Recent posts by Valkjosandi on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [Dev] What is best in life?

B > C

Absolutely against A and D, especially A.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [Dev] Proposed Conquest changes

Originally posted by Philosopher:
Originally posted by ralkkdillon:

Also, all of you are forgetting that the developers do have minds of their own. There are many of them and they are all hardcore gamers…do you really think they just sit back and let us tell them what to do?!?!?

We all spent countless hours and pages upon pages upon pages of discussions and balancing. The bottom line was what the developers wanted for their game, how they envisioned it being played. Try to think about this from an outside perspective – do you think the devs envisioned conquest as a bunch of factions sitting on a map, not fighting each other? I cannot imagine any developer wanting that for their game.

And yet you convinced them to make a bunch of changes that DETER attacks, once again! There are pages of discussions — I’ve read some of them — and all of you discuss among yourselves from a very narrow perspective. What I find amusing is how you guys ask each other if anyone in the forum disagrees, and of course you rarely do, because you all share the same perspective and agenda. Everyone who would disagree with you is excluded. It’s bad for the game and it’s the reason there are once again silly rules proposals that will do the opposite of what the Devs want.

Are you a Consortium member? If not, who has leaked the private discussions restricted to the Consortium forum?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [GUIDE] How to open the Tyrant game directly without loading Kong

Originally posted by 00craigs:

Is there a Canvas equivalent on Armor Games?

That is a good question. Someone in #agtyrant over at Mibbit might know!

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Tyrant Now On Armor Games!

Originally posted by Destilio:

is there a forum or a chat?

There is a chat, yes. If you know how to use IRC, the server is irc.mibbit.net and the channel is #agtyrant. If you don’t, you can use the Mibbit web interface by going to http://chat.mibbit.com/ and typing your desired nickname and the channel (“#agtyrant” without the quotation marks) in the respective text fields.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Tyrant Now On Armor Games!

Originally posted by Bascule2000:
Originally posted by Valkjosandi:
Originally posted by Cid84:
Originally posted by mcv9:

he is still hanging in the arena, but his units are just ordinary gold pack units, like havoc
its not wrong image, it does have s 1 and chaos

I hope they ban this asshole …

<3 you too! And you’d know the vault is open to everyone if you came to #agtyrant, as stated by catepillar just a couple posts ago.

I don’t see the core vault (the place where you might find Lord Halcyon) on Armor Games. I see only the promo vault, with 4 terrible cards, and rewards vault. So where did you get Lord Halcyon, if not hax?


Originally posted by catepillar:

Just because you can’t see it doesn’t mean it isn’t there.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Tyrant Now On Armor Games!

Originally posted by Cid84:
Originally posted by mcv9:

he is still hanging in the arena, but his units are just ordinary gold pack units, like havoc
its not wrong image, it does have s 1 and chaos

I hope they ban this asshole …

<3 you too! And you’d know the vault is open to everyone if you came to #agtyrant, as stated by catepillar just a couple posts ago.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Where are people going?

Originally posted by p4n1q:

“Less” is a mass count. “Fewer” is a count noun.

No, “fewer” is not a noun. Please allow me to explain! The grammatical category of nouns can be construed either semantically or syntactically. There exist many slightly disagreeing accounts, both semantic and syntactic, but virtually all of them can be pared down to something along the following lines.

Semantically, nouns and only nouns have criteria of identity, whereby they can serve as standards of sameness. To illustrate, the expression “X is the same ___ as Y” is meaningful if and only if the blank is filled by a (common) noun: That is the same card as you saw in the other deck. The following examples are ungrammatical (the asterisk is customarily used to denote the fact that a sentence is ill-formed):

  1. * That is the same long as this.
  2. * I saw Atlas the same sing as you did.
  3. * I watched that card the same do an animation as this card did.

This shows that adjectives and verbs do not observe the criterion of identity. Now, let us perform that test on the word “fewer”, which you happen to have referred to as a noun. Here goes: * That is the same fewer as earlier.

