PDA

View Full Version : Patch Notes - 4th April 2014 Update



Monkeythumbz
4th Apr 2014, 17:52
You can now find patch notes in a new section that can be accessed under the main NEWS header on the homepage, or by following this link: http://www.Nosgoth.com/game_updates

Online
Region filter will now function properly when NA or EU is selected
Fix for imbalanced teams being created (5v3, 6v2, etc.)
Improvements and fixes to Party system and friend inviting / joining

Voice Chat
Improvements to quality and consistency of voice chat
Fixes for being unable to hear some team-mates in-game

Controller Support

Unofficial support for playing with and rebinding Xbox 360 controllers enabled. This is still a Work In Progress so use at your own risk! PS4 controllers will also technically work but will not show PS4 button prompts.

Hunter

Crossbows:
Crossbows now have stronger horizontal recoil
Aim assistance at extreme distances reduced

Bola, Poison Bola:
Bola skills now break if the affected vampire takes 350 damage while bola’d
Shot delay after throwing Bola/Poison Bola reduced
Tooltips fixed to properly show Duration and Damage Threshold

Grenade:
Slight reduction to max damage

Blinding Shot:
Damage reduced to 65 x 3
Fixed a bug causing it to blind vampires who weren’t looking at it
Reduced blind duration

Alchemist

Sunlight Vial:
Increased radius to 400 units
Cooldown reduced to 20 seconds
Fixed a bug causing it to blind vampires who weren’t looking at it

Reaver

Shadow Step:
Cooldown increased to 15 seconds, was 10

Sentinel

Flight:
Sentinels should now be significantly more effective at flying up stairs…
Disabled “dive” audio screech when flying now that Kidnap plays its own tell

Misc
Fixed a bug causing chatbox to sometimes require multiple button presses to close

hirukaru
4th Apr 2014, 20:10
Thank you MT, like the new website part.

PencileyePirate
4th Apr 2014, 20:29
Finally a fix for region and team balancing ... and I'm happy to see that the bola's new damage break has been changed to 350.

Hopefully we'll start to see new content now that many of the worst bugs are getting eliminated. Even if the new classes are still being balanced, a few more maps would be greatly appreciated.

KageOfShadows
4th Apr 2014, 21:13
Thank you so much for the party balance fix and for the work on the party invite system. Great job guys love the game and can't wait for what is to come!

ZeroFernir
4th Apr 2014, 21:34
SS is now 15 secs cooldown =( Doesn't match my Leap anymore... Bad for my hit n' run tactics...

MordaxPraetorian
4th Apr 2014, 23:14
Fix for imbalanced teams being created (5v3, 6v2, etc.)
Improvements and fixes to Party system and friend inviting / joining


Still broken, worse if anything

Miltile
5th Apr 2014, 03:34
Still broken, worse if anything
its not that bad , they did fix it and if it happens all you have to do is leave and come back to that match and it will fix itself.

Kajirou
5th Apr 2014, 08:56
If it does happen (and it does), then it's not fixed. And for players to leave and rejoin, that's the same fix as they had to do before hand. So.. no, not fixed. At all.

Also the chat bug wasn't fixed, I still need to slap enter twice after using team chat.

Khalith
5th Apr 2014, 11:31
I don't like the team system, inviting 1 person to play with you is one thing. But these premades of 3-4 aren't any fun to play with or against as it makes the game incredibly one sided, put groups that size in their own queue, if they don't like it make them queue separate.

The bola fix was desperately as was the lowered aim assist, but horizontal recoil wasn't the solution, hunters max damage on their bolts needs a reduction still.

TheMalgot
5th Apr 2014, 14:23
Still no music while in background-option.

Umngyr
5th Apr 2014, 15:25
I am Umngyr, one of the 2 first Nosgoth Quiz perfect score winners - And i aprove this patch.

SiD_Green
5th Apr 2014, 22:28
Still no music while in background-option.


This worked for me:


Ok here we go: My Documents---->My Games---->Nosgoth---->BCMPGame---->Config---->BCMPSystemsettings

Now use the find function (ctrl+f) Search for UseDirectSount. It will be set to True. deletet the word True and write False (the capital is important). Next time you start nogoth, you will here the drum beats for the mach start counter.

