1
Skyward Collapse / Extremely-detailed wall-o-text first impressions by a long time Arcen player
« on: Yesterday at 01:19:26 PM »
Ice Giants are BEAST!
*Continues gleefully playing*
*Continues gleefully playing*
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
Off Topic / Wargame: Airland Battle
« on: May 03, 2013, 06:41:21 AM »
Not sure how many of you in here tried Wargame: European Escalation, which was a fantastic war simulator made by an Indie French company called "Focus Interactive".
However, Wargame: Airland Battle is coming out in a few weeks, and having tried the beta, I've got to say, it's absolutely fantastic.
Here are some screenshots:
This game is filling a childhood dream of mine, of being able to us an F16 in an RTS game. I can't believe it's taken 15 years, but it's finally happened.
The air combat is spectacular, and more realistic than anything I've ever seen before. Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRMH887q3Bo
Aircraft do not stay on the field for a particularly long period of time. Unlike every other unit, they are called onto the battlefield from an off-map airbase, where they must quickly complete their mission, then leave before they run out of fuel. Aircraft have varying speed based on type: http://www.wargame-ab.com/?rub=aircraft
Certain aircraft are designed only to destroy other aircraft, then you have bombers, and of course "multirole fighters" which can do the job of both. What makes it so cool (surprisingly) is that it's over so quickly. In a dogfight, if a missile or volley of machine guns connect, the fight is practically over. It's such a different experience than what you're used to seeing in RTS games, where "air battles", if they even exist, are long and drawn out endeavors.
Here are some pictures of the Armory, where I can view detailed statistics about each unit in the game, filtered by Faction and type (these are taken from my own machine):
The "deck building" system of the game is also one of its coolest features. To build a deck, you choose a side from "NATO" or "PACT". Each side includes various countries with their own units, strengths, and weaknesses: http://www.wargame-ab.com/?rub=sides
You can build a deck using ALL the units from each side, but you get deck "bonuses" if you limit your units to a certain country, a certain selection, or a certain time period (so before 1980, for example). If you use all 3 bonuses in tandem, you will be extremely limited, but you also get the biggest benefit. (So for example, I could use American-only units, of the "Marine" category, that were all made before 1975)
So in addition to the HUGE selection the game offers (over 150 planes alone, not including the units of all other types), you also get to make neat, specialized decks based on limited selection which can be, if used correctly, even BETTER than decks which have access to everything
A warning to those considering buying the game while still in beta: There is no single campaign or computer AI added to the game yet, it all takes place in multiplayer during the beta. Both of those features will be added by launch.
However, Wargame: Airland Battle is coming out in a few weeks, and having tried the beta, I've got to say, it's absolutely fantastic.
Here are some screenshots:
This game is filling a childhood dream of mine, of being able to us an F16 in an RTS game. I can't believe it's taken 15 years, but it's finally happened.
The air combat is spectacular, and more realistic than anything I've ever seen before. Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRMH887q3Bo
Aircraft do not stay on the field for a particularly long period of time. Unlike every other unit, they are called onto the battlefield from an off-map airbase, where they must quickly complete their mission, then leave before they run out of fuel. Aircraft have varying speed based on type: http://www.wargame-ab.com/?rub=aircraft
Certain aircraft are designed only to destroy other aircraft, then you have bombers, and of course "multirole fighters" which can do the job of both. What makes it so cool (surprisingly) is that it's over so quickly. In a dogfight, if a missile or volley of machine guns connect, the fight is practically over. It's such a different experience than what you're used to seeing in RTS games, where "air battles", if they even exist, are long and drawn out endeavors.
