ENT Gaming

It seems that there has been some unrest in the community with an older version of the map. Unfortunately the poll from earlier is outdated and it's creator is starting to put words in people's mouths over what the poll was actually about.

This suggestion (and poll) is to clear everything up and make sure that the communities demands are met.

The poll is open for 10 days indefinitely and allows revoting in case you change your mind!

Cheers.

Although i'm not an ID player myself, i'll add my 2 cents to this, since honestly this is starting to "annoy" me a bit, considering the lack of respect (Could also name it lack of communication from both sides, but w/e):

-> Whether most people like it or not, agree or not, Island Defense has lived on these last times due to Neco's work (new versions, balances, bugs/errors fixs, etc), and looking at the amount of games played per week, since the start of this year, you can clearly see an improvement (aka more games being hosted/played - Just to satisfy a few curiosities, February it was around 500games/week, atm it's around 763 (this last week)), so although not all balances are perfect (i think they are called balances for a reason), can't deny he's doing an excellent work in continuing to improve a map to allow ID players (Old & New) to enjoy ID for as long as wc3 exists.

-> I'd like to believe there's no personal vendetas going on with everything that has gone in the last weeks, and that everyone is actually working to make ID a better/balanced stable map:

[*] Communicate more (That goes for both sides: The Mapmaker (Neco) & players/community) to ensure balances are achieved within reasonable time & suggestions are taken in consideration (Note: Not always balances/suggestions are easy to be done, may it be due to time, or mapmaking itself, so be patient)

This is as far as i go towards the situation in general, now speaking personally:

This idea spoken in the previous topic about preventing the new map from being autohosted, is simply unnecessary: You won't get a more stable/balanced map without it being played/hosted (Yes you can host it privately for testing purposes, but face the reality: Remember how long it took for some mapmakers to get feedback from the community due to the map being hosted only privately? This idea will kill the rest of ID, and you might lose Neco - So think twice sometimes)

After this last sentence, i'm sure a few heads are already thinking "So we should suffer from it?" ... And yes, sacrificing a bit to ensure Neco can keep, actively, updating the map you all like to play, seems more than fair, so yes give him time to fix/balance what's needed, and help him as he helps you -> Even Art)y was always positive about pushing Neco's map, cuz he knows its good for the community, and trusts Neco's work:

aRt)Y wrote:But in order to ever have anything even close to a finalized stable ID version, we will have to push it. I am committed to supporting neco in his last effort for ID. If this last project fails, I wont support any further map development either. I do fully trust Neco tho.

tl;dr - Be more receptive to changes: Might take a while for it to take effect, but in the end, it will be worth it, for all of us.

PS: With all of this being said, i do trust everyone realizes it will need a work from both sides, to ensure it's a win/win situation, and for the time i've been on ENT, and what i've seen from Neco's work, i do trust he's trying the best he can (with the time he has) to ensure We get a good/balanced/stable map.

@av1on

This poll isn't about whether or not to keep the new map, it's how neco should go about making changes to the map and how it's updated in correlation with the hosting service. Therefore, it's not identical to your previous poll.


Anyways, I'd just like to chime in on the most current updates. Lots of good QoL updates and removing anti-fun mechanics which make the game frustrating to play as both titan and builder. Only gripe would probably have to be the removal of terrain, when it could've had a few changes to make it decent, or just left there altogether. That being said, having the map tested by a small group of individuals will lead the map in a hive-mind direction with the community being so small.

New pick system is solid.
Neutral buildings are good - removed anti-fun mechanic of suiciding.
Titan skills/exp level early game is a good balance change and favored by many.
Goblin walls remove unfun RNG.
Shield nerf was needed, adds a dimension of decision making between shield + hp upgrades (shield was always way too favored).

These are just some changes that are notable that I can remember off the top of my head.

One thing I'd like to see completely overhauled are some of the un-popular builders. Statistically you can already see that some builders are never forcefully picked for a reason - they're underpowered or straight up boring. This needs to be fixed ASAP imo. One of the worst feelings is being forced into a builder you have 0 motivation to play, and knowing you can't even make a base because it'll be supbar to another builder on your team.

