Haven 2.0: "Hafen"

General discussion and socializing.

Re: Haven 2.0: "Hafen"

Postby borka » Sat Aug 09, 2014 8:08 pm

Scubas wrote: I realize haven doesn't have these terms in its EULA (if it even exists) but in an established game, those rules are there for a reason, because it enables shitty, borderline botting "gameplay".



You'll might read
http://www.havenandhearth.com/portal/doc-src

mainly Free and Non-free Parts Chapter2
Avatar by SacreDoom
Java 8 - manually downloads - good to check for actual versions url here:
viewtopic.php?f=42&t=40331
Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head Feed your head
User avatar
borka
 
Posts: 9965
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 7:47 pm
Location: World of Sprucecap

Re: Haven 2.0: "Hafen"

Postby Danno » Sun Aug 10, 2014 12:37 am

Xcom wrote:they have this wonderful idea about how everything in Haven can be fixed with more content.

You are an idiot. The grinders are the ones pushing for more content, thinking that the game will magically have infinite replay value if there are a few new things to build or a few new crops to grind. The game has enough content as it is to be a good game. The problem is that the game is geared towards retards like you who just want to do zombie tasks all day everyday.

Also, you grinders are the ones who are afraid of a challenge or competition. You're the ones who think Haven should have virtually no PvP and that it should be all about your daily time management and maintenance. You're telling me to go back to casual Facebook and smartphone-esque farming games? Fuck off, you hypocrites.


It's pretty ironic that you guys interpret that I have your ideals (wanting to WIN the game, wanting a cookie for my achievements, wanting to add more content as a band-aid fix, etc.), then tell me how stupid I am. It says a lot about your intelligence.

Xcom wrote:Your ideas are as stupid as the noob suggestions found in C&I. You practically walked into main assembly of Havens oldest

Xcom Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 6:43 am
Danno Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 5:21 pm

Tell me more, I'm so interested to hear about how you're one of Haven's oldest. I'm one of the oldest players in this thread, you moron.
RIP
User avatar
Danno
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 12:21 am
Location: Canada

Re: Haven 2.0: "Hafen"

Postby Scubas » Sun Aug 10, 2014 1:19 am

Xcom wrote:Your ideas are as stupid as the noob suggestions found in C&I. You practically walked into main assembly of Havens oldest


Scubas
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 5:11 am

Xcom
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 1:43 pm

Xcom wrote:Learn how to present an idea and try not to reinvent the whole game while your at it.


Scubas wrote:I'm not going to sit here and claim that I know the end-all method of making hnh combat/gameplay utterly godlike and perfect.


I CLEARLY STATED I am not trying to do that. It's like you get to a certain word in a post, then you start seeing red and start replacing it all with your own version of it instead.

I am well aware that this topic has been discussed for years, and it's people like you that are the reason why it's STILL being talked about.

I can't help but laugh at how you have this mentality that you are an "older member", yet, if you look (where it is clearly pictured) when Danno and I joined this forum, we outdate you by months, even years. It just shows that you think you are the shit from the very beginning, without even bothering to check your facts before you before you jam your foot so far into your mouth that you'll be shitting toenails. Also, just to let you know, even though I am in fact an "older member" than you, little xcom, it doesn't validate my opinion any more than yours, despite what you may think. Does that make you feel better?

Duderock wrote:Haven is a slow paced game and that is one of the things many of us enjoy about the game. I don't think waiting a while for things to happen is a bad thing. I'd go as far as to say, the player doesn't have to be constantly engaged all the time like a fighting or action game. As long as they take a bit of thought like you mentioned, then its fine. Time management is one of the true skills that the game requires.

Thank you for responding properly. I do agree with the notion that the player doesn't have to constantly be engaged. What I think, though, is that doing certain menial tasks like chopping a stump shouldn't take 55 seconds to do. That amount of time adds up. I think the game's totally different if maybe you have someone to chat with on skype while you stand there waiting for the task to be finished, but some players don't have that luxury, and just sit there bored, doing nothing for a minute. I don't think it would kill the game to lower the times down quite a bit. I get it that "chopping a stump irl isn't fast", but my response to that is: haven should pick a fucking theme already. It really looks stupid in my opinion to have certain things be "realistic" and other things be absolutely absurd.
Last edited by Scubas on Sun Aug 10, 2014 1:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
Scubas
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 5:11 am

Re: Haven 2.0: "Hafen"

Postby Kaios » Sun Aug 10, 2014 1:22 am

Danno wrote:I'm one of the oldest players in this thread


Exactly, only providing further evidence of Xcom's retardation. There's a reason a majority of the older players haven't stuck around.
User avatar
Kaios
 
