[QUOTE=prophett;510750]Something weird happened a couple of patches ago that may or may not be DB related.
I used to always ping 120-140 to Euro servers now I am pinging 160-180. I believe I heard Spookify and maybe Inferno mention it as well :/[/QUOTE]
i also get additional +20-30 ping.
i used to have 70 minimum, now i have 100 minimum
I think you might regret saying this. 
But I too would really like to see something like this, and there have been strong hints that something along these lines may well be on the cards.
[QUOTE=Mustang;510779]I think you might regret saying this.
But I too would really like to see something like this, and there have been strong hints that something along these lines may well be on the cards.[/QUOTE]
True DHAT! Cant wait… SD can expand upon this and give it more depth and detail; especially with access to states.
Correct me if I am wrong but LOL just has a high rank and boarder right? Triple Platinum or something? Is there a way for those ultra high ranked players to see where they rank within themselves??? Based on Win, SPM, Kills and deaths or total victory time?
I am torn on seasons but if done correctly the could be interesting… I hate losing rank and starting over and that can also loss players… Look at the new Diable Patch with Seaons! They had a crazy amount of people come back and play season 1 and then guess what… You lose everything and the game also losses players… Who wants to start over!!
Odd comparison is Clash of Clans… They have seasons however you never loss your throphys and u just hope right into the next season by doing a battle and it will rank you… The inactive players are not ranked until they play again. FTW so close to 2600 trophy’s in COC!!! GRRRRR!! I super suck at attacking!!!
[QUOTE=Glottis-3D;510777]i also get additional +20-30 ping.
i used to have 70 minimum, now i have 100 minimum[/QUOTE]
Ditto additional 20 to 30 pings… At lunch I was at 120 ping to a euro server which is really good but then the server got super slow and totally crashed… And crashed hard!
Was considering updating but will take this thread as a reason not to. Pixel, you’re reiterating things from 2012 if they haven’t fixed it yet, when do you think they will?
I am East Coast as it gets and I am pinging 10-15 higher than you 
Currently 160-180 up from 120-140 about a month or so ago…
but the whole slowing down and lack of distinguishable updates thing…
basically yes… I expected far more nightly-builds and experimental stuff ever since the alpha started. That is not a nexon-thing.
Now we just all sit here and wait months for a new update.
The game itself is only playable in the evening ( in the later hours ) and when I check the servers around afternoon, all I see are 3 players.
At this point, I rather play other games and kill time.
Once this server maintenance is complete and possible even the next update is release myself or maybe even something for Pix to record is Frame Drop on maps…
I super tweaked my Config last night messing with Lodbias’s and radial-blur and basically everything! Made it read only and game looked a ton better however I was the only one in any server last night so hard to test when you are running around by yourself.
I did hop on Train and run around and had a stable Frame rate of 349 to 354… I was pretty pumped about that… I also tried a few different classes and noticed that when I shot I loss 20 - 30 just by squeezing the trigger… Frames would go to 320 and be stable at 320 for the entire clip…
I would have loved for someone to come on to see if their presents of being in the server did anything PLUS if they started shooting at me what that would do to my FPS…
Combinations of all this should be tested I feel… 30 Frame Loss for just pulling the trigger! Really?
I did play White Chap and had a very high frames in the 320’s again and when a person shot at me it dropped to 250 to 280… If I would shoot back when the person was shooting I would get around 180 to 200 frames… Thats a 100+ frames loss when in a fire fight… Seems ridicules…
Again I would like to see small testing on this… Find a stable spot on some map and have you and another try different things to affect frames…
Like Pix’s said steady frame rate is a huge advantage in this game… I will also go as far as saying it does something with my mouse feel aswell. Better more stable frames makes my mouse feel super smooth and responsive… Again now playing with oneframelag ON!!! WTF?
That’s not quite the case… months ago, I stated that we were focusing on Stopwatch, and that was because there was a lot of inconsistency in how it was working across the maps. We needed a stable base in order to start getting guidelines together, so it was a logical point to attack.
Ultimately the most popular modes will be the ones we focus on.
I’ve always had the ‘slideshow effect’ up close tracking making it very hard and frustrating unless there aren’t many players on the server. Don’t have the rig to be able to record demos unfortunately :(. I do generally get between 80 and 140fps (terminal is the worst for some reason). There is that huge lag when a new player joins as well. Dome I can get up to 160fps and is more consistent. The drop in framerate with full servers has been there since day one.
nice update, lots of progress on the ui,training etc oh and trainyard … finally.
for all the moaning we do, and i agree with most of what is said,
DirtyBomb is still a much better game than some over hyped crap like destiny.
thats why i still come here. (i think)
SD still know how to make an enjoyable game.