ZeroFernir
6th Apr 2014, 00:26
Dumahim's ShadowStep have now a cooldown too long! I am dying almost 20% more!

rasxxx
6th Apr 2014, 21:35
I don't like the team system, inviting 1 person to play with you is one thing. But these premades of 3-4 aren't any fun to play with or against as it makes the game incredibly one sided, put groups that size in their own queue, if they don't like it make them queue separate.
Agreed.

cmstache
6th Apr 2014, 22:55
Khalith, considering it's a team game it's hard to justify that. That being said, I'm sure it's coming at some point. But, penalizing teams by forcing them to not get matched up with others just because they went out of their way to form a team isn't the right way to go about it. Sure, it's boring for them too, but you can see some really intense games vs premades. We had one the other day vs. some of the QA team.

Khalith
7th Apr 2014, 00:30
Khalith, considering it's a team game it's hard to justify that. That being said, I'm sure it's coming at some point. But, penalizing teams by forcing them to not get matched up with others just because they went out of their way to form a team isn't the right way to go about it. Sure, it's boring for them too, but you can see some really intense games vs premades. We had one the other day vs. some of the QA team.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to have teams in their own queue, if you want the intense premade vs premade then they should get their own queue. You're not being penalized, you're being forced to fight on fair terms against another team, putting them in the same queue as the solo queues is simply not fair to those that may not have a group of friends or a team yet. Forcing the teams to play against other teams is perfectly valid, if you think it's fair that teams of 3-4 are going against a full pug lobby then it's really hinting to me that you just want to stomp other teams without a challenge whereas if you truly are interested in intense games of team vs team then having teams in their own queue shouldn't cause any complaints.

cmstache
7th Apr 2014, 01:56
My issue isn't keeping them separate, it's that there isn't a playerbase to support it.

Prime_Abstergo
7th Apr 2014, 06:12
C'mon, Khalith you know there are no sense to implement closed lobbies while in CB stage. Personally I know only three premade groups atm: [immortal]*, _VRNB and "fellows from 200g" (but without any prefix so its a phantom menace :D).
So IMO I'd put it on low priority at this stage of development.

ps. BTW does group chat works or not? And what about Deceiver - I think they will show him during PAX.

Khalith
7th Apr 2014, 13:54
C'mon, Khalith you know there are no sense to implement closed lobbies while in CB stage. Personally I know only three premade groups atm: [immortal]*, _VRNB and "fellows from 200g" (but without any prefix so its a phantom menace :D).
So IMO I'd put it on low priority at this stage of development.

ps. BTW does group chat works or not? And what about Deceiver - I think they will show him during PAX.

Party chat does work and so does voice on your team. As for the Deceiver some of his abilities have already been shown, we already know what the Deceiver is like, there are vids of it already. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sovPU282Vso&t=13m5s

There you go, click that. I'm against the whole premades vs pugs, I always have been, I would rather see them in their own queue, I understand it probably won't be implemented for a while but my opinion on the issue won't change.

Planetus
7th Apr 2014, 23:12
Still no dice getting people in a party lobby before queueing, currently queueing as 3 people is like playing ARMA with an actual Sergeant Major leading the mission, "Is there a spot?" "YES" "GO GO GO MARINES".

lucinvampire
8th Apr 2014, 11:23
"Is there a spot?" "YES" "GO GO GO MARINES".

^ This – so much THIS!!! :p :D …it is the eternal battle against the Lobby…to be able to invite ones friends to the battlefield – to stand with your comrades side by side against the humans/vampires of Nosgoth! …heh

I actually managed to find an empty lobby last night and it was like winning the jackpot - but most the time get thrown in to a half in progress match.

Oroibahazopi
8th Apr 2014, 19:10
C'mon, Khalith you know there are no sense to implement closed lobbies while in CB stage. Personally I know only three premade groups atm: [immortal]*, _VRNB and "fellows from 200g" (but without any prefix so its a phantom menace :D).
So IMO I'd put it on low priority at this stage of development.

ps. BTW does group chat works or not? And what about Deceiver - I think they will show him during PAX.
Plenty of sense, I set up Nosgoth PUG specifically for PUGs which need locked lobbies. There are 230+ people in the group

cmstache
8th Apr 2014, 21:10
Most of which don't play anymore atm. Including yourself.

