TalonZa wrote:Players can hard code AI per map that isnt really AI, just the owner saying do x,y then z.
and which AI is not doing this? Even alphago has a neural network that is fine tuned by the dev team. I understand what you mean, when I had the course in AI I learned the minmax and I discovered that AI is nothing else than an hardcoded heuristic that computes really fast with neat observations to avoid following wrong paths.
So for my perception it sounds like "I lose because I do not hardcode solutions, if the others wouldn't do so, they will lose against me". It is an excuse. Your AI is nothing different from the others, you also say "dear bot, when you have low shield and everyone is attacking you, please retreat". Is this not an hardcoded behavior? If you wait that your bot gets to know this by its own, it will be always vaporized.
Editing of AI is tedious with no undo or version control.
That editing is tedious, I agree. Version control it is not so easy. I mean, I challenge you to produce a quick framework for versioning just files (not using git or whatever, create yours). Not directories, just files. You will see how not easy it is, and you have only the task of making a version control system, not an entire game + its infrastructure. So I wouldn't expect it. While I would expect a better editor.
Perhaps some hints while creating AI like "this action will never be reached".
Another not easy thing.
Again, which game doesn't ? Heck life repeats. Don't you sleep every day? Don't you eat every day?
Ranked skill groups limit the people ever more that you can compete against.
What would be the solution, compete against everyone? And where is the fun to beat a 1300 guy when you are 1700? Just to feeling better because you win? "oh look I have a streak of 50 wins against opponents way worse than me!" . Meh.
I know above sounds lile ranting/crying.
Not all the points, but some yes. I really believe you are whining on some points, whatever you say. I also remember your rants about the elo as being unappropriate when you lose (I wonder what could be appropriate, since other systems are even less merciful than elo. Maybe something that discount losses? Once again, Meh).
But lots of reasons for players not to come back.
For what I observed and discussed (on discord especially, that has a lot of inactive players) it boils down to two things:
(a) paywall. Few people will accept to pay upfront a cost of 3$, like a mcdonald burger. With a fremium model I suppose there will be way more willing payers or at least casual players.
(b) difficulty. There is little to hide it. There are hundreds of examples (I do not know about studies, but surely there are) that show that when things gets hard, people quit. Most of the people like "low effort, nice results for one's self esteem". There was someone saying that a lot of MMORPG are successful because they ensure that a player can find its niche place where to win, so the game gives back an easy reward. Here instead there are duels and if people do not put effort in it, they are going to suck, and sucking is frustrating. I guess it is hardwired in humans, don't dotoo often what does not give you back nice results.
For example let's pick your stats. You played only 404 games (pretty a little, if those would be 1500, maybe they would be enough).
So in master you had hard times, but more or less you had balanced games. You got in grandmaster and you got demoted pretty quickly, then again in master you won a bit, and now in GM you are again "cannon fodder". I understand that this is frustrating, but one does not see that one has nothing to lose when he is at the bottom of a league. Just adapt until you crack the enemy and the elo will reward you immediately. You may lose 2,3 points when you lose to a 1900+ , but then you get +15 when you win (it means, 5 defeats covered) or even +2,3 when you draw.