| 1 |
When it comes to gameplay design I think it is good to put more weight to vets' feedback because they tend to have a better understanding of intricacies than a fresh newbie would.
|
1 |
When it comes to gameplay design I think it is good to put more weight to vets' feedback because they tend to have a better understanding of intricacies than a fresh newbie would.
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
Compare the threads: the newb-made one says to add storage to cons because "it was like that in TA" (bad argument: we're not TA) and because "losing a commander leaves no storage" without even explaining why it is bad (obviously it's bad from the perspective of a player but you could make the same argument for losing your units in combat).
|
3 |
Compare the threads: the newb-made one says to add storage to cons because "it was like that in TA" (bad argument: we're not TA) and because "losing a commander leaves no storage" without even explaining why it is bad (obviously it's bad from the perspective of a player but you could make the same argument for losing your units in combat).
|
|
|
4 |
\n
|
| 4 |
In here vets say "does not create a meaningful decision" (good: reducing trivial decisions is one of the things ZK design aims at).
|
5 |
In here vets say "does not create a meaningful decision" (good: reducing trivial decisions is one of the things ZK design aims at).
|
No storage after com dies is noobtrap