ClockworkOrange

Testers
  • Content count

    356
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ClockworkOrange

  • Rank
    Treepie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    West Coast
  1. We all understand that. Why would you want it as a built in system to the game when P2W is generally accepted as a bad thing and harmful to games.
  2. This is my concern, but it is getting ahead by P2W type means. Crowfall was advertised as an MMORPG that took out the grind and allowed players to focus on PVP. We were told we would have passive training and there would be no balance affecting mechanics between VIP and non-VIP. I took this to mean we would be on an even playing field and we got to focus on skill and tactics. What I see now is a game where paying more money gives an obvious advantage. Added systems that cause the type of EVE 28K skill injector scenario. People often quit PVP games when they realize they aren't on an even playing field. Every competitive PVP game is designed to be on an even playing field (LoL, CS, PUBG, Overwatch). The problem is, player skills currently are not a huge factor in the outcome of a battle. The skill ceiling has been created extremely low in Crowfall (another complaint of mine). This low skill ceiling pushes more emphasis on passive skills as I have very little potential to outplay you. This means the group that has paid for additional passive combat skills will almost always win in an even match up (think 5 v 5 of same classes. Only 1 group has VIP (double profession training) or has bought tomes to advance their skills past the other group). The P2W advantage will be the greatest factor in the outcome of this fight. In my opinion, that is unacceptable and against what I thought Crowfall was advertised as. The low-skill ceiling, lack of REAL friendly fire (third huge complaint of mine) and P2W mechanics = Largest ZERG with the fattest wallet is king of the castle. Totally OK with your points spent each time you enter a campaign world. It creates an even playing field in a PVP game which outcomes of fights should be mostly determined on player skill and tactics. If you felt insulted by my comment, it was not my intent. I was trying to make a point to Kith that him easily 2v1ing people is somewhat of a joke and not a representation of what should be happening. I would recommend waiting till 5.3 as much will change, population should increase and skills will be wiped putting you on a more even playing field. I still haven't seen any argument why allowing two mechanics that offer P2W potential is good for anyone aside from ACE (and I argue it is bad for them). Some claim it helps them keep the game open longer, but any P2W potential keeps many people from ever touching the game. I have a group of 5 friends who all ask me about the status of this game. If I were to tell them these P2W mechanics were introduced they would lose all interest immediately. If they truly make a good game, they will have no problem of funding. Overwatch has no monthly sub and has actively continued developing. ACE can add all the cosmetic crap in the world if they need money. Take advantage of the nerds obsession and vanity to make money, don't ruin your gameplay. It might not seem like it, but I badly want this game to succeed. I honestly feel ANY P2W passive skill training potential in this game = dead game in a few months. I will be paying for VIP and I see the problem of me having more power than a non-VIP (dual profession training).
  3. Why make an overly complicated solution of diminishing returns when the easy fix is a skill cap that requires no brain power or understanding of the game when pitched to a customer? Tomes in my opinion isn't a great social option. If we want more of a social option develop a mentoring system. I believe it was Tinnis or someone who proposed something like this recently. I am OK with a mentoring system being used as a catch up mechanic, as long as their is a skill cap and mentoring doesn't lead to increased power. I am far from a socialist and play video games partially as an escape from the poorly made socksty politics of the world I live in. Please don't bring it in here. But if they benefit the game by preventing P2W advantage why spend any time or effort writing about why they aren't necessary? I don't get the "ACE will fix it if tomes become a problem". Why not just fix it now with a simple skill cap? ....Still failing to see why adding a skill cap is a bad idea.
  4. Impossible? You don't seem to know what lengths gamers will go through to exploit any advantage. But why even allow It? The only reason is for ACE to make more money. I don't mind tomes as long as they can't make someone statistically more powerful than a VIP player who started on day 1 and never missed a training session. Money shouldn't create power. That is basically the definition of p2w. I don't understand why you would want that ability in this game unless you just like to blow real life money to give yourself an in game skill advantage.
  5. I honestly just find this funny. You are playing idiots and you must be a class that naturally is better than the other 2. There is very little skill involved in Crowfall. If you think you are outplaying them like a genius you are full of yourself and wrong.
  6. That wasn't what was advertised. From Crowfall Kickstarter: "Other cool (non-balance affecting) benefits as we think of them! " Is giving VIP 2 Professions vs the non-VIP 1 Profession balance affecting? This is a Yes or No answer. It is also obvious and if you say No I will call you a liar. Then there is this from EVE, their inspiration for Crowfall apparently: http://massivelyop.com/2016/02/15/eve-player-uses-28000-of-skill-injectors-to-create-max-character/ I don't want this ^. I don't want anything like this. So I go back to this, the Zerg that pays the most will win Crowfall.
  7. I also think the tomes are easy to fix, but the entire Q & A where they were announced we were constantly reminded by Todd "We really think we nailed it this time". Now you might call me a P2W purest, but I hate any advantage gained by throwing money at the game. EvE does this and I think it is poopy and its a move of a greedy company. I liked SUB based games and I was sad when that model died and was replaced by item mall/p2w bull poop. Now when the head guy of a company tells me "We really think we nailed it this time" while introducing TWO P2W mechanics (Double professions for VIP and Skill Tomes) I feel we should all grab our pitchforks and torches and strap Todd to a post and tell him we aren't having it. If you don't speak up now, there is a good chance the proposed system will be adopted. They did say they were actively developing with our feedback and I feel that they have actually done that (I GIVE YOU MANY KUDOS FOR THIS ACE).
