[adobo]

Originally posted by Squishy:

All of those "extensive and exhausting weapon testing" videos are all a few kills spent at specific enemies and you never see them actually play the video game in it's entirety on D7-9 (hell, debatably D4-6 with how absurd the spawns are on those, they feel the same as D7-9).

That's why its called testing. They do it in a controlled environment to get an accurate result with no outside factors affecting the test.

[Wiawyr]

Originally posted by adobo:

Originally posted by Squishy:

All of those "extensive and exhausting weapon testing" videos are all a few kills spent at specific enemies and you never see them actually play the video game in it's entirety on D7-9 (hell, debatably D4-6 with how absurd the spawns are on those, they feel the same as D7-9).

That's why its called testing. They do it in a controlled environment to get an accurate result with no outside factors affecting the test.

Do we play in a controlled environment?

[IndianaJones]

Originally posted by adobo:

Originally posted by Squishy:

All of those "extensive and exhausting weapon testing" videos are all a few kills spent at specific enemies and you never see them actually play the video game in it's entirety on D7-9 (hell, debatably D4-6 with how absurd the spawns are on those, they feel the same as D7-9).

That's why its called testing. They do it in a controlled environment to get an accurate result with no outside factors affecting the test.

I think what he meant was to playtest of new changes. You don't use dev environment but build that is same or similar to public build and see how those changes coherent with other systems in the game, so you have a full picture, and not just some small, "unrealistic", controlled environment feedback.

[sithstone]

I am currently in a "feels bad" situation in that the planetary defenses on the bug front. It just feels real bad. The last Major Order had 2 planets get liberated and then lose 5% a few hours after players moved on. Liberating them twice in the same day. Oshaune has now recieved 3 planetary defenses. Hellmire at least 1 and Estanu had 2. All but one Planetary defense failing. It just feels bad. DMs should not take away your victories and that's what it feels like.
Defend is being overused. Joel could instead increase the planetary regen mechanic grinding progress to a halt. Players would need to keep at it to prevent backsliding. I would honestly feel better about that than losing planets hard fought over. In the case of Oshaune 5 times already.