Всі Категорії

Perfect Robot Shooter  has been turned into a Vegas Style Slot machine (AI/BOTS/Teams)

Perfect Robot Shooter has been turned into a Vegas Style Slot machine (AI/BOTS/Teams)

Пошук
24 листоп. 2021, 03:2124.11.21
24.11.21
31

Perfect Robot Shooter has been turned into a Vegas Style Slot machine (AI/BOTS/Teams)

I've been playing this game for some time, and on a couple of iPhones and I have one observation. Deterministrically player skills, experience or anything else no longer matters, what matters are game item purchasing habits, estimated player budget (free to play or paying) and reducing the per player load on servers where the outcome of a match is 100% predicted ahead of time, no more than a roll of dice or other game of chance that is computer controlled.

The following changes were made and have a compound effect on game play quality and enjoyment.

1. Modification of scoring of the control point matches, ending matches earlier to disallow additional captures or kills.

Convert control point battle into a predictive ML model from it's classic state, it no longer matters if "your team" captured all control points or killed almost all the other teams mechs, other unknown conditions determine from 0 to 100 if you won or lost, thusly ending in 99/100 wins or 100/99 losses and battles ending prematurely, limiting ones ability for retribution, time in action. Where the average 5 minute - timed battle lasts no longer than 2.5 minutes at best usually less. Probably in an attempt to get the players off the game server and back into the awards screeen microservices as fast as possible.

2. High Reaction time and co-ordinated enemy AI players. 

All enemy AI Players are able to trigger their ability or defense mechanisms in record time, detect when your mech is about to reload, have perfect aim and work like an equivalent of your teams "human players" being on headsets with no lag telling eachother what to do - (I'll slow him down using the Panther net, and you shoot him in the back as I'm out of ammo) - AI enemy players work as a solid team, covering exact map angles with perfect precision - some of them are near impossible to hit with any kind of weapon, I don't know if the developers play this game on low latency keyboards I believe the rest of us play on touch screen phones.

3. Completely un-coordinated bumbling idiot AI Team Mates 

Those who run around in circles, insert themselves into the line of fire to the enemy mech will take less damage, push your into the line of fire or generally are underpowered to battle enemy AI such that no matter how many of the enemy you kill the 5v5 Battles or Control Point Clashes are lost since your comrades are all K.O. or did not aggressively complete the objectives. 

4. In game upgrades urgency, disappearing A-Coins (I will skip this as this is a profit motive)

So in conclusion, a round of mech arena is slowly becoming less and less enjoyable from a gameplay perspective, Whether in Level 1 or 10. The outcome seems a percentage calculated by RNG (Random Number Generator) combined with a Win Percentage Factor. 

Thusly before the match even starts the game already has decided that User XYZ needs to win 8 and lose 2 because someone crunched analytics and decided that a player on platform X (iPhone/Android - including the phone price and their GeoIP for their likelyhood to purchase an item) with a win/loss ratio of say 60% is more likely to react to an offer than at 70% win/loss rate.

How does Plarium take such a enjoyable game, which was fun to play and turn it into this synthetic experience that builds nothing but frustration or dull battles where you kill everyone like a champ. Under the guise of the word "rebalancing" the gameplay itself whether free to play or with purchased mechs and weapons the experience has become dull and mindnubming after said "tunings" were released with the last 3 months of updates. The new levels are dull, mostly duplicates of the 3 point sky map or the Aisan themed 5 point map with again 3 control points.

In my humble opinion the game updates were made to increase profit margin while ruining gameplay for the players as a whole. My complaint is probably mirrored here many times over by other posters.

TLDR - My general view on "freemeium" games is I'll pay for it not to level up but to support the work of the company and developers - as If I were paying for a paid title on PC or Playstation. But to reneg on that social contract of taking an enjoyable product that I gladly paid to support and convert it to abhorent gameplay is in bad taste. At the end of the day the game is supposed to get MORE FUN and not LESS FUN with devs efforts funded by our dollars. For a $500 million game company it seems as a minimal effort to add mechs, weapons and refine the gameplay, hire or croud souce testers such that the game returns to it's orginal glory.




Перегляди
15
Коментарі
5
Коментарі
RescueCommunity Manager
24 листоп. 2021, 13:2724.11.21
21.12.20
324

I have to disagree with your first point pretty strongly

1. Modification of scoring of the control point matches, ending matches earlier to disallow additional captures or kills.
Convert control point battle into a predictive ML model from it's classic state, it no longer matters if "your team" captured all control points or killed almost all the other teams mechs, other unknown conditions determine from 0 to 100 if you won or lost, thusly ending in 99/100 wins or 100/99 losses and battles ending prematurely, limiting ones ability for retribution, time in action. Where the average 5 minute - timed battle lasts no longer than 2.5 minutes at best usually less. Probably in an attempt to get the players off the game server and back into the awards screeen microservices as fast as possible. 

