Forums › English Language Forums › General › General Discussion

Search

6/9/11 Gate Mechanic Feedback Thread

10 replies [Last post]
Thu, 06/09/2011 - 20:24
adrian783
Legacy Username

Gates

- The two stratums in a tier may not be the same theme.
- Stratums will give a bit of feedback as to how their current theme was determined.
- Mineral payouts will vary between stratums more.

1. The "2 Stratum in a Tier" Rule is completely uncalled for

No users asked for this rule. What they complained about is the all SHOCK gate. This mean that shock as a status should be tweaked, not implement some arbitrary rule about 2 stratum in a tier. I don't think anyone would object to a all poison gate, or all fire gate, or all jelly gate (see project uJelly), or all ____ gate except for shock.

OOO, I know you're still tweaking the gate construction mechanic, but for god's sake ask the players before you force stuff like this down our throat. Just make a thread in the forum, is that so hard?

2. Confusion about gate construction

So how exactly does gate construction work now? What determines the crown payout for any given strata? What happens when 2 stratum in a tier both meet the mineral requirement for the same type?

3. OOO's Naivety

OOO, i know you have a vision of how your game is "suppose" to work. But now that the game is released please stop treating it like your pet project and updating on things that absolutely no one asked for, and collect player feedbacks before you're about to make some changes. Like I said before, no one asked about the changes for "2 stratum in a tier". I thought the entire point of gate construction is so players can have choice in how they want to play the game, and now you're taking the freedom of choice away from the players without prior notice? Who do you think you are to tell me how i want to play the game?

The same applies to the binding update, I know you have some kind of vision for your items, that some items should be "rare" or whatever. But the fact is the players have evolved the game into a semi-stable market, it is very unthoughtful and completely tactless to just barge in the player-run economy and exercise your developer muscles saying "all 7 of us at OOO think the game should be played 'THIS WAY'".

If you want more player to buy CE just be open and tell us that, I for one would be more understanding. If you honestly think that YOU have some kind of given right to tell ME how to play the game...seriously OOO, how DARE you.

Thu, 06/09/2011 - 21:24
#1
Tenkii's picture
Tenkii
umad

yaumad

I can see why some of the gate changes could have happened - autosellers and gate variety [and I won't go further into that point].
I applaud the effort, though it also doesn't necessarily solve the silent issue of everyone-plays-only-the-boss-gates lol. I'm kind of interested to see what people will do (in terms of gate choice and CE prices) in the short time that the Jelly King stratum is gone.

Thu, 06/09/2011 - 21:49
#2
Providence
Legacy Username
"No users asked for this

"No users asked for this rule."
-----
They kinda did. When everyone complained about the shock gate, the symptom they were complaining about was having every single stratum the same. The simplest way to prevent another shock fiasco would be to make SOME kind of arbitrary rule like the "no two in a tier." If it wasn't this, it would have been something else. The real issue here is that players didn't present a REAL and permanent solution to the "all shock" gate----all we did was demand that the GMs change it, but nobody could muster the minerals to change it themselves. What might have been better is suggesting that the new gates that are generated start with random strata, not all shock by default.

With the new update, we can encourage jelly, then fiend, then jelly etc. What does it matter that they're not all in order like that? There is either a terminal or a subtown between each stratum, so players should be encouraged to explore different armors and weapons. Also, I don't think shock is any worse than fire or poison...it all depends on the gear and playstyle. Shock is hated on the most because shock-resistant armors aren't popular for some reason.

FYI, this game totally IS the "pet project" belonging to OOO. You're not entitled to have your way about everything. The game doesn't revolve around you. If you want OOO to treat you better, maybe you should put a little more work into this relationship--try some constructive criticism, what do YOU want to see instead of the recent "no two to a tier" change? What do you think would make the gate mechanic more fun?

Thu, 06/09/2011 - 22:00
#3
Trouser's picture
Trouser
I don't think anyone would

I don't think anyone would object to a all poison gate, or all fire gate, or all jelly gate (see project uJelly), or all ____ gate except for shock.

To the contrary, there will probably be someone who will object to any gate. In the Project uJelly thread, there was in fact someone who objected to all jelly. This is fine. No gate must please everyone, so long as there is variety available across the gates as a whole. One shock only gate is actually kind of amusing. The problem with it is more that it's a symptom of the skewed mineral drop rates, particularly in the popular jelly palace, which has been pushing all gates toward shock and fiend. Project uJelly will hopefully show us that this trend can be fought, but it's already shown that it's an uphill battle.