The main focus (in my opinion) needs to be on remaking these unpopular builders so it doesn't seem so much of a chore when you get dealt these builders.

Hyo wrote:Although i'm not an ID player myself, i'll add my 2 cents to this, since honestly this is starting to "annoy" me a bit, considering the lack of respect (Could also name it lack of communication from both sides, but w/e):

-> Whether most people like it or not, agree or not, Island Defense has lived on these last times due to Neco's work (new versions, balances, bugs/errors fixs, etc), and looking at the amount of games played per week, since the start of this year, you can clearly see an improvement (aka more games being hosted/played - Just to satisfy a few curiosities, February it was around 500games/week, atm it's around 763 (this last week)), so although not all balances are perfect (i think they are called balances for a reason), can't deny he's doing an excellent work in continuing to improve a map to allow ID players (Old & New) to enjoy ID for as long as wc3 exists.

-> I'd like to believe there's no personal vendetas going on with everything that has gone in the last weeks, and that everyone is actually working to make ID a better/balanced stable map:

[*] Communicate more (That goes for both sides: The Mapmaker (Neco) & players/community) to ensure balances are achieved within reasonable time & suggestions are taken in consideration (Note: Not always balances/suggestions are easy to be done, may it be due to time, or mapmaking itself, so be patient)

This is as far as i go towards the situation in general, now speaking personally:

This idea spoken in the previous topic about preventing the new map from being autohosted, is simply unnecessary: You won't get a more stable/balanced map without it being played/hosted (Yes you can host it privately for testing purposes, but face the reality: Remember how long it took for some mapmakers to get feedback from the community due to the map being hosted only privately? This idea will kill the rest of ID, and you might lose Neco - So think twice sometimes)

After this last sentence, i'm sure a few heads are already thinking "So we should suffer from it?" ... And yes, sacrificing a bit to ensure Neco can keep, actively, updating the map you all like to play, seems more than fair, so yes give him time to fix/balance what's needed, and help him as he helps you -> Even Art)y was always positive about pushing Neco's map, cuz he knows its good for the community, and trusts Neco's work:

aRt)Y wrote:But in order to ever have anything even close to a finalized stable ID version, we will have to push it. I am committed to supporting neco in his last effort for ID. If this last project fails, I wont support any further map development either. I do fully trust Neco tho.

tl;dr - Be more receptive to changes: Might take a while for it to take effect, but in the end, it will be worth it, for all of us.

PS: With all of this being said, i do trust everyone realizes it will need a work from both sides, to ensure it's a win/win situation, and for the time i've been on ENT, and what i've seen from Neco's work, i do trust he's trying the best he can (with the time he has) to ensure We get a good/balanced/stable map.

I appreciate you giving your input Hyo, I do. If there is anyone I would expect to give a reasonable outsider opinion, it would be you. However I'm not entirely sure you understand why all of this started to begin with.

Now whether you'll admit it or not - I know the ''lack'' of respect is directed to me regarding my ''communication'' with Neco but I honestly don't mean to. I know it looks that way but, Neco has been very strict on considering player feedback in the recent 104 series and some have tried to speak up both personally and publicly but it did no good. There's major public concerns to consider before giving your 2 cents on a public based situation.

->You can say ID lived on even before Neco's work. You can also say ID practically lived through 3.0.9 for as long as I can remember, where a proper/active editor couldn't commit or improve island defense well enough to finally transition from that. I can see your point when you say ID has increased in games but is that truly because of the map change? ID will always have it's ups and downs in games.

I'm so glad you brought up Communication. You know, you're definitely right. Both sides of this drama even before the revert, had a very steep communication wave from both the editor and the public but wouldn't you think that the editor could at least give us some feedback too? Especially when things aren't so positively acts of gratitude? For example -
https://entgaming.net/forum/viewtopic.p ... 7&start=15
https://entgaming.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=101&t=85291
Where is Neco's communication in these? Obviously they aren't the best responses but they do address public opinion and feelings on the version.