First, as it name implies it is Control Point Clash and not Deathmatch.  

Secondly, the clock in both game modes is a necessary game mechanic to force an outcome to every match.  Without it, it could create games that go 10, 20, or more minutes if for example 2 players left alive (1 on each team) do not capture the control points or kill the opposing player.  Other players in the match in essense would be held hostage because even if they exit the game and come back in, they would still load into that match.

Timers in most games are pretty standard game mechanic to force action and an ending, otherwise, you would need to supliment it with something else to force the conclusion of the game.

24 листоп. 2021, 19:4824.11.21
24 листоп. 2021, 20:02(відредаговано)
24.11.21
31
Rescue

I have to disagree with your first point pretty strongly

1. Modification of scoring of the control point matches, ending matches earlier to disallow additional captures or kills.
Convert control point battle into a predictive ML model from it's classic state, it no longer matters if "your team" captured all control points or killed almost all the other teams mechs, other unknown conditions determine from 0 to 100 if you won or lost, thusly ending in 99/100 wins or 100/99 losses and battles ending prematurely, limiting ones ability for retribution, time in action. Where the average 5 minute - timed battle lasts no longer than 2.5 minutes at best usually less. Probably in an attempt to get the players off the game server and back into the awards screeen microservices as fast as possible. 

First, as it name implies it is Control Point Clash and not Deathmatch.  

Secondly, the clock in both game modes is a necessary game mechanic to force an outcome to every match.  Without it, it could create games that go 10, 20, or more minutes if for example 2 players left alive (1 on each team) do not capture the control points or kill the opposing player.  Other players in the match in essense would be held hostage because even if they exit the game and come back in, they would still load into that match.

Timers in most games are pretty standard game mechanic to force action and an ending, otherwise, you would need to supliment it with something else to force the conclusion of the game.

Okay, - I guess what I've typed was 'unclear' - I perfectly well see 5:00 mins on the clock during a control point clash. In no way am I suggesting or recomending a limitless battle.

I am preplexed at the scoring change from the time I started playing the game to now.

It used to display the number of control points your team has and the number of control points the opposite team has and you had 5 minutes to aquire a winning amount of them

Now its a value of 0 to 100 calculated out of a myriad of parameters and the match now ends not when the clock runs out, but when one or the other team reaches 100. The 100 score is also a scalar value that is connected to the clock - so any kills later in the clash can add up-to 30-60 points to that 100 terminal score, so battles ending in 99/100 with a WIN in the other teams favor preplex me the most, especially if they conclude without any consideration for the amount of control points the team has. 

Gripes with the 100 point scoring system which was introduced in the last 3 moths is the match ends at 1:30 to 2:30 minute mark while I'm still shooting at a robot, thusly I don't get the extra kill for that mech, this used to not be the case. 

The current deathmatch scoring system is non-trasparent to the player, I don't know why the extra points are added to my team or given to the team I'm playing against. 

For example it was perfectly normal back with the old 5 point system to have 1 mech vs. 2 mechs from the other team left in the control point clash and be able to shoot those 2 mechs dead and re-aquire the control point, now the computer just decides that since there are 2 of them, and distance to mechs is 150 meters and they are in separate places to end the match in their favor, since in no way could you make it to them and shoot them in time. 

Even if you have more control points, because hypothetically as predicted those to enemy mechs will kill yours and hypotherically get more control points than you. So the match is ended early.

It was plain and simple prior, 5 minutes on the clock, 20 to 25 mechs on your team - capture the prevailing number of control points, logical and straight forward, now someone from Plarium should probably document what psuedoachivements are required to get the 100 points and why does the opposing team get to lose with 50,60,70 up-to 99 out of 100 of these 'points' 

Control point clashes end on first enemy fire contact typically, so I assume the calculations are arrived from 'damage' amounts and not killed mechs or times a control point is captured, re-captured or etc... Which makes zero sense - if it made any logical sense then why are there always an odd (3 or 5) number of contol points - it's such that there could never be a 'draw' someone will alway have 1 more control point. But if we stick to the current system that should just get chucked out the window, we can have stages with 4 or 6 or 8 as it's no longer relevant, and yet again I see 5 minutes on the clock, the best average time without dying I've spent is around 2 minutes 21 seconds in this new configuration at any given time. The outcome of a control point clash is now basically 'random' - I've setup custom matches to see where the points out of the 100 pool come from and I've yet to come up with conclusive diagnosis. 

