New Island Defense Version

[IAmDragon]

Map is attached

Thanks

- IAmDragon

[Merex]

Changelog can be found here.

This version has gone through weeks of testing within the Azeroth community of ID. It is familiar to a large chunk of ID players and it is a step forward to new/fresh updates for ID.

[Hash]

I wouldn't really say that it is familiar to a large chunk of ID players, probably like a dozen people have played it. Seems like a step to huge imbalances, with so many drastic changes made in such a short period of time. I have talked to many other experienced Island Defense players about this version, and many of us would actually prefer to keep playing the current map, rather than hastily implementing a version of Island Defense, that has barely been tested for the amount of massive changes made to the game.

[B4rt0]

I wouldn't really say that it is familiar to a large chunk of ID players, probably like a dozen people have played it. Seems like a step to huge imbalances, with so many drastic changes made in such a short period of time. I have talked to many other experienced Island Defense players about this version, and many of us would actually prefer to keep playing the current map, rather than hastily implementing a version of Island Defense, that has barely been tested for the amount of massive changes made to the game.

I find your argument equally good and bad at the same time.
Yes, changing a lot of stuff may always lead to imbalance, confusion, etc.
On the other hand, changing a bit to very little, once every several months brings us to stagnation.
I believe approving this version for a test period of a week would do more good than bad. How otherwise editors are supposed to get feedback on their job if you don't even want to try? Feedback from very limited number of players is insufficient.

[IAmDragon]

Thank you B4rt0

I'm with him as well. Many of the changes were not game-breaking, we tested with a few inhouse full-houses, so we did the best that we could.

If things are broken we can fix them, but the real question is can ENT upload the new version quick enough for our quick fixes to matter?

- IAmDragon

[PubLord]

The same argument Hash made could have been made for Neco's updates to ID. There were plenty of multiple month-long stretches where entire builders would be unavailable due to simple, glaring bugs, but where would ID be if we decided not to update the game without a single bug + every "experienced" ID player giving their approval. These "experienced players" should report on what specifically they have issues with in this version, in this thread or somewhere useful other than to Hash directly, at the very least to contribute to ID's development if not to have them at least defend their requests to not update ID.

[Hash]

@b4rt0 I agree it has been a bit stagnant, but the way I see it is, it's better to be consistent and stagnant rather than implement a bunch of drastic changes to the game, and cause massive imbalance issues. It looks like there's more changes in this version than there was from 3.0.9 to 4.0.0.Considering that, and the fact that this version isn't even from the normal Island Defense editor (Neco), I believe there needs to be much more than just a test period of a week before actually considering implementing this map. Maybe even a poll asking the community if they would prefer to play this version or not.

@iamdragon I don't want to speak on behalf of ENT for this, but based on how it has been the past couple of years for Island Defense map updates, I would say no they cannot upload versions quick enough for quick fixes. Now when you say there's not any game-breaking changes but for example there are changes like regeneration to buildings to prevent full deny, changes like that scare me because it seems you don't think it will impact the game much. And the fact you said "we tested with a few inhouse full-houses" bothers me also, for the amount of changes made in this version, I think there should be much more testing than just a few games before we implement a version that we are going to be stuck with for a long time.

[IAmDragon]

@Hash The regeneration is intentional. We believe (Remixer, I, and Neco) that full-deny where all your buildings just sit there with no maintenance is silly. We added a slight regen (it will still take roughly 6 minutes for them to be full HP) to the trees. If anything this elevates the skill-cap, as you can still self-deny. We just made it slightly higher.

Regardless, we fixed a lot of bugs, made two Titans playable and new, and made Nat's army require upgrades to be good. That's the basis of the patch. @Arcanium tested it with us as well, I fixed the bugs that we found and in order to find more we need a bigger community.

Finally, we haven't tested this "a few" times. We've tested it hundreds of times, with some of my friends in the Azeroth community using my bot to private test each and every single change to try to find the balance. It's not perfect but if you have better suggestions I'd like to hear them now.