And now, for the sake of completeness: syntactically, X is a noun if and only if X is a lexical category and X bears a referential index, expressed as an ordered pair of integers. Hopefully, explaining this will not be necessary as not many people are comfortable with theoretical linguistics and especially Chomsky-style theories of syntax.

The closest the word “fewer” comes to a noun is when it performs the function of a pronoun, as in the following examples: Fewer continued playing Tyrant than were expected, Few know and even fewer care about the words they use. Its other role is that of an adjective: These guys read fewer books than those guys (although the classification of the word “fewer” here may be controversial, see e.g. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language by Huddleston, Pullum et al, but it is most definitely not a noun here).

Hope this helps!

And if it doesn’t, it might be helpful to remember the following rather simplistic rule of thumb: in English, nouns prototypically inflect for number and case (apples, but * fewers), they characteristically function as head in noun-phrase structures; and various dependents (certain determinatives — a, the, every, — pre-head adjectival phrases — good news, but * good fewers, — and relative phrases — cards that strike) occur almost exclusively with nouns as head. The following words are prototypically nouns: apple, cat, car. The following are not: to play, blue, fewer.

Finally, applying the principle of charity, one might be led to believe that you could have been referring to the prescriptivist so-called rule. To which I can only provide a link to this excellent answer by nohat: http://english.stackexchange.com/a/505

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / The "Ask OOH" thread

Where does the Holy Bible stand on the atomic theory controversy? Are we to side with Zeno of Elea or with Democritus of Abdera, whose atomic theory was conjured in part to refute Zeno’s aporia? It has been pointed out to me that the second verse of the Book of Genesis — “the earth was without form” — does in fact state that there are no such things as atoms, for if the matter of the earth were atomic, it would have had the form of the atoms.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Happy Holidays from the Evil and Eviler Alliances!

Originally posted by inorix:

0’0’0 is at it again ^^

[CONQUEST] 9E, 3N is invaded by 0’0’0, owned by Time is Mana

I suggest 0’0’0 abandons all their tiles to prevent further “mistakes”.

Bumpity-bump!

An hour and a half of protection left as of the moment I am bumping this. With haste, folks, observe the 0’0’0 in their natural habitat! Note their plumage! Marvel at their sexual predilections! Only 15 WB!

 
Flag Post

Topic: Kongregate Multiplayer Games / [Heavens] new years medals

My medals are not working either. Screenshot attached.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [Dev] Conquest invasion issue

Originally posted by uizito:
Originally posted by kkk1234kkk:

does synapticon get a penalty, too (because of not able to fix a bug that is known for months) ?

+1

+2

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [DEV] 10/25/2012 Terminus and Halloween 2012 Release Tomorrow!

The Tyrant Dev XML has been modified. It has this now:

<item_pool>
<item id="103" p="10" amount="3"/>
<item id="152" p="10" amount="2"/>
<item id="1051" p="1" amount="1"/>
<item id="201" p="5" amount="1"/>
<item id="301" p="5" amount="1"/>
</item_pool>

. . . which is 5/31, or roughly 16% chance of one Awakening shard per completed quest.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [DEV] 10/25/2012 Terminus and Halloween 2012 Release Tomorrow!

Wrong. Each of those items has the same odds.
It’s 20%, not 3.7% (which would be technical suicide on the devs part if you were right)

Well, first, one doesn’t have to assume that the developers are nice. Second, instead of getting technical about probabilities and weights, let’s see what the current Kongregate XML looks like and how it compares to common sense. In the non-Developer XML, we have:

<item_pool>
<item id="103" p="10" amount="3"/>
<item id="152" p="10" amount="2"/>
<item id="1051" p="1" amount="1"/>
<item id="201" p="5" amount="1"/>
</item_pool>
<item_pool>
<item id="301" p="1" amount="1"/>
<item id="301" p="1" amount="2"/>
</item_pool>

1051 is the ID for Full Energy Refill, and 301 is, as mentioned previously, the ID for Awakening Shard. Thus, we have 1/(10+10+1+5) = 1/26 ≈ 4% for Full Energy Refill, 10/(10+10+1+5) = 10/26 ≈ 38% for 3 Artemis Generators or 2 Hive Capacitors, 1/(1+1) = 50% for 1 Awakening Shard, and 1/(1+1) = 50% for 2 Awakening Shards; which squares nicely with our experience. Hope this helps.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [DEV] 10/25/2012 Terminus and Halloween 2012 Release Tomorrow!

