Is 3.0 ready for reg?

Shadow · August 07, 2012, 08:57:47 AM

Pretty simple question. It's pretty much good to go, I think. Of course I will still be coding new features/themes, but the core of the game is done and that's what reg is.

If you voted no, please tell me why!

Firetooth · August 07, 2012, 09:47:43 AM

I don't think 3.0 should ever be introduced to reg, but not because the code is underdeveloped or anything.

Maybe make another server like regular with 3.0 in it, but reg has existed so long with the same code, I think it would be too fundamental a change. Plus, some people probably like the option of a server without the new code.

Sevz · August 07, 2012, 10:45:27 AM

My reason for why not.

We've never played a legitimate round of 3.0.
All we seen is beta versions and a juggling act to balance things.

Death · August 07, 2012, 11:24:52 AM

Are you really sure you want both servers running the same exact code? What Reg has now is pretty solid.

Shadow · August 07, 2012, 01:52:11 PM

Well, what reg has now has some imbalances that I tried to address with 3.0, what with leaders owning everything and takedowns on solo players being impossible. That being said, I've never been the nostalgic type, so maybe others feel more strongly about that bit of code than I do ^_^. It doesn't matter to me, I just always assumed that's what would happen when 3.0 was done. From a maintenance perspective it's simpler to have everything doing the same thing.

Death · August 07, 2012, 03:44:27 PM

Variety is the spice of Prom my nigga.

That said, taking into account the thing we talked about with the storehouse I'd say 3.0 is readyish in theory, but I am of the mind that you should ask if Reg players want it. I know I'm not the only one with a preference for Reg.

Gen. Volkov · August 07, 2012, 03:57:02 PM

I think there is more work to do on refining 3.0. It's fine for a round based game like Turbo, but with reg's indefinite timeframe, we need to make sure the code is completely solid before we make a 3.0 reg. I think there is still too much potential for indefinite takeovers. Also, whether we go to a 3.0 reg or not, I'd like to see the current version of reg stick around.

Sharptooh · August 07, 2012, 04:42:14 PM

There are too many bugs with the theme (visual theme) in 3.0 in my opinion, not to mention we've had a major change (storehouse) this round to the code, which still needs to be fully tested.

I think we should wait at least a couple of months before everything gets ironed out, in my opinion 3.0 is still in a beta stage (features still being added, bugs still unfixed)

Shadow · August 07, 2012, 05:22:46 PM

Well I would appreciate specificity here. If you say "needs refining" or "there are bugs" that's lovely ~words~, but I can't do anything without details.

Holby · August 07, 2012, 09:05:01 PM

As an essentially non-player, I say make the switch!

Reg is still, and always will be, buggy. The code is dead, all focus went on 3.0. I don't see any reason to keep it, other than current/past players are familiar with it. If 3.0 was worth doing, it was worth transferring to reg.

Gen. Volkov · August 08, 2012, 12:15:34 AM

QuoteWell I would appreciate specificity here. If you say "needs refining" or "there are bugs" that's lovely ~words~, but I can't do anything without details.

The power of leaders to indiers and cashers is still not completely balanced for one.

Shadow · August 08, 2012, 06:28:33 AM

how so?

Sevz · August 15, 2012, 05:16:28 AM

Shadow, stop throwing puzzles at laymen. Your the one tinkering with everything, 3.0's incomplete that's what they'll try express politely. They aren't the coders they're the players, it's your job to incorporate every aspect of the code and make it for the players not force them to throw up a solid argument to stop you getting your way.

In defence of redwall I say do not make these ugly changes to the regular server.

Shadow · August 15, 2012, 06:03:24 AM

I'm not throwing puzzles. I don't see the problems they are referencing, so I need details from them.

I cannot magically guess features people want. If they see something as incomplete, they need to tell me what.

If people just say "it's not done" without giving any explanation, I am going to assume that they are objecting on principle just because they are scared of change.

That being said, I am open to leaving reg alone if you really want the old imbalanced code to stay. But reg seems pretty lack-luster since 3.0 has been around. If you can point to a specific feature reg has that 3.0 doesn't that you are trying to hang on to, we can talk it out and see about working something into 3.0.

But I need real input from people, not just vague one-liners.

Gen. Volkov · August 15, 2012, 02:24:59 PM

Quotehow so?

Didn't have time when I first read this for a complete response, don't have it right now, but I'll give one tonight.

OK, first off, the attack buff spells are too powerful. The steal attack buff is like twice as good as an unshielded steal. I should not be able to take someone's entire cash stockpile before maxing them on attacks.

Second, the troop balance is still screwed up. Rats are now entirely overpowered and all the other troops suck. Indies who aren't making troops for a clan can sit there and stock up on rats run after run, gaining cash, and sticking over 100 million rats on the market. Meanwhile, if you make stoats, you lose cash so fast it's not even funny. I lose less cash on 30 million rats than I do on like 5 million stoats. That's just retarded. That's 60 million aggregate attack power vs 25 million.

Lastly, sabotage is too easy to use. The ratio requirement is too low I think.

There's probably more I am not thinking of at the moment, but those are what came to mind off the bat.