Okay now I can't join a room without crashing (tried 5 times). It's the crash where you try to join a room and nothing happens, until you try again / try to change servers / close your inventory and then the game freezes indefinitely. I tried 5 times, no luck, even while first logging onto an empty server.
"at least 2v2" means, at least 2v2 when the game starts or when it ends?
Also, If you crash leave through a match (crash might be a more accurate word) does it still count toward the completion of the event?
I love these events, but now that you have the code, you should probably integrate it into the client the way some events were in the past, so that we can track our progress and be certain that we are going to get the reward in the end.
If even that is hard to implement, I don't want to know how bad S4 league's code is.
I know, is the answer the periodic table of elements?
I'm so good at this.
I literally can't play.I crashed right at the start of a game six times in a row. Is there anything I can do to reduce the likelihood of a crash?
If you ever do me.. I must have a motherly, yet evil, smile on my as the world burns around me BWAHAHAHAHA
I picture you better with camping gear, setting up a tent on top of some roof...
(JK, always a pleasure to play against you).
I know it sounds cliche, but APM matters.
Actions Per Minute? What does that have to do with anything?
Whatever the delay is for sprinting, single tap is faster anyway. Even if you can double tap a key with a frequency of 20 Hz (which I doubt is even possible for a human), it's still 0.05 seconds slower than a single press.
The more buttons you use, the more your hands have to stretch or move.
S4 doesn't have enough useful keys that it would be a problem, hell most players still have the emote selection key on e (or q I don't remember which is which). I could easily imagine sprint as shift and skill on q or e. But of course, as an option or something.
That means slower reaction time
Double tapping also means slower reaction time though, since it takes longer to perform.
As for PvE and S4L, I actually like how the AI is in Arcade. It feels like you're fighting actual players. Actual players automatically lock onto you or your previous position because they look quickly, AIs can just do this auto and it's the same difference.
Whaaaaaat? What kind of players do you play against usually? Mine do not walk in a straight line before standing still and shooting at me. Mine do not lock onto my exact position like they have an aimbot nor do they lock onto my previous position. Human aim is difficult to emulate, people have a degree of inaccuracy, a reaction time. They try to predict your movement, are thrown off when it is erratic and adapt to your dodging pattern if it's too repetitive.
Just look at the bishops and queens in cube defense, you just have to move to one direction parallel to them and they can't hit you ever. As for the gunners in scenario mode, they're automatically locked on you like a sentry and you can't dodge anything they do. They're just a straight DPScheck.
Heck, I think i'd wanna start a thread about QoL suggestions if I wasn't so lazy.
I thought about doing it a while ago. Ima list off a few of my grievances just for fun.
-The warning messages for your team s*ck. Reset is so far off that I can't reach it quickly when playing, and yet it's the most useful one. It should be possible to hotkey them to F keys at the very least.
-Remember when the screen didn't get stuck on the respawn area when the enemy team scored? I want that again.
-Why are the two loading screens separate (with the server selection screen inbetween)?
-The waiting time when enchanting items/chips needs to go.
-The waiting time on switching characters needs to go.
-I want a way to tell from a glance if my F skill is available of if there's still a tenth of a second left.
-I want a dot in the middle of the screen when playing sharpshooter (if an intentional drawback of your weapon gets bypassed by drawing a dot in the middle of the screen with a sharpie, then it's probably not good design)
-Why is it impossible to bind an action to left click, right click and other mouse buttons (but the scroll wheel is fine for some reason).
-The pause during half time is too long, cut it to just character changes, it looks pretty bad anyway.
Action Hack n Slash games are best done with double-tap
On keyboard though? I mean, I don't play many hack'n slash so I'll have to believe you. I mostly play shooters and a few platformers so I might have missed that it still existed.
I just know that having to double tap to dodge in Nier Automata tilted me so hard I had to switch to controller to have a decent control scheme (for my defense, my first playthrough was hard mode). So I figured it might be the same for new players and such.
Clan missions PvE (larger arcade mode)
I am doubtful. I mean, every time a dev has tried to combine PvE and S4 league what ensued was a disaster. Enemies automatically locking on to you or to your previous position, walking forward and queuing an attack when you are in range for the melee ones. On top of that, nothing of the platforming aspect of the game has carried over so far. I guess they didn't want to give us any walls to WS from.
