Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

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.

Messages - milo christiansen

Pages: 1 ... 27 28 [29] 30 31 ... 258
421
Quote from: Vote Now!
Plan A: (0)
Plan B: (2) NUKE9.13, Milo
Plan C: (1) Jilladilla

Windrider Name:
- 'Vicious Quill' (2) Milo, NUKE9.13

Edit: Changed vote.

422
Other Games / Re: Gaming Pet Peeves
« on: April 09, 2018, 11:44:27 pm »
This is in fact one of my own gaming pet peeves -- devs deciding to compromise important elements of gameplay just to make sure no one plays the game the ""wrong"" way. Who the hell cares how other people play?

I'll second that.

A horrible example of this forced play style is enforced "ironman" play in many games nowadays. Is it so wrong to allow multiple saves? Not everyone is an expert who wants to play your game over and over and over just to get to the middle, much less then end.

423
Quote from: Plan A
Ships:
Windriders@WKD (Chimera, Longlast, Payoff, Black Ink): Dogpile
Skiffs@WKD: YARR

Crystalclear@TC: AGILE
Fukutu@Wreth: Move To TC, AGILE
Deadline@VV: Move to Wreth for repairs, AGILE

1 Skiff@TU: PEEK
All other skiffs at Wreth, TU and VV: Move to TC by shortest route available.

WOSV Marge, Shibboleth, Ledger: Wait at TC.

Marines:
Continue tactics from previous year.

Quote from: Vote Now!
Plan A: (1) Milo

Windrider Name:
- 'Vicious Quill' (1) Milo

424
Very soon we will have TC in hand, at that point a defenseless demi-spire will be a great place to move most of the marines. It will actually be easier to take a demi-spire than one of the belt spires (we are already well equipped to deal with Kasgyre troops, while we lack equipment to handle hostile belt spire conditions), and much more importantly, taking a spire from Kasgyre hurts them and helps us.

Possibly losing a windrider or two to spire guns is nothing in the face of the possible gains.

425
Whether or not it's worth staying though is another issue.

....

if we need to negotiate a ceasefire due to recent events

Are... Are you feeling OK?

426
Maybe later as a low priority. I'm pretty happy with how it turned out, it isn't as awesome as I vaguely hoped, but it is plenty good enough for me to be happy.

Anyway, what plans do we have for this turn?

427
"Psst, I'm going to sneak up on em as fast as I can" Miles says quietly to Götz, I'll join in as soon as I can, but I won't be able to hit them immediately, it is too far. Try to lure them up beside the bushes, I'm headed for the one on the end.


((I can kill two per turn with my katana if I only have to move one space.))


428
Process of elimination, I'll wait for the right group. I'm changing my mind about the bow, I'll stick with the katana for quick kills. I can always pop "Stalk" if the going gets tough.

429
All right, assuming everyone else is OK with it, sounds like a plan.

((Question: Can we please post actions in "GM's eyes only" spoilers like the following?))
Spoiler: Actions, GM only (click to show/hide)

430
Other Games / Re: Gaming Pet Peeves
« on: April 09, 2018, 04:32:14 pm »
And what would be preferable is being able to complete the story at my own pace. Not having to wait around. Not being forced into action before I'm ready (because it's a video game.)

I'll second this.

I don't deal well with time pressure, a part of my brain that would normally be devoted to solving "the problem" ends up running around in circles yelling "The clock is ticking! The clock is ticking!" This means that games with a time limit are simply not as much fun as games without. Implied "hurry, hurry" motivations are no problem, because deep down inside I know that nothing bad will happen if I'm not quite fast enough.

Even fairly generous time limits are an issue, there is always part of me worried about that %$^&*#@ clock.

431
"Yeah, I can take out a goblin fairly quickly, but I doubt it can be kept quiet under the circumstances." Miles peers though the bushes at the nearest goblin group, while absently scratching fluffy's ears. The kitten seems to appreciate this, but not enough to come out of his hood.

"I'll head around to the side a bit and get ready to open up with my bow when any of you get noticed. After a few shots I'll charge in from the side and catch them in the flank when you all have their attention focused. Unless anyone has a better idea, of course?"

432
EA Happiness is still a bit low.

433
Other Games / Re: Gaming Pet Peeves
« on: April 08, 2018, 11:21:52 pm »
Going back to someone's earlier post on Nethack and other roguelikes with a hunger mechanic - are those games suddenly terrible?

If there is a strict limit on food availability? Yes. I don't like most rogue-likes for a variety of reasons, but tack on some kind of time pressure and suddenly they are 10x worse.

What about racing games, where players must go faster (and thus achieve a better time) than other racers?

Racing games don't really fit here. Trying to go faster != being forced to play under a time limit.

Is the Super Mario Bros series awful because of the timers? I certainly don't recall the timer ever giving me too much trouble.

If the timer never gave you any trouble, why have it? Seriously, why have a time limit if it is generous enough to not be an issue?

Keeping track of time for score reasons may be fitting for some games, but there is no need for a limit.

What would be a good alternative to a timer?

Consider Warzone 2100. It has a persistent campaign, and all the levels have a time limit. Generally these limits are pretty generous, and they really exist to forcibly keep you moving. This is a crude and obnoxious way to keep the player from "breaking the game" by farming an easy map for unlimited resources and building a gigantic supply of power and units.

In this case a simple power and unit transfer cap would be all that is needed. Fluff it with something about the transport only being able to hold so much or something similar and it wouldn't even seem weird.

Look at STALKER. In the first game some of the missions had a time limit. I always found this hugely annoying, I could never just play, I always had a little worry that I wouldn't make it in time. There is a reason the third game is my favorite by far.

Look at any Bethesda RPG ever. No time limits, but dialog certainly encourages you to hurry anyway. If you have a reason not to hurry then you don't have to. You never have to worry that if you don't travel quickly enough something bad will happen. If you want to check out something on a hill nearby just go do it, no worries. Sure, a generous timer would allow the same thing, but then you have this vague "time anxiety" leaning over everything you do. Yuck.

434
Other Games / Re: Gaming Pet Peeves
« on: April 08, 2018, 08:49:53 pm »
Time limits are put in place by game designers that need the player to move forward, but couldn't think of a good way to encourage them to do so without forcing them.

In short, they are a refuge of laziness. Worse, any player who likes to take things slowly, or who does not deal with time pressure well, will end up disliking the game, sometimes without ever quite realizing why.

435
B

Pages: 1 ... 27 28 [29] 30 31 ... 258