Page 2 of 5

Re: Kings are not OP

PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2016 6:21 am
by topkilla
graybo wrote:I seem to remember TopKilla this is in part what happened in the 2nd game we played which I count as the worst game I've ever played - 1 player got 2 others to feed him specs the entire game. But arguably he had achieved this through some crazy diplomacy/amazing lies.

What if specials expired?


So you agree with me then?

How would expiring specialists work?

Re: Kings are not OP

PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2016 6:44 am
by zyxe
I do know what you are talking about, I've only played in one 4v4 but it just ended when everyone gifted their specialists to one person and that person took out everyone.

I almost think that not every specialist needs a nerf. And as much as I hate to say it, the only real problem is global abilities. Almost every specialist can be outmaneuvered. You have DA's and martyrs to deal with death subs, inspectors to deal with large number of weak subs, and even infiltrators to deal with Security Chiefs.

But the problem comes with global specialist. Powering everything is already unbelievably strong, but most global specs grow exponentially stronger with each higher, allowing stacks to be really powerful.

Re: Kings are not OP

PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2016 11:28 am
by niverio
I have to say something about this. I was going to make a very long discussion about all the changes that should be made, but since this was already opened, I will write it down here:
Just one change: You can only have one of each global specialist.
This change solves all problems, doesn't hurt any existing spec (King is still strong when only one is there.), and certainly makes things easier in terms of balance.
I am not sure how to implement the second part of it, but if you are gifted another global spec you own, that spec would just vanish.

Re: Kings are not OP

PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2016 11:36 am
by dane69
I could not disagree more. I took a decent sized break from the game and came back to find that everyone was playing this "NAP" game. Wtf is a non-aggression pact? I still think the fact that everyone is so obsessed with them is a travesty. Though my last five or so games have been incredible. Tides turned, specs exchanged, wars reversed—and not because of turtling spec givers. Diplomacy. Reason. Subterfuge is alive and well as far as diplomacy is concerned. If you don't agree, then you need to change your tactic. Anyone can be convinced to do anything—unless that person is Panzer. Guy is fucking nuts, lol.

Also people are bloodthirsty. Getting an elimination is as valuable as a shiny top three medal, at least to the people that I play with. I am in a game with Niv rn. I chased him off his outposts and into the darkness, and now he is sitting in someone else's base (and I am assuming) giving them specs. I could have avoided this if I had been savvy enough to reach out and make a deal. Though I am stubborn, and want my kill.

Re: Kings are not OP

PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2016 11:36 am
by dane69
Also, kidding about the Panzy thing. Well... half kidding 8-)

Re: Kings are not OP

PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2016 7:14 pm
by mathsums
topkilla wrote:Kings are not OP, nearly every specialist is.


I’m in a game right now, as it currently stand, I’m about to get completely destroyed. Not because I suck, I played very good, but because one player wasn’t eliminated in the early days like he was supposed to have been, and another player has been collecting all his specialists.

Thankfully, this has finally lead me to figuring out the issue with specialist balance. It’s not a single, or a select few that need to be changed to fix the erroneous balance. It’s the whole underlying foundation of the specialists, their wide range of usability and relation to game mechanics, along with their king-making potential.

Subterfuge is supposed to be about diplomacy, but due to the issues above, it’s currently about who can acquire the most, best, specialists. Usually, as the result of one player who gets beat bad, and then gives all his specialists to another in the hopes that his protector will eventually have enough specialists to easily manhandle his old opponent, and therefore rank higher than the person who he severely got outplayed by.

You should care about this because I feel like it truly has hurt this game. People don’t play games that are not fun. And the way Subterfuge is currently balanced, it’s not fun. And that’ not a something you can afford to have when the games last ~7 days at a minimum.


P.S. - Anyone who disagrees and thinks that turtling and feeding a player your specialists, “is diplomacy” is wrong. For example, North Korea doesn’t supply China with [specialists].

Lol, you got your butt handed to you by an alliance, he was capable of ensuring your destruction. He played better. In the game called diplomacy, jassinary often comes into play. Basically a slave of the greater power. You forced that player to become a vassal, you left him with one last best hope. He took it, now if you had finished the job rather than ighting his ruler, or whatever it that you were doing, then you would have had a better chance. Get powned noob. Yes it is lying when me into , but imagine what it feel for .

Re: Kings are not OP

PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2016 8:47 pm
by aclonicy
Z makes a good point, specs are infinitely better than drillers once you amass enough of em, they can practically outmode drillers in some cases. However I just don't know if I'd like subterfuge as much if specs were weaker. I'm just not into diplomacy as much as some other guys are. I can see how it would be aggrivating, but I'm getting multi teamed in a game by 2 guys and my decently good specs can't save me, so diplomacy does seem to win out in the end, you've gotta set yourself right I guess. Just sort of my 2 cents about all this.

Re: Kings are not OP

PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2016 10:29 pm
by rcboy
ive seen this issue in one of my other games. All you have to do is to develop the ability for players to issue bans and have someone from the subterfuge look over them to make sure that the turtling player is warned or banned from the game for a period of time. If banning is misused, warn or ban that player.

Re: Kings are not OP

PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2016 11:30 pm
by bleatingsheep39
rcboy wrote:ive seen this issue in one of my other games. All you have to do is to develop the ability for players to issue bans and have someone from the subterfuge look over them to make sure that the turtling player is warned or banned from the game for a period of time. If banning is misused, warn or ban that player.


There's nothing wrong with turtling. It's a strategy, ok.

Re: Kings are not OP

PostPosted: Tue Dec 20, 2016 12:17 am
by dane69
Agree with the last few posts. A turtled player is dangerous af and usually a game-changer. Just gotta be cunning enough with your keyboard to ensure that the player changes the game in your favor ;)