ClockworkOrange

Testers
  • Content count

    298
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ClockworkOrange

  • Rank
    Treepie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    West Coast

Recent Profile Visitors

386 profile views
  1. TBlair won't admit Stamina Knight was a bad idea. You are exactly correct though and it was a bad idea.
  2. Sounds like a low skill ceiling healer that is better than the higher skill ceiling druid. For that alone, I don't like it. Also, sounds like too much auto targeting. Tanks and Healers are not the roles for easy to play classes. These are classes who have to focus on their team as well as the enemy (more so than DPS) and require a higher skill level to play by default. If you want to make low skilled characters (which I find shocking because currently every class is) please focus on DPS roles. Since Tanks and Healers can turn the tide of a battle, they should require a higher level of skill to play. Please start making this game harder to play. Just reading the abilities makes this sound easy to play.
  3. I like that you are creating conversations. Don't let haters like me stop you. It seems like less new threads pop up because this salty forum crowd likes to smack everyone down. Good day Sir
  4. Snarky messages are sort of my thing. Maybe I overreacted in my response, but that's because I thought it was a terrible idea. My friends won't touch early access games because they have been burned by "endless beta" before. People quit early access games before they are "complete". Releasing a game early is not good for the long term sustainability of the game. This game already looks like it will be released early. Crowfall already has limited content (it has what it needs, I am not insulting it but lets be honest) This game is entirely focused around combat. Having all combatants in before launch will allow us to come to some sort of healthy balance. If the game is highly unbalanced (which is easily caused by having missing classes) at launch everyone will leave. What people want on these forums is often not what the typical gamer wants. A typical gamer wants to spend money on a completed product. When they find there is missing parts from what was advertised they are highly disappointed. They will ask for refunds and stop playing before this game has a chance to go anywhere. Not trying to be rude, but most of us see your idea as obviously bad. I don't know why we need to spell this out for you.
  5. I like everything you are saying. Just don't make it so dark that people have to gamma exploit to see anything. If they have to, they will. What is your solution then?
  6. Yeah lets release early. Get everyone to quit before the game is complete and ensure they never come back. This works every time. This sounds like a you don't want to wait for the game and your intended class is in it so, eff everyone.
  7. If you have played a competitive PVP game with nighttime before you know the problem with this. I honestly like nighttime to be dark with limited visibility. Unfortunately people exploit by adjusting gamma. It is real fun when you are running around at night and someone you can't visibly see (didn't adjust gamma) is killing you and clearly has no problem seeing you. For this reason you need to brighten up the night so we don't have to gamma exploit. This is a competitive PVP game, do you really want to hear in a nighttime raid "alright everyone adjust your gamma....."
  8. Just don't force people to adjust gamma for 50% of play time. Need to brighten up the night.
  9. This is how I am starting to feel as of late. I disagree with a timeline of 1-2 years to reach the end of the game. I know part of this creates specialization, but the other part hides aspects of the game from players for months. As you mentioned people quit hardcore games in droves which leaves you after a year with players at the top and a lack of a catch up mechanic. Well they say a catch up mechanic is to come. What does this really mean though? Are you going to allow people to instantly gain a year of training? If so, specialization will be lost at that time and the game will become flooded with alt accounts. I am starting to think a UO type system with a skill cap is a better alternative. Let me be MAX in two weeks to a month, but limit me by a skill cap that doesn't allow me to have more than 100 pips invested or some number like this on any one character. This creates the problem of alt accounts and lack of specialization, but a strong catch up mechanic will create that down the road. Currently I see alt accounts as less of a problem as they have always existed and you can't do much to prevent them. One man with 10 alt accounts is still less effective than 10 players. Nobody complains about a guild cap, why complain so hard about alts? Both create a power advantage due to the import system. I don't like ALTs, they are just unavoidable in a passive skill gain system.
  10. Most changes are great. I don't say positive things enough, so great work. As much as a I like the darkness, could you please brighten it up. I say this because if you leave it this dark, it will lead players to exploit giving them an advantage over those who don't exploit. Played Rust? Knight needs a third stat pool. I feel like you just don't want to go back on the "Stam Warrior" change.
  11. Which is also a potential problem. The reason I used the example I did is because anyone can do that as it is a simple macro. Macros can then be passed to guildmates so anyone regardless of technical ability can use them.
  12. Yeah, sorry I realize that looks directed at you. It was not at all. I appreciate your contribution.
  13. This depends on what the group meta is. Say the group meta is 3 damage dealers and 2 support characters. Since the 3 damage dealers aren't adding anything to the group (like group buffs). It makes more sense to remove 1 damage dealer and put him in a different group and replace with a bard weaving songs through a simple macro. This increases your overall team size while making each individual character within the groups stronger (by addition of the bard buffs). Other examples of this are heal bots. Place heal bots inside walls in your tower and now group members can run to healing stations during the fight. Obviously this is a simplified example of a rather complex issue. There is a lot of min/max calculations that need to go on to see if there is more incentive to replace a group member with an AFK bot. If there is, this is game breaking for me as I won't tolerate sieges ruined by bots. I started this thread to point out a potential problem and have a discussion on it. You might even call it a general discussion.
  14. You are using 32 accounts. You are attempting to break the game. I will not talk to you about what is and what is not game breaking.
  15. Advanced bot? Lol. You could create a macro that rotates bard spells and the class doesn't have to move. I'm not fear mongering, I am pointing out potential game breaking issues. Once the population leaves due to game breaking issues, they don't come back. Ignoring issues isn't a solution.