When I started playing and the more intuitive scoring system of who has how many was on the score board - say red 3 blue 2 etc.. But then again I guess I'm feeling nostalgic for actual gameplay and enjoyment and not what the developers think, as I love getting that nice blue "WIN" tag and fade to black while unloading a pack of missles at a target that never hit, nor does my bot get points, acheivments or medals for.


24 листоп. 2021, 20:1824.11.21
24.11.21
31

@Rescue

Incidentally I just checked and you get 1 point from 100 for capturing a control point, this is why the new AI BOTS from the opposing team no longer prioritize capturing them, the rather cluster in  groups of 3 or 4 on a single one and killing mechs with max damage as the teams pool of available mechs is depleted. Basically turning a control point clash into a deathmatch of sorts. Where the only relevant thing is where the enemy and you can spawn from - this used to not be the case 3 or 6 months ago. 

RescueCommunity Manager
24 листоп. 2021, 21:3124.11.21
21.12.20
324
I've setup custom matches to see where the points out of the 100 pool come from and I've yet to come up with conclusive diagnosis.  

I get it now.  The easiest way to explain influence points is to ignore all damage or kills.  Neither are factored into how influence is tallied.  You can get 19 kills and still lose the match.

Think of influence points like interest with control points being the currency.

Scenario #1:  When you start the game you have no control points so you gain no interest (influence).

  • Blue Team Control Points = 0  so 0 influence/per 0 seconds
  • Red Team Control Points = 0 so 0 influence/per 0 seconds

When you start the map you don't start acrewing any interest until after the first point is taken which typically takes about 10 seconds to both get to and then sit on to capture from your spawning zone.

Scenario #2:  You and Enemy team capture the closest control point at the same time. Now you will start to acrew interest (influence) at a low rate since you only have 1 control point.

  • Blue Team Control Points = 1  so 1 influence/per 6 seconds
  • Red Team Control Points = 1 so 1 influence/per 6 seconds 

A couple things to note in this scenario.  Lets say it is a heated battle and no one takes the center control point (3 Control Point Map)  that means in a minute you would acrew a total of 10 influence.  It would take 10 minutes to gain 100 influence.  This won't happen as the game limit is 5 minutes so whoever has the most at 5 minutes wins.

A second note is ties rarely if ever happen because the intial capture points are never really taken at the same time.  There is someone bot or player that runs ahead and captures a point quickly so even if no other points were captured 1 team would win by having started acrewing their influence faster then the other team even if it is only by a second.


Scenario #3:  You (BLUE) capture another control point but the enemy team doesn't.  This means that your rate of interest (Influence) will increase.

  • Blue Team Control Points = 2  so 1 influence/per 3 seconds
  • Red Team Control Points = 2 so 1 influence/per 6 seconds  

In this scenario you will gain 20 influence a minute while the enemy team only gains 10 influence a minute.


Scenario #4:  You (BLUE) capture another control point and the enemy loses one of theirs.  This means that your rate of interest (Influence) will drastictly increase and the enemy team's will decrease.

  • Blue Team Control Points = 3  so 1 influence/per 1 second
  • Red Team Control Points = 0 so 0 influence/per 0 seconds  

In this scenario you will gain 60 influence a minute while the enemy team gains 0 influence a minute.


Obviously most capture point clashes are fluid so the rate you gain influence increases and decreases with each capture point in your control.


Now there are three ways you can win CPC.

1.  Acrew 100 influence first.

2.  Have more influence at 5 minutes when the time runs out.

3.  Kill all enemy mechs.

Of the three Killing all enemy mechs occurs most often followed by acrewing 100 influence.  Very rarely does a match hit the 5 minute mark but it does happen from time to time.

Hope this helps!


24 листоп. 2021, 23:0724.11.21
24.11.21
31

@Rescue - this definately helps and thanks kindly for the explanation, however this "influence" based system, was it not recently introduced into the game after updates, there was a different system to determine the outcome of CPC before such as hold more control points than enemy team or take over all control points in a stage. 

The only objectives this new influence based scoring system services are; reduce a 5 minute battle to 2.5-3.0 minutes on average, and eliminate the need for a odd number of control points like 3 or 5 in future stage designs? 

I don't know but I prefered the older scoring system better in CPC, that is what my original post in point one was trying to express.