This is not a major company where we just see the updates and live with them, No. This is a small loyal gaming community especially the ID faction and for the sake of keeping the interest alive, we should be able to have a say or have our opinions/suggestions considered. Sure, communication could be better and that's why when my friends tried to confront Neco, they were badgered or discarded for the most part. The only thing this thread proves and my previous one is that if our own Editor whom we put our trust in ourselves is unable to communicate with us, then we will have to take matters into our own hands.

I know I'm not alone in this, although it may seem like I'm the only person commenting, the 10 votes in the period of ~2 hours don't lie to what I say. If we're going to be ignored, we will find a better way to suit our gaming experience. Why should we be more adaptive to change if all it does is negative our impact on it? The community is small and we have to stick together. All of us. I'm more tired having to explain this and go through all of this then rather have a good community-to-editor discussion(s) and such.

Going onto your next topic - Preventing a new map from being released is absolutely necessary if majority already disapproves of the series altogether. I mean look at some of the post(s) on those topics, ask Neco himself how much negativity was received on the 104 series. I know every game update will come with dislike but from nearly everyone of this community? That should speak to something alone. We want to be able to know what we're updating into rather then just being slammed with game changing aspects that could very well, again, ruin our experience.

I'm not going to sacrifice a game I actually love and play so that sometime in the future it can ''be better'' or ''be playable''. This community stands strong on how the game operates and if mostly none of us enjoy the changes that are being made, we should definitely have a say in what's better.

For the record - I never intended for the revert to be permanent. Only until a suitable version is released in which then everyone can vote and give their opinions. By denying the right to actively update ID, it'll actually give more voice and testing before randomly being added. Especially when not such a positive flow of feedback is coming from the previous version(s).

This poll will not get "removed". How dare you even demand that, avion. He has the same right to post a suggestion as you do. And this is the last time I will tell you publicly to watch your behavior as ENT moderator in ID related discussions.

Topic remains open for the poll. If you've suggestions regarding the map... post them in the ID section.

All I want is for @Neco to give the entire community (outside of IDL private hosting) a proper chance to test and try out any major changes that he has planned for ID, and then allow several days of feedback that won't simply be ignored. If you're actually up for that Neco, then you have my support for pretty much any future releases.
With or without the revert, I think this poll was a good idea to help clarify how many feel the same way.

Hyo wrote:-> Whether most people like it or not, agree or not, Island Defense has lived on these last times due to Neco's work

I normally don't post on the forums (10th post in having an account for over a year!! woo!! I'm almost a post a month on average!) but i will give my thoughts on this topic because ID used to be important to me at one point in time.

Neco has put in a lot of work in the map and i am sure he has good intentions (or else why would he be putting all this effort in) but the changes are doing both good and bad.

Certain changes have caused a very large amount of the player base to quit (myself for one). A constantly refreshing community is something nobody wants. If you take a look at the regulars who play ID now and the regulars who played ID a year ago, you will find a handful of similar names. Maybe life changes and they no longer have time or the desire to play ID, but if you hear the opinion on the changes from these people who no longer play, there is an overwhelming negative feedback.

For me personally, there are just some things in the game that have been around so long that to change them would be to start making ID a different game. I do not disagree that some things are/were a bit unbalanced but that was what created fun and memorable games (3 toxics on a splitting rad chasing down titan, tauren rush, supporting a shit arach base with several mags and winning, etc). We don't need every builder to be "balanced". We don't need every titan to be "balanced". We dont need the terrain to be "balanced". If that were the case why call it 10 Maks err Murlocs vs Luci on a blank map? No wall walking right?

Coming from someone who used to play ID religiously, i quit because the community and game went to shit due to the new map where everything was given a child-proof cage and catering to the lowest common denominator became the norm.

TLDR; neco just needs way better communication between the ID community or the community needs better communication.

