Is everyone attacking simultaneously in your game? If so, that's not the intended behavior. Can you try if the build in this link https://zittacheng.itch.io/uploadtext (password: REDACTED) fix the problem for you?
That build (both web and PC version) should theoretically fix the problem, but I can't be sure because I can't find a PC with the correct culture setting to test it...If you have the time, can you check real quick whether the build works for you? You've been a great help, thanks for still sticking with this game!
Hey! Sorry to bother, but just a quick question: In your game, is there any delay between followers and enemies' attacks? Or are they just sort of attacking simultaneously?
Are you playing the download version? If so, can you send me the logs at C:\Users\username\AppData\LocalLow\DefaultCompany\HolderOfPlace\Player.log right after the death effect failed to trigger? Someone else reported this bug earlier but I think it has something to do with PC settings. It'll be super helpful if I can take a look at your logs!!
Definitely. And I think the majority of the problem stems from the lack of an alternative of attacking and attack damage (i.e. spell damage vs minion attack in hearthstone). Because in current deck you always have to kill enemies with followers' attack damage, support followers end up feeling like "regular followers that can't attack" instead of their own completely different thing; Even sculptor is sort of like "turn all support followers into 2/4". The dynamics between support follower's trait damage and active follower's attack is one of my faction concepts, and I'm really excited to create a deck where support and active follower has equal weighting when we get to factions.
Hey! Any chance you can provide me with a log? I checked the parsing and that doesn't seem to be the issue. Checking your log is probably the only way for me to potentially figure out the issue and it'll be super helpful! :)
I think either it's something I'm completely not aware of or it has something to do with your language setting messing up with parsing numbers (e.g. your language use comma for decimals). I think I had solved it in earlier builds but maybe the newer codes messed it up again. If that's the case, the web version shouldn't have the same problem. I'll double check all my parsing code later.
as for what's YOU, uh...future narrative content will help with that
Is that only for that one run or every run? Either way that's really weird. If it's for every run, then the game should create a log at Users/username/AppData/LocalLow/DefaultCompany/HolderOfPlace. It will be super helpful if you can send me your log right after a death effect failed to trigger! (e.g. just start a new run, buy a supplicant and make it die in combat)
You can just post it here or email me at zittacheng@gmail.com
I'll have to double check but there's a chance that prospector's trait doesn't interact with familiar at all, nor does familiar interact with other familiars. This is for the most part a technical constraint, and I haven't decided on what to do with it yet
We'll probably start working on factions only after reliquary, but current plan for second faction is to have a hero card and make everything else revolve around the hero. Third faction is followers with magnetic tag from hearthstone.
Thanks for the feedback! Glad you love the game and like, these are all really valid feedback and I really appreciate it! I want to follow up on several points you raised: not to say a certain piece of feedback is good or bad (they're all good!), just to provide some context as to how we made some of the decisions for the new version.
A lot of your feedback is somewhat tied to the faith/core health rework, which is probably the most impactful change we made. In the old game, faith is intended as a checklist mechanic: the player will have different faith caps at different points of the run, and are expected to more or less cap their faith; although they can achieve that through different means, and maybe increase their faith demands with certain cards like apprentice, but the game is designed around the player having a specific amount of faith income each round.
But this created a lot of problems when we tried to expand the game and add more cards. If we balance the game around a faith cap, then it means that the player should always have ways to reach their current faith cap, which will force us to design the faith generation cards and non-faith cards separately, and always keep them at a consistent ratio (which is exactly how we designed the cards in the old version). While it's easy to design a bunch of unique non-faith cards (with mechanics like random damage or summon), the design space is very limited for faith generation cards. I suppose we COULD have gone the route of having temporary/permanent faith, having followers interact with faith cap, or using other means to make faith more complicated, eventually, the decision is to make faith, or at least those generated by followers, to have the same weighting as other mechanics.
So the idea of the new faith system is that recruiting faith generation followers should be a strategic choice rather than a necessity and that the player should be able to beat the game without any faith generation from followers. We tried to achieve this with enemy faith drop being more substantial and random event options. Ideally, there should be builds where the player will buy high-value cheap cards with enemy faith drop and afford expansive core cards through skipping and faith injection from random events; or, to recruit tons of faith generation followers, BARELY winning every fight due to recruiting another supplicant instead of a templar, and get to big tech cards while still in early game (we'll still need to analyze the playtest data from the past few days to see how viable these playstyles are). We want to get to a place where we can design faith generation cards just like any other type of card, and don't need to worry too much about having an imbalanced number of faith and non-faith cards.
Only showing affordable cards is a byproduct of the rework. If I remember correctly, in the old version the game would occasionally show one card that costs more than current faith but less than faith cap. The assumption in the old version is that the player will be able to afford that card next round if they try. At some point, this feature existed in the new version as well, but I removed it because it constantly made me feel pressured to have a positive faith income, which is not the goal. But this 100% makes locking and planning build worse. I'll probably need to try a lot more things before I can decide how to solve all this. Maybe like occasionally having a recruit event that only shows high-cost cards or something.
Refresh is another thing we struggled with. Having refresh as a basic mechanic works best if the player knows what exactly is in the pool. But we really don't want to pressure the player to memorize every card, or even to constantly check a menu listing all the cards. This is one of the design goals for this project: to create a card game that is more fast-paced and free-form than, say, a deckbuilder. The current plan for refresh is to make it like Hades 1, where you can use tokens to refresh. For example, maybe a follower with "When recruited, gain +3 refresh tokens", so it's less of a basic mechanic and more of a situational/preference thing.
Tbh permanent buff and support follower is more or less the same as faith rework, where we are trying to make something not a necessity. Permanent buff followers definitely still need a lot of tuning -- it seems like they are still somewhat necessary for perfect runs. For support followers, the idea is that we want the player to keep getting more capacity throughout the run, but also want to make follower count part of the build, so that aoe effects like flagbearer can have variable value in different builds. We end up with summons and support followers, which is essentially trading 1 capacity for passive effects. This idea will definitely be further explored when we get to factions, where we plan to create archetypes with maybe just one or two active followers.
Valid suggestion! If a big warning sign is implemented and it still can't sufficiently inform players aspect can't stack, then maybe we should just disable applying duplicated aspect. But doing that will certainly make the game less intuitive and make some effects weird (like archivists, or "the next aspect will have double the effect" -- this one not in the game yet). But hopefully a big warning sign can solve everything!
Glad you enjoy it! We decided against having a community discord because managing that will likely be a lot of extra stress :( Maybe when the game is in a more complete state!
If you are talking about aspect, then yes: they won't stack but the new aspect will replace the older one! We received a lot of complaints on this so will definitely add a more explicit/noticeable warning on a later update!
1. Yes, O and 0 are considered the same. Also i and 1.
2. Sadly no, Ctrl + C and Ctrl + V works fine on the desktop version, but doesn't work on WebGL. Something about not WebGL can't have access to the clipboard?
