Constructive Criticism

For the King!

Constructive Criticism

by pc09 » Wed Mar 29, 2017 3:15 pm

Each iteration of the KR games has shifted the balance from tower defense to hero micro. The original KR was about tower selection, the hero was support. By frontiers, they were at least equal in importance and the hero was more important in some cases like veteran heroic and iron challenges. By origins, the hero was more important. I remember things like the airplane guy soloing early waves with just his attack, or basing entire level strategies on specific hero spells, then having to memorize exactly when to cast that spell on certain waves.

What made this all worse was that the later games were for mobile. Micro is questionable as is for tower defense but it's even worse when you have to tap with your thumbs. Not only is it tedious, it's hard to aim your thumb taps on a small touch screen. The steam versions make the micro more manageable with a keyboard and mouse but at the end of the day, why micro that much to begin with when the game is tower defense?

I understand that some players may like a more hero micro oriented game. I further understand that developers have to eat and that hero purchases are a great way to earn income. Most importantly, I understand that it's their game and that they have every right to take it in whatever direction they see fit. The purpose of my thread isn't to make demands. The purpose is simply to voice how I see it, one opinion among many. My hope is that if enough fans see things the same way, the developers take it into consideration.
User
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:54 pm

Re: Constructive Criticism

by RaZoR LeAf » Wed Mar 29, 2017 5:52 pm

I completely agree with you on the first point. I think it's because Heroes always reset to level 1 before each new level that makes them a better support feature, as they get built up through the level at a similar rate as the towers. Frontiers and Origins take this away by allowing you to enter a level with underpowered enemies with an overpowered hero. It renders the weak starting towers useless as the hero is doing all the work. I can't imagine IH reverting the Hero system back to level resets, but an alteration to the way EXP is gained or points shared out may help to balance it.

I can't comment on the second point though unfortunately. I primarily play on an iPad, so rarely have a problem with the difficulty you present in micro tapping (but I do understand where you're coming from, I can't type on an iPhone keypad without having to correct 50% of the words).

Also, welcome to the forums! If you have any questions or problems, feel free to message either AerisDraco, BigBadBug, or myself, we're your resident friendly mods (with zero ties to Ironhide).
Image
Yes it's me
User avatar
Moderator
 
Posts: 2732
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2013 10:05 pm
Location: Wales, UK

Re: Constructive Criticism

by Big Bad Bug » Wed Apr 05, 2017 2:05 am

Interesting topic. Welcome to the forums, as well! :D

Heroes do end up taking a lot of the glory in levels both in KRF and especially KRO. It makes levels really hard to balance when heroes are so drastically different. I feel like some heroes are just unusable on certain levels because of how much they matter yet how diverse they can be. Of course, having diverse heroes makes them a lot more fun, but there's so much less strategy involved in missions like Duredhel Outskirts because I just get used to where to put the hero and use spells at certain moments. After beating it for the first time, the same strategy I used didn't work with Eridan after using Reg'son. The same goes for other levels and heroes.

Honestly, I don't really care about maintaining hero levels throughout the whole campaign. I know Ironhide hyped up the fact that heroes can be leveled up through the Hero Room idea and it did seem fun at the time because of that, but, looking back, I realize now how much that messed with the missions. The issue of fully-powered heroes rendering early missions completely non-threatening is a worse version of what star upgrades already did, but now both are present.

