@Kaz seems to answer everyone’s questions but mine.. I either need a penis (Teeceezy says I’m allowed to say that) or I need to be toxic.. I’m still contemplating on which one I should choose
⚔️ Leader/Elder TheHerdReborn/TheHerdReturned⚔️ 🌟IGN: Rene 🌟 Line ID: Mystique_01
@Kaz seems to answer everyone’s questions but mine.. I either need a penis (Teeceezy says I’m allowed to say that) or I need to be toxic.. I’m still contemplating on which one I should choose
I'm terribly sorry! Just focused on the wall of text and forgot about you!
But anyway, I do have an answer for you, but it's not what you want to read.
So yeah, it's going to be the challenge with the "old settings" (including the timer) until we are 100% sure that we can make some changes!
Again, we want to sort that out as soon as possible, ok? So I don't have yet a date, but it won't be Teeceezy's soon, don't worry!
> @Mystique said:
> @Kaz seems to answer everyone’s questions but mine.. I either need a penis (Teeceezy says I’m allowed to say that) or I need to be toxic.. I’m still contemplating on which one I should choose
I can help with one....
I’m generally nice so I have a lot of pent up toxicity.
Where did you think I was going with that?
1. What is the base chance of a body shot, normal hit, or a critical hit on an opponent by one of your survivors? The players assume these chances vary by the difference in level between the survivor and enemy. Is this true, or is there a variance in the hit chances by the difference in levels? 2. What effects does the combination of different components have in the crafting of badges? Are there specific recipes that change the resulting outcome of crafted badges in any way?
So yeah, there are no recipes that guarantee one specific result, so by using the same combination of components, you can still get all the possible results. But the combination you use does influence the badge type.
Thanks @Kaz. I was aware of these previous threads. However, they really don't go into enough detail to answer my questions.
For my first question, I was asking for the base percentage chance of a body shot, normal hit, or a critical hit. I was looking for these numbers, not a general discussion of the concept.
For question #2, I was looking for exactly how the combination of components affect the resulting badge type.
Both the answers referenced above are not provided with enough detail to be sufficient, at least for me and for some of the other players here too I imagine.
I do realize you can continue to elect not to provide that level of detail I requested. My view is that providing this level of detail is better for the players, and in turn better for NG. Insufficient answers to questions like this can be frustrating to players.
To be perfectly transparent, there is no plan to add a pinball machine to the camp at this time.
That's it. I quit.
Bad Pig Bad to the bone! The Notorious P.I.G. "I'm stuck in forum prison, and time keeps draggin' on" "I’ve never said I’m a perfect pig, nor pretended to be someone that I’m not."
@nadecir I'm just wondering what difference it would make knowing the base levels of those hits would make to you or any other player? Haven't you played the game enough to get a rough idea of what they are? Also even if you knew because it's a chance then you will never be able to predict exactly what will happen. Sure you could say that if I shoot that walker the base stats say it should be a normal hit and will kill it. Then you get a bodyshot. Same as if you didn't know the base stats. Same for people who want to see the detailed logs of all the roll calculations. It's a game play it and have fun.
The only chance I want to know is what are the chances of sorting out the whole swapping weapons and armour between survivors being sorted out in the next update? Would be so nice to choose survivor then just pick out of all available weapons. Eapically with the growing number of situation traits which have been released.
Too true! Sorry for the derail! UC3 was amazing! Got to my highest difficulty by Sunday morning and actually managed to play the distance on the Saturday for the first time in forever!
I admit that I had a certain "fire burning" when I wrote the response, but reading your further reply shows me that I perhaps assumed too much of your position when I first read the post I replied to. I appreciate your geniality here, and apologize for my 'jerk'ish tone.
I would not expect NG to divulge trade secrets, [...] it would not violate any laws that I am aware.
If that is what you are really concerned about, I suggest some training for all your companies' employees about what the disclosure of market-sensitive information really means is in order.
We've had days of training, and by law, it is renewed annually. The company position is caution first, caution second, and caution third. We have a very passionate audience, and we have goofed more than once in the past. We're not in control of the way people react to our information, and things we thought would be recieved well in the past weren't. For these reasons, we are instructed to be very careful with things that seem innocuous, because they may not in fact be as safe as assumed.