Oroibahazopi
8th Apr 2014, 21:12
Exactly

cmstache
8th Apr 2014, 21:23
My point was: Why would they make a locked lobby for players who aren't currently testing. It'll come anyways, but active players would make it more of a priority.

Oroibahazopi
8th Apr 2014, 21:37
Why would they want as many people to play their game as possible? I dunno

I really don't feel incentivized to play right now, it's just not fun. All the best players left and stopped playing and this game is supposed to be competitive.

Competitive players don't give a **** about skins or new classes that just add more crap to the imbalance, they want to play with people at their skill level at the very least. They want rewards for being the best, not for just logging on each day or grinding XP and gold.

Ugh I really cbf'd to repeat what I have said many times before

cmstache
8th Apr 2014, 23:27
While you do make a semi-valid point, the problem is that the logic is only semi-valid. Would I like more competition? Yes. Are there issues that need to be balanced? Yes. Are there competitive features that need to be implemented? Absolutely. However, complaining that you're getting a skin is ridiculous.

First, you're under the assumption that you can't be competitive AND want good aesthetics. This can actually happen. Second, you need players. Better looking games bring in more players. The look of a game can attract players easier than competition can, because the competitive players don't actually know how competitive the game is yet because they haven't played it. On top of that, a player who becomes competitive might not be looking for that when they join the game. Again, you're under the assumption that competition and aesthetics can't go together. And finally, the biggest flaw in all of that was the fact that you assume that the art team has much to do with game balance. Different people work on different aspects of the game. They can, believe it or not, work on both things at once.

That being said, had you spent much time in the game recently, instead of complaining that there aren't any competitive players you would notice 3 things:

1 - Competitive players do exist, and in fact there's more of them. There are quite a few beta players who can rival any of the better Alpha player.
2 - This update is phenomenal. The two factions are extremely balanced and while certain issues may need tweaks, this update fixed almost all the game-breaking issues.
3 - There are a few competitive groups that line up matches every day. You could be helping organize these, but instead you choose to come on the forums of a game you aren't playing, when instead you could be helping with the new abilities and offering real solutions, with details to help speed the process along. You "not playing" just makes your own problem worse.

Oroibahazopi
9th Apr 2014, 06:44
The look of the game only attracts scrubs. Do people play chess because of the hi rez custom colour premium chess pieces? Do people still play quake and CS because of the super realistic polygons?

I really don't see how you can make claims about the balance of a game when there are no regular skill matched games played. It's like I've always said, the metrics right now are worthless because there is no matchmaking forcing groups with similar skill levels together.

A few competitive groups huh? Where are the league tables then? Who are they? How do they set up scrims without locked lobbies? Tribes Ascend had live streamed tournaments in ALPHA, we don't even have the ability to host a private game or have spectators yet.

SiD_Green
9th Apr 2014, 06:55
Well let's be honest, nobody wants to play low rez chess

cmstache
9th Apr 2014, 11:58
The look of the game only attracts scrubs. Do people play chess because of the hi rez custom colour premium chess pieces? Do people still play quake and CS because of the super realistic polygons?

I really don't see how you can make claims about the balance of a game when there are no regular skill matched games played. It's like I've always said, the metrics right now are worthless because there is no matchmaking forcing groups with similar skill levels together.



Competitive players do care about graphics. Would you have the system you have if all you wanted was 8-bit graphics on your shooters? No, you have high-end hardware for high-end games. Graphics are part of that. Will a competitive player play chess? Yes because it's a good game. But, how many of them would rather play "battle chess" on a PC because they have fun graphics that let them see the knight destroying the pawn, a good many, if not most. Graphics add additional input into the player's mind, thus giving more to process which gives a game staying power. No where did I say competition is bad. And nowhere did I say that we didn't need more competitive features. What I said was that these additional features aren't harming the game, as you suggested. Again, how does getting new skins (from the art team) have ANY impact on when private lobbies (gameplay/UI) will become available. Your complaint about not having them is valid. But, crying that it's because we're getting skins is just being pouty.