A combination of the Hero Room (since it's not going to go away now that it gets added to with each game) and KR1's system of leveling with the pace of the towers would hopefully fix this. Maybe players can select how the hero levels up by putting skills in order of when they're unlocked and increase in power per level-up, and then see that in action as the hero levels up from the beginning with each new mission. :?:
BBB
User avatar
Moderator
 
Posts: 7815
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 5:22 pm
Location: Your worst nightmares

Re: Constructive Criticism

by SealDarklight » Wed Apr 05, 2017 1:15 pm

Yeah i felt the same problem despite the fact that i havent played origins yet. It feels much easier to play with you hero on frontiers compair to the first game but the enemies are too easy. They should have made enemies far more tougher and towers more unique and usable like the first original game. It makes the game nearly like an RPG and the game series feels like a mix between RPG and Tower defence except the hero automatically plays and does the job well. While the first game had problems with the heroes early on since one part dies easly, other doesnt deal that much damage when you needed to and there xp resets when you start another level. The heroes later on had easier but not as easy as the frontiers since the enemies are as jelly as than the first game and weak comparison. I mean Savagers are the weaker and less tougher than Trolls and Saurians speed is bare and there even more of a joke than demon spawns were. The original was a joke with archers since most enemies were armored and mages were expensive and the most common were brigands with medium armor wich punishes you for not using mages but here theres no armored enemies early on.
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 484
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 6:40 pm
Location: In the Deep Dark Woods

Re: Constructive Criticism

by PitNata » Wed Apr 05, 2017 7:23 pm

I don't know how to react, but i agree more or less to this. KRF & KRO was very integrated with the Hero Room, which was in fact difficulty when your hero gets leveled up lower, and stats with abilities wouldn't unlock so fast, if not were you're losing a single level every time, which in turn you would get an pre-upgraded 10 lvl Hero which packs a punch and just go through the enemies like it's having a chainsaw. it would ruin some of the fun, as your hero would now acting like a Mobile Tower on steroids, crushing foes like the bugs. While it was quite a bit of fun that Hero would have so much details on abilities and as such, mostly you could get a minimum of towers around which are all upgraded to maximum, while you carry around your hero with plenty of Reinforcements. KR1 Hero's were not so detailed, but were in need of towers to back them up, mostly helping it to get a level every time, which you could play normally, like you didn't even have a hero at all. They were like all Elite soldiers with ability to move freely, but very fragile, that they could even stand against many enemies. They brought more fun to some extent, as you would be more careful rather being careless and hoping it does do the job.

It's not like i do a lot of micro around it, but selectable abilites on which it could get, Hero always at 1 level would make more sense to make, rather to make again a Hero which could get upgraded and become very powerful
I'm modding Kingdom Rush. :geek:
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2016 2:16 am
Location: Afganistan, Kabul

Re: Constructive Criticism

by TheLightBringer » Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:05 pm

Perhaps there should be a hero level limitation in early missions/challenges

I agree about some points, but it all comes up to the question of how powerful heroes should be.

Personally I dont think it's bad if you take a very high leveled hero into one of the earlier missions and it would do most of the job, it kind of makes sense doesn't it? an experienced hero should be stronger than a couple of basic archers/mages on a tower, or than a bunch of farmers/recruits.

To some it may be funny/ironic to see a hero struggling against an a bit tough unit, while if a hero could beat a strong unit alone it would seem too overpowered to others.

If I would be the developer of a game, I'd increase both the level cap and experience needed to reach it massively higher. This way having a low leveled hero who wouldn't be very powerful, and having a high leveled hero who'd be that strong to be able to deal with some hard enemies (not too many though) makes sense. And this way you wouldn't have too powerful heroes in earlier levels than they should be.
Just an example to clarify everything - I would've done it so there would be a hundred levels on a hero, and experience needed to level up raises with every level, to a point when your hero is level 40, it would barely get any experience (if any at all) from killing a so called "level 1" (or a very basic) enemy.
Now it would make more sense if a level 100 hero could slaughter the very first mission by its own, but wouldn't be as tenth as powerful in a mission which fits his level.
Yea, it would make the game vastly bigger - if you want to have more content with heroes there must be more content with every other aspect of the game : towers, maps and enemies, but isn't it what we all wish for KR? :hero:
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 168
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 9:07 pm

Re: Constructive Criticism

by Manijure » Sun May 07, 2017 3:19 am

I can see where you're coming from. For Frontiers, many of the later stages in a campaign run can be finished easily with a high-leveled Hero, especially Alric, who can whale through enemies quickly. When it came to Origins, however, I think the devs realized some of the issues with Heroes taking all of the spotlight. As such, they made enemies more anti-Hero (and anti-barracks), many of them ranged and/or appearing in hordes. For me, I felt that it fixed part of the problem of the Hero leveling system, making you rely on your towers much more than you did in Frontiers.