Though I guess if you can make it work, then it might not be a bad idea.
Speaking of which, I'm just going to throw it out there.
No. More. WS.
Seeing the current trends, the only way it would work is if the remake is a battle royale game.
But more seriously, let's entertain the idea of a remake for a moment. in the current environment you can't release a game where you have to two-tap forward to sprint, that's just not a thing anymore (so that would have to go somehow I think). The chain wall jump mechanics probably also deserve an update, we all got used to double wall jumping so we don't realise that it's hella janky.
Aside from that, if I were tasked to remake S4, I would make it a bit easier to do cool sh*t. Very few people are willing to learn frame perfect or pixel perfect tricks anymore, you wouldn't believe what passes for "advanced tech" in modern shooters.
Like, I would increase the window to realise certain techs such as instant wall jump, reload cancel and such, and add some pixels where you can stand to make certain jumps more doable.
Ice Square is based on RustyGarden map
What? Rusty garden had a two layers middle area, disjointed spawn and goalpost, and one short and trouble free way to the goalpost from mid. The two maps are neither close in design or in the way they play (I had to practice it for a small tournament a while ago). Unless you can explain me what they have in common.
Me. If you know what is so special about it, then feel free to share.
it is also probably one of the worst designed maps as well. You can score faster than one can even respawn and you can get sniped across the map just by leaving the spawn. Heck, the only safe place to defend is a wall in front of the goal and you can still get sniped from an angle and one bomb is enough to flush your whole team from that single spot.
It's quick to get to the action, there's a lot of fancy stuff that you can do, several angles of attack, it allows for a variety of playstyles, and offense and defense are pretty well balanced. I thought I made that clear in my first post.
I don't think it's a flaw of the map that you can score faster than one can spawn, it's part of the challenge of the map that you have to make sure that a counter attack will not go unchallenged, and it is achieved through good decisionmaking, that is facilitated by the fact that it's pretty easy to get a global vision of the map from basically anywhere.
And yeah, snipers and bombs (and a lot of other stuff) are an issue, but they have only become an issue as of late, and you cannot expect a map to be designed taking the balance 4 years later in consideration. Then again, you'll be hard pressed to find any touch down map that the current state of balanced has not made significantly worse.
I think Ice Square was an attempt at replicating the success of sta-2.
There is a long way with some amount of cover, a short way that is quick but easier to defend with lasers on top, the spawns are right next to the goalposts, and are elevated compared to the central area, and there is cover around the spot where the Fumbi spawns. Finally there is a sort of bridge connecting the two camps.
But Ice square doesn't play as well as sta-2 for several reasons. Snatching the Fumbi in the middle is too easy, so you never see the two teams fighting for control over the mid area, the ramp area is too long, the bridge thing is kind of useless unless you're sniping, the geometry doesn't allow for many jumps, especially in in the short way, nobody likes spikes and there is an option to wall shoot when attacking from the ramp area.
I think the most important things you have to get right if you want to replicate how sta-2 plays are:
-map traversal has to be quick when nobody is bothering you
-The map needs to have built-in hazards to help the defenders to compensate for the quick map traversal options
-there has to be several viable options when attacking
-There needs to be a reason for people to want to control the mid area, meaning that picking up the Fumbi should not be free.
-there has to be jumps
-you should be able to understand what's going on from one quick glance from almost everywhere on the map (or you end up with temple or highway)
Boy the chips are made to boost ur play style not the weapons you use. rushers mostly use full green. ppl who support uses full blue or orange. people who want to get kills have either shiny set to get pen or red set. and other ppl use mixed sets on there prefered stats they wanna boost.((thats is what ive seen))
How is that relevant to what I was saying (x2)? I'm telling you, chips and enchants (red and blue specifically, maybe green) have given a certain advantage to rushers against melee weapons that do not stun and guns that don't explode. If you buff those weapons where they can fill their defensive role as consistently as they used to, then some of the damage caused by the chips invasion will be repaired.
Are you that bad at movement or cant you head jump or cant you predict when and where hits gonna land ? personally ,i love to use bomb to destroy their balance and killing a senty if there is one.