And claims of balance can be made because we DO regularly play against skilled players. You haven't played regularly since the mid-end of Alpha, how would you know who is competitive or not? Sure, we have games that are complete stomps, but there are just as many close, competitive games, many of which ARE organized by the organized, similarly skilled teams. And once again, I bring up the fact that you not playing just makes your own problem more difficult. Instead of complaining on the forums about a game you aren't helping test you could be trying to organize matches and put those "worthless metrics" to a real test with more competition. If you're going to be overly critical of the design team, then why not offer real help and input instead of blatant criticism which no proposed idea details? You would save everyone, including yourself, a lot of energy.

Oroibahazopi
9th Apr 2014, 18:06
Competitive players do care about graphics. Would you have the system you have if all you wanted was 8-bit graphics on your shooters? No, you have high-end hardware for high-end games. Graphics are part of that. Will a competitive player play chess? Yes because it's a good game. But, how many of them would rather play "battle chess" on a PC because they have fun graphics that let them see the knight destroying the pawn, a good many, if not most. Graphics add additional input into the player's mind, thus giving more to process which gives a game staying power.
wat, no srsly wat. Only consideration someone who plays competitive makes with regard to gfx is, is the frame rate optimal and is the image quality optimal. Many professional players or players with disposable income will have the best gear to get an edge, and that almost never means playing at max detail. People who are competitive set the system up to be most optimal which, for people with smaller amounts of cash to spend on gear, means playing at lower gfx settings.


No where did I say competition is bad. And nowhere did I say that we didn't need more competitive features. What I said was that these additional features aren't harming the game, as you suggested. Again, how does getting new skins (from the art team) have ANY impact on when private lobbies (gameplay/UI) will become available. Your complaint about not having them is valid. But, crying that it's because we're getting skins is just being pouty.
Quote where I said custom skins are bad. I never made any reference to how we get custom skins instead of the other stuff, I'm asking why we don't have the other stuff. Your point about how skins are nothing to do with the lobby development, say, only emphasises my question "where are they?". Can you stop making me look like an idiot because you can't read English.


And claims of balance can be made because we DO regularly play against skilled players. You haven't played regularly since the mid-end of Alpha, how would you know who is competitive or not? Sure, we have games that are complete stomps, but there are just as many close, competitive games, many of which ARE organized by the organized, similarly skilled teams. And once again, I bring up the fact that you not playing just makes your own problem more difficult. Instead of complaining on the forums about a game you aren't helping test you could be trying to organize matches and put those "worthless metrics" to a real test with more competition. If you're going to be overly critical of the design team, then why not offer real help and input instead of blatant criticism which no proposed idea details? You would save everyone, including yourself, a lot of energy.
YOU CANNOT ORGANISE MATCHES WITHOUT LOCKED LOBBIES. I flat refuse to cheat and waste time to get the matches I want, frankly I'm surprised you don't consider abusing the matchmaking system and preventing it from matching you in a normal manner an exploit considering your prior history on the subject.

You've still to mention who these teams are also, because I may actually start playing again if what you say is actually true. And I am highly sceptical simply because of the kinds of balance and suggestion threads I see in the forums.

Seriously can't you read? Every post I made had a solution in it, what part of "add spectators and locked lobbies" can you not understand? And what is the point in providing feedback if you cannot critique, the idea is to make a good game, not circle jerk with the developers.

It takes no energy to type.

Timeraider007
9th Apr 2014, 23:02
"Fix for imbalanced teams being created (5v3, 6v2, etc.)" .. im still laughing at this part supposedly being fixed. 90% of matches that happen just get a full teamabandon at 1 side..

because a 2v5 with 2 lvl 2s at one side and 4 lvl 30+ at the other... listen .. minecraft has better mm

Zuppzupp
9th Apr 2014, 23:13
So .. you want another tribes ascend , yes ?

A game who is allready going full-competitive (dont get me wrong , i like competition i realy do !) in alpha to beta and then, due to this fact, there´s no room for casual players anymore. After 6 month we almost lost 80% of our playerbase. Even the competitive scene died because they had not enough ppl to fill the teams for the tournaments !

