Vectious

ACE Development Partner & Investor
  • Content count

    1,423
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

Vectious last won the day on July 14

Vectious had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Vectious

  • Rank
    Raven

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Oklahoma City

Recent Profile Visitors

1,606 profile views
  1. Indeed, they would change the way the class would be played. Duelist could go dual pistols or full melee. Confessor could get a melee version that instead of long ranged directed, his/her effects would radiant in a small area from them. Or a melee shield variant that halves all her range on abilities. Basically instead of just adding stats or skills, change the dynamic of their base tool kit, and like Coolster said, allow or modify their equipment allowance.
  2. 2-to-1? Just myself, my 'power per person' or ppp, is 5-to-1, with out any additional accounts. Playing blind folded, with one arm is a sling. I got alot of ppp.
  3. Hit a 30k query, was in game for a good 2 hours then they restarted their servers and now back in a query. PoE has gotten huge, lol.
  4. I agree, i have voiced my opinion on the matter alot, repetitively. People have argued both directions, and i am of the opinion, anything that requires live player interaction and not to much grind, is a plus. Unfortunately, what we are up against is a rather large game mechanic that ACE simply does not have time/funds to fit in before the release.
  5. Email Support. They can rebundle it for you which should allow the upgrade.
  6. Such a shame, thats where i prefer to hit it.
  7. I think the LMB is a bygone technology/mechanic of the old root motion mechanic. I think its the 'gap filler', something to do between using abilities. Just...they sorta made it a bit too strong on some classes. But i am actually more worried about huge change to ray cast. Or maybe its the combination of the two?
  8. Well thats not true at all. You wont even have access to Bard in the ungeared/early stages of the game. The runestone is a part of the gear, after all. But seriously. If the bard buff was 15-20% damage increase, you would literally have to make this a requirement in any group comp. Theres going to be hundreds of runestones, that just doesn't make sense. Diminishing returns is extremely important to min/maxing. A single buff in a game with hundreds if not thousands should not always be the best pick. Also, you have to think about balance. Its a group buff, toggle ability, no cooldown, a guaranteed boost, it should statistically weaker then a temp buff with a cooldown, a flat value makes it more reliable for balance. Debuffs are more tricky though. Its actually the reverse if you scale debuffs. They hurt people with better gear/stats then without. Most games i have played debuffs scale, buffs do not, and the exception to buffs scaling is tiny increases, like 5% damage increase. Unless its a temp buff with a cooldown, then they should use separate rules for obvious reasons. (Or movement speed of course)
  9. Honestly, i would be more concerned with the 2 week skill nodes that give 10 support power then buffs. But its pre-alpha it might of been a oversight with scaling all support power effecting stuff with the new baseline. The non-scaling is important to builds and min/maxing. Otherwise, always selecting that buff for your loadout is a 'must'. There is no diminishing returns on that decision, its always the no brainer because its a percent increase. But if its a flat increase then at some point, as your character gains in passive stats and gear and such, statistically, the buff is no longer as effective and replacing it with something else is the better choice. (But yeah currently with those scaled up baselines it feels underwhelming out-the-gate.)
  10. Yeah its not even fun anymore with this derailment.
  11. Learn English I hope. Or perhaps we can learn how to un-bug the game. At least the memes are funny.
  12. Hmm? Never claimed you guys didint do well taking advantage of a bug.
  13. I think you misused the term 'pushed back' when we held the objective. Thats a defensive term when holding the line against aggressors. But yeah, i liked how the entire time the slider showed order winning when you were fighting over a already claimed objective. It would of made more tactical sense to go claim a keep that was not already under your own factions control If the system was working correctly you had lost the moment you chose to contest a already occupied objective. I guess in this game, due to the bug, two wrongs did end up making a right.
  14. Yeah i think the term 'holding off' is misused in the situation where someone already holds your objective. Obviously we had no reason to push any advantage, we had the objective. Just due to a bug wasent able to capture it and move on. Unfortunately, due to the bug, time dragged on forever and eventually we were overrun once you rallied enough people. Heres hoping you can rely on like-same bugs for good video footage in the future, yes?
  15. ^ And its another layer of technology they would have to create on a ruleset whim. While possible, just not efficient. Anything could happen though.