[PubLord]

I agree with the idea for a poll. Although I would still argue that Neco's edits and the current version could easily be voted out in favor of an older version if these litmus tests were applied across the board, I still think the poll is the easiest way to solve the issue if mods are allowed to selectively block map updates from official devs.

Maybe even a poll asking the community if they would prefer to play this version or not.

[PubLord]

Maybe even a poll asking the community if they would prefer to play this version or not.

[Hash]

if mods are allowed to selectively block map updates from official devs.

Not sure you know how ENT works in terms of updating maps, but that's not even possible. And last I checked, Neco was the official developer, I didn't see him updating this version personally.

[PubLord]

last I checked, Neco was the official developer, I didn't see him updating this version personally.

From what I understood Neco and Remixer edited the current version, and now Remixer and IAmDragon have taken over development from Neco for further iterations. If not, you should warn Neco that someone gave IAmDragon an unprotected version of the map and that he's editing it without their permission.

[Hash]

@iamdragon I would hardly say that there's no maintenance for full deny lumber bases, it not that hard for a titan to get a minion and get mini minions at lvl 3 which would make a full deny, an easy 20 gold for titan, having to watch out for mini minis and blocking off lumber bases from them certainly seems like maintenance to me.

It's nice that you fixed a couple bugs, but with the amount of changes you did, how many more bugs will arise, I think it is pretty safe to say there will be more bugs in this version than there was before, but with new versions that's expected. I'm recommending that much more testing be done before considering this map to be updated on ENT. I don't think hosting this version right now when ENT cannot update new versions quickly for small quick fixes is a good idea. There is just too many drastic changes made in such a short period of time, I don't believe that this was tested and balanced enough for ENT to be hosting it at the moment.

we tested with a few inhouse full-houses,

We've tested it hundreds of times, with some of my friends in the Azeroth community

You went from saying this was tested a few times to hundreds of times, that doesn't really sound reassuring to me.

[Hash]

last I checked, Neco was the official developer, I didn't see him updating this version personally.

From what I understood Neco and Remixer edited the current version, and now Remixer and IAmDragon have taken over development from Neco for further iterations. If not, you should warn Neco that someone gave IAmDragon an unprotected version of the map and that he's editing it without their permission.

Sure Neco gave him an unprotected version of the map, but for what reasons, I would like Neco's side of the story. And the fact that this map wasn't uploaded by Neco bothers me. I trust Neco as an experienced editor, but no offense to IAmDragon, but I don't really know his qualifications to be editing the Island Defense versions we play on ENT.

[Arcanium]

Here's my opinion. I like the ideas, I like the concept, I don't like the rush.

A lot has changed on this map, and I have only had 1 chance to test it. Not due to the fact that IAmDragon hasn't hosted it/given the chance to, but due to my own agenda (I don't know how much he's gone through, but I believe it was only people within the Azeroth group and other close people to him). This is the first reason I don't think it should be hosted, as i'm sure there are more like me who haven't had many chances to test/play.

The second reason is, with these bigger changes, the very first time I tested the map was vs a Noxious. Once I became mini, I noticed that I was under the effects of Noxious' poison trap. Now already there's a bug/glitch, but a few days later it gets suggested to go public? It seems like he's trying to rush things out, instead of spending time debugging. Now that's not to say that there were in fact other glitches/bugs about, but the fact that I found it within the first 10-20 minutes (correct me if I'm wrong on that), it definitely raises a point.

Third off, no offense to IAmDragon but I think that he's going the wrong way about editing. It's nice, the idea of Noxious and all that, but, really? I mean think about it. We've had to go months, maybe years without being able to play Titans like Fossurious / Aetherious, and now he wants to remake Sypherious? Not to mention Furbolg which has been teasing us for a very long time aswell.

I like Hash's idea of a poll. For this poll we would need to make sure it actually gets a lot of the people's votes. Start making announcements/talking throughout the community telling them a poll will be in place soon, getting them to visit the forums more often (you know, advertise sort of thing).

So, that's just my 2 cents.