Here are some pictures of the Armory, where I can view detailed statistics about each unit in the game, filtered by Faction and type (these are taken from my own machine):
The "deck building" system of the game is also one of its coolest features. To build a deck, you choose a side from "NATO" or "PACT". Each side includes various countries with their own units, strengths, and weaknesses: http://www.wargame-ab.com/?rub=sides
You can build a deck using ALL the units from each side, but you get deck "bonuses" if you limit your units to a certain country, a certain selection, or a certain time period (so before 1980, for example). If you use all 3 bonuses in tandem, you will be extremely limited, but you also get the biggest benefit. (So for example, I could use American-only units, of the "Marine" category, that were all made before 1975)
So in addition to the HUGE selection the game offers (over 150 planes alone, not including the units of all other types), you also get to make neat, specialized decks based on limited selection which can be, if used correctly, even BETTER than decks which have access to everything
A warning to those considering buying the game while still in beta: There is no single campaign or computer AI added to the game yet, it all takes place in multiplayer during the beta. Both of those features will be added by launch.
3
Off Topic / Glorifying War
« on: April 25, 2013, 12:56:53 PM »
Recently I was visiting the Company of Heroes 2 website, and I came across one of their new trailers: http://www.companyofheroes.com/news/company-heroes-2-debut-trailer-has-arrived
I found it interesting because they called it the "Forgotten Sacrifice Trailer".
You'll have to watch it yourself, but basically the premise is that the Russians gave up astronomically more soldiers (and innocent civilians) than the Allies did over the course of the war, and very few people know about it. The best way to remember "their sacrifice", I guess, is to glorify it in a video game?
I was a bit shocked when I read: "Their front, Their courage, Their story, Your War".
I don't know, it just seems like a crappy marketing gimmick gone wrong. What do you guys think?
I found it interesting because they called it the "Forgotten Sacrifice Trailer".
You'll have to watch it yourself, but basically the premise is that the Russians gave up astronomically more soldiers (and innocent civilians) than the Allies did over the course of the war, and very few people know about it. The best way to remember "their sacrifice", I guess, is to glorify it in a video game?
I was a bit shocked when I read: "Their front, Their courage, Their story, Your War".
I don't know, it just seems like a crappy marketing gimmick gone wrong. What do you guys think?
4
Off Topic / Controversial report claims DotA 2 has overtaken LoL in players (is wrong btw)
« on: April 11, 2013, 05:21:20 PM »
http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/04/11/dota-2-most-played-report-challenged-by-riot-we-investigate/
I found this article very interesting.
I don't understand why this company (DFC) would release a report like this with such bad information.
What I *DO* find interesting however is that DotA 2 can even be compared to LoL's playerbase, considering that it is rarely advertised on Steam, and is still in an invite-only beta.
Based on what I hear from most LoL connoisseurs, LoL's streamlined simplicity and newbie friendly mechanics make it a game much more appealing to a considerably larger audience.
However, it seems that DotA 2's added complexity for the sake of depth and skill approach may yet prove that theory wrong.
What do you guys think? Who will come out on top?
I found this article very interesting.
I don't understand why this company (DFC) would release a report like this with such bad information.
What I *DO* find interesting however is that DotA 2 can even be compared to LoL's playerbase, considering that it is rarely advertised on Steam, and is still in an invite-only beta.
Based on what I hear from most LoL connoisseurs, LoL's streamlined simplicity and newbie friendly mechanics make it a game much more appealing to a considerably larger audience.
However, it seems that DotA 2's added complexity for the sake of depth and skill approach may yet prove that theory wrong.
What do you guys think? Who will come out on top?
5
AI War / (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« on: April 10, 2013, 03:05:28 PM »
So I've been mentioning in some other threads how big of a disparity there currently is between High-Cap Swarmers and Low-Cap Pseudo-Starships.
Recently I started a game with Laser Gatlings (randomly) and was very unimpressed by how ineffective they were compared to what I usually pick.
Remember that Low-Cap ships already have these innate advantages over High-Cap Swarmers:
1. They usually have several immunities if not more.
2. They're much easier to keep alive, so therefore you save a lot of money not having to constantly rebuild them.
3. They're much less vulnerable to AoE attacks.
3. They're low cap, so they don't trigger Eyes.
4. They can't be reclaimed and turned against you.
6. They can all be boosted by a Flagship, which increases their DPS much more than high cap swarmers, which can't all be boosted by the munitions bonus, since there are hundreds of them.