Originally posted by Shadowhopeful:

Heads up – There will only be a 20% chance of getting an Awakening Shard from Daily Quest. Good luck.

I believe it’s been long enough since the announcement, so . . . Please allow me to put forth a slight correction. Namely, in the Tyrant Dev XML we currently have:

<item_pool>
<item id="103" p="10" amount="3"/>
<item id="152" p="10" amount="2"/>
<item id="1051" p="1" amount="1"/>
<item id="201" p="5" amount="1"/>
<item id="301" p="1" amount="1"/>
</item_pool>
<item_pool>
<item id="302" p="1" amount="1"/>
<item id="302" p="1" amount="2"/>
</item_pool>

301 is the identifier for Awakening shards, 302 is the identifier for Terminus shards. So unless the developers add last-minute changes to the XML, the chance of getting a single Awakening shard from a Quest equals 1/(10+10+1+5+1) = 1/27 ≈ 3.7% per completed Quest, which is lower than the chance of getting a Full Energy Refill now.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [To the Devs] Please be smart about the "buffing"

Thanks, this is a well-thought-out analysis. Personally, I’d go with Option 3 just because I have heaps of old unused components, but I guess newer players might find Option 1 preferable.

I support this.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Dev please fix this deadly bug!!!!! conquest invasion cheating

Nice. More ways to prevent players on the same team1 from being, well, a team2. Keep them coming!

The system is fine as it is.

1. de jure
2. de facto

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Dev please fix this deadly bug!!!!! conquest invasion cheating

So, to summarize: some people are a little bit upset that a highly organized attacking faction has an advantage over a less organized attacking faction. My sympathies, I would probably be upset too. It’s only human, after all. But . . . it doesn’t really make sense, now does it?

IMO, this is not a bug but a feature: lose more if you cannot get your players to be hyperobedient, win more if you can. Trying to conquer non-neutral tiles is already hard as it is. We see factions failing everywhere on the map.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [Dev] Big Announcement - July 24th

Originally posted by synapticon:-Stamina cap will be increased to 500. At 1/min, this allows players to max stamina spend by playing every 8 hours (and 20min) rather than forcing players to play every 1h40m to maximize stamina usage.
-We will be removing the option to use WBs to recharge Stamina. This will keep gameplay competitive and enjoyable for all.

I love the sound of this (and that it’s 500 stamina, and not some ridiculously low figure like 250 or, heaven forbid, 100). I really do. Now, what’s the catch?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Post Active Raid Links Here


Sentinel Reborn #10958
Join | Status | Suggested decks | ?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / First Day Quest Drops

Nothing except gold. Oh, and that energy refill after the patch.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [Proposal] Make the components buyable for 50 Loyalty each

Originally posted by SesiC:

Almost every components are very easy to get. The only exception is gateway node. In my opinion huge amount of quitter will be appear in near future only because of gateway node.

Well, I absolutely hate live battles. Waiting 20 or even 30 seconds for someone or their computer to pick a card is literally torture. And this isn’t going anywhere unless you find a way to upgrade people themselves: people are slow, and some even do that intentionally to frustrate their opponents. I haven’t been touching tournaments with a long pole for that reason, and I am not alone in this. And then there are those people in Level-10-and-below factions who have a snowflake’s chance in hell to get Artemis Generator, if I remember correctly. So that reasonably makes Gateway Nodes, Capacitors, and Artemis Generators if we are placing a limit on buyable components. And I can already sense someone who has completed the raids but loves tournaments think, “No, capacitors are OK, let’s make Nexus Beacons buyable instead.”