This argument is unrelated to the bit you've quoted. And it's a bad one. First off, bomb is a weapon any respectable player should stay away from as it is OP, requires no skill and is frustrating to play against. Then, all melee weapons are somewhat predictable, so according to what you are saying a good player should never ever get hit by a sword, right? Except that when you're trying to score, the situation changes. You're low on time because you want to score before the rest of the enemy team respawns/comes back, and low on stamina, and if you are trying to score against several players, they can attack in a pattern that you would not be able to dodge. In either case, you have to take risks (because feinting a PS user and all of that is time consuming). That's where stun is strong, because it's game over if you get hit by it + the enemy team gets the (and its hitbox is quite large if you haven't noticed), while you'll still be fine getting hit by other attacks depending on the circumstances.
BOY you said A well designed weapon gives its user an incentive to explore its depth, which plasma sword fails to do because stun is the correct option in a large majority of defensive scenarios. and i was saying that the game gives you the choice to make a set of 3 weapons to fill the flaws of each other, meaning a weapon for close range (like revo, sg , ag, a preffered melee) and a 2nd weapon for long range (semi , smash, preffered sniper), and a third weapon that either boosted ur movement speed (dag, hg , vs, ib) or one that helps you def (sentry or nell) and a skill that also plays a role in ur play style (like sp mastery for rushing, sheild for supporting ).
Again, how is that relevant to what I was saying? How does the fact that you have three weapons available and can make them work together compensate for the fact that in its current state, plasma sword does not give any incentive for players to explore its depth?
I know, right? And for having played with/against him a few times, it's not like he is getting lucky on those clips. He is consistently good.
Looks like he released part 2, and the quality is still up there !
--> you need to kill to score ? you only need to do that if they have a bajilion wall in front of the goalpost other than that you can dodge the shots by using unpredictable route or movement
If you shoot people with a revolver or with a sniper, like was suggested, in most cases yes. Both weapons inflict knockback, meaning unless they are trying to defend right next to the goalpost, they're still going to be in position to intercept you with the second stun unless you finish them off.
--> how are you going to balance weapons to smth that gives extra stats I mean chips are made to make you stronger. its true that lvl 5 are hard to get but full level 4 can still give you pretty good stats
That's a very interesting question, or it would be if you meant it as an actual question. Personally I'd go for more damage for swords, more ammo in guns, and stronger pushback for both.
"Well, the strong cut has the potential to push the opponent in the wrong direction. If people want to play safe, why blame them for it."
-> I don't blame them for it. I blame the weapon. A well designed weapon gives its user an incentive to explore its depth, which plasma sword fails to do because stun is the correct option in a large majority of defensive scenarios.
--> boy they give you 3 weapons for a reason you cant just depend on 1 weapon and that is it, i use ps vs 1 maximum 2 ppl .when its more i use another weapon like tb or bat, in unli i use bomb or rl. in games like s4 where you can equip more than 1 weapon it is there for a reason . and that reason is to use more than one weapon to strategically win. i'd suggest watching these videos down and you will see that they dont depend on 1 weapon only but they create a set that they can use to def their base and the how kz actually 1 v 8 not by using 1 weapon but by using 3 weapons together and knowing when to use each one
How is that relevant to what I said though?
I dont understand how PS triggers you and bomb doesnt
It does though. You're assuming things about me that I haven't said. This post doesn't say "PS triggers me and nothing else does". In fact, I have expressed my disgust for lightning bomb in at least 3 threads this year, two of which I have created myself.
If you play against someone with a PS its not hard to dodge a stun with 2 conditions:
you're not a total noob
you and the person performing the stun dont lag or have distance lag relative to each other(ideal <30ms).
Good ol' "you mad cuz you bad" argument. So, does that mean I have never played against a good player? Because I do play PS myself in my rush set, and I get stuns off against good and bad players alike. As for distance lag, realistically it's going to happen a lot when we have only one server still decently populated.
Hey! Thanks for the feedback. I'm going to have to disagree with most of what you said though, and it appears as though there have been some points where I failed to communicate my point effectively, resulting in a misunderstanding.