So with all this in mind, I expected the high-cap swarmers to have significantly better stats because of their inherent disadvantages. I was pretty surprised by the results:
Laser Gatling -
Cap Health: 10.7million,
Cap DPS: 163,200
Cap DPS with bonuses: 293,760
Cap Cost: 54,400
Raider -
Cap Health: 10.2 million
Cap DPS: 98,000
Cap DPS vs with bonuses: 392,000
Cap Cost: 60,760
Zenith Reprocessor -
Cap Health: 14.9 million
Cap DPS: 89,600
Cap DPS vs bonuses: 716,000
Cap Cost: 32,000 (did I mention it earns you money?)
Spire Railcluster -
Cap Health: 16.75 million
Cap DPS: 137,500
Cap DPS vs bonuses: 687,500
Cap Cost: 90,000
----
Similar patterns can be drawn from the rest of the high-cap swarmers vs. the low-cap pseudo-starships.
The point is that given ALL the advantages of a ship having a low cap, such as its immunities, much higher survival rate, lower susceptibility to AoE, and many other things, you would expect these ships to have significantly WORSE stats, and HIGHER costs, than their swarmer counterparts.
This is unfortunately not the case. Especially where damage vs. their bonus ships are concerned, the low-cap ships win by a landslide. They also win the health department as well, which is somewhat odd considering that their survivability is already so much better to begin with by being low-capped.
When I say that the balance of the bonus ships needs to be reviewed, this is what I mean.
Recently I started a game with Laser Gatlings (randomly) and was very unimpressed by how ineffective they were compared to what I usually pick.
Remember that Low-Cap ships already have these innate advantages over High-Cap Swarmers:
1. They usually have several immunities if not more.
2. They're much easier to keep alive, so therefore you save a lot of money not having to constantly rebuild them.
3. They're much less vulnerable to AoE attacks.
3. They're low cap, so they don't trigger Eyes.
4. They can't be reclaimed and turned against you.
6. They can all be boosted by a Flagship, which increases their DPS much more than high cap swarmers, which can't all be boosted by the munitions bonus, since there are hundreds of them.
So with all this in mind, I expected the high-cap swarmers to have significantly better stats because of their inherent disadvantages. I was pretty surprised by the results:
Laser Gatling -
Cap Health: 10.7million,
Cap DPS: 163,200
Cap DPS with bonuses: 293,760
Cap Cost: 54,400
Raider -
Cap Health: 10.2 million
Cap DPS: 98,000
Cap DPS vs with bonuses: 392,000
Cap Cost: 60,760
Zenith Reprocessor -
Cap Health: 14.9 million
Cap DPS: 89,600
Cap DPS vs bonuses: 716,000
Cap Cost: 32,000 (did I mention it earns you money?)
Spire Railcluster -
Cap Health: 16.75 million
Cap DPS: 137,500
Cap DPS vs bonuses: 687,500
Cap Cost: 90,000
----
Similar patterns can be drawn from the rest of the high-cap swarmers vs. the low-cap pseudo-starships.
The point is that given ALL the advantages of a ship having a low cap, such as its immunities, much higher survival rate, lower susceptibility to AoE, and many other things, you would expect these ships to have significantly WORSE stats, and HIGHER costs, than their swarmer counterparts.
This is unfortunately not the case. Especially where damage vs. their bonus ships are concerned, the low-cap ships win by a landslide. They also win the health department as well, which is somewhat odd considering that their survivability is already so much better to begin with by being low-capped.
When I say that the balance of the bonus ships needs to be reviewed, this is what I mean.
6
Off Topic / Best and Worst April Fool's Joke you've seen today?
« on: April 01, 2013, 12:07:41 PM »
Best One:
http://smashboards.com/threads/project-m-demo-3-sneak-peek.335378/
For those who don't know, Project M is a modification of Super Smash Brothers Brawl, to make it more like it's predecessor Melee. In other words, faster pace and much more "combo" oriented.
