Game needs a change of mind set.

Basically, every match we see now-a-days is MONOLITHS constructed in build time, and then both sides suiciding against each other, constantly, even if you tell them to stop when we have 20 lives left...even less...and less...BEEEP!

Anyways, i think games would work a LOT better, if teams would coordinate, but thats not up to the devs, thats our problem, tell your team to advance to -location- so you can build a small base/wall and manage people to group up and charge fortresses, and then build a small defense at the base so arrows can't hit you from above.

It doesn't even matter if you move 10 blocks at a time, and make a VERY small shelter for people to pass through infront of a castle, but as it is now, people are not making ANY headway in normal games attacking a castle!

I've seen much discussion with NERFING stuff, and some of it is justified, but i think the devs expect us to actually act more mideval, and be strategic in how we attack castles, move forward, build, move forward, build, repeat, even if it is slow. The goal is still to win, not suicide.

So all those in favor of actually trying to manage the team, like this, and attempt to tame the wild blood-thirsty monsters we call our playerbase as it is right now.

 

We are supposed to get better siege weapons later in premium, like arrow covers, so at least this shouldn't be so much of a problem when the game is finished. People will be less likely to run out in to the open and get shot then with a mobile defense like that.

 

We need a ranking/grading system that ranks players during the match. It should reward them for doing useful things and dying less often, and lower their ranking for being inactive, and/or doing stuff that doesn't help the team.

I know, we have a scoring system, but the scoreboard isn't obvious enough to be able to tell people how they're doing.
We need a per-match GRADING SCALE that shows up in the corner of the screen, in clear sight, to tell people how they're performing. I'll betcha that people will be less likely to suicide against a wall when they see a big fat "F" on their screen taunting them.

 

its impossibru

 

Uh... explain? "its impossibru" doesn't say much, Neat.

 

That could work, so after a few matches, since people will WANT to be captain, (more people may stay after a match in attempt to get the part), also you could have preset cammands, like move up, or follow me, and wherever you stop for 5 seconds, anyone else that stays around you for a few seconds gets more points, that way you could make this game actually team oriented, and ofcourse AFKing would drop your points to the point of server kick, so would constant breaking of blocks (other than mineing)

We could actually utilize the score board as it's own server check list to lkeep the game in order, it could be optional, have a set limit of starting points, that reset when you switch teams (that way if grefers switch to greif they will reach 0 points and get kicked automatically) but yeah, this should in general go in another thread, make it if you want, just a good idea that i think may work thanks to you.

But yeah, more thoughts on controlling the suiciders and working together? instead of complaints and nerfs due to negligence of working together?

 

The pub players are impossible to tame.

 

Find people that know how to play. Action servers, Power server, MOLE server. On all of those servers I haven't had problems with slow games.

I agree with Neat, you will never be able to get the general public to a standard of anyone's liking that knows how to play.

 

If only there was someway to communicate easier to your team in-game then typing. I have no idea how that can be accomplished with just "random" matches. Clans are usually good about this type of thing.

I really like the idea of that GRADING SCALE. It really would motivate me to do better and change my tactics if I get an F...

If you could elect someone as the King or Leader either based on the last game (or vote for clans) it would be really good.
But still the communication has lack. Not everyone can type fast and not everyone looks up at the chat. Those that do sometimes miss things. One good thing is when I see somebody stand close to me and show ---> I understand to move up. But move up, down, left, and right do not tell me much. It helps but they don't help me in tactic. Some things are easier to say than type. I usually have a different mindset when typing because I think, "How can I shorten this and you understand it."

Somehow this game has to push team work instead of suicidal persons...

 

Nighthawk is correct - Since KAG is played on a server-by-server basis, we don't have the luxury of Matchmaking, and a ranking system as well as statistics system would facilitate players getting much better.

Our current score, kill, death stats are extremely limited in how much information they yield. After bug fixes, Stats are the next thing I want -- even over zombies.

 

THIS. I like this idea. Giving people a leader and a reason to follow that leader makes them less of an angry mob working towards a similar goal and more of a controlled army being led by their (hopefully) competent commander.
I like it.

Thank you for explaining. And yes, some people are impossible to get to understand how to properly play (especially when they're younger than 10 years old!). But still, it'd be a sin not to TRY, ya know?

 

Will the leader be the one with the most points? If so I completely disagree with this idea. So many noobs get 1000's of points by staying in the back and building whatever they want. I've joined games where some unknown that has no clue what to do besides mine and build is the top player because he has sat there for 7 games building to his hearts content. I don't know how another way to do the leader thing. KDR may work, but has the same problem.

 

There are ways of fixing that. Change the system so other players determine a person's score. You know when people go by and give you a when you're standing proudly on that defensive structure you built? Why not make it so players can instead award each other points, to a certain limit? When people recognize the smart players, they would give them points in appreciation for what they've done. Hell, sometimes I congratulate an ENEMY knight on killing me. I'm sure that the community is capable of doing something like that.

 

But then people can join in pairs, and thumbs up eachother to the top. Obviously you can "dislike" them back down, but who wants to take the time to do that. Obviously there are more ways to work around this too, but I don't want every match to become about points and becoming the "leader" of your team. Just my opinion.

 

You think I haven't tried?

Why do you think all the vet clans play amongst themselves so they can steamroll pubs. Pubs don't WANT to be tamed. They just kick your efforts in their faces. I don't waste my time anymore.

 

Solution(imo): Group of friends + VoiceChat

 

Yes, and this does work well in groups of 5, 4, or even 2 people.
I hope to get some of my friends to join in this game. We usually talk on Skype.

 

That playerbase you're referring to are pretty much the ones asking for nerfs because they can't coordinate themselves from scratch and rather have their KAG gameplay based on a coin-flip. This is also why I'm starting to see sky bridges being used more and more nowadays. I liked Kag, when people didn't complain about buildings when they were built in physically possible ways, and when I see a sky-bridge, I'd encourage anyone to grief it down. It's just a hindrance to see how derailed this game has become.

Also, KDR ratio doesn't seem to be a good thing, it'll only force people to focus on kills rather than team work. A point system would be more viable, so that deaths don't count over how much you contribute and help your team.

 

One of the reasons I do not like sky-bridges is because they are physically impossible!
Perhaps putting a cap on how far a block can go before being attached to ground level would help.
Although I never like caps they can be good sometimes.

 

Or just restrict those damned impossible architectural aspects. Like I said, sky-bridges are hindrances especially if they fail to contribute to the team which adds onto drastic results. Similarly with in-base spike pits.

Again, not to go off topic but these are few problems which contribute to the problems you all seem to agree on.