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [Proposal] Make the components buyable for 50 Loyalty each

Originally posted by TheTrio:

I don’t think we need to increase the trollage potential of catfacing even more…

On the contrary, if you can spend your loyalty down and keep it close to zero or at around 2500, the trollability of catfacing is decreased. Losing less than 2500 LP isn’t as bad as losing more than 20000 LP.

Originally posted by kagrunz:

But if we can buy components with them, all faction leaders and their best men will have heracles NOW and I really dont wanna see that.

I don’t see any harm in that.

First, we have to remember that not that many people are over 20K Loyalty now. In the grand scheme of all things Tyrant and particularly in the context of faction wars, the Leaders’ and Officers’ having or not having Heracles doesn’t count for much compared to the damage output of the rest of the faction. What is two or three people when 50-player factions are at war? Unless we are talking about heavy WBing, but then it’s another reason for the devs to implement this proposal.

Second, like with pretty much any so-called OP card before, the players collectively will find a way to counter Heracles when it becomes important enough to do that (which isn’t important when only 2 people per faction have it). The meta game will shift once again. No big deal, everyone moves on.

Third, everyone else gets a tangible chance to lay their hands on Heracles at a nice steady rate of an additional 1 or 2 components per day.

Fourth, spending 22K Loyalty gets you exactly one card: Heracles. What about Longshot? Or those three other cards? No, sorry, you are out of loyalty, mate. Quoth the devs, ‘Grind some more.’

Care to elaborate?

Originally posted by Tidgy:

why? what do LP and components have to do with each other?

Well, if we are bringing this up, what does a CCG have to do with crafting?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [Proposal] Make the components buyable for 50 Loyalty each

Originally posted by pacachomp:

but this really discourages people from changing factions which, from a community perspective, is a good thing imo.

How so? People with 20K+ Loyalty are discouraged from changing factions right now. They are reluctant to lose that precious figure, which isn’t even remotely useful. On the other hand, if you buy components with your loyalty points, you spend your loyalty down to something like 2500, or even zero. Now this low of an amount of LPs is a horse of a wholly different color: you might as well join another faction because 2500 LP doesn’t take as long to grind as 20000 LP. Thus, as I have already stated,

this also encourages interfaction mobility

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [Proposal] Make the components buyable for 50 Loyalty each

I have been playing this game for almost a year now, and I am already running out of steam. As we have witnessed on multiple occasions, top players who reach the end-game stage quit after having played for a year plus-minus a month on average.

Just to give a little perspective, they usually reach 15K+ Loyalty and Level 120+ by that time if they have been loyal to any one faction and have been active almost every single day. (And no, I am not generalizing from my own personal example: I am at ~24K and ~140, respectively.)

So if you have reached the end-game stage, you have already spent a year on this game or thereabouts, and grinding for another 5 or 6 months sounds like an insult. How to alleviate this? Suppose a player had 15K loyalty, and if the components were buyable for 50 LP apiece, the player would be able to buy 300 components. You need a total of 445 components to get Heracles. The remaining 145 components are still quite a grind, especially if you are in a lower-level (11 or 12) faction and hate tournaments, but not insultingly so.

Most importantly, this also solves the as-yet remaining problem of dumb luck and being in Level-10-and-below factions for the players who have just started: 50 LP/day guarantees them a component/day. Not a huge amount, but something to work with. And as a beneficial side-effect, this also encourages interfaction mobility and gives a solution to the issue of deadweight loyalty.

Plus, as we all probably know, most of the income generated by the game comes from players who are active in faction wars.

Thus, I propose to make the components buyable for 50 Loyalty Points apiece.


EDIT: As per a suggestion by hunterhogan (Thanks!), you can vote on this proposal here: http://synapsegames.uservoice.com/forums/141585-tyrant/suggestions/2785659-make-the-components-buyable-for-50-lp-apiece

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Development Problem

Oh, and mine, please!