Posts: 9171
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:14 am

Re: Haven 2.0: "Hafen"

Postby Danno » Sun Aug 10, 2014 1:24 am

On that note, Potjeh is one of the earliest players to join this game (far older than you 2011-2014 grind lovers), and he thinks grinding is a shitty game mechanic. Hmm.
RIP
User avatar
Danno
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 12:21 am
Location: Canada

Re: Haven 2.0: "Hafen"

Postby borka » Sun Aug 10, 2014 1:35 am

too bad how this thread went ... i would have loved if it would have just stayed an informational thread and may be a kind of Q&A with loftar and jorb ...

it's good to see that people come with ideas (even if they're often TL ...) but that's what we have Critique & Ideas subforum for ...
maybe that's where Xcoms "oldest" comes from (besides the posting account mustn't be the oldest and that i know players that joined much later than me but for sure know some ingame stuff better than me)
Avatar by SacreDoom
Java 8 - manually downloads - good to check for actual versions url here:
viewtopic.php?f=42&t=40331
Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head Feed your head
User avatar
borka
 
Posts: 9965
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 7:47 pm
Location: World of Sprucecap

Re: Haven 2.0: "Hafen"

Postby TeckXKnight » Sun Aug 10, 2014 1:49 am

The one thing that I'll ask is that we don't devolve into using join date as a source of credibility. Older users can be just as much of a dumbfuck as newer users. The only thing that lends credit to an argument are the ideas and evidence stated within. To some extent the experience and reputation of the poster as well.
User avatar
TeckXKnight
 
Posts: 8274
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 2:31 am
Location: How Do I?

Re: Haven 2.0: "Hafen"

Postby Danno » Sun Aug 10, 2014 4:06 am

I entirely agree with that, but he walked himself right into that one. It's that elitist attitude that's dragging Haven down. The quality grind only encourages this cancerous elitism where players feel they are too high and mighty for peasants to be worth their time.

I also agree the Q&A thing/developers actually sharing their ideas was nice. I just really, really, really don't want to see Hafen take this same pointless direction where players are guided into doing the same boring tasks over and over with no thought, effort, or challenge. This game could be so fun, and not just for the first couple weeks. I want to play it again and I want to get my friends to play it, too, but I know that they'll never play this game again with the end-game being the way it is. With the 5 seconds wasted here, 30 seconds wasted there, we end up wasting hours of time literally watching the hourglass in this game - on tasks that are already a waste of time as is. The "high time investment" thing really needs to be rethought and refocused.
RIP
User avatar
Danno
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 12:21 am
Location: Canada

Re: Haven 2.0: "Hafen"

Postby LordD1 » Sun Aug 10, 2014 4:09 am

As to what I've been reading, the game itself is good yes. However i do agree with others that combat, etc should require more skill but also that learning points put into a character's combat stats should also play a bigger role in PvP.

Yes, at the moment it requires skill and numbers at the moment to still take someone down or successfully run away, but however I don't agree with the whole... "as long as you don't get your defense bar dropped from 100-0 you can fight the person back" statement, as nearly anyone with decent melee combat can 100-0 someone's defense in one hit.

I have pretty decent stats, and with my stats a val strike can hit a lvl 5 troll from 100 def down to 3 def. This can easily be followed up by another person with another val strike to down the troll. This also applies to real PvP combat as if you hit someone down to 20 defense or less, and you can get another person to follow up and they have decent strength, and a decent quality weapon... Hate to say it, but you're going down.

If you're wanting to fight someone with 1500 ua you're going to need at least two to three people with 700+ ua/mc to take the char down. However, a 1v1 situation its still possible to face the 1500 ua char but you have to fight it with extreme caution. I don't think unarmed combat is whats broken, instead its the melee combat. When you're hit moving, your melee combat doesn't mean anything (even when on shield stance) as it switches the atk weight with your unarmed def weight. Which some people have complained about, but I see it as okay considering melee combat is overpowered anyways, and everyone would just carry a shield with them so they don't have to spend learning points on unarmed combat. However, the atk weight ratios with melee combat, using a val strike or a cleave is pretty broken. Even more so when the person cleaving or val striking has 5 adv on you.

I'm going to use my stats as an example for this (note I no longer fight and I am peaceful but I used to PvP);

1500 unarmed combat = about 1125 atk weight with a punch = 1500 atk weight with knock his teeth out
1600 melee combat = about 2800 atk weight with a val strike = 4800 atk weight with 5 adv + cleave

Anyone that is "big" in PvP knows it takes 4x the atk weight of the defenders defense weight to drop the persons defense from 100 to 0 with one strike.