First off, yes I want weapons to be balanced around latency, unless latency is fixed somehow, which does not look like it is going to happen. We gotta work with what we have. Same thing when it comes to the chip stats. I hate them, but it's likely that they are here to stay, in which case we have to balance weapons around them.
You make the point that stunning leaves you open to get punished by the enemy team, which I have already taken into consideration (hence why I said that my complaints only applied to games with low player count), and even then, it is very often worth the risk given that your team can deal with the stunned attacker very easily in a way that prevents the from being picked up by the enemy team.
You also make the point that it's only fair for a rush attempt to die as easily as a stun hitting, which I agree with, the issue is that very few weapons have access to a consistent way to stun, meaning that those that do have received an indirect buff compared to those that don't. I made that point to explain why I consider stun to be currently stronger than in has ever been, not to explain why I find it problematic, that comes later.
And then you seem to think that it's fine for stun to be frustrating because frustration has become an integral part of the S4 experience nowadays, which is a strange position to have. Normally you'd want the game as a whole to get less frustrating, and that can only be achieved by tweaking the individual pieces that make it so, which is what I'm advocating for.
"And while they cast it you totally can't shoot them in the head with revo or your sniper could cancel them right."
-> I mean, what ends up happening more often than not when you do that is that they're still alive and you still have to go through them, at which point you need to kill them or something, and you waste a lot of time that you probably don't have because their team is going to respawn. Not to mention, with latency you very often end up getting stunned anyway.
"Well, the strong cut has the potential to push the opponent in the wrong direction. If people want to play safe, why blame them for it."
-> I don't blame them for it. I blame the weapon. A well designed weapon gives its user an incentive to explore its depth, which plasma sword fails to do because stun is the correct option in a large majority of defensive scenarios.
"This is straight up a lie. There were even missions where you had to do faint-dodges in the early days of s4. Those include dodging out of being stunned or out of the dash's stagger. And this special dodge can't easily be canceled out like the normal ones."
-> I might be misremembering some things but I'm pretty sure that they did tweak the stagger animation of the dash attack (I remember reading the patch notes for it) and I'm pretty sure that performing a counter against a PS dash has become harder than it used to be. I got into an argument with a friend over it after the fact, and despite thinking that countering dashes was easy, they weren't able to do it once in 10 minutes of attempt so that's where my assumption comes from, in part. Again, there always is the possibility that I am entirely wrong, I just wish the translated patch notes had been kept somewhere.
"Yeah speedcounter has a narrow time window, that is why you practise techniques"
Again, the issue is latency. You don't know precisely when you're going to get hit, so getting the timing right is harder than it has ever been, and somewhat luck dependent. Like, when is the last time you've seen PS get speedcountered in unli?
"I list things more critical to turn down than punish the weapon for stupid surroundings"
Weapons don't exist in a vacuum. Also I started my post explicitly stating that I considered the issues with plasma sword as being low priority.
"Else: "It doesn't seem to happen very often anymore" is just hearsay. "
-> I'm appealing to shared experience. I do not need to justify with data something that everyone can observe, unless there is a disagreement over whether or not my observation is accurate.
"If Revo doesn't satisfy you, you can always try AG, melee or MK2-Gauss, as well as suggest a slight buff to revo in that regard (which would in my opinion be a lot more useful)"
-> I have suggested a buff to Revo and shotty already, in a separate post. This post specifically deals with the current issues with PS, it does not aim to provide any solutions, although if anyone wants to propose some they are welcome to do so.
Why? There is no more official S4 free of latency. You can balance weapons for good servers all you want, but it will not benefit anybody, because everybody has to deal with the current servers.
I know there are issues right now that are more pressing than the balance of the Plasma Sword, but nobody seems to talk about it, leading me to think that not many people share my opinion that PS is currently overtuned, does not promote skillful play and is frustrating to play against. Note that what I am going to say only applies to touch down, I have no experience playing Sword Only therefore it only applies to unlimited, and it only applies to games with a low player count (4v4 or lower).
-Very high server latency cause$ hits to be harder to dodge, but the tradeoff is that it has become hard to predict where an enemy player will land when you knock them back. The stun does not have that setback, and thus only benefits from server latency, where other moves have now become unreliable.