Anyways, welcome to the (somewhat quiet) forums! I hope you'll enjoy your stay, especially when Iron Marines updates are coming soon!
"Carpe diem. Seize the day, boys. Make your lives extraordinary."
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 907
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: Somewhere

Re: Constructive Criticism

by Sinque Productions » Sun May 07, 2017 4:58 pm

Here's an idea:
Heroes start at level 1 during the mission like in KR, but can choose upgrades, like KRF and KRO, but during the mission. (e.g. at each level they gain coin points to get the upgrade(s)) I think it would keep the best parts of heroes in KRF and KRF (upgrades and micro) but make them less early powerful.

And tower selection needs to be more critical again. KR is a difficult but fun gain. KRF and especially KRO make it easy.

If I would be the developer of a game, I'd increase both the level cap and experience needed to reach it massively higher. This way having a low leveled hero who wouldn't be very powerful, and having a high leveled hero who'd be that strong to be able to deal with some hard enemies (not too many though) makes sense. And this way you wouldn't have too powerful heroes in earlier levels than they should be.
Just an example to clarify everything - I would've done it so there would be a hundred levels on a hero, and experience needed to level up raises with every level, to a point when your hero is level 40, it would barely get any experience (if any at all) from killing a so called "level 1" (or a very basic) enemy.
Now it would make more sense if a level 100 hero could slaughter the very first mission by its own, but wouldn't be as tenth as powerful in a mission which fits his level.
Yea, it would make the game vastly bigger - if you want to have more content with heroes there must be more content with every other aspect of the game : towers, maps and enemies, but isn't it what we all wish for KR? :hero:


The grind on this seems awful. It is bad as it already is, and it isn't any fun. Additionally, making heroes the strongest thing makes KR pay to win. And Ironhide is poor and can't make a ton of towers, maps, and enemies (although if they created a fan editor for a steam workshop type of thing, that might fix that problem).
The above message has been sent by The Killian Experience version of Addy.
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 9:10 pm
Location: Addy's secret lair.

Re: Constructive Criticism

by TheLightBringer » Tue May 09, 2017 11:31 pm

Sinque Productions wrote:The grind on this seems awful. It is bad as it already is, and it isn't any fun. Additionally, making heroes the strongest thing makes KR pay to win. And Ironhide is poor and can't make a ton of towers, maps, and enemies (although if they created a fan editor for a steam workshop type of thing, that might fix that problem).


Not very precise. You can divide monsters to (for example) 3 different levels - low, medium, and high. Then make the monsters grant experience respectively to their level. If you want to gain levels as a hero, you could do it with either killing TONS of low leveled monsters (namely : grinding), or you might as well slay some high level monsters, which would actually grant you enough experience so you won't be aging while trying to get your hero to the maximum level.
(Of course such system could be more complex than just 3 levels. Besides, there are other creative solutions to getting experience which one may think of. Like adding some quest system. Or giving the Achievements actual rewards. This list can go on and on and on)

Making heroes the strongest thing does not necessarily make KR pay to win. Only if the only way to achieve them would be paying money (and even then it's up to debate - you can actually make free heroes just as strong as other premium heroes, and many more factors).
Personally as a fan I'd prefer it so all heroes were free (in exchange for some other content changed to "premium"), and even though I didn't really try to think about it from IH's pov, this opinion allows me to see things the way I see them right now.

About Ironhide being poor, I believe in their future :)
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 168
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 9:07 pm


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 80 guests