And if when it’s released, I’m still playing it, then they must be doing something right.
Bungie can’t do it with $500 m and yet SD do it with £3.50.
ok back to neg feedback.
Where’s my t-shirt, i’m freezing here.
Since I saw on Rex game mode poll thread your negative opinion towards stopwatch, I wanted to throw in a major question I have towards your argumentation of stopwatch giving certain teams a huge psychological advantage. I have two examples that I would like to know how you think about them, and why it´s working for them and not going to work for DB`s stop watch:
Leauge of Legends: As someone who plays and follows the competitive scene a lot I can tell you that there is a psychological advantage given by the asymmetric map and the different benefits that come from playing on a specific side of the map as well as the order in which you pick and ban. Those factors are actually game deciding in many cases also causing a HUGE psychological advantage for who ever gets to start on the better side. The currently played Leauge of Legends world finals underline this fact by a win rate of the “better” side being 66%.
Counter Strike: Global Offensive: In this game psychological disadvantages are existent to an almost ridiculous level. On many maps there is a clearly favored side (either CT or T) that is often supposed to win 66% of even more of the rounds. It´s not so rare that teams play from the back with a score of 8:14 where you need 16 rounds to win.
With a properly adjusted stopwatch mode - what is one of the few things I believe that are going tohappen - you will also have some specific times that either suggest a team of being ahead, even or behind in therms of progress. And even tho it´s hard to follow for someone new to the game, and psychological unbalanced it´s the case in the most successful and competitive games of our time.
Leauge of Legends: As someone who plays and follows the competitive scene a lot I can tell you that there is a psychological advantage given by the asymmetric map and the different benefits that come from playing on a specific side of the map as well as the order in which you pick and ban. Those factors are actually game deciding in many cases also causing a HUGE psychological advantage for who ever gets to start on the better side. The currently played Leauge of Legends world finals underline this fact by a win rate of the “better” side being 66%.
Well first off this is not really a psychological thing…
The map is different for each side and that will make a difference. However, the pure number of games played by the public show the difference is only small. What the Pros seem to be saying is that its about the camera angle. The fact that people are mentioning it and actually complaining shows that LoL is not actually really getting away with it. LoL in general is very well balanced (where it counts) and the issues caused by the camera are pretty much the same as we have in an FPS to some degree. For instance it is easier to players too shoot someone moving right than it is for someone moving left. This is simply caused by how we hold mice and due to how our muscles work. The difference is only small really but it is a real thing…
When it comes to the Picks and Bans this is a really hard one to address. Just looking at games like Magic where the second player gets a whole extra card and Heartstone where the player gets a special card and lots more. This literally comes down to trying to balance out first move advantage and its really difficult to do. Basically it comes down to trial and error and the goal posts are always moving because of the constantly evolving meta game.
Now, to balance out the camera angle problem, in theory you could just flip the map for each team. However then you end up with a new problem… Both teams would not have the same view of the battlefield (when it comes to moving behind trees and stuff) so it is unlikely they will take the risk in trying it.
Sure, there is a small psychological advantage caused by simply knowing your on the team with the advantage. However, due to the mode really being a single battle, the effect is minimised. It would also be minimised over LOTS of rounds (ie why people play multiple games). This same effect would happen on DB when you start looking at best of 3 and best of 5 formats. Honestly, I have not spent a lot of time following LoL so I cannot really go into depth about each and every system. I will mention one last thing though. With LoL having so many systems and mechanics that all have a lot of depth, the overall effect on the map (while real) is made almost insignificant. Team Comp, Item Builds, Skill Builds, Picks and Bans and much more all have a much bigger effect on victory than the map.
Counter Strike: Global Offensive: In this game psychological disadvantages are existent to an almost ridiculous level. On many maps there is a clearly favored side (either CT or T) that is often supposed to win 66% of even more of the rounds. It´s not so rare that teams play from the back with a score of 8:14 where you need 16 rounds to win.
Actually Counter Strike is much more fair then you may realise…
You just need to look at it as “I am only allowed to lose the same number of rounds that the previous team lost” and it starts to instantly feel more fair. I do however understand what you are saying. If you are on the stronger side first, you really do not need to worry about winning, its more chilled in general. Knowing you can only lose 1 round before you lose the whole match can be very stressful. This is why Counter Strike should never be played in a Best of 1 format at a competitive level. Again, the money system, asymmetric maps. multiple rounds and more all work towards reducing this problem.