I do believe answers to some questions about NML would enhance player satisfaction with it.
Here are two questions that players have asked that NG has elected not to answer in the past. These are just examples of where I believe NG transparency is lacking:
1. What is the base chance of a body shot, normal hit, or a critical hit on an opponent by one of your survivors? The players assume these chances vary by the difference in level between the survivor and enemy. Is this true, or is there a variance in the hit chances by the difference in levels? 2. What effects does the combination of different components have in the crafting of badges? Are there specific recipes that change the resulting outcome of crafted badges in any way?
There are more questions about this game like this that the player base here has asked previously. If NG would be more willing to be transparent and answered these questions about this current game openly, the player experience would be enhanced for all.
Personally, I disagree with the statement that revealing answers to these questions would be necessarily beneficial to the game. There are always chances that we'd need to change the values, and you can see here on the forums how we're accused of doing so constantly. Secondly, we see a benefit in players playing, experimenting, communicating, and theory crafting together. Third, releasing them will likely not have an effect on the amount of feedback we get abut them.
In the case of the body shot numbers, I'm pretty sure we have said pretty regularly that the chances are affected by the difference in level between the attacker and defender, and that the number of elite stars a survivor has affects this chance. This is why I have stated over and over that having maximum-level survivors allows a player to push further into challenges, specifically because you'll get fewer body shots at higher difficulty levels. It could be that this info is not widely disseminated.
In the case of component recipes, we specifically wanted to build a feature that encouraged theorycrafting, pattern recognition, sharing recipes and results, and other forms of discussion. So sharing this down to the percentage is counter to that goal, and would have precluded all of the conversation about this that has come before. Yes, the combinations have an effect; yes, you can get any result with any recipe; and no, we won't say more than that.
I have also suggested that NG be more open with the status of bugs in this game. I suggested a specific way to do so using this forum in another thread. Players here don't expect commitments on when bugs will be fixed. We just want to know if issues in the game are planned to be fixed, or have been marked as "working as intended" or "we don't have any plans to fix this one" or "we are working on this one for the next release - no promises though". We all realize that these categorizations can change at any time, so there are no implicit promises with any issues. Plans are subject to change at any moment.
I don't think I've seen a bug report on the forums that I would list as "no, we'll never fix that one". I also can almost never say "you'll see a fix to that soon", unless the work is already done and the release is pending. I have said a number of times that bugs that affect getting into the game, reconnects, or purchase and ad processes are prioritized above others, and that bugs related to the new features in the update come before those that we've been able to live with for a while.
Every other bug falls into the "we'd love to, but we don't have infinite time, so no guarantees can be made" category. If there are specific issues you haven't seen commented on in the forums, I encourage you to ask them, but in 90+% of the cases, I'll give you the answer I gave here.
Thanks once again for listening.
And thanks once again for writing.
Development Team Member - The Walking Dead: No Man's Land Please note: Development is a fluid process, and suggestions and implementation take time and iteration. Any discussion of future features, deadlines, updates, balance changes, and such should be considered prospective and subject to change.
@Shteevie Thanks once again for your response. I am trying to be helpful here.
In terms of your view on the players uncovering game details versus NG being more open with them, we will have to disagree. There is a problem with players even trying to spend significant effort in "theory crafting"; there is no guarantee that NG will not change the game's algorithms at any time and make any time spent in theory crafting a worthless waste of time. I will bet you if you polled the players here about this question, they would much rather have NG be open about this games mechanics versus them uncovering the details.
Being more transparent about the game let's players help you find bugs in the game too. Without this transparency, players can only guess about bugs or whether an issue is working as intended. In fact, this lack of openness leads the software developer in me to question if this is just a somehow an effort on NG's part to hide issues in the game. This questioning is not meant to somehow denigrate you, but it follows from a direct result of a lack of openness.
Take it for what it's worth, and i don't mean this to be mean spirited, but your lack of transparency will eventually be the reason I quit this game. And I will be very unlikely to play one of your future games either because of it. I can't express the opinions of any one else here, but my business experience tells me I am not the only one that feels this way.