Now, with these stats given a punch at 1500 ua will only one hit a char with less than 280 ua. Now, if the 1500 ua char didn't have any melee combat and they only knew how to punch than yes, someone with 500-800 ua could easily defeat the 1500 ua char. However, a val strike with 1600 mc will 100 to 0 someones defense if they have less than 700 ua. Meaning, almost the same amount of learning points required, for you to make it to where someone with 2x the stats can't "face you" because they get one shotted to 0 defense. However, even MORE broken comes the advantage. If you get a char with decent charisma vs someone with shit charisma you can get +5 adv from stern order within 1-3 stern orders. So, with a cleave and +5 adv on your target with these stats you can 100-0 any char with 1200 ua or less.

However, when it comes to a 400 stat difference, a 800 ua char can kill a 1200 ua char with the correct moves, etc... yet here with melee combat a 1600 ua char can one shot the other making it so called, "impossible to fight" ordeal to those who say you can fight as long as you don't get one shotted to 0 defense.

Now, keep in mind this is STANDING STILL HITS AND NOT MOVING. Loftar and Jorb didn't fully remove movement hits, as most PvPers know. It however was nerfed and it mulitpies your atk weight by four. Meaning a 1600 mc char with +5 adv and a cleave, hits for 19,200 atk weight. Which is enough to 100 to 0 a 4800 ua char. Making it really no point in raising a character higher than 2000 ua/2000 mc or even 1500 ua/1500 mc

In my opinion, there is a cap in PvP because of this fact. Also note, that in order to get 4800 ua it takes 1,152,239,900 learning points which I find pretty much impossible to get within the average amount of time it takes for a world reset.

Image

Averaging 1.2 million learning points a day, it would take 960 days.

Now, in order to get 1600 in a stat, lets say melee combat... it would take 128,079,900 learning points which is easily doable.

Image

Averaging 1.2 million learning points a day, it would take 107 days to complete a char which is only a little less than 4 months.


Now, within the time it would take you to create a 4800 ua char you could have made 4 chars with 1600 ua/1600 mc, however the 1600 mc char could still 100-0 the 4800 ua char. So, with this its obvious how broken melee combat is compared to learning points per skill. You would assume you would get your "moneys" worth if you're spending almost nine times the amount of LP into a stat, however you aren't.

Also note, it would take someone with 534 mc to 100-0 someone with 1600 ua if they used a cleave moving, along with having +5 adv, making it even more obvious how broken advantage is along with how borken current melee combat weights are currently set as. I'm not going to explain the difference in the learning points with 534 mc, with 1600 ua as you should already know the difference is quite high and it would be retarded to think someone with such low stats could 100-0 a titan chars with not even 600 melee combat.


So, for those of you who think combat is broken because you think "oh noe such high stats can't fite them"; I'm sorry but you're wrong in so many ways and I'm sure you have no idea how combat really works. It is fine how it is, but I think in order to make it more fair to players who have played and HAVE GRINDED their butts off to get high stated chars, don't get downed by a char that took less than a month to make compared to a char that took nearly four months to make. For those of you that would cry about getting punched by someone with 1600 ua, think of it this way... A punch at max damage and high strength will only punch for 1000 hp, but if you have armor on its only going to be about 250 hp depending on your armor. However, with a 500-800 str char you can easily KO with a cleave or val strike if you have a decent quality battleaxe as you will hit for 3000ish hp and through armor thats anywhere from 800-1000 hp at the moment.

NOTE: I believe combat is currently broken because of melee combat weights and damage dealt based off of your weapon in contrast to unarmed combat weights and damage. Also, how learning point differences not mattering much when it comes to even a 1v1 situation as it should rely on skill, but yes also stats. I am not in any matter saying I am a PvP god as there are way better fighters out there than me, but I as a Haven player am quite fond of how PvP works and the mechanics behind it.

I would say it all comes down to a persons strength, constitution, agility, and charisma at the moment rather than learning points.
Also, sorry for TL;DR post but for those interested in my thoughts of current PvP there it is.
How 2 Fite Legit
Image
User avatar
LordD1
 
Posts: 651
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 10:08 pm

Re: Haven 2.0: "Hafen"

Postby Scubas » Sun Aug 10, 2014 4:49 am

LordD1 wrote:So, for those of you who think combat is broken because you think "oh noe such high stats can't fite them"; I'm sorry but you're wrong in so many ways and I'm sure you have no idea how combat really works.


LordD1 wrote:I would say it all comes down to a persons strength, constitution, agility, and charisma at the moment rather than learning points.


I'm a little confused here.
Scubas
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 5:11 am

PreviousNext

Return to The Inn of Brodgar

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot], Claude [Bot] and 0 guests