However, this video (a preview of the next version) is just INSANE. It's like turning the Super Smash Brothers franchise into Marvel vs. Capcom 3. I died laughing.
Worst One:
(A woman I know on Facebook)'s husband decided to pull a nasty April Fool's Day prank on her and turn his FB status to "single". However, considering that their relationship was in a really rocky place, and that she was already considering leaving, she took it as a grave insult, and a form of passive-aggressive behavior, where the "joke" was a form of a plausible deniability for the malicious intent of his actions.
Now she's talking about packing up her things (and her kid) and leaving her, and she's completely serious. Bad move dude.
http://smashboards.com/threads/project-m-demo-3-sneak-peek.335378/
For those who don't know, Project M is a modification of Super Smash Brothers Brawl, to make it more like it's predecessor Melee. In other words, faster pace and much more "combo" oriented.
However, this video (a preview of the next version) is just INSANE. It's like turning the Super Smash Brothers franchise into Marvel vs. Capcom 3. I died laughing.
Worst One:
(A woman I know on Facebook)'s husband decided to pull a nasty April Fool's Day prank on her and turn his FB status to "single". However, considering that their relationship was in a really rocky place, and that she was already considering leaving, she took it as a grave insult, and a form of passive-aggressive behavior, where the "joke" was a form of a plausible deniability for the malicious intent of his actions.
Now she's talking about packing up her things (and her kid) and leaving her, and she's completely serious. Bad move dude.
7
AI War Technical Support / Getting weird graphical glitches
« on: March 29, 2013, 08:33:25 AM »
I've been experiencing this specific problem for about a year now, and I've been hesitating to bring it up.
I have a Radeon 7950 3GB card, which is obviously way too powerful for AI War. However, it seems like my framerate is massively too high or something, I get a huge amount of tearing and weird graphical glitches while playing. It even happens when I force V-Sync on in my ATI Control Panel.
And AI War isn't the only game this happens in either.
One would think that if you forced a V-Sync, there would no longer be graphical glitches because it would make the FPS 60, but for some reason I'm still getting really bad ones. I'm not sure what to do. I'm contemplating just replacing the card, it could be bad. I'm not sure what else to try, it's very distracting and it ruins the experience for me.
I have a Radeon 7950 3GB card, which is obviously way too powerful for AI War. However, it seems like my framerate is massively too high or something, I get a huge amount of tearing and weird graphical glitches while playing. It even happens when I force V-Sync on in my ATI Control Panel.
And AI War isn't the only game this happens in either.
One would think that if you forced a V-Sync, there would no longer be graphical glitches because it would make the FPS 60, but for some reason I'm still getting really bad ones. I'm not sure what to do. I'm contemplating just replacing the card, it could be bad. I'm not sure what else to try, it's very distracting and it ruins the experience for me.
8
AI War / Crafty Spire AI Type Bug?
« on: March 19, 2013, 05:35:38 PM »
I recently started a game with the "red" AI Type, "Crafty Spire". From what I remember of these guys, they have Spire mega units on most of their planets, and also send them in waves as well.
When the game began, there were lots of Spire units I had to deal with, but I've played for about 3 hours now, and I haven't encountered a single Spire ship since the beginning of the game (first seed, most likely). This is extremely odd, and I'm beginning to wonder if it's bugged out somehow. Usually you see the mega Spire units constantly, but 3 hours in I haven't seen 1 in a wave or on a planet.
The only place I see them is on the AI Homeworld right now, and they were probably seeded there at the start.
Is something wrong?
If someone can confirm this is a bug I'll put it in Mantis.
When the game began, there were lots of Spire units I had to deal with, but I've played for about 3 hours now, and I haven't encountered a single Spire ship since the beginning of the game (first seed, most likely). This is extremely odd, and I'm beginning to wonder if it's bugged out somehow. Usually you see the mega Spire units constantly, but 3 hours in I haven't seen 1 in a wave or on a planet.
The only place I see them is on the AI Homeworld right now, and they were probably seeded there at the start.
Is something wrong?