-Chips and enchants have significantly increased the average health pool and stamina pool. As a result, rushers now expect to be able to sustain a few melee hits and be able to air recover if pushed away as well as evade if they are hit. But if you get stunned once, it's over.
-It goes without saying, but stun is, and has always been a frustrating move to get hit by. The intense hate that was directed toward it during the early days of S4 was not due to it being particularly OP, because it wasn't, but having the game take away control from you and have you watch yourself die is always going to be frustrating.
-The consequence is that most PS users are defaulting to stun every time they have to defend and don't really have a reason to get good at using light/strong cuts, and that means passing up on most of the weapon's depth.
-Spamming dashes was one of the marks of a beginner for a long time in S4. I have no clue why the devs decided to actually buff that move but here we are. What they did, a while back, that many players haven't even noticed, is that they increased the potency of the stagger effect that it inflicts (for lack of a better terminology). Basically, before the buff happened, it was possible to just dodge for the normal amount of SP after getting hit by a dash, and you could also cancel your dodge directly after getting hit to puni$h it with a revolver hit, a dagger stab, a bat JA and such. Now however, you have to expand extra-SP to get out of the stagger animation, and you cannot cancel it halfway through. I think there is a way to get around it (see Fazoodle's post on the different types of evade),but the window you get to perform that trick and punish the dasher is extremely small and latency does not help with precise timings. Anyway, now spamming dashes when you're out of bullets actually works a certain percentage of the time, and it's just sad.
-More importantly, latency helps PS users the most when it comes to scoring. The fact that they get knocked back with a certain delay means that very often, the dash they initiate after getting hit on the defender's screen is going to go through, either partially or completely, leading to them often scoring and only then getting pushed away from the goal, as if by a vengeful ghost of some kind, or escaping getting pushed out of the map into the bottomless abyss.
-Also, it used t be that you could not dash carelessly into the goal against a revolver player since they had the ability to make you miss your dash if they hit you at the right timing, but it doesn't seem to happen very often anymore, although I can't tell if it is because of the Rev/Shotty/HG/Dual nerfs or because of server latency.
Anyway, it's kind of an unconventional opinion so I'm interested to see if anyone has anything to say.
Feed him views, he's good.
PS: Nerf rail gun.
That is why I think a report system may be just better even though it probably won't go without abuse
A report system is what I was implying.
By the way, I do not share your experience of people not banning AFKs. In my games it has consistently been done when needed, that is when someone went afk for a long period of time. Beside, there is always the threat of forgoing the sit just playing with the number's advantage if people refuse to kick the AFK, which I have had to use only once. Rather, people who AFK in the lobby and therefore cannot be kick voted prove to be the bigger pain in the @$$.
The problem with the statement above is the the "last resort" is mostly of the time the first and only resort aggainst newbies or players that use X weapon.
I don't think you understood what I wrote. The last resort I am speaking of is that of disabling kick votes.
To be honest, i really don't miss it since other than abusing it, it is not used for anything else.
I had a hacker in one of my games recently. Their name was Dorq, and they put a lot of 1 shotting sentries down.
Kick votes allow us to kick AFKs, hackers and people who don't respect the room limitations.
While I agree that people who kick nuubs because they're bad should just uninstall, disabling kick votes should only be considered as a last resort. Aeria doesn't even have a clear stance on the issue, at least that I know of. Just remember that "etc" can still be selected as a reason to kickvote (though "bad manners" is close 2nd when it comes to nonsensical reasons to kick someone).
Here are two changes I would consider implementing before it comes to that:
-A clear stance from Aeria, and make nonsensical kick votes a bannable offense (it would require displaying the name of the one initiating the kick vote, but I'm waiting on an explanation for why that would be a bad thing in itself).
-Add a vote to shuffle the teams while in a game to provide an alternative way of balancing the lobby.
-Even if I was the kind of person who burned hundreds of € on the game, I would get rid of the chips and premium stats for the sake of balance. The stats does not need to be even in the clothes or weapons, since like in beta all the clothes had the same. Just make character-global stats (this will make balancing easier -Guild Wars 2 has this feature for example, for PVP and it works great). Transform this broken item system into skins/cosmetics (same for skills). After this... 2 things would happen: people like me would think: hey, I spent the money because I wanted to, so what?, the game is better now (which is also really good for new players) and the people who burnt their money just because they wanted a shortcut for winning will rage, and hopefully quit (which is great, we don't need that kind of people in our community).