In a nutshell .. Competitive gaming : yes yes and yes ! But not at the cost of losing our up-and-coming-players, for the competitive scene needs them more than some super-competitive nerds. Diversity is the new meta.

"Tribes : Ascend" is the best example to show how to do this completly wrong.

Balance even more (it has to be an ongoing process), tweak up the animations and hitboxes and (for gods sake ..) give the players a reason to play / grind in form of a good progression-system.

First you play for the looks, then you play for the feel of the game, then for the progression and at last for the competition.

EDIT PS : And yes .. i intend to post to-the-point suggestions in the near future.
EDIT PPS: As a software developer i can assure you that the oh-so-easy parts in development are (for some reason i wont be able to understand ..) the freaking hardest. Always.

cmstache
10th Apr 2014, 00:00
wat, no srsly wat. Only consideration someone who plays competitive makes with regard to gfx is, is the frame rate optimal and is the image quality optimal. Many professional players or players with disposable income will have the best gear to get an edge, and that almost never means playing at max detail. People who are competitive set the system up to be most optimal which, for people with smaller amounts of cash to spend on gear, means playing at lower gfx settings.

While you have a point about people playing with optimal settings you ignore the fact that people still do buy better cards for better graphics. So yes, they still care. It's just budget limited, which is understandable. You make it sound as if they don't give a rip about settings, which just isn't true.


Quote where I said custom skins are bad. I never made any reference to how we get custom skins instead of the other stuff, I'm asking why we don't have the other stuff. Your point about how skins are nothing to do with the lobby development, say, only emphasises my question "where are they?". Can you stop making me look like an idiot because you can't read English.


"Competitive players don't give a **** about skins or new classes that just add more crap to the imbalance, they want to play with people at their skill level at the very least."

This statement implies that you don't want skins and the fact that those skins get in the way of other updates by comparing the two. Despite my personal feelings about your attitude I know you're not an idiot. This is why I went out of my way to call you out on this. You essentially said "I don't want this, so don't put it in the game." despite it not conflicting with ANYTHING else you've said. If you cared more about the success of the game, and including others you wouldn't have even brought it up. It's a purely selfish response. Honestly, it never should have even been mentioned. Skins have ZERO effect on balance issues. As for the other stuff, it is in development. As a moderator I can't make any other statements on this. The only things I can say about it are this that have already been said. These things don't just fall out of mid-air. They take time to develop. Why would they make locked lobbies when they are still trying to get normal lobbies to work correctly?


YOU CANNOT ORGANISE MATCHES WITHOUT LOCKED LOBBIES. I flat refuse to cheat and waste time to get the matches I want, frankly I'm surprised you don't consider abusing the matchmaking system and preventing it from matching you in a normal manner an exploit considering your prior history on the subject.

We do it, sure it's a pain sometimes but it's still worth it when the matches start. I would like for you to point out ANY time I have ever cheated, or even exploited an issue intentionally. If I don't do it in-game, why would I do it in the lobbies. Are they there? Yes. Do I use them? No. Do I report them as I stumble upon them to be fixed? Yes. There's nothing more you can honestly say I can do about that.

You've still to mention who these teams are also, because I may actually start playing again if what you say is actually true. And I am highly sceptical simply because of the kinds of balance and suggestion threads I see in the forums.


C'mon, Khalith you know there are no sense to implement closed lobbies while in CB stage. Personally I know only three premade groups atm: [immortal]*, _VRNB and "fellows from 200g" (but without any prefix so its a phantom menace :D).
So IMO I'd put it on low priority at this stage of development.

ps. BTW does group chat works or not? And what about Deceiver - I think they will show him during PAX.

They were previously mentioned, so I didn't name them. There are also NUMEROUS good players who regularly play with other players, although they aren't "organized teams" but are still more than noteworthy players:
Saturn
Cookiedude
That'sNotMyPirate
Omhz
DFA
Rufus Shinra
BringerofHugs
Bobo
Furbz
Wobbley
Aquilius
Deputy Potato
RT
Livin
Victorian Rat
TapxJames
agile
It's DooDoo baby!
Omegamesh
Prime
About 4-5 QA guys (The others are meh)

I can go on longer, but you get the point. Some of those names you'll recognize, some you won't. I wouldn't mind having ANY of the above listed players on my team in a match.