Hyo wrote:-> Whether most people like it or not, agree or not, Island Defense has lived on these last times due to Neco's work

Whether most people agree your not, you're ugly!11!.
Legit you can't open a sentence like that to prove anything unless you actually close with legitimate facts. 2 data points nothing. What about March data? did it go from 500 to 1500210 then down to 700? How about April 2015 data? Sure maybe a larger dataset will still show an upward trend but you haven't shown that until you use a larger set.

This idea spoken in the previous topic about preventing the new map from being autohosted, is simply unnecessary: You won't get a more stable/balanced map without it being played/hosted

ID hasn't been stable/balanced for a long time but its been autohosted for a long time so obviously autohosting something =/= it getting/being balanced.

After this last sentence, i'm sure a few heads are already thinking "So we should suffer from it?" ... And yes, [u]sacrificing a bit

A bit as in like 4 months of games where people would just mass pick demo and end it in 5 minutes? A bit as in a month where people could pick satyr and attack allied hunters for gold?
The "a bit" is something that is questionable. While it is just a game, to say that Neco has left relatively small imbalances in the game is silly.

---

Shield nerf was needed, adds a dimension of decision making between shield + hp upgrades (shield was always way too favored).

Shield was more cost effective after the first 2 hp upgrades. It was 2.77 hp/gold vs 2.5 (40g hp) and also gave armour/magic resist.

Statistically you can already see that some builders are never forcefully picked for a reason - they're underpowered or straight up boring.

Just because something is unliked or unpicked doesn't make it weak. All of you bti-ers were qq-ing how weak draenei was and now that jared just picks it 24/7 you all decided it was strong.

---

This poll will not get "removed".

@art)y so regardless of outcome of this poll I can make another?

---

All I want is for @Neco to give the entire community (outside of IDL private hosting) a proper chance to test and try out any major changes that he has planned for ID, and then allow several days of feedback

Yes. IDL testing is obviously pretty poor or there are some serious bugs that exist in every version and they're too busy catching those.

@FollowingPath This has been mentioned multiple times, the map download link is here > https://entgaming.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=153&t=84587
It's always there a week before any version is released at minimum and whilst half your post is around only IDL people testing. You can cut that down to only me and foss. Nobody else bothers. It''s nothing to do with being in Clan IDL, when me and foss were both in BTI it was exactly the same. You all have access to download the map and I've seen maybe 1-2 people bother testing even though there's plenty who complain after it's released.

@Stealer We spent like 4 hours testing the -UP system alone. Shit takes time and unfortunately if noone can be bothered to bug test pre-release then there is always going to be bugs that make there way through.

I actually find it quite interesting that people voting for revert and poll's before release seem to be split into 3 groups. People who are just angry about top middle and want the map reverted based on that. People who are nostalgic and people who apparently prefer 7 mags and 1 arac as a game of ID. Lot's of different motives which don't achieve the same goal. Just thought I'd point out that most of the people wanting a revert are complaining about balance and then some of them actually want a unbalanced map. Kinda funny really...

@Hyo The idea that a map with 763 games per week with 11 players per game can be reverted based off of 15 votes is joke worthy. This poll is no better than the last. The only people who will vote are the people who care. The ones who are not bothered will simply play the game as usual have fun anyway. If it was such an issue for the "majority" of players I'm sure more than 15 would have voted considering there are 700+ games a week..... Communication is always a problem in ID. Half the people want balance and the other half want no changes at all. Then when you change something for balance that they thought was fun then all of a sudden your the bad guy. That's just the way ID has been for years. You should have seen the 2.0 series when they made it so the gold mine no longer disappeared and it now stayed permanently. The point is there's been bigger changes and A LOT more players upset but a map has never been reverted, especially not with such a low number of votes considering the amount of games happening.

We don't pay him, we just hope that he keeps releasing versions. There's always going to be versions that people don't agree with, things eventually sort themselves out as they have in previous versions over the last 3 years and the 6 years before that.

@ShadowZz As it is now, the download link is put up entirely for bug reporting. What I am asking is that the map is made publicly available with something else in mind as well: for people to try out changes to gameplay and balancing without having all their opinions treated as QQ'ing.
Basically, a map that can be subject to changes other than bug fixes after it is posted.