Ugh, that again. Guild wars 2 has an entry cost, it's a terrible example. You're asking Aeria to endanger their income in the hope that it will attract new players (which also means advertising in most cases, meaning more expenditure). It's not a wager a company will take blindly. Give me examples of free2play games that stay afloat with a playerbase similar to that of S4 and a cosmetic only business model and I will actually take you seriously.
Hey, I liked your rail gun vid, but this one seems a bit over-edited. I think you're good enough that you can let your gameplay speak for itself a bit more, with proper selection of footage (though it might be hard to innovate in a goal montage).
Also, some of the memes weren't all that fresh. 'Might just be me, but a joke starts wearing thin the 100th time I hear it.
This is ridiculous.
If you don't want to fix this, then please turn it off. And don't tell me nobody on the team ever noticed it was an issue, it happens to me every two messages.
Also, somewhat related, if an emote could not appear whenever I type the verb or noun "FACE", it would be great.
The only significant upside of HMG compared to SMG is the ammo count. But as a result, it synergizes way better with shield and healing. I have no issue with the weapon outside of those synergies, and I'd rather see power shield and healing get nerfed instead.
Well that is why I consider st2 to be a bad map.
Also I am pretty sure most ppl will already agree that the rg is currently OP so not sure what else do you want me to say. I am talking about in general.
All of the maps are bad. Also Sta-2's openness wasn't as much of an issue when RG was balanced (on the contrary, there is value in being able to understand what is happening after a quick glance around from anywhere on the map.
Oh, I see, I thought you were talking about rail guns when you talked about staying out of their effective range. But the fact remains that if there is a defense, there is a need to break it (or slip through), and if the enemy team attacks, you need to be there to defend it. Somebody needs to pick a fight with the shield HMG that is blocking off the ramp and somebody needs to stop the boot user that is making the whole team look retarded, and if nobody in your team can, then there is no game. I can't control what my team brings into the match (or if my team is even good enough to do stuff on their own).
Basically staying out of their effective range unless it is absolutely necessary.
That's not the part of my message I was hoping that you would try to reply to tbh.
I'm going to assume that you're being literal when you say "absolutely". Several problems there (in sta-2, at least):
-Trying to avoid a sniper that hard is extremely inefficient. It means you're only allowed to defend from behind the wall in front of the goalpost in sta-2 since anywhere else is in range of the sniper, which also means you can't steal the ball unless the carrier dies in that area. That's the fastest way to lose.
-By your own admission, even then the sniper still gets opportunities to get you. Right out of spawn for instance or any time your team wants to make an offensive play.
You can flank snipers assuming they aren't focusing you (and your team is capable to defend on their own).
Look, I've had that whole "can you or can you not flank a sniper" conversation before and I don't really want to have it again. It just s*cks, at least in v4 or less. You have to invest time and stamina to get there, and if you get spotted I'd argue the snipers has 90% chance to win the v1 (due to having a spawn with lasers to retreat to, allies that can spawn and help and more often than not using shield). And when you're done with the fight, you might realise that you're heavily out of position unless things worked out in a convenient way for you and your team happens to be pushing.
Now of course you don't necessarily get spotted and sometimes it's an easy kill, but then they get cautious and you'll find that it's pretty easy for a sniper that is cautious to spot any potential flanker. Flanking a sniper is something that you can do once in a while to keep them on edge, but not a universal response (if they're good, that is).
I never use rail gun. I simply trust the snipers in my team to contest the enemy snipers. Ofc this doesn't always work.
Same applies to hmg + shield. You don't have to counter it. It's enough if one of your teammates can counter it.
Now, I never check the eq of my teammates before a match (bring back old GUI btw!11!) because most of these important weapons (explosives, rail gun) are given in any team that's at least 3 people.
So, I just need one or several competent teammates who have chosen builds that conveniently cover my weaknesses is what you're saying? I don't disagree with you, but I don't get those often (stacking is evil).