If we was to directly compare what I claimed was present in Dirty Bomb with the one in Counter Strike however… The team with the most pressure put on them is the team that wins more. The added pressure on Dirty Bomb causes you to play better/harder and the less pressure on the other team causes them to play worse/laid back. The pressure itself is what causes excitement both for players and spectators. The problem with Dirty Bomb directly when compared to these other games is that Dirty Bomb has less fail safes and additions to negate the effect of pressure. Multiple round, Momentum and Learning.
It is also important to note that Dirty Bomb is actually much more asymmetric than both of the games mentioned. Overall this advantage is only a very small reason behind my distaste for Stopwatch and Objective modes. So while I believe its an issue, I COULD live with it provided the overall mode was decent. Its not…
Then consider my post as not relevant anymore. I could swear that that was one of the reasons why you disliked stopwatch in the past, but well wouldn´t be the first time that i misunderstand you 
Even tho I think that many of your points are inaccurate, as long as you don´t see the psychological imbalance as that huge of an issue anyways, I won´t bother talking about them.
What I would ask you for tho - especially if you consider having adult conversation about ideas etc. with other people in the future - is to be more gentle and polite in your posts. Stating that a game mode - that is widely considered as good, and in my eyes has a lot of potential - is **** is ok if you post it as part of your opinion. It´s easy to accept someones different opinion, but
it´s much harder to just ignore things that are stated as “facts” from people who aren´t in the position to do such a thing.
[QUOTE=onYn;511579]What I would ask you for tho - especially if you consider having adult conversation about ideas etc. with other people in the future - is to be more gentle and polite in your posts. Stating that a game mode - that is widely considered as good, and in my eyes has a lot of potential - is **** is ok if you post it as part of your opinion. It´s easy to accept someones different opinion, but
it´s much harder to just ignore things that are stated as “facts” from people who aren´t in the position to do such a thing.[/QUOTE]
I kind of see what you are saying.
I am truly open to listening to peoples ideas and opinions and I honestly do respect them. I do feel people misunderstand my perspective though… Take Pepsi for instance (the drink), I love it and I drink far to much of it. So sure, in my opinion Pepsi is a decent drink. However, when you look at it from a more technical perspective… Its a drink that contains far too much sugar, addictive levels of caffeine and is produced and sold for a HUGE profit. Me loving the drink does not mute any of them points. Lets be honest, we all love something that we know is crappy. If I could force Pepsi to create a drink that tasted exactly the same but had no sugar, gave you a boost without any caffeine and was half the price… I would do it…
Basically the positive needs to outweigh the perceived negatives in order to reach a mass market.
I can completely understand and respect that a bunch of people really do like Stopwatch mode. How ever is it a big enough bunch to ensure the game produces enough revenue to survive… I personally don’t believe it will be. Sure, I could be wrong about this. I just look at what is in front of me and assess what I can of it. For multiple reasons, these are bad modes.
So yea, please believe me when I say I respect your opinions and I understand that we all like different things. I try my best to deal with numbers and triggered emotions and decide what I believe the outcome will be.
That´s what I meant. It´s cool when you think that something does have more bad aspects to it then positives but at the same time there are others who actually probably do the same in the exact opposite way, as long as you state it as your opinion and not a fact. I for example would bet my entire savings on stopwatch being not as bad as you think it is, and probably even better then anything you ever came up with, and that´s why you usually see me using the phrases “I think”, “I see”, “probably”, “usually”, etc. very frequently. Because no matter how sure I am of myself there is no way to actually really judge which way is “better” since both won´t get the same chance to proof themselves anyways.
This is where I do have to disagree with you…
You can quantify good and bad simply by understanding the goals the game mode has set.
ie,
Balanced… - I have already done many threads about this and recently had my concerns confirmed by Anti with the win rates. If you want something to be balanced and its not, its a BAD thing. So not simply an opinion.
Tug of War… - Back and forth game play is both exciting to play and watch… Sure, this can be SUBSTITUTED for informative, personality driven, funny and other things. However in a sports setting, this is one of the most used and proven ways to increase a person excitement levels. It allows the people watching to be mentally involved by making predictions in their head. There are many reason why Game Shows (on TV) use very similar camera angles, pauses and formats. Its why people slot machines and gambling are so addictive. Swinging peoples emotions is a science that can be done right or wrong. Dirty Bomb does this wrong… This is also a BAD thing.