  8. I have no problem with you calling me out. I think the truth might be somewhere in the middle of what we are both saying. I have played UO and have played Darkfall and have watched players rage quit the game because they were killed and lost their loot. This is somewhat comparable to Crowfall, but not completely as gear is only somewhat permanent and the focus of the game is to engage in these PVP encounters. PVP players learn that everything that is in your inventory is not yours. It is only yours once you bank it. This is what hardcore PVP players who play EVE, UO and Darkfall live by. This mental reasoning allows us to go out again and again and lose our gear in combat. We decided the gear was gone the moment we equipped it or went out to PVP wearing it. You bring up PUBG, but this is far less comparable to Crowfall. In a Battle Royale you have NO EXPECTATION of keeping any of that gear beyond your current match. This is what allows peoples brains to justify losing the gear. There was 0 ownership because in 20 minutes it is all gone and the game is reset. It is not a persistent world. Crowfall is probably somewhere in between both of our examples. Semi persistent worlds with import/export restrictions and different campaign rule sets differentiate it from my examples, but I still believe it is more comparable than PUBG that has no persistence beyond that short 5-30 minute round.
  9. Heresy!!!
  10. It seems like Crowfall always tries to mimic EVE, so lets use that as an example. Day 1 accounts are worthless compared to 5 year accounts. I quit EVE because it took too long to become PVP ready. I either had to P2W or sub for a few months prior to trying to PVP to be able to play. For some reason Crowfall is copying this model, when they have created a PVP focused game. Lets keep in mind EVE only gets away with their Sub based, optional P2W currency because they have created an amazing game. This game model doesn't exist anymore and I think its foolish for Crowfall to copy it. The problem is they introduced a P2W system and in my opinion they broke this game until they get rid of the P2W system. I understand that your skills are supposed to be a shallow power curve. The problem with that is the vet player will already have a leg up by understanding more game mechanics and skills and knowing how to counter them (Think LoL. The more champs you have played, the better player you are as you know how to counter people). Now we are letting people buy up their skills so they have an inherent power advantage before we even get to the understanding game mechanic advantage. This RUINS the new player experience. I am one of those weird people who will get their ass kicked over and over and keep coming back and I see the potential problem in this. Many gamers die a couple times and get looted and they are done forever. I understand you not liking the passive training only, but coming from PVP games like UO and Darkfall that encouraged macroing (had to do it to compete) I actually think this could be good if implemented well. I like the fact we are all on an even power level and that is part of the reason my MMORPG PVP often gets replaced with Survival type game PVP (even playing field). I also think we are too far along for Crowfall to try to introduce active XP without going back on promises and making major changes to the game.
  11. What about a Total Skill Cap plus a moving skill cap. Once the moving skill cap reaches the total skill cap, we remove the moving skill cap? The total skill cap doesn't solve the P2W option presented by tomes. That is what I want to address. I think Tomes are P2W because they allow you to gain skills faster by spending money (basically the definition of P2W). I believe VIP allowing more profession training than non-VIP is P2W. I honestly think its not debatable, there are some who would say it is.
  12. The reason I like the "someone who started on day 1" metric is because it helps keep the power curve even. I know Crowfall handles this differently than many MMORPGs that we are familiar with, but it is still a potential problem. In a traditional MMORPG some players will grind hard in the beginning to gain an XP advantage (in Crowfall this would be the P2W advantage of buying more skills early on). New players join the game and fight one of these players and lose all their gear. Regardless of whether the skill difference caused the loss or not, they blame unfair mechanics for the loss. The more they die, the more they blame the game for unfair mechanics and they leave. New player retention has always been an issue in PVP focused games and this new player experience is often what destroys player retention. If the players know that there is this mostly uncapped P2W advantage through tomes, they will always use this as their justifying reason of why they lost the encounter. If there is a known skill cap it gives them an attainable goal (which they can work towards) and the knowledge that you can only be "X" good. This mental reasoning helps justify their losses and prevents them from blaming the mostly uncapped P2W advantage that skill tomes provide. I also like straight skill caps due to games like Ultima Online which imposed a flat 700 points with 100 being top level in any one skill. The problem with Crowfall currently is it takes sooooo effing long to train anything. This still leaves a huge P2W advantage as it will take a lot of time for someone to reach that skill cap. This leaves the potential of one player having 700 skills (through P2W tome advantage) while the average player is still sitting at 300-400. For that reason I prefer the "someone who started on day 1" metric.
  13. I used to assume ACE would fix obvious issues without being told they needed to. I no longer believe that.
  14. Catch up mechanics don't give you the ability to have more skills than someone who has started on day 1 and never skipped a beat. Skill cap anyone?