There aren't but you can pick your weapons in a way to serve you in different situation. You don't really have to build a offensive or defensive character excursively. if it happens to Face weapons that you can't fight against withe the current gear, you can still avoid those encounters. Everyone is pretty much in the same boat anyway.
What do you mean when you talk about avoiding encounters in Touch Down (I mean, I assume we're talking about touch down here since you mentioned offence and defense)? When the enemy team is pushing, you gotta defend, or they score. When your team wants to score, you still gotta get through the defense, so you don't exactly get to pick your fight too often either in that case. By the way, how is anyone supposed to avoid an encounter with a rail gun?
Oh and by the way, there is at least one build that performs well no matter what the enemy team is playing, the only issue is that it's completely cancerous (so either way it's a loss).
I would like to point out that S4 is a team game.
Cool. Your point?
The use of rg, bombs and ib is way higher than the use of hmg, so assuming those ppl use these to counter hmg is just laughable.
Sorry I have no idea what that means. What do you say I am assuming?
Not able to switch can be a problem indeed but that is why you have 3 weapon slots instead of just 1 so you can choose your gear more wisely even if you don't know what you are going to face.
If you think there exist builds that perform well regardless of what the enemy team is bringing, I would be happy to learn what they are.
Just addressing a point some people seem to be making. Just because a weapon / strategy is easily countered by other weapons doesn't mean it's not toxic for the game. Switching is impossible after the first half. I don't want to lose just because I failed to bring one specific weapon that I didn't know I would need. At this point it's tantamount to throwing a coin to determine who wins the match.
For instance, I hear people saying the interaction between HMG and power shield is fair because people have access to bombs and boots and such, but if somebody gets shut down hard the whole game because of it, would you really tell them that they're to blame for not playing bomb or boots? That's unreasonable, and if you want weapon diversity it's also counterproductive.
Detect in DM is way stronger than you people give it credit for. Death Match is about picking the right fights, and it has synergy with mine gun, mind shock and rail gun. It's not all that good in Neden 1, but in Neden 2, Neden 3, Square, Spade and Treasure you can become virtually immortal granted you avoid any head-on fight.
The game was also getting a lot more content as well.
The 1st season was really a big thing since there was nothing like it. We got new weapons, maps, chasers, and more weapons skins and costumes like never before.
I might be misinterpreting your message, but you frame it like I was using my example to demonstrate how pay2win doesn't matter. That there are other factors to consider is my point, it's exactly what I say in the one sentence you cut from the paragraph you quoted.
I think the enchantment system is what destroyed the game because that pushed the P2W to the very limit. I was a PEN user and I think AP vs PEN wasn't as unfair around 2009-2011, I had a few permanent items with decent stats from the Random shop and good chips, so the time spent in-game kinda paid off at that time. But then the buff system came, and then the enchantment system, and quickly the scale heavily turned against the PEN players, and for new players it was even worse.
The enchant system is rubbish (the chips as well), but having spent only 2 euros into the game I've got a way better matchup against money spending maniacs now than I had during Dark Lightning. But of course, that's because I sank a lot of time into the game. The people who really suffer from it are new players, but "pay2win" isn't an accurate way of describing the problem. If, for example, all of the items and enchants that were acquired using money were to disappear, it wouldn't change the fact that new players get boned by people who have all FP, all lv5 chips and okay enchants such as myself.
Oh boy I've spent around $500 on skins and icons on League of Legends. Why? I don't really know, maybe I'm just stupid, or maybe I just don't have anything else to do with my money and I really like the customized VO and graphics for Legendary Skins, and I've given around $200 worth of skins as gifts to my friends in just the last month (to be fair that's a lot of money considering that I live in a 3rd world hole), and they usually send me random boxes or another skin of the same grade in return, so that explains why Riot is making over $1.2b per year since 2015. I personally don't have a direct problem with the P2W in S4 because I think I can afford a few FP sets and weapons, but the question is, why would I buy anything in a game that has no players to play against? (I already did that mistake by spending money in the LatAm S4 server, the game was turned into a chatroom and closed few months ago).
