• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


APE last won the day on August 19 2016

APE had the most liked content!

About APE

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

2,208 profile views
  1. I agree that a MMO doesn't need to limit itself just because, but at the same time I don't see a need to attempt something that hasn't proven to work in the same context. In your opinion it might enhance everything, but despite being the self proclaimed spokesperson for entire groups of people (millions of them), I don't see much support for your views. Part of this might be as they are more conceptual and not really easy to agree/disagree with. Believe most disagree with you as a persona more so than what you are commenting about. If you gave specifics I might agree/disagree, but "Make it as good as WoW or better" is rather empty. Bickering about which game had larger fights which are irrelevant to CF seems more about epeen than actual constructive discussion to improve this game. You're right that the design allows for multiple rulsets and even if "certain people" want FF to work a certain way, ACE will do what they want and likely provide different options. The Dregs doesn't have to be the same across all CWs. Tab targeting isn't going to happen nor have I seen this as something people care about today. Changing the combat system be it slightly or drastically would impact all players, much different then having FF, player tags above heads, auto run, different group sizes and other knob options that will likely exist. I see folks that are fine with CF as is or hope it will improve as it develops. Then we have you that unless you have suggestions that only slightly change things, expect ACE to drastically overall the system to please an unknown group that has done nothing to support development so far. Seems like an easy choice on their end. Again, list some specifics. Maybe 5-10 ways they could improve the "ceiling" that doesn't include "Be like WoW" or "Standard of MMOs today" or "What real competitive players want." Take into account what they've said so far, current state of the "game," potential of tech being used, Dev team experience, etc.
  2. I agree that CF should be challenging, but I question why someone that plays "competitive" games would want to play CF in any form. Lobby type competitive games provide a rather simple formula that has drawn a ton more players than any MMO has. Regardless if skill translates across games/genres, the reason or drive for players is similar across MOBA, RTS, FPS, CCG, even MMO Arenas. Pre-set team size, map, match time, gear (usually), team comp possibilities, etc. Along with having leaderboards, ranks, match making, tournaments and other easy to define quantifiers of who is who. Instant gratification for the most part. Something "wild" like CF (as presented) is nothing like this despite ACE taking inspiration from this proven formula. Your focus appears to be about making CF appeal to these folks, yet the core of what makes these games popular can't exist in CF. Superficially there are some similarities, but the formula just isn't there and no amount of increasing the "skill ceiling," mechanical requirements, or whatever aspect of combat will change this. I'll go out on a limb and say that many play such games to prove something. Usually that is being the "best" relatively speaking. That is easy to see thanks to numbers, rows, and lists. In CF, what will make for the "best?" Winning a campaign, battle, skirmish, burning down a stronghold, capturing the most land/POI, doing so on a specific ruleset? Doing any of this with a specific team size/comp? I guarantee people will be bickering about such to prove who is better, but there is no single right answer. Factor in that campaigns can be months, I just don't see how such unknown variables will appeal to the crowd I assume you speak about that likes A + B = C. You mention "best mmo pveprs" which I see having no reason to not give CF a try if they enjoy MMOs and PVP. As many of us do, new shiny, try, move on or not. CF shouldn't be any different. Being there isn't really a "PVP MMO" currently that fills the niche of CF, even without high skill ceiling combat, it should still be appealing to plenty. What are the alternatives? There are several similar products in the works, but overall none are promising what you seem to be seeking. Overall, CF should fit a niche that doesn't exist and people that want it will play if it isn't horrible quality. Those from other genres are seeking a particular standard might not like it, but oh well. ACE has never promised or even alluded to what you continue to go on about so expecting things to go that way makes zero sense. Maybe you'll settle for whatever it ends up like, but honestly don't get why you wouldn't focus on something that actually provides a challenge. Unless you've reached the top of every single game/genre out there?
  3. How can things missing (a lot of systems) not need "balance" or fixing? From here on out everything they add will work first try? Don't think so. If by balance you mean tweak a class power 5% here, add some health to a race there, rework a Disciple or twenty, that will all come in time and every update does a little bit. Would be really helpful if we could focus on XYZ at a time to work out issues and provide targeted feedback, but efficiency doesn't appear to be a main goal... I really hope little in the current build is 100% or close to being finished, no matter how simple or complex. Pretty much everything needs to be gone over and will continue to need this. Call it balancing or fixing, never really stops. We are no where near playtest, beta, soft launch, launch imo. Still early in development and while they should continue to fix/adjust as they go, there is realistically no way to "balance" combat/classes/abilities insert whatever without a more complete product. What this change will provide is a 24/7 version that doesn't receive updates until they've been gone over on a test server. What we currently have is that test server(s). Why people would want to spend a significant amount of time "playing" such an unfinished build lacking so much instead of testing the most current build isn't for me to answer, but is what it is. Seems like it will add more for ACE to deal with as they might fix an issue that was on Live, push it to Test, push to Live but fix causes another issue due to Live's build having something Test doesn't due to something else that was changed, then they have to fix that and push it to Test. I don't envy them. Overall, they need to continue developing the game and fix/balance what they can along the way. New systems need to be added and more realistic builds will hopefully make Live/Test more popular and speed up this whole process. If something is totally broken and making things difficult to test, hopefully they get to that quickly, but insert class dominating or being useless isn't really a 1st line problem imo. Then again, they don't tell us what they are really looking for so reporting the same OP class/ability over and over is what we are left with. Makes a lot of sense. "PVP" can take many forms and currently it's dueling for giggles, which is at the bottom of what I enjoy about "PVP," at least when looking at what the "game" is supposed to become.