If someone can confirm this is a bug I'll put it in Mantis.
9
AI War / Adding a "Neutered" Marker to the Galaxy Map
« on: March 14, 2013, 04:50:38 PM »
The "Neutered" Marker would work just like a Priority Marker, except it would be an "N", or something similar.
The Neutered Marker could be placed by the player onto any planet, and would serve two purposes:
1. To let you and all your allies know which planets have been neutered, and are therefore safe to travel through.
2. Neutered planets would automatically be chosen FIRST for allied pathing, instead of simply choosing the FASTEST path, which may lead your forces through MKIV AI Worlds, Raid Engine zones, or worse.
A simple and elegant solution to the long-time AI War pathing problem, which also has the additional value of making the galaxy map more accessible.
Please vote. http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=10901
The Neutered Marker could be placed by the player onto any planet, and would serve two purposes:
1. To let you and all your allies know which planets have been neutered, and are therefore safe to travel through.
2. Neutered planets would automatically be chosen FIRST for allied pathing, instead of simply choosing the FASTEST path, which may lead your forces through MKIV AI Worlds, Raid Engine zones, or worse.
A simple and elegant solution to the long-time AI War pathing problem, which also has the additional value of making the galaxy map more accessible.
Please vote. http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=10901
10
AI War / Starting the game with more resources?
« on: March 07, 2013, 02:40:16 PM »
We had this discussion awhile ago, but I just want to bring up a key point: Starting the game with so few resources, especially on higher difficulties, can make it very tough. It forces the player to invest in higher MK Harvesters quickly. Even on lower difficulties, having to alt-tab to Facebook while you wait for your starting base/army/defenses to build is pretty monotonous.
If I remember, we pretty much all agreed that upping the starting resources would be a good step for the game. It might solve some of the economic balance concerns we're seeing, by allowing the player different options than having to simply upgrade his Harvesters quickly in order to keep up early production.
Perhaps we could try it for a beta update?
If I remember, we pretty much all agreed that upping the starting resources would be a good step for the game. It might solve some of the economic balance concerns we're seeing, by allowing the player different options than having to simply upgrade his Harvesters quickly in order to keep up early production.
Perhaps we could try it for a beta update?
11
Off Topic / So League of Legends Season 3...
« on: December 04, 2012, 11:33:08 PM »
Has anyone tried the new patch?
Holy crap, complete game makeover. I've only played 1 match, but so far I'm really impressed with the changes.
The item changes specifically are awesome! I'm quite shocked that Riot is willing to change their game so dramatically.
I'll have to see if my first impressions hold. What are the community's thoughts?
Holy crap, complete game makeover. I've only played 1 match, but so far I'm really impressed with the changes.
The item changes specifically are awesome! I'm quite shocked that Riot is willing to change their game so dramatically.
I'll have to see if my first impressions hold. What are the community's thoughts?
12
AI War / Keith Appreciation Thread
« on: December 03, 2012, 03:55:50 PM »
Looks like Keith has been sick lately and probably feeling pretty nasty.
Another thing is that we as a forum are very quick to criticize changes and problems with the game, while not taking enough time to thank Chris and Keith for all their hard work!
So I devote this thread to thanking Keith for all his passion and dedication to AI War. It doesn't go unnoticed or unappreciated. Feel better soon!
Another thing is that we as a forum are very quick to criticize changes and problems with the game, while not taking enough time to thank Chris and Keith for all their hard work!
So I devote this thread to thanking Keith for all his passion and dedication to AI War. It doesn't go unnoticed or unappreciated. Feel better soon!
13
Off Topic / Company of Heroes 2 vs. Wargame: Airland Battle
« on: December 01, 2012, 12:01:36 PM »
Which one are you more excited for?
Company of Heroes 2
or
Wargame: Airland Battle
Discuss ;p
edit: Link fixed.
Company of Heroes 2
or
Wargame: Airland Battle
Discuss ;p
edit: Link fixed.