Seriously can't you read? Every post I made had a solution in it, what part of "add spectators and locked lobbies" can you not understand? And what is the point in providing feedback if you cannot critique, the idea is to make a good game, not circle jerk with the developers.

Saying "do this" and "Here's how I would like this done" are two very different things. Saying "Nerf the hunter, he's imbalanced!" doesn't do anything. Saying "The hunter needs a RoF nerf and here's why..." does. You want locked lobbies. Good. Now, how to you think the best way to go about that is? Should you just make them passworded? Will they be selectable in a list? Are they invite only? If so, how do you invite opposing players? All these things need to be dealt with, and saying "just do them" isn't really helpful. Critiquing is fine, but it does nothing if you don't follow it up with why, or any other advice.


It takes no energy to type.


Responses inline...

MasterShuriko
10th Apr 2014, 00:23
Im only meh ? ='(

cmstache
10th Apr 2014, 00:34
I was referring to the QA guys there. And I didn't list them all, that was just a quick scan of my Friend's list. There's more than what's listed.

Oroibahazopi
10th Apr 2014, 06:03
So .. you want another tribes ascend , yes ?

A game who is allready going full-competitive (dont get me wrong , i like competition i realy do !) in alpha to beta and then, due to this fact, there´s no room for casual players anymore. After 6 month we almost lost 80% of our playerbase. Even the competitive scene died because they had not enough ppl to fill the teams for the tournaments !
TA died specifically because the comp scene was ignored too long. It had nothing to do with casual players, if anything all the changes up to the end of development were designed for casual players.

Zuppzupp
10th Apr 2014, 14:59
You mentioned TA had spectator mode allready in alpha as an argument for how competitive games should be developed, and now you´re saying that it wasnt competitive at all ?

Yes the competitive scene got ignored too long, but not in the development rather then in terms of tournaments (which you need if you want to have competitive scene, since ppl need to make a living you know .. dats what competitive play is freaking about !). In short: They had no money, and a game which brought none in since .. *drum roll* .. it was too hard to learn / too competitive for casual players.

Back to topic: I dont want to see Nosgoth to become the next TA, thats why i say .. looks > feels > progression > competition .. not because i like badass looks more then smooth / sweet feels and animations (i realy dont), but because the majority of players (its sad but it is as it is) gets drawn to a game because it has the awes0me lookz and not because it has a well established competitive scene.

Last but not least .. If a game has a large enough playerbase the comp scene is emerging from it by itself .. League is the best example.

Passarbye
10th Apr 2014, 15:55
looks > feels > progression > competition

I agree with this, it's the best choice overall because you bring new players in with how the game looks and feels, progression/balancing is an ongoing thing and competition will happen naturally when players like the game enough to care.

Game development is a weird thing though. :hmm:

Oroibahazopi
10th Apr 2014, 16:54
If you focus on looks you are destined to be deserted as soon as the next flashy game comes out. But then that is what most development cycles are built around these days.

Minsoinch
10th Apr 2014, 17:41
There is nothing wrong with wanting to have teams in their own queue, if you want the intense premade vs premade then they should get their own queue. You're not being penalized, you're being forced to fight on fair terms against another team, putting them in the same queue as the solo queues is simply not fair to those that may not have a group of friends or a team yet. Forcing the teams to play against other teams is perfectly valid, if you think it's fair that teams of 3-4 are going against a full pug lobby then it's really hinting to me that you just want to stomp other teams without a challenge whereas if you truly are interested in intense games of team vs team then having teams in their own queue shouldn't cause any complaints.

My issue is; when playing against a pre-made, I'm not really testing the game but more of my personally skill against players who are possible more experience.

I not against users creating a clan or even a pre-made, I actually think it's a good sign that user are that commited to the game and wish to start end-game. I agree, there is just not enough player base to justify the implementation of 4v4 group mode. We can't tell clans to not form pre-made, infact we should be encourage player to create clans and pre-made. But are we really testing the game in this situation?