As i said earlier, transparency is free and generates untold accounts of customer goodwill. Take a look at the thread on the the luck mechanics as an example. On the flip side, there's a price to pay for an obvious lack of corporate transparency.
Although I don't agree with your point of view, I do appreciate the time you took to express it. I hope you give this transparency issue more thought and question your own views going forward. Perhaps even your analytical side will push yourself and NG as a whole to explore trying more transparency with some customer tests.
Getting a bruise while playing scavenger, outpost or some challenge missions and not having any heal time is working as intended. That's about all the transparency I plan to divulge
| OG | NOC | USA | UK | CA | CQR | UC | RAD | ZEN |
I might not be able to express it as elegantly as @nadecir but I fully agree with the general statement. I don't mind finding out new stuff about the game, but over the 30 months of having this game, parameters have been changed so many times that it makes no sense whatsoever to redo all tests with every release, sometimes even during a challenge.
I appreciate the openness on the Luck topic VERY MUCH, this is something that should be built on.
I don't think anybody reasonably here expects you give us the source code or the exact formula for everything.
If you would like to join a drama-free and fun group of enthusiasts, contact us via email at [email protected]
Revealing in deep detail the in game mechanics will just make us better players. At least I'll be able to play it smarter. Knowing my chances, assuming my risks, etc... how to build better survivors, how to upgrade them, how to face challenging maps....
I miss the 'old days of WOW' where you can actually read a log and understand what is going on. Here is just, ok whatever... Badge system is a great example, is really hard to know which badge is going to be better for a survivor... we need to try it, then test it and waste a lot of gold. With hundreds of badges it gets tedious and boring, I don't want to play this game with a sheet on my computer all the time to support my decisions. The game should be good enough too provide me the information that I need to make a good decision. But it isn't.
With combat mechanics is pretty much the same thing. The big problem with that is that you want to call this game "strategic" but in fact is just arcade, smash and tap almost randomly because most of the time we don't know what is going on. And we are talking about the people that read the forum, have done tests, etc.. what is that? 5% of the base player? the other 95% doesn't even know.
The true is that Daryl lessons are pretty bad.... We could use some Eugene lesson at least that could make him useful...
Revealing in deep detail the in game mechanics will just make us better players. At least I'll be able to play it smarter. Knowing my chances, assuming my risks, etc... how to build better survivors, how to upgrade them, how to face challenging maps....
I miss the 'old days of WOW' where you can actually read a log and understand what is going on. Here is just, ok whatever... Badge system is a great example, is really hard to know which badge is going to be better for a survivor... we need to try it, then test it and waste a lot of gold. With hundreds of badges it gets tedious and boring, I don't want to play this game with a sheet on my computer all the time to support my decisions. The game should be good enough too provide me the information that I need to make a good decision. But it isn't.
With combat mechanics is pretty much the same thing. The big problem with that is that you want to call this game "strategic" but in fact is just arcade, smash and tap almost randomly because most of the time we don't know what is going on. And we are talking about the people that read the forum, have done tests, etc.. what is that? 5% of the base player? the other 95% doesn't even know.
The true is that Daryl lessons are pretty bad.... We could use some Eugene lesson at least that could make him useful...
Couldn't agree more. Strategy is sidelined for real. Too much gambling and randomization.
Is this a strategy game or a "Interactive Jackpot Machine"?
General thought is that mobile games aren't taken seriously. NML could be one of the pioneers of this change.
Comments
🌟IGN: Rene 🌟 Line ID: Mystique_01
But anyway, I do have an answer for you, but it's not what you want to read.
So yeah, it's going to be the challenge with the "old settings" (including the timer) until we are 100% sure that we can make some changes!
Again, we want to sort that out as soon as possible, ok? So I don't have yet a date, but it won't be Teeceezy's soon, don't worry!
🌟IGN: Rene 🌟 Line ID: Mystique_01
> @Kaz seems to answer everyone’s questions but mine.. I either need a penis (Teeceezy says I’m allowed to say that) or I need to be toxic.. I’m still contemplating on which one I should choose
I can help with one....
