Duffy

ACE Investor & Tester
  • Content count

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Duffy

  • Rank
    Magpie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

391 profile views
  1. Well the simplest format is combat characters win campaigns, you only get to export resources if you win, therefore it is in the best interest of crafters and combat characters to work together as they will have distinct specializations and limits on their time. No one is going to turn away a combat character simply because they're an 'extra' combat character. If your gonna be helping me achieve a goal I'll make damn sure your equipped as best as I can provide. This game is probably going to be about 75% resource/PoI raiding and 20% Sieges, combat characters will be very useful very often.
  2. Minor update: tweaked the menu to actually work so it's visible now. Nothing special accessible by it yet, but figured I'd add it while I'm setting up the next tool's page's layout. Also fixed a few more transcription errors and lack of cross references resolving properly for a few items due to naming oddities. The issue with harvesting tool Sigils and Runestones not finding related recipes has been reported and will take some data model changes to resolve, will fix it in the next few days.
  3. I'm a little surprised more people haven't straight up said 'play with people'. It would take about 6-7 accounts to be self-sufficient (also assuming all your classes use similar gear across crafting stuff) AND time efficient starting day 1 which means you need to split a lot of your attention to be self-sufficient, thus it's not really efficient at all compared to working with other people. Which in turn means some level of specialization will have drastic logistic and efficiency gains, therefore your best bet for anyone interested in staying competitive is to work with other people. That's it, one way or another you'll need to deal with people, lots of different ways to go about it, but ultimately it boils down to being useful enough at something that people will trade your effort for their effort. You can go check out the Guild forums to find organized groups if you want to go that way, there are plenty with various themes floating around.
  4. PvE is hella expensive to create and far more difficult than giving us PvP mechanics. For a game on a relatively tight budget, it's just out of scope for anything too involved. On top of that they are aiming for a PvP niche that isn't being filled right now, therefore it's not a useful target for them anyways due to desired game-play they must have and the costs it would add to include. Right now the PvE in the game is basically moving resources nodes and minor threats to keep you on your toes, I wouldn't expect much beyond that without some radical gain in funding and even then maybe not. A bit more on topic: any mechanical disadvantage that makes room for a comeback is still a tax or penalty, its a way to negate the advantage that was originally given. If that's the desire, just remove the advantage in the first place. However, that would also mean winning a campaign has less value as the gains can't be reinvested into winning another campaign, thus it's unlikely they would remove the CW where you can import some advantage. However, I do expect them to tweak the details to adjust for any issues or imbalances that arise. As I said before, the setup of the CWs is very very good for adjusting to any major problems that arise. I don't think this particular 'issue' is worth worrying about until we have way more information about how Imports/Exports work, how a campaign will play on a strategic level, and what the win conditions will actually look like.
  5. Those are overly complex (neat but sound beyond the scope of what is planned for the limited PvE) and boil down to a victory tax that I suspect would end up being trivially gamed. If the potential advantage is that big a problem, just remove or reduce the advantage from existing in the first place. You're somewhat dancing around the problem that the theoretical blob is always going to have an advantage, and that's a simple truth in a sandbox. The blob will always have some sort of advantage unless there are 'hard' arbitrary gates on how much a blob can bring to bear on a particular endeavor. That sort of hard limitation is generally frowned upon in a sandbox. The lighter touch solution to that sort of problem is to instead do stuff like mitigate power projection and respawn mechanics, or make larger and larger numbers inefficient to supply or direct which makes it easier to nibble at the edges. It doesn't entirely mitigate the advantage of the blob you're facing, but it does take the edge off and require them to play well on top of having the numbers. If all goes well in the end the numbers just create a better buffer before failure versus guaranteeing straight up victory.
  6. However Imports end up working is going to strongly hint at how 'bad or likely' a problem like this could ever actually present, but complexity of the map and win conditions can also heavily mitigate this sort of potential problem. For example it doesn't matter if you can win every fight if your team ultimately needs to win 10 fights all over the map at the same time and can only be in 1 place at a time. It would require a pretty spectacular series of mechanical and social failures for such a lopsided victory to happen easily, and thankfully due to how the CWs work, if it did happen it should be a temporary state. The nice thing about some of these design choices is that if it did become a recurring issue ACE could make adjustments for the next go around without having to alter large swaths of the existing game, it would feel more natural from both a dev and player point of view.
