• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dominate

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Orion Spur

Recent Profile Visitors

141 profile views
  1. I think the Dregs are going to be tougher than anyone expects, simply because the devs will be cautious about the markets. Guilds will sprint to where the money is, in the Infected & the Shadow. Hopefully it won't just be zergs and N+1, but so far the devs have been silent. God's Reach has the potential to have the best competition, but the low rewards and spoiler Balance might have the opposite effect and drive away participation. If Viking gets his way and the power curves aren't flattened, Dregs will wind up the "end game" and be ruled mostly by power curves, numbers, time, and grinders. With, of course, some skill and strategy, but not as much as he claims is relevant. Viking himself will still play if something is added that promotes a high skill ceiling. If not, he won't play; I don't agree with others he's here just to stroke his ego. If the power curve is flattened and gear is throw-away, as promised, there will be enormous pressure on the Discipline system and grouping functions to make the game fun to play. Again, Viking is right that boredom will set in. The trees, combat, and everything else is just not interesting enough to maintain interest more than 3-6 months. I agree that the key counterparts to power curves are the import / export rules, resource availability, and Attributes. ACE is not getting my respect yet, in designing systems pro-actively that lock down rules such that other areas can be tweaked. They're doing the opposite - holding their cards close and setting up everything to be tweakable. I'm pretty positive even the basics on the CW page at are completely wrong. They'll have to do something far, far more complicated with CWs if they allow persistent trees and gear, including considering normalizing the CW rewards or tying rewards to CW durations. The details of why are complicated. Keep a close eye on Attributes, and how they'll be implemented such that CWs aren't just the standard "level-restricted zones" in disguise. With low payouts and locked in durations. Ouch.
  2. Current thinking is that the combat per se will not be superb. It will be sufficient for superb group gameplay, whose elements are still mostly TBD. If anything, the best part of combat will be the ability to predict players' actions and counter them despite lag, unlike other tab-targeting spam & FPS systems. You can do that with some skills at the moment, but not most.
  3. Crowfall is right on the tipping point. The state is definitely late Alpha. The current, working skeleton can be fleshed out. Success in 2017 is a nothing more than a Vegas Pick: so far a great start, but too much is implemented mediocrity and unimplemented core. There is no real harm in not testing immediately. Huge features are not implemented and not only is there no Meta to train, there's no prelim balance passes for Archetypes, Exploration and gear. Unless you're just curious, start looking seriously in mid Summer. We'll have all ATs, a game loop, crude campaign rules, and the skeleton of final power curves. Your guildmates goals should be to get sufficient combat experience to make AT selections, dabble in the Discipline system, and chose a prelim Exploration vs Combat role with careful guild advice. Tell your guys to keep an eye on the soft launch date. I'm guessing Fall. Earlier is not a cause for concern, provided you have your # of accounts (and/or VIP) selected and get them training in anything. The earlier they push this out the more major changes will make specific selections moot. p.s. regarding lag vs combat: both are circa 2001 beta. it's still just potential.
  4. Thread tl/dr: McDonald's food is fine as is. If you're lucky, you'll get to see a Clown.
  5. Exactly.. You are pushing for ACE to take their customer relationship seriously. I agree and believe they do. Keep pushing on this angle as necessary, including via email. The point has been repeatedly made that they shouldn't perform wipes that aren't necessary. Re you're not a volunteer and "customer is king", not really You're not only testing voluntarily, you're trying to perform due diligence via such testing, without any guarantees it's any good. Title III gets you little: access to whatever they call testing, a legal/fiduciary responsibility, an Annual Report, and specific (low) tier return on a liquidity event. "Customer is king" is a corporate mantra for hypothetical profitability in mature service markets, not a universal customer right. "Caveat emptor" applies here.
  6. +1 on giving every class a very unique siege ability. Druid's Teleport and Duelist's Burrow would be the gold standards. Champion or Myrmidon could Ram, but if balance is relevant its use must be limited -- it opens holes for entire armies. Ranger Grapple or Assassin Glide could work for up, but preferably not both. After those 4, it leaves 9 more classes. Myrmidon should keep Cast Net and it should yank people off walls, but to avoid the epic fun and instant nerf we had with GW2 players getting yanked into whole armies, we need a defense for it - maybe Dodge. Note such skills are probably too powerful over castles to begin with. Either they need to be weakened, or better, made even more powerful but require multiple ATs working together. E.g. 5 Frostweavers have to first weaken a wall before 5 Champions can breach it. E.g. 5 Confessors can create a super tornado that pushes players onto walls.