I’m generally nice so I have a lot of pent up toxicity.
Where did you think I was going with that?
https://forums.nextgames.com/walkingdead/discussion/32834/what-is-the-relationship-between-body-shots-and-critical-hits#latest
(Also, a plus because I love this thread title).
2. For the second one I couldn't find any recent discussion, BUT, I know that I've answered that when I was on the support team still. We even have a support FAQ about that https://nextgames.helpshift.com/a/the-walking-dead-no-man-s-land/?s=camp-buildings-trade-goods-shop&f=do-different-component-types-affect-my-crafting
However, the answer there is pretty plain, but so is this functionality.
So yeah, there are no recipes that guarantee one specific result, so by using the same combination of components, you can still get all the possible results. But the combination you use does influence the badge type.
For my first question, I was asking for the base percentage chance of a body shot, normal hit, or a critical hit. I was looking for these numbers, not a general discussion of the concept.
For question #2, I was looking for exactly how the combination of components affect the resulting badge type.
Both the answers referenced above are not provided with enough detail to be sufficient, at least for me and for some of the other players here too I imagine.
I do realize you can continue to elect not to provide that level of detail I requested. My view is that providing this level of detail is better for the players, and in turn better for NG. Insufficient answers to questions like this can be frustrating to players.
Bad to the bone!
The Notorious P.I.G.
"I'm stuck in forum prison, and time keeps draggin' on"
"I’ve never said I’m a perfect pig, nor pretended to be someone that I’m not."
No need to keep it in the game.
Mavericks Guild Family
What I'm wondering is what on earth any of this has to do with the ultimate challenge... lol
Wildly entertaining to say the least.
Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit
Concordia
I admit that I had a certain "fire burning" when I wrote the response, but reading your further reply shows me that I perhaps assumed too much of your position when I first read the post I replied to. I appreciate your geniality here, and apologize for my 'jerk'ish tone.
If that is what you are really concerned about, I suggest some training for all your companies' employees about what the disclosure of market-sensitive information really means is in order.
We've had days of training, and by law, it is renewed annually. The company position is caution first, caution second, and caution third. We have a very passionate audience, and we have goofed more than once in the past. We're not in control of the way people react to our information, and things we thought would be recieved well in the past weren't. For these reasons, we are instructed to be very careful with things that seem innocuous, because they may not in fact be as safe as assumed.
Here are two questions that players have asked that NG has elected not to answer in the past. These are just examples of where I believe NG transparency is lacking:
1. What is the base chance of a body shot, normal hit, or a critical hit on an opponent by one of your survivors? The players assume these chances vary by the difference in level between the survivor and enemy. Is this true, or is there a variance in the hit chances by the difference in levels?
2. What effects does the combination of different components have in the crafting of badges? Are there specific recipes that change the resulting outcome of crafted badges in any way?
There are more questions about this game like this that the player base here has asked previously. If NG would be more willing to be transparent and answered these questions about this current game openly, the player experience would be enhanced for all.
Personally, I disagree with the statement that revealing answers to these questions would be necessarily beneficial to the game. There are always chances that we'd need to change the values, and you can see here on the forums how we're accused of doing so constantly. Secondly, we see a benefit in players playing, experimenting, communicating, and theory crafting together. Third, releasing them will likely not have an effect on the amount of feedback we get abut them.
In the case of the body shot numbers, I'm pretty sure we have said pretty regularly that the chances are affected by the difference in level between the attacker and defender, and that the number of elite stars a survivor has affects this chance. This is why I have stated over and over that having maximum-level survivors allows a player to push further into challenges, specifically because you'll get fewer body shots at higher difficulty levels. It could be that this info is not widely disseminated.
In the case of component recipes, we specifically wanted to build a feature that encouraged theorycrafting, pattern recognition, sharing recipes and results, and other forms of discussion. So sharing this down to the percentage is counter to that goal, and would have precluded all of the conversation about this that has come before. Yes, the combinations have an effect; yes, you can get any result with any recipe; and no, we won't say more than that.