  7. Just a curiosity most people don't seem to bring up but 'tab' targeting or any target locking style system (even ESO actually uses a target lock system they just hide it well) is a performance enhancing technique, it cuts down on a lot of server communication overhead. Now it's far easier to do without nowadays, but it does have an impact as the number of people fighting in an area grows. It's not entirely about preference or style.
  8. I prefer this sort of deck and hand setup on a personal level, that said practically speaking it's not really any different than what your talking about. There's a mechanic limiting how many abilities you can 'use' instead of how many you can 'learn', the end result is you only have some subset of all the game's abilities available. How you 'hotkey' and what not is beside the point. I think the distinction your looking at has more to do with how characters are fundamentally made versus how the skill system works, in Crowfall it's all very closely tied together and importantly easily swappable (relatively speaking) compared to something like SB's system. This system has more in common with how EVE's ships work than it does with some other games. Comes down to a preference/design thing really.
  9. Very true, the high level max summary will stay, we'll just expand on the idea to provide a little bit finer grained information without having to dig through all the component recipes. Due to the way the recursive query works we have all the data, we're just summarizing it right now so if we can come up with a nice clean way to display it we can hopefully clarify some of the numbers.
  10. It's a known sandbox problem that's been tackled in many different ways in many different games, right now I haven't seen any particular decisions that imply Crowfall has it's own unique solution to that specific 'problem'. However, we also have none of those high level campaign mechanics yet and what little we know is very hand-wavy and theoretical. The other usual 'bad' scenario for mega guilds is stagnation, however due to the limited campaign time and what should be clear victory conditions that particular case should be mitigated. So ultimately they just need some sort of mechanics that mitigate the value of the almighty blob at some arbitrary point, right now we don't have enough info to really answer the question.
  11. First thanks! As for the recipe details we're working on cataloging all the recipe 'outputs' next which will provide the baseline for that sort of information and for the optional components it will provide the information for the next major feature. The goal is that you'll eventually be able to slot in all the optional components (plus quality and experimentation points) and see the final stats for an item before you even start gathering or shopping. Right now we're planning to cover base items (no optional components) ASAP to get that basic info in there. Look for things like Metal Bar, Metal Sheets, Stitched Leather outputs to appear over the next couple days and the base item stats to start appearing over the next week or so. Since the latter requires a bunch of in-game activity that will be at the whims of the servers being up and our schedules not conflicting with that, I'm not sure how long it will take. For the resources that's a good point. Once I made the query and looked at the results I wasn't that happy with what it was conveying, but expanding it is non-trivial so I slapped the baseline in there for now. We're going to add a section to the recipe page that shows the resource breakdowns per component and shows you what the breakdown amounts are. So for example instead of just saying 20 Ore summarized it will say you need 10 Ore per this type of component that you need two of, but each one takes that ore in two 5 Ore chunks. We ended up going over the layout of that page most of last night. The recipe component icon layout may look a bit odd at the moment, but it's actually mimicking the crafting screen layout. We just have to put in the buffer space, but to do that we need to standardize the icon sizing a bit better. Goal is to look just like the game screen's layout so it's obvious and easy to reference. Overall daily to weekly iterations will be fairly common. The recipe related images were all created by cutting up screenshots from the game.
  12. I noticed mine grayed out today when I logged in to check something (well after I posted) they must be doing an EK reset for the next test. Check back in a day or two for the weekend test, hopefully it'll be available then.
  13. Tonight's update fixed a few data whoopsies and added the Maximum Required Resource summary to all recipes. After some debate I think we're going to expand the Required Resources to be a bit more involved to cover the fact that you'll not only need that much of a particular resource type (or specific resource) but you'll need to break it up into chunks of particular sizes. But I wanted to get the quick version out there as it's still a useful high level view of what you'll need to gather.
  14. You'll need to re-import your parcel and building stuff after each inventory wipe. I think they even sometimes wipe just the EK related stuff but leave the SB.
  15. I was assuming they were already laying around in vector format for their uses. If so allowing us to deal with resizing and converting to other types would save them some effort and give us superior output for minimal effort. If their default in some other format I'm uselessly rambling; but I'll take whatever I can get, whatever is the most convenient for them that gives us value would be awesome.