  7. If so, I'm surprised they're so easily confused. If the rest of the game is engaging, it's mostly engaging. If not, particularly if harvesting is a large fraction of activity, it's dull. Pressure on, PvP. The game already has code to prove they're somewhat concerned: we're not given big X's on the ground and told to stand there until challenged. Crowfall has above average variety on resource types, but IMO below average creativity invested in the activity itself. It's standard MMO. The question is whether this development is sufficient considering the relative importance of harvesting, and whether we have enough info to know.
  8. Gathering in some games is actually fun. There's still time to make it so in Crowfall, but the window is closing. There was an example tossed out from BDO, but no mention of the good stuff: roping horses, hunting whales, etc. Hundreds of ways. I'm not sure they should make it fun, vs just not make it tedious throughout a campaign. ACE should know, based on their knowledge of where players are designed to spend their time. We don't have POIs, sieges, caravans. I'm more worried about harvesting being boring at the end of campaigns, and again and again in EKs and future campaigns. That is enough for me to simply not want to harvest, period.
  9. Perfectly reasoned, which is very appreciated. With due respect, I think you're right only if the competition around nodes is as interesting as you hope it is. If not, then even a toggled F is exactly the type of dull, repetitive cliché we should replace. Not by re-inventing it, and not by adding in more irrelevant, repetitive mini-games, but by going back to basics: engaging, dynamic, consequence laden content. As another example, try Everspace, where mining is the usual asteroid crap, made interesting by numerous small tweaks: the imminent arrival of something-as*-kicking if you got too greedy, revealing resources by scanning, collision in tight spaces, the use of harvested resources immediately, space mines, etc. The game is single-player, but they obviously knew what they were doing, incl just copying FTL. I pray the competition is epic.
  10. Most of the numbers bandied about are for advanced, fully equipped (but still crap) gear. The disparities are far, far worse if you don't have gear, or if you're using crap abilities vs good ones. I suppose we could go into the absolute worst case, but it's not going to get us very far.
  11. p.s. How do you sync your point of view with the Uncle Bob Risk example? Think the devs are on your side... that 500% is flat enough for them, too? Curious your thoughts.
  12. I think I could buy that I could see it. When I see a Capital Ship in my freighter, I flee or call in back-up. A newb in EQ1 knows very clearly where not to be. Crowfall has none of that - no inspection, no size differences, no zones, nada. Terminator CWs will drop you in naked. Sounds a bit of fun to figure out who's The Man ... once, maybe twice. Or I could buy into it if we have to craft it all, after we drop in. 33% starting position, 5000% ending position.
  13. Let's just ignore the sh!tty players & imagine everyone has equal arena-skill (tactical selections in balanced starting scenarios). Who cares otherwise? We should also not let this thread be side-tracked further on various types of game-skill within the Rules: obtaining gear, joining a guild, analyzing the Trees, predicting markets, spying, zerging, etc. These vary wildly and discussions of capping them are valid - elsewhere. The OP seemed to be discussing simple power curves due to being able to gift gear and earn passives. Another non-thread area: discussing "exploits" we're actively trying to minimize which mimic real skill: bugs, 24x7 grinding, simultaneous multi-boxing, RNG, paying to win, forum warfare get the nerf you want, etc. Start a thread! I and others threw in damage numbers not because the thread is about damage alone, but because it's what we've got.. The OP made a general, across-the-board appeal for 25%. Adding defense & support could easily make the gaps worse, not better. But it's a relevant point. --- Viking, since I understand your position and agree it's a viable point of view but disagree, do you think we should: limit the 1v1 power difference between a pro vet and a new PRODIGY to 1.66x (33% training + 33% gear)? allow a greater gap in certain cases, e.g. Exploration focused players in Support roles or not trying to gear up properly for combat? limit the 1v1 power to 1.33x plus .33 gear crafted or found during the course of a Campaign, even if that gear is crafted quickly? address the current ~25x (4x gear * 2x Combat * 1.5x AT * probably 2x vessel)? I agree with you that an MMO can be wide open; good players in good groups given months will figure it out. I'm surprised, however, in your faith that MMOs are fun with huge power gaps; for every game where it works, there are 100 where it doesn't. (The oldest MMOs didn't, really. EQ1 has morphed. Then came ganking & grinding to win, fun for a short while.) I'm also surprised you accept that a PRODIGY coming into the game and joining a top guild will still get absolutely waxed. Sure you can group up, but so what, why support huge raw power gaps, over skill? Trying here... perhaps your position depends on that 400%: 4x gear can seem acceptable, even preferrable, if it bootstraps a good player over the apparent 1.5x AT training. Note that the final numbers aren't in yet, even assuming no power curve flattening; currently it's ~4x * vessel vs ~3x * promotion. What would be good? Wide open?
  14. And the Minotaur Cast Net Skill was pre-announced as the Marshal rune. But by all means add it to the ranger, or just make any ranged CC drop Assassins like stones. More fun for all.