I mean, skins are profitable, never said they weren't. I know that not everybody thinks like me (good for them, and for consumerism). But are they really enough in the case of s4? I'm not defending the current business model of S4, just saying that you probably also want to milk income from people who want their money to have an impact on how the game plays for them. I've given an example of how League of Legends does it, and without turning their game into a pay2win or alienating their newer players.
That's the whole problem. This game is dying because it can't hold the playerbase BECAUSE newcomers despise the P2W model and cheaters/hackers, and so it turns boring and monotonous because there are not enough players, and that's because online games are designed to offer "replayability" which is provided by the interaction with other players, just like split-screen games did in the past. Absolutely NOBODY is gonna buy AP to play the same kind of boring match (Sword ST2-TD and Chaser-Circle) vs the same 10 fellas in the server, so keeping a freemium scheme will only destroy the community just like it has been doing since AP stats were introduced.
There are probably other factors involved, not just the pay2win model and hackers. For instance, S4 league was at its peak of growth when it had the most pay2win model (back when it was literally pen/fumbi shop against prems, the dark lightning and following season).
Also, you seem to think that the only two options are an exclusively skin based economy and pay2win. But that's just not true. Something else that you can make players pay for that doesn't give them an advantage strictly speaking is... options. An example of that can be found in League of Legends, where you can buy characters with money. Those characters are not necessarily better than those you already have (if they're balanced correctly), but spending money still changes the experience of the player in a meaningful way.
To be honest I'll never understand people who buy skins, so I might be a little bit biased on the issue, but games that can survive exclusively on skin income seem more like the exception than the rule.
Fortnite (as example) is as I know the biggest f2p pvp game without p2w aspects at all. Seems to work perfect and I'm sure they have more than enough revenue with skin and emote releases.
That's not a valid comparison for several reasons.
1: You need a big player base to survive exclusively on skins. Epic Games as a brand attracts more people than Aeria (they're known for the Gears of war series and Unreal Tournament), and they have spent money on advertising as well.
2: Fortnite Battle Royale exists alongside Fortnite PvE, thus even if it had not been profitable (which it ended up being), it's still good publicity, so it wasn't meant to be just about skins from the start.
3: There is (or was when it released) a pretty big demand for battle royale games, which is part of why it was able to gather as many people as it did. On the other hand, there isn't much demand for fast paced third person shooters with a steep learning curve.
4: Skins probably sell better in games that don't have outdated textures.
I doubt S4's player base is big enough to support an economy based entirely on skins. It would need a pretty big push to be able to have that kind of player base, and just switching to a more marketable business model isn't going to cut it, there also needs to be actual marketing as well, and even then there is no guarantee that it's not going to end up as a financial disaster (there are many reasons why S4 might be hard to sell to the general audience).
The dodge animations will still be the most meaningful factor for choosing a character based on game mechanics.
Is there really a difference between the two dodges when it comes to mechanics? I'm kind of dubious about that. I think I heard Silver say that the male dodge had a slightly smaller gun hitbox. But then again, he uses female char himself so it's probably not worth it.
Wake me up when you see OSers actually preferring to use female characters.
Most S4 League players as far as I know are male, as is the case in shooters as a whole. It's only logical that they'd go for the character they can identify with more easily.
They could at least had gone for the "Kill to fill the special bar" and then allow you to use the skill once you fill it up.
That's a win-more mechanic. You give a greater advantage to the team that's already winning. Is that really something that you want in the game?
Well, there is basically already the random shop. The crafting system offers random enchant too but is too expensive to be used to gain timed items. But even if it wasn't no one wants to play a game where they have to wear random timed garbage just to be able to compete (even if you already do it through the random shop anyway if you have no perms).
The random shop is strictly worse than just using temporary I's costumes, and those are already not good enough (because of the chips, and they're expansive, so is the random shop). The crafting system is not only expensive, it's also way too confusing to be used by a new player. You gotta find it, find how to craft the pieces, for that you gotta open enough caps...
I've played random time items for a loooong time before I got my first set, and I was fine with that, as long as it didn't put me in too much of a disadvantage. Of course nobody wants to keep playing with random timed items forever but I never said people would have to. It should still be possible to acquire permanent items through paying or spending enough time.