14
Off Topic / Moba balance comparison, please comment
« on: November 29, 2012, 03:48:18 AM »
Yeah, I know, it's this thread again. Honestly though, I'm trying to be civil this time and give League of Legends a fair chance. In fact, I've been doing that for a lot of things in my life, for example reading a really interesting book called "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel, even though I'm very firmly atheist.
In other words, I'm trying to turn a new leaf here. I don't want to be the angry, judgmental person that I was before, I would really like to delve into an open-minded investigation of this matter and get the community's opinion on this topic.
The reason I'm doing this is because I'd like to make a DotA 2 vs. LoL youtube video that gives both games a fair review and treatment, with as little bias as possible, for people interested in the genre. For example, I've already thought of many of the categories. League of Legends wins in learning curve. Ease of use. And it's community is 1 million times better than DotA 2's. It's so surprising not to get raged at when I make a small mistake in League, which is really refreshing and also something that is rare to find in a DotA 2 game. I really respect LoL's community for that reason, and I'm impressed with Riot for having such great results.
The category I'm interested in now though is balance. I want to believe that League of Legends has good balance, or that there's something I just don't understand, but when I see heroes like Rengar and Vayne, among many others, who are just miles ahead of all the rest, I get extremely frustrated at the game.
For example, I like to play Ashe. I like playing Ashe because she's a simple, positionally-based carry. In DotA, some of my favorite heroes to play are positionally-based heroes. In other words, powerful heroes who can make a huge impact on the game, but whom don't have any strong escape mechanisms, meaning that your positioning skill makes all the difference.
However, the more I play Ashe, the more I get the impression that positionally-based carries suck. For one thing, I'm forced to take Ghost and Flash; if I don't get those escape moves, I'm in serious trouble and I'll probably die constantly. So already, the idea of playing the game with superior positioning has kind of been thrown out the window. In addition, even with Ghost and Flash, I feel so useless compared to other ranged carries such as Vayne and Graves. They do so much more damage than I do, with similar farm, and at least with Vayne, have powerful escape mechanisms to boot. Vayne does massive amounts of true damage, she can knock her targets back, she can dash every few seconds, and even go invisible in a pinch.
To confirm my suspicions I go online to Elementz tier list, and see that Ashe is in Tier 3 for both solo queue and competitive play. Much to my surprise, there are ranged carries that are in even WORSE positions than Ashe (it's hard for me to believe after playing several games with her, compared to other, much more superior carries).
My complaint is not that Ashe is slightly underpowered. Like okay, I get that, perfect balance is impossible. My complaint is that Ashe is so godly underpowered compared to these other carries that she is a joke. I often play with a full team of 5 friends all on Skype, and they won't even let me pick Ashe. Is it because I'm a bad player? No. They just realize that there are so many better carries out there. I can't blame them, we usually lose when I do. So when my friend picks Vayne instead we roflstomp the game.
How can the balance be that bad?
When I play DotA 2, there is a hero that is functionally very similar to Ashe named Drow Ranger. She is a ranged female hard carry with no escape mechanisms and frost arrows (it seems like Ashe was based off of Drow in many ways). But the difference between Drow and Ashe is that Drow is actually really good. Drow scales extremely well into lategame, she gives all the ranged heroes on her entire team a powerful +dmg aura, and she can even give allied ranged creeps her aura too, for mega full-map pushing power!
Yes, she's similar to Ashe in that if she gets caught out, she's dead; but her strengths make up for this glaring weakness, where Ashe's strengths do not.
So fellow League players, please offer your input on this situation. Is LoL's balance really just that bad, or is there something I don't quite understand?
In other words, I'm trying to turn a new leaf here. I don't want to be the angry, judgmental person that I was before, I would really like to delve into an open-minded investigation of this matter and get the community's opinion on this topic.
The reason I'm doing this is because I'd like to make a DotA 2 vs. LoL youtube video that gives both games a fair review and treatment, with as little bias as possible, for people interested in the genre. For example, I've already thought of many of the categories. League of Legends wins in learning curve. Ease of use. And it's community is 1 million times better than DotA 2's. It's so surprising not to get raged at when I make a small mistake in League, which is really refreshing and also something that is rare to find in a DotA 2 game. I really respect LoL's community for that reason, and I'm impressed with Riot for having such great results.