FollowingPath wrote:Basically, a map that can be subject to changes other than bug fixes after it is posted.

I'm pretty sure this is the case already, right @Neco ?

Thank you all for this very entertaining argument about who whines and flames the most. We have all very much enjoyed it. Now stop it, please.

I'm fine if suiciding is removed by something that makes sense. Not something completely crazy retarded.

It literally solves the same problem

It does not.
It solve something that is not a problem by creating something that is a problem.

Im not unhappy because its not done the way I want it to be. I'm unhappy because its done a way that is insanely stupid IMO and instead of just QQ on forum I made a suggestion.

My suggestion of having towers feed 0 gold is the only change I would do, I wouldnt adjust any other buildings gold. I'd even let neutral buildings give gold, exept for the towers.
This suggestion solves a non problem with a non problem.
How is it the same thing?

I actually like 104 more than 103 btw.
You then wrote 17 lines of pointless stuff. Thank you I guess?

Removing gold feed from all towers in all of ID would inevitably lead to more balance problems in the same way as having neutral buildings. I'm not even going to discuss that to be honest so it's pretty much the same problem, with the same outcomes, just a different solution.

Well 104 is being reverted due to problems with 103, kinda stupid really.

I pretty much agree with all of what @Hyo said.

I don't think reverting to having old versions hosted is the right direction to go in. In fact, I think that it is 100% the wrong direction, and I pretty much completely disagree with Av1ons suggestion and a good portion of what he said (sorry bro).
I don't think every change needs a seal of approval from the entire community.
I DO think that changes which fundamentally change the game are going to be implemented, there should be a new thread opened up, with a poll (even if it's meaningless, which many of these are), well in advance of the release. If we're changing over to -up, adding neutral buildings, etc, I think it should be given time to be discussed.

I personally would like to see neutral buildings work. I think it's a good idea, and really isn't too bad. I wouldn't mind seeing a gold nerf or tweaking of values, I also wouldn't mind having neutral buildings do something like attack, or be able to be taken over by other builders so that they don't disappear or sit there useless (lets face it, titan got neutral buildings, loads more gold, and builders got.... oh feeders now feed even harder, and new/poor players are even more of a liability than before). Maybe split neutral buildings up among the remaining builders, and leave it to them to det/defend. Then the entire base isn't entirely dependent on a single 300 hp builder not getting chain nuked. (I'm not totally endorsing any of these ideas, just trying to enforce my point: don't revert the map).

I think @BeeKauzh addresses some real concerns, although I slightly disagree with his course of action: titan is still really gold fed most games (although exp is surprisingly well under control). Although having towers not feed gold would be greatly helpful, you would have to change gold values on a lot of other things (would other buildings give more gold? would item prices be reduced? What does the titan get for breaking a base, just exp?). Would towers give gold if you don't kill the builder? If so, then suiciding is starting to become really important. I think that Beek and I just have a core difference of opinion: I don't think suicide should be a strategy just to fuck the titan over, I think it really lowers the quality of gameplay, especially when you are fighting new-average titans (90 percent of games). I have also been a long proponent of making Titan easier to play, despite the fact that both Beek and I know that the top 10% of titans are nearly impossible to beat. These are fundamental opinions we probably won't agree on, and that's fine. But you'd be a fool not to take his posts seriously, he's definitely right that gold gain is retarded as titan right now, and he gave a pretty reasonable suggestion to fixing that problem (although I actually am slightly more inclined to agree with @ShadowZz's suggestion of multiplying all titan gold values by 10, then making neutral buildings give 5, but this -also- would make suicide a more viable option).

I think a lot of changes that have been implemented in the 4.0 series are great, and personally if the hosted version was ever reverted to 3.0.9, I would probably quit. Constantly reverting the map, even to previous 4.0 versions, is not the path forward, releasing new maps and actively playing them and giving feedback is the only way we'll see change, even if that means dealing with versions we personally hate. We're a small community; we should be working together to help develop the map we want, and being divided like we are now is the completely wrong mindset and approach.