I disagree that the choice is between ruining the game for the majority of people or ruining it for a minority. I think that it is a choice between forcing everyone to have to deal with a minor inconvenience, or completely ruining the game for a minority of people. Honestly, I don't think it's a horrible fate, to sometimes have an early leaver in your game. In fact, it has been my experience that people almost never leave the game unless the game is already decided.
Jaxian
I don't think it is possible to implement a karma system that won't reap havoc upon the game. Player-ratings are too random to be meaningful. And a sort of automated karma system is bound to be misinterpreted too often. For example, let's look at the system that was proposed above: +1 karma for a win, -1 for leaving early, +3 for a loss. Now, let's imagine that a player leaves early every time he's going to lose and stays every time he's going to win. Ave
I feel like the proxy servers should work. But I'm thinking of a different solution as well. In a previous post a sort of connectivity was described where, if two players in a game cannot connect to each other, they would just send their messages to a player who they can connect to, and this player would forward the messages to the person they can't connect to. I feel like that sort of solution would also fix this problem. Is that still in the w
I don't really see the point of implementing this. How does it match players of equal skill level together? You should be equally likely to find someone of equal skill level using this method than using the custom game or random assignment. I mean, sure, you could research the players that are joining your match, but just how much time are you really willing to spend when the match itself lasts only twenty-five minutes or so? And I just don't see this method catching
It is true that I have played many games with Aussie players and with players above 300 ping without having any trouble. Because the game is peer-to-peer, you don't notice any lag. I'm not saying that the game doesn't occasionally run very slowly for some reason, I'm just saying that it is unrelated to the ping of a player, as far as I can tell.
For my part, I agree with the original poster. I think that there are too many people playing the weaker demigods (in my opinion the weaker demigods are UB, Rook and QoT) who are being killed a lot by Erebus that are mostly upset by this. I think that instead of nerfing Erebus, those three other demigods should have been improved, since I think that Erebus was very much on-par with the other demigods. I don't feel weaker than Erebus at all when I'm playing Regulus, Oak, Sedna, or
I have question about the original post, regarding what STUN is, exactly. I was looking at the "New STUN" link, you posted, and it seems to me like it's a big description of a message protocol, but the only functionality it really seems to provide is allowing a client behind a NAT to determine his external IP address. I don't think that this is enough information to determine what kind of NAT the client is behind. So I'm not sure how it is possible to make that determinati
[quote who="si1foo" reply="24" id="2184509"]bit isn't the most powerful or the most useful just that it is 3 in one is what people like but the major point is that it can be beaten[/quote] Right, but, for example, Oak's Penitence has a better debuff, about equal damage, and it hits at a range. I think it's pretty even to Bite overall. Torchbearer's fireball has a fast cooldown, a very long range, and extra damage. I think that Bite really shines in a 1 v 1 situatio
I won't say any Demigods are overpowered, but I do think Rook and UB might be underpowered: I think Unclean Beast is too weak against generals (I guess I don't have a great solution for this). I think that Rook is overall too weak: while he can protect a position very well, I think that he has a very tough time capturing flags or killing other Demigods. Maybe Rook's just not my character, but right now, I pretty much never use him. As for Torchbearer, I think his
Interesting you should mention that...I was having a similar problem with my 8600M GT. I checked the Nvidia site and there were new drivers released a few days ago (April 30th). I'm using those and the crashing seems to have gone away. For now, anyhow. If you haven't checked for drivers in the last few days, it couldn't hurt to recheck. Maybe it'll help?
My roommate is a girl who plays. She goes under the name KayTheAlmighty.
For my part in it, I don't think Erebus is really overpowered. I guess I do think that Mist form would probably be best removed and replaced with a different skill, and perhaps I think stuns in general are too good. But I definitely think that Erebus is on par with Oak, Sedna, Regulus, and Torchbearer. I think a big part of the problems is that the people who are complaining are largely playing as Unclean Beast. And I think that Unclean Beast is far too weak against
As an update: I can log in again. Guess I just had to wait.
Actually, the same thing is happening to me, and I have tried restarting my computer. I have logged in and played countless times without issue, and I seem to have no problem logging into Impluse using the same username and password. Interestingly, I had logged in successfully twice in a row just before this, and each time my game crashed at the character select screen. Then the third time, I just couldn't log in anymore. It's only been about ten minutes, so perhap
The power of Generals was definitely increased...many of their skills became more powerful (especially Erebus's skills), the cost of idols were decreased, and certain assassin items were decreased in power. I'm having success with them about just as much as I am assassins at the moment. Though I would definitely disagree with the claim that a half-general, half-assassin team is necessarily better than a full assassin team or a full general team. I haven't noticed any evide
[quote who="Ceylin" reply="3" id="2143083"]Heres some information on the NAT negotiation that they use -- RakNet http://www.jenkinssoftware.com/raknet/manual/natpunchthrough.html[/quote] According to that link, the original attempt to connect the computers is: "The server will find the external IP address of each client, and tell both clients to connect to that address at the same time." Does that mean that the server is really just telling the clients to co
It also seems strange to me that the operating system would fail to create a socket...I was basing this claim on this post: http://forums.demigodthegame.com/345345 Though I now noticed this post: http://forums.demigodthegame.com/346451 which does mention server load as well. Still, watching the connection info list, it looks to me as though players
By the way: Regulus's sniper shot does have a maximum range, but it's quite far. You definitely won't be able to shoot from one side of the map to another, even in the smaller maps, but if you're in the middle, you can hit most of a smaller map. Choose the ability and scroll the map around and you'll eventually spot the edge radius.
I believe that all bonuses stack with each other...someone correct me if I'm wrong.
I have pretty limited networking knowlegede, but based on what I've read on the forums, I don't think that the NAT negotiation server getting bogged down is the problem...I think the problem is that player connections to one another are being refused, either because the NAT traversal isn't working or because the socket connection is created incorrectly by the operating system. This understanding has lead me to make my own uneducated guesses about solutions: When I look at the
Well, here is the situation as I see it: I wouldn't buy the game for the single player...it's not that I don't have fun playing single player, it's just that it gets repetitive facing the computers, and there isn't a lot of variety. I think most players will agree that multiplayer is the fun part. If you are planning on playing the game mostly over local LAN with your friends, go ahead and get it now...I've played many times with my friends over the LAN and it works just
Hmm, this is definitely interesting behavior...my roommates and I are running it on several computers without seeing any problems like this (even a couple Macs using Bootcamp to run Vista), and I think that these sorts of problems in single-player haven't been very common, which is why I think people are suggesting that there is an issue with your configuration. My laptop seems far less powerful than your computer... Intel Core 2 Duo T9300, 4 GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce 8600 G
When looking at the connection status in the Connection Info window, I notice that I often see one person who is trying to connect to my game, who no one else can connect to. New players who try to connect seem to be trying to connect to this person, even though he is not in our game. This seems to prevent people from joining. This also seems to happen occassionaly when somone leaves the game...I think that if people only tried to connect to those other players who are alrea
There is a bug where, if you are not able to connect to the Impulse servers (either because you don't have an Internet connection or because the servers are down), you will get the message "Invalid username or password." So this message doesn't always actually mean your username and password are invalid. Currently the Impulse servers are down. I'm guessing they'll be back up at some point tonight, but we will see.
As time goes by in the game, you will gain "war score". Your war score will increase faster the more flags you control. When you get enough war score, your team will increase in war rank. The max war rank is 10. In order to purchase certain citadel upgrades, you need to meet the war rank requirement. You'll see the required war rank at the top of the citadel upgrade purchase screen. To check your war score and war rank, press tab. I think you go u