The category I'm interested in now though is balance. I want to believe that League of Legends has good balance, or that there's something I just don't understand, but when I see heroes like Rengar and Vayne, among many others, who are just miles ahead of all the rest, I get extremely frustrated at the game.
For example, I like to play Ashe. I like playing Ashe because she's a simple, positionally-based carry. In DotA, some of my favorite heroes to play are positionally-based heroes. In other words, powerful heroes who can make a huge impact on the game, but whom don't have any strong escape mechanisms, meaning that your positioning skill makes all the difference.
However, the more I play Ashe, the more I get the impression that positionally-based carries suck. For one thing, I'm forced to take Ghost and Flash; if I don't get those escape moves, I'm in serious trouble and I'll probably die constantly. So already, the idea of playing the game with superior positioning has kind of been thrown out the window. In addition, even with Ghost and Flash, I feel so useless compared to other ranged carries such as Vayne and Graves. They do so much more damage than I do, with similar farm, and at least with Vayne, have powerful escape mechanisms to boot. Vayne does massive amounts of true damage, she can knock her targets back, she can dash every few seconds, and even go invisible in a pinch.
To confirm my suspicions I go online to Elementz tier list, and see that Ashe is in Tier 3 for both solo queue and competitive play. Much to my surprise, there are ranged carries that are in even WORSE positions than Ashe (it's hard for me to believe after playing several games with her, compared to other, much more superior carries).
My complaint is not that Ashe is slightly underpowered. Like okay, I get that, perfect balance is impossible. My complaint is that Ashe is so godly underpowered compared to these other carries that she is a joke. I often play with a full team of 5 friends all on Skype, and they won't even let me pick Ashe. Is it because I'm a bad player? No. They just realize that there are so many better carries out there. I can't blame them, we usually lose when I do. So when my friend picks Vayne instead we roflstomp the game.
How can the balance be that bad?
When I play DotA 2, there is a hero that is functionally very similar to Ashe named Drow Ranger. She is a ranged female hard carry with no escape mechanisms and frost arrows (it seems like Ashe was based off of Drow in many ways). But the difference between Drow and Ashe is that Drow is actually really good. Drow scales extremely well into lategame, she gives all the ranged heroes on her entire team a powerful +dmg aura, and she can even give allied ranged creeps her aura too, for mega full-map pushing power!
Yes, she's similar to Ashe in that if she gets caught out, she's dead; but her strengths make up for this glaring weakness, where Ashe's strengths do not.
So fellow League players, please offer your input on this situation. Is LoL's balance really just that bad, or is there something I don't quite understand?
15
AI War / Weird/inexplicable allied Enclave behavior
« on: November 23, 2012, 08:00:42 PM »
I've noticed these kinds of things a lot, and I was wondering if you could explain to me what's happening Keith.
Sometimes one of my planets will be under massive attack and they'll just sit at my Homeworld as if nothing is happening.
In the save I'm attaching, one of my planets gets hit with a wave of about 700 guys, including 5 Spire Frigates and several Starships, and my Enclave ships just sit there doing nothing. Ironically, as the wave begins they release their entire force of ships on my Homeworld...
It has to be a bug or something. As soon as the save starts watch how they release their force even though there is no enemy threat on my Homeworld, then also watch how they just sit there and do nothing.
Sometimes one of my planets will be under massive attack and they'll just sit at my Homeworld as if nothing is happening.
In the save I'm attaching, one of my planets gets hit with a wave of about 700 guys, including 5 Spire Frigates and several Starships, and my Enclave ships just sit there doing nothing. Ironically, as the wave begins they release their entire force of ships on my Homeworld...
It has to be a bug or something. As soon as the save starts watch how they release their force even though there is no enemy threat on my Homeworld, then also watch how they just sit there and do nothing.