  4. I make words mean whatever I want!
  5. If they did this, I might log in for more than 5 min at a time. I'd prefer they actually have structured testing on a "test server" with requests instead of running around not knowing what is worth testing or not, what is a bug, what is a to be addressed later, what is their intended design, etc. I have little interest in reporting the same "bug/issue" that's been reported for weeks/months nor wade through thread/comments doing the same thing to see if anything has been addressed or not. Why? They'll just do X tomorrow which will change it again, then Y the next week, Z the following. I get wanting things to be "fun" or at least not clearly broken in some situations, but there is no way to "balance" at this stage, especially with Disciplines being added and needing a whole other "balance" effort. They've already done this before and now X class/ability is OP/broken in the other direction. Until they have a lot more available, "balance" is going to be messy. Need the rest of the classes, skill training update, other universals, crafting/gathering working properly, POI/loop, siege/win conditions, and overall a more realistic version of what we might see at launch. Until then its balance around duels and unrealistic non-combat features. As I said above, they should have us actually "testing" instead of logging in and piddling around doing whatever. They could say "How is this class, ability, weapon, discipline, combat mechanic?" Instead it's "Provide us feedback" which looking at some of the dev responses isn't even wanted/needed in several cases. I don't want to "play" a broken mess, I would however spend some time actually "testing" if there was a bit of guidance. Much like the long list they provided months ago that was very basic. Something updated be it general or specific would be much appreciated. Unless I've missed them doing this some where?
  6. For the sake of those gathering/crafting, hopefully ACE goes over the trees heavy handed as right now there is little sign of alts not being close if not equal to those doing the role as their main. As I said above, something about CF will need be very different compared to basically all other open world PVP games where people spend time and I assume enjoy watching over others whack on rocks or click things in their UI. Crafters might be able to hide behind a strongholds walls, but gatherers will require guards anytime they want to actually do their main role. Finding folks to do this all the time might be tricky, especially depending on the CW rules. Will be interesting to see how it plays out. Not sure if they've mentioned traps, but not sure how they could be used effectively to avoid being attacked out in the open. Unless someone can litter the world with invisible traps (no-anti trap powers?) that others foolishly walk into. If it was as easy as run up to a node or just out in the open, drop a trap and an enemy will get caught just because, seems just as one sided as a ganker running up and killing someone that likely isn't able to fully defend themselves.
  7. Isn't this a reason to not solo and to focus on friends/guilds/alliances? Those situations imply that they are either solos or at least not part of the same force. At least in non-faction based CWs. Guess factions will have typical scammers and what not, but sort of the reason to align with a guild and not work outside no matter the CW type. Being this will be a open world, no safety, loot game, making a bad name is a quick way to end someone's time there. Will be especially true with potential name/character/account/forum connection.
  8. Personally a fan of a challenge and the typical system of Fighter sees Gatherer = Gatherer dead is rather boring and usually not a challenge. Rather make it at least a bit entertaining. Albion's systems aren't perfect, but do add a bit more excitement (on both ends). More risk v reward for the gatherer (gather more at a time and or more often) while making the hunt/kill more challenging for the attacker. EVE is rather different in "world" setup, but even as you said, a group can potentially run. As someone focused on PVP, I'd like to see potential victims have a chance to run at least. CF hopefully isn't built with solo as the main focus, but surely it will be part of how folks play. As much as I want to see guarding gatherers to be something to do, not sure how exciting it will be to stand around doing nothing while someone else is standing around holding F. Unless a map is congested, not like there is going to be action 24/7 at every single node/POI/structure/etc. https://albiononline.com/en/news/gatherer-gear-explained https://albiononline.com/en/news/new-feature-persistent-mounts
  9. Sounds nice hypothetically but seems unrealistic with what they've said/shown so far. If X craft is so valuable that I'm not going to kill someone, likely a guild will have someone trained that way be it their main, alt, or deal with someone in a friendly group. "Economy" will only go so far when it winning is a main focus. Where other games have central/safe trade spots and or auction houses, this type of friendly play works be it openly or anonymously, but without those in the CW, this might not exist. EKs can still have friendly economy, but then again, no ganking going on either. Killing and taking everything off of a super unique gatherer/crafter to hinder an enemy organization seems like an easier/smarter tactic than working together just to eventually attack/kill one another in the battle for the CW. "Hey enemy crafter, can you make me your Fire gear so I can attack you tomorrow?" Don't see that working well. Personally hope ACE looks at other games like Albion Online and borrows some of their "anti-ganker" mechanics. Still possible, but at least potential victims have more chance to escape/evade than without anything in place. Relying on the good nature of people in a competitive PVP game seems like a last resort.
  10. CF should try something new, but I see no evidence that it will actually work and if anything, "forces" players to go the alt route more than ever due to the "restrictive" game design. Will be interesting to see the break down of roles and how many of each will make for a competitive force. 33/33/33 - 50/25/25 - 20/10/70? Along with how well alts will stand in for main roles of any kind. Seems unlikely that we'll be able to do any role 24/7 and having 2-3 accounts to mix it up seems relatively easy and encouraged thanks to passive training. I'm all for "needing" one another and avoiding the solo focus so many games have, just not sure if CF will actually do it any different or if it's just a superficial plan that doesn't account for how people actually will/want to play. Seems to be more evidence of players working around the system than with it the more restrictive it becomes. Regardless, VIP and basic training should be looked at from multiple play styles not only from the assumption that everyone wants to play the same way (1 UT + 1-3 Class). Might miss a cash flow opportunity if it doesn't appeal to a variety of play styles.