There are hundreds of individual points that can be broken down into a good or bad thing. Sure, this can be subjective if you look at it like “how many bad points does it take to make a mode bad”. The way I get around that mentally, is have a few aspects that I consider cannot be bad and if anyone of them is… I call the whole mode bad. These are… Balance, Tug of War, Pacing and Skill/Learning Curve… I honestly believe that no matter how good a mode is if one of these is fairly bad it breaks the whole experience and limits the game.
So not only are you copy pasting logics from various things all other the place - something that you criticized me heavily for when I was active on the forums some time ago. But at the same time I could argue on some of your theories being rather inaccurate. Even if I would come to the conclusion that every single argument of how easily good and bad can be categorized is reasonable for me, I will ask you if you really think that you are not only smart enough to make up theories like that (and I can see that they all have some reason behind them), but also see yourself as capable at applying ALL of them properly. At the same time you would need to analyze every single aspect you are facing to a level where you can say that this and that is bad considering EVERYTHING that could be done outside of those specific things in order to understand how they could work out in an optimal scenario, to judge if something truly is really just bad.
I think that is exactly causes so much hate between various groups of people who discuss topics concerning game development. There are usually many reasonable explanations for why this and that may be good or bad in general, at the same time those things can be achieved by tuning different things arround like the seemingly “obvious” cause. And I actually think that many of what you are saying would improve the situation overall - but it would also change up a lot what could lead to an even bigger slump - and in my opinion there are other points that can be changed up, in order to allow a mechanic that you would call “corrupt” to fulfill it´s purpose in ways that you not always will be able to predict and maybe would be surprised how well it can workout given the right circumstances. The same obviously applies for my thoughts as well, leading me to the conclusion that there is no definitive good or bad as long as you are not an savant who is capable of thinking thousands of steps ahead on each individual point (simultaneously quanti- and qualifying them) concerning a single aspect and on top of that considering all the interactions this changed aspect of the game will have with everything else.
First off, let me start by saying that I never once claimed I could create something better. If I could I would be a billionaire right now…
Not being able to do better does not make your criticism invalid though…
I would like to also point out that NO I am not smart enough to come up with these theories…
Hence why I spend many hours each day reading, watching and testing stuff out…
If you want a look at my reasoning behind game pacing take a look at some of these…
Behavioural Game Design:
The Skinner Box:
Why you play and why you pay:
http://business.financialpost.com/2013/07/30/candy-crush-saga-why-you-play-and-why-you-pay/?_lsa=32ea-313e
Beyond Pacing:
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4032/beyond_pacing_games_arent.php?print=1
Thoughts on Pacing:
http://www.davidmidgley.net/2013/12/thoughts-on-videogame-pacing/
Why slot machines are addictive:
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115838/gambling-addiction-why-are-slot-machines-so-addictive
I could continue >.<
Sure I inject my own findings and experiences into my posts.
The vast majority of my reasoning’s however are formed of pure research and “science”.
If you want to turn gaming into pure science and biology…
SD’s job is to release lots of dopamine into our brains and manage to turn a profit…
Stopwatch mode is leaving my brain high and dry…
I think that is exactly causes so much hate between various groups of people who discuss topics concerning game development. There are usually many reasonable explanations for why this and that may be good or bad in general, at the same time those things can be achieved by tuning different things arround like the seemingly “obvious” cause. And I actually think that many of what you are saying would improve the situation overall - but it would also change up a lot what could lead to an even bigger slump - and in my opinion there are other points that can be changed up, in order to allow a mechanic that you would call “corrupt” to fulfill it´s purpose in ways that you not always will be able to predict and maybe would be surprised how well it can workout given the right circumstances. The same obviously applies for my thoughts as well, leading me to the conclusion that there is no definitive good or bad as long as you are not an savant who is capable of thinking thousands of steps ahead on each individual point (simultaneously quanti- and qualifying them) concerning a single aspect and on top of that considering all the interactions this changed aspect of the game will have with everything else.
This part I actually agree with you on…
You can force poor aspects to work by changing other things. That is exactly what SD are trying to do now…
Fixing the bad systems design by forcing the maps to work within the highly restrictive bounds created by other aspects of the game…
I am also not saying I would always be right when it comes to my predictions.
I do attempt to look many steps forward and back to see how each change would effect the game but no one is perfect.