Bombing.
(a maximum of six misses in a run without trance is just ridiculous)Play some other STGs and then come back and see how silly this sounds lol
I actually liked IN's way of handling deathbombsWhat about them, that they lasted for far too long and wasted two bombs if you didn't bomb on the first frame?
I'd like to see less "literal" spellcards, if that makes sense.I agree with this general sentiment. I think it's gotten really obvious since TD, but it seems as though ZUN is trying a bit too hard to make many patterns fit a special intention rather than just being thematic, and I think it really interferes with his pattern design.
Play some other STGs and then come back and see how silly this sounds lolhaha yeah, I really didn't put much thought into that.
What about them, that they lasted for far too long and wasted two bombs if you didn't bomb on the first frame?I like the general idea, a stronger bomb at a bigger cost, basically. (I could live without Border Team's minute-long deathbomb timer though)
Rank doesn't affect score in those games besides in secondary ways, no.
And do you mean if rank did work as a multiplier?
I've thought way too much about how to design a graze system that isn't inherently dependent on supergrazing and/or heavy milkingI can see why you'd be against milking, but why supergrazing? Personally I'd say supergrazes are just about the only good thing that could ever come from a graze mechanic in these games, and if you're going to try to avoid them you may as well not bother with a graze mechanic in the first place. The basic idea (if we agree on what a supergraze actually is) is that you're rewarded for performing difficult tricks, which seems like a sound concept to me.
Seriously, the power system does absolutely nothing good for the games. Any of them; at best, it's simply "not as bad"No. The power system is extremely essential, and adds depth to various games of the series. In EoSD, you use the max-power cancel at times to either clear the screen for survival, or gain a major amount of points. In PCB, you use the power items into cherry items mechanic as a way to control your route, and gain extra borders via suicides. It's very prevalent in the game. MoF and SA sacrifice power for bombs, and along that, point-item value. The power management routes are probably more complicated in MoF than in PCB, or at least the former has more delayed PoC's. In UFO, you don't really sacrifice just power (although you can transform power items into point-items and vice versa with the rainbow UFO's), but resources altogether when it comes to gathering more score. In some well optimized stage practice routes, maintaining SanaeB 3-power was required.
Curvy lasers are another example. I mean they are just an element to a spellcard or attack but they are oftenchallenging enough on their own that sun cant really go overboard on the bullets too without making the attack too hard compared to the others, so they probably doom an attack to mediocre visual appeal.(Shou didn't have many problems with cool-looking attacks though...)
I'd like this:Wow. I would play the hell out of this.
Wow. I would play the hell out of this.
I'd like this:
Yeah. Too bad I can't mail this to ZUN (and even if I could, he'd probably reject it anyway since he dislikes being influenced by fans).
Speaking of overdrive spells, I want to see overdrive as an actual difficulty.We already have fan-made ultra mode patch though.
I can see why you'd be against milking, but why supergrazing? Personally I'd say supergrazes are just about the only good thing that could ever come from a graze mechanic in these games, and if you're going to try to avoid them you may as well not bother with a graze mechanic in the first place. The basic idea (if we agree on what a supergraze actually is) is that you're rewarded for performing difficult tricks, which seems like a sound concept to me.I probably didn't explain that too well. Supergrazing itself isn't really a problem; conceptually it seems like a nice risk-skill-reward tactic and is one logical extreme of the risk-reward that grazing systems were meant to be. The issue comes mostly when the grazing does devolve into milking, as is the case in every game ZUN has made whose system involves grazing as an actual scoring factor (rather than say FW, where you graze for recharge). Moreover this seems to be the case for all games with graze-heavy scoring systems that I can think of. Unless you can build a system that limits the graze bonuses you can do in some way (few bullets, time constraints, upper limits on things, etc), a system that allows and encourages supergrazing is generally going to be linked to milking for that graze. Of course there are various tradeoffs usually, just from the difficulty of supergraze tricks or from burning resources, but I feel this doesn't "excuse" it turning into milking things for graze. So when I said "devolves into supergrazing", this is what I meant. This train of thought pretty much assumes my position that milking is awful though, so how other people see this can vary.
For a concrete example, back when we were really talking about this, Naut used this style of grazing system for a contest script. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eI6akRT_ro#t=11m03s)This seems like a cool idea. I'd like to see how it would work in a boss battle.
Reverse power system, power starts off at 100% after you die and slowly goes down to 50% at a rate of 1% per 30 seconds.Nice thought there. I'd like to see a system where power becomes more important to the roles of survival/scoring.
Reverse power system, power starts off at 100% after you die and slowly goes down to 50% at a rate of 1% per 30 seconds.
Nice thought there.Why, exactly? This doesn't seem to serve any purpose besides being a backwards-seeming gimmick. Is it supposed to what, encourage dying? Punish not getting more power items (if this system would have them)?
Why, exactly? This doesn't seem to serve any purpose besides being a backwards-seeming gimmick. Is it supposed to what, encourage dying? Punish not getting more power items (if this system would have them)?
Why, exactly? This doesn't seem to serve any purpose besides being a backwards-seeming gimmick. Is it supposed to what, encourage dying? Punish not getting more power items (if this system would have them)?
Probably like a rank system of sorts pretty much is the idea. Coming from a huge fan of EoSD, though, I always thought rank was a stupid system.I don't see how that's anything like a rank system. It doesn't even necessarily make the game "harder" until you reach a point where your power actually downgrades, and even then it really isn't comparable to the bullet patterns becoming more intense (which itself can be seen as a reward).
Circular for scorerunnersThis statement is objectively incorrect.
This statement is objectively incorrect.
The circular health bars are the best thing about the new games.
Having to glance at the top-left corner in the middle of the action (scoreruns...) = worst.
Still on that, the order of the Stage 4, 5 and 6 bosses would depend solely on the team you picked. They'd be 3 powerful gods with pretty much the same amount of power.I had an idea like this too except I would suggest making the 3 rotating bosses in stage 3, 4, and 5, and then having the 6th be a kinda of trio master (a la pokemon). The reason I want this is because this rotating system lets us say that all 3 teams are fighting the game at the same time. Until they all reach the stage 6 boss at the same time and team up against him in a glorious 9 on 1 defense of fantasy (or however many PCs there are).
If you pick Team 1, you'd face the three last bosses in order XYZ, Team 2 would be YZX, and Team 3 = ZXY. (The same applies if you choose only a single character individually. A character from Team 1 would face order XYZ, one from Team 2 would get YZX and so on).
That would be interesting because all of the three bosses would get enough development in the spell cards department. Either as a Stage 4 boss, a Stage 5 or a Final one. (Needless to say, they'd have different spells depending on their placement too).
1. Total removal of the power system.Wow, this is so true. Good call.
- Reviving old/dead threads is disruptive and often serves little purpose. It's far better off to start a new thread than to revive an older thread that has seen little or no activity in the past week or so. If it's something dealing directly with the old thread, start a new one and link to the old one.