The restriction against two strata of the same tier sharing a theme doesn't appear to do much about that problem, since on its own it would probably lead to gates that tend strongly toward half shock and half fiend. So I'm not sure what its purpose is, other than to make sure there's some variety in every tier and make players at least consider a gear change at the terminal.

But the other thing that's changed is how the mineral payouts are determined. At a glance, it looks like there's a random payout applied to each stratum. I'm going to guess that this then adjusted as the mineral distribution in the stratum changes, pushing each stratum towards a random theme. This will probably have better results than what we've recently had, but we will probably still have an uphill battle to change a stratum away from its naturally preferred theme. Furthermore, without addressing the mineral distribution there may still be some funky biases associated with that as well.

We'll see. I'm guessing this will be an improvement, but I'd rather see the nonuniform mineral distribution addressed so that gates tend toward equal numbers of minerals without player intervention. That way, players' power to choose is maximized.

Thu, 06/09/2011 - 22:34
#4
Senshi
Legacy Username
Doesn't really solve the problem.

The 'fix' doesn't really solve the problem. There could still be all shock levels for the top half of any given tier. 3 of the T3 strata 5 are shock now, one is Poison. I don't think shock in T1 or T2 is anywhere near as terrible, but still... it's possible to have identical theme horizontally, which is really much more concerning than vertically. If I have no choice of theme at a particular depth, then I really have no choice in theme to play at my level.

Thu, 06/09/2011 - 22:49
#5
Trouser's picture
Trouser
it's possible to have

it's possible to have identical theme horizontally, which is really much more concerning than vertically.

That's a very succinct way to put it, and I agree. But I think that's why they've added a random factor to the mineral payouts. The themes that are there now haven't had a chance yet for the new system to affect them. Give it a few days, then we'll see if it's working.

Thu, 06/09/2011 - 22:58
#6
Ageatii's picture
Ageatii
New Boss

Obviously the solution is for them to make a new Shocking Fiend boss in Tier 2 :)

Anyway I approve of the new Stratum rule. I get bored easily if a whole Tier shares the same theme.

Fri, 06/10/2011 - 00:38
#7
Dasparian
Devilite CEO

is most likely going to have 5 managers, each that'll take his place once he "dies". That means that while you fight the CEO, you're getting pelted by 5 different elements at a time. Killing off the CEO probably sets off a frenzy from the managers that wanted the position, while killing off the managers only strengthens the CEO as his opposition is taken out.

At least, that's what I'm thinking.

Fri, 06/10/2011 - 05:12
#8
Sanzenin's picture
Sanzenin
I too approve of the new gate

I too approve of the new gate changes. No complaints from me.

Also I've played the shock gate almost exclusively since it came out. The only exception being Snarby which is in a different gate. So I was fine with the gates as they were and I'm ok with the changes as well.

Quoted from OP:
If you honestly think that YOU have some kind of given right to tell ME how to play the game...seriously OOO, how DARE you.

OP: I don't understand your indignation here. Since they've designed all the systems and game mechanics for Spiral Knights they absolutely have decided how you play the game from the very beginning. They don't need to go to the trouble of telling you how to play the game. They decided how you would play the game before you even started playing it. Furthermore, if they notice, upon a wider release, that certain things need fixing/changing they are well within their rights to fix/change them without trying to get a consensus from the masses. Even if this fix seems unneeded from your point of view. You don't have all the facts. They have usage data and statistics that you're not privy to. You are not owed anything by OOO aside from what's listed in the ToS. Maybe you should read that again and look for the section where it says that Spiral Knights will check with the players before implementing changes. It'll be right next to the section that paradoxically states that Spiral Knights will never change.

Hint: There are no such sections.

p.s. I'm not suggesting that OOO doesn't take player feedback into account or that they shouldn't solicit feedback. I'm simply stating that there's nothing anywhere, that I've seen at any rate, that requires them to do so.

p.p.s Instead of complaining about OOO's solution why not use that time constructively and propose your own? There is a suggestions forum for just such a purpose. It would be a foolish company indeed that didn't heed a well thought out suggestion.

Fri, 06/10/2011 - 05:16
#9
Splinter's picture
Splinter
Maybe if we offer up another

Maybe if we offer up another solution, that is feasible, this 2 stratum rule can be changed.

Fri, 06/10/2011 - 05:39
#10
Gigafreak
Legacy Username
...This

...This same-theme-in-one-tier rule is exactly what they did with alloys before the mineral change. It's just automated now.

Powered by Drupal, an open source content management system