- Sep 15, 2018
- 837
- 3,521
Yes, the save file helped. Thanks.Thanks for the bugfixes! I hope the info I linked helped.
Yes, the save file helped. Thanks.Thanks for the bugfixes! I hope the info I linked helped.
It actually "just" takes a relly long time for the next screen to show. Just leave it running, get a coffee and when you are back it should have loaded.- After defeating the 3rd Boss (the ExBoss Women) on the cow-run, the game freezes and has to be closed.
A reverse Image search and some further rummaging got me all the way to a Pornpros watermark, but that's the amount of effort I'm willing to put into it.Also, if anyone knows where the image from "Lick It Up" (89) comes from I'd love to know. Not having a lot of luck Googling Sophie Dee + blue tarpaulin...
I agree with the caveat that in Animal Girl you take it immediately. The difference between a 3 cost and 2 cost Dog/Bunny/Cat Girl is immeasurable, and the sooner you can get the "In Heat" cards online the better.Just Skip:
- Permanent Makeup: the Permanent Pile is not nearly worth it to spend the TF.
I can't really say much for the Sissy deck mechanic but I do have a decent understanding of how it works.Is it just me or does the sissy deck/mechanic not work very well? I can't seem to get it to work, or rather, I guess I'm confused. cards that have a "lock" I use when locked for no effect, and the one that is close>open>closed are kinda confusing...I can't tell if it doesn't work or if I just don't understand how to work the sissy deck mechanic
That was enough, thanks! For the record, it's from Cumshot Surprise.A reverse Image search and some further rummaging got me all the way to a Pornpros watermark, but that's the amount of effort I'm willing to put into it.
Anyone who's played a fair bit of Slay the Spire (or some other competitve card games, but this game feels more like it's drawing from STS) can see that a lack of resource cost on playing cards pushes the meta heavily towards card draw, which you've pointed out. But there are some extra layers of strategy that the ascensions provide that I think help balance some of the things you have a problem with.Liking this quite a bit so far, though I've spotted a couple of things so far:
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.
I've pretty consistently had the end of story lag something (closeto)fatal when deck size gets too high, pretty sure it's the "this is the deck you won with" showcase which does it, but I have yet to get solid verification on this.
In terms of game feel there's also a couple of thoughts I have:
This comes from the perspective of me having found that the best way to play is to get a whole bunch of cycling cards, which help drown out the more useless basic cards, and then trying to inch through the various ranges and gathering as many good cards as possible.
All of the Transformations feel like there's been some good work put into them, they feel unique and so far none of them seem to out of whack with the others (though some that rely on Yellow do come off a little worse for wear).
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.
A reverse Image search and some further rummaging got me all the way to a Pornpros watermark, but that's the amount of effort I'm willing to put into it.
I explain this so often I should really have a stock answer somewhere, but here's why removing cards from your deck is very limited. As the game is based around your basic cards transitioning what resource they give you, removing basic card can break the game. If you remove all of your basic cards, you can make it impossible to buy new cards later on. That's why it's mostly late brain cards that remove basic cards, because if you're buying expensive brain cards late you're probably mono-brain anyway.
Because of this, the only way to improve deck quality is to buy more cards, so removing non-basic cards is generally detrimental overall. That's why this game doesn't support removing cards as a core feature like in other deck building games.
This makes draw cards very powerful, which is fine, but the biggest problem is that drawing cards and taking as many turns as you can is the best way to improve your card quality through theme upgrades as well as win. In .9 I have plans to overhaul how theme upgrades work to make stall decks give you less upgrades in the end. How many cards you draw and play will have nothing to do with how you upgrade themes, but rather how few turns you can beat your opponent in.
I disagree. Having your game mechanics create unexpected fail states through natural play is bad game design. It's not like falling in a pit in Mario, it's like losing an adventure game because you missed an item an hour ago. Having to balance getting rid of cards and still being able to play the game is definitely more skill intensive in that it's something you need to learn and pay attention to, but it's bad design.I say let people destroy their own decks. Failure is a learning experience. People generally get mad at dying from falling in pitfalls when it feels unfair. When a game shows clearly what is going to happen when you do something and then you do it and destroy yourself people (usually) don't blame the game, they blame themselves and work to do better next time. I fully stand by giving people all the rope they need to hang themselves. But of course, you've done a great job with the game so far, and I trust in your decision making. It stands as a testament to it's quality that I and so many others that generally don't like the TF fetish still play this game so much.
In regards to your Xcom2 comparison, the new system would be positive feedback, not negative. There's no punishment for going slow, you just get rewarded for going fast, like the current "rest" period before bosses where you can chose a little buff. So the less rounds it takes to beat the opponent, the more "points" you get.Making powering up contingent on winning faster is a tricky thing. I'm reminded of XCOM2, where developers tried to force players into playing riskier games that would theoretically be more entertaining and engage with a lot of the more exciting aspects of the game. They did it with time limits that didn't allow players to play at the slow careful safe pace they would have played at otherwise and the idea got a generally negative reception.
But then they switched things around a bit to rewarding players for finishing faster, rather than punishing players for going slower (which are effectively the same thing if you stop and think about it), and people found it much more palatable. Stupid human brains doing goofy things.
Still, it sounds like it could be an interesting idea, and I look forward to it.
I would argue that it shouldn't be unexpected that removing most/all of your resource cards makes buying harder/impossible in the same way that removing all of your limbs makes jumping quite difficult. But then I would also argue that any adult on the planet should be able to look at an analogue clock and understand how to read it without being taught. So if my coworkers have taught me anything, it's that I overestimate people.I disagree. Having your game mechanics create unexpected fail states through natural play is bad game design. It's not like falling in a pit in Mario, it's like losing an adventure game because you missed an item an hour ago. Having to balance getting rid of cards and still being able to play the game is definitely more skill intensive in that it's something you need to learn and pay attention to, but it's bad design.