I don't think I've seen a bug report on the forums that I would list as "no, we'll never fix that one". I also can almost never say "you'll see a fix to that soon", unless the work is already done and the release is pending. I have said a number of times that bugs that affect getting into the game, reconnects, or purchase and ad processes are prioritized above others, and that bugs related to the new features in the update come before those that we've been able to live with for a while.
Every other bug falls into the "we'd love to, but we don't have infinite time, so no guarantees can be made" category. If there are specific issues you haven't seen commented on in the forums, I encourage you to ask them, but in 90+% of the cases, I'll give you the answer I gave here.
And thanks once again for writing.
Please note: Development is a fluid process, and suggestions and implementation take time and iteration. Any discussion of future features, deadlines, updates, balance changes, and such should be considered prospective and subject to change.
contact us via email at [email protected]
Body is 3 characters too short.
MAVERICK'S 1 Million Star Club | OG | USA | NOC
Analyze This with ALF4reals | v1 | v2 | v3 |
| My YouTube Videos | My 1st Interview | Best Analogy Award!! |
Freemium... the "mium" is latin for 'not really'
In terms of your view on the players uncovering game details versus NG being more open with them, we will have to disagree. There is a problem with players even trying to spend significant effort in "theory crafting"; there is no guarantee that NG will not change the game's algorithms at any time and make any time spent in theory crafting a worthless waste of time. I will bet you if you polled the players here about this question, they would much rather have NG be open about this games mechanics versus them uncovering the details.
Being more transparent about the game let's players help you find bugs in the game too. Without this transparency, players can only guess about bugs or whether an issue is working as intended. In fact, this lack of openness leads the software developer in me to question if this is just a somehow an effort on NG's part to hide issues in the game. This questioning is not meant to somehow denigrate you, but it follows from a direct result of a lack of openness.
Take it for what it's worth, and i don't mean this to be mean spirited, but your lack of transparency will eventually be the reason I quit this game. And I will be very unlikely to play one of your future games either because of it. I can't express the opinions of any one else here, but my business experience tells me I am not the only one that feels this way.
As i said earlier, transparency is free and generates untold accounts of customer goodwill. Take a look at the thread on the the luck mechanics as an example. On the flip side, there's a price to pay for an obvious lack of corporate transparency.
Although I don't agree with your point of view, I do appreciate the time you took to express it. I hope you give this transparency issue more thought and question your own views going forward. Perhaps even your analytical side will push yourself and NG as a whole to explore trying more transparency with some customer tests.
MAVERICK'S 1 Million Star Club | OG | USA | NOC
Analyze This with ALF4reals | v1 | v2 | v3 |
| My YouTube Videos | My 1st Interview | Best Analogy Award!! |
Freemium... the "mium" is latin for 'not really'
I don't mind finding out new stuff about the game, but over the 30 months of having this game, parameters have been changed so many times that it makes no sense whatsoever to redo all tests with every release, sometimes even during a challenge.
I appreciate the openness on the Luck topic VERY MUCH, this is something that should be built on.
I don't think anybody reasonably here expects you give us the source code or the exact formula for everything.
contact us via email at [email protected]
I miss the 'old days of WOW' where you can actually read a log and understand what is going on. Here is just, ok whatever... Badge system is a great example, is really hard to know which badge is going to be better for a survivor... we need to try it, then test it and waste a lot of gold. With hundreds of badges it gets tedious and boring, I don't want to play this game with a sheet on my computer all the time to support my decisions. The game should be good enough too provide me the information that I need to make a good decision. But it isn't.
With combat mechanics is pretty much the same thing. The big problem with that is that you want to call this game "strategic" but in fact is just arcade, smash and tap almost randomly because most of the time we don't know what is going on. And we are talking about the people that read the forum, have done tests, etc.. what is that? 5% of the base player? the other 95% doesn't even know.
The true is that Daryl lessons are pretty bad.... We could use some Eugene lesson at least that could make him useful...
Last Stand BE have 4 places available for genuine GW players.
I can be contacted by PM for recruitment questions.
Is this a strategy game or a "Interactive Jackpot Machine"?
General thought is that mobile games aren't taken seriously. NML could be one of the pioneers of this change.
Mavericks Guild Family