I hope, that when the game transit into Open Beta that this issue is resolved though. Putting newbies against pre-made will not make the game enjoyable and just simply stop them from playing. Therefore, stopping the player-base growing and the game becoming popular.

Something does need to be done, just not right now.


Competitive players do care about graphics.

I'm sorry, i totally disagree. StarCraft 1 is probably the longest competitive game ever to run and the graphic have aged but that still didn't stop them. In my opinion, competitive player will care more about a game being balanced. You can play chess in 8-bit, because the game chess is balanced.

Which bring me back to my original point. Are we really testing the balance of the game when we're putting PUGS vs Pre-made.

cmstache
10th Apr 2014, 18:11
I never said that competition isn't important. In fact, I've gone out of my way to say that I do wish they did more with it. It doesn't change the fact that there are competitive players who care about graphics. If I have two similar games, I'll take the one that looks more polished. Graphics don't make the game itself better, but they do make it more enjoyable. Again, it's an important note because the game's balance has little (if anything) to do with the graphical team. Do all competitive players care about graphics? Of course not. But to say that none of them do is a pretty huge statement, and rather narrow-minded. People respond to all different kinds of things. SC1 was a great game (still is), but I'm sure if it (hypothetically) received a minor graphical update people aren't going to complain about it, which just shows my point.

I would like more competition, but I don't mind it coming as a process. I do have a problem with them neglecting the issue entirely, but as of now they haven't done so. Which, for now anyways, it's in the pipeline. That's all anyone can ask for at this point. To have competition you need players. Currently, many of those players are playing other games. We need something to attract them here. Catchy graphics do that well, as long as the game's mechanics work. And for the most part they do. There are things in progress and getting tweaks, but honestly most of the major issues don't really arise until higher levels of play. Until then you only think you know what's wrong, then you find out you were previously wrong.

And I ask people again, why would they add pre-made lobbies when the normal matchmaking is still a bit buggy. Gotta have something to build on before you start adding stuff.

Minsoinch
10th Apr 2014, 18:49
And I ask people again, why would they add pre-made lobbies when the normal matchmaking is still a bit buggy. Gotta have something to build on before you start adding stuff.


In my opinion, a "Pre-Made-Lobby" just won't work, instead perhaps we should be asking for a "Private-Match-Lobby" where users throw out invites to similar users. This will give the option to thoses who really want to test their competitive side of gaming and maybe provide valuable data for the devs to work with.

Yes, the match making is still abit buggy, but this could mainly be due to the size of the currently player base. Once the player base grows to a certain size, then the match maker may find it easiler to find similar level player to create more balance games. I have be thrown in a game where player are double the level of myself, but better to get in a game to test then to wait forever for users to log on. That is just the naturally inherited conditions of Closed Beta that we have to accept. Of course, I'm sure match making systems are an ongoing delevopment and will always need tweaking even after final release.

cmstache
10th Apr 2014, 18:56
I would have no problem with invite-only lobbies. Obviously, though, that still doesn't fix the issue that we don't need it right now and that it's coming. I do think a way to play with the developer with pre-made teams would be a nice testing function though.

Zuppzupp
14th Apr 2014, 11:38
If you focus on looks you are destined to be deserted as soon as the next flashy game comes out. But then that is what most development cycles are built around these days.

The looks are good enough (i´d even say they are superb in terms of atmosphere) the feels are good too. The next step would be a nice progression system so ppl actually stay in beta. Wether this is a ranked-ladder or a leveling-system (chests ... meh ..) there has to be something to hold the beta-players until release, so nosgoth has a nice playerbase right from start.

And yes .. then competition will happen naturally ..

Passarbye
19th Apr 2014, 21:49
The looks are good enough (i´d even say they are superb in terms of atmosphere) the feels are good too. The next step would be a nice progression system so ppl actually stay in beta. Wether this is a ranked-ladder or a leveling-system (chests ... meh ..) there has to be something to hold the beta-players until release, so nosgoth has a nice playerbase right from start.

And yes .. then competition will happen naturally ..
I think it's pretty good now, but there definitely needs to be a leveling thing to make us keep playing.
They also need to work on balancing and adding new classes and maps, and maybe even a new game mode or two.

The game is good, but it just needs tweaking i think.