Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

karast

Testers
  • Content Count

    62
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by karast

  1. OP has a very valid point in all this, and that is that the best aspect of Crowfall to date is actually the combat. It is enjoyable, and there is some nice diversity and building options, but to actually get to the combat, and try those options is a horrible grind of tree punching. You can find groups and specialize to make this easier, but for a player, or even a group of players that are keen to only play and hour or so at a time, you will spend most of that time gathering and crafting, and then looking for fights. It really kills the will to play if your goal is combat rather than crafting. Not everyone is interested in crafting, but it is the onus of your first few hours of Crowfall right now. There are a lot of games out there, and a lot of new players watch the videos, see the combat, and think, "Wow that looks great" but when they start out they are alone punching trees, and hammering rocks trying to figure out whats going on with the crafting system, before running around for another 30min to find someone to fight before getting rolled and starting over. They can play for hours, and be mostly bored. The dev's will need to do a lot more to smooth out the start. It is still alpha but I am really hoping they create a smooth tutorial, and the ability for some more instant action at the start. Simply letting people start out with a full set of basic gear would dramatically change a players first few hours of game play. They'd go out and start fighting, and then start crafting to replace gear, rather than build up from the start. It would make for a much smoother experience I think.
  2. Getting away from a more forced crafting theme is nice. Although I am hoping for a bit of diversity in styles. Dwarves tend to get shoe horned into 2h melee, or S&B, I am hoping we have the option to go ranged as well. A core mechanic built off of increasing rage / anger is a solid basis for many different play-styles.
  3. The main issue I have with having different movement speeds, and stationary mechanics in a very mobile game, is that it really limits what those classes can do in organized play. It is important for a group to move together and move quickly and differing movement speeds is a nightmare for that kind of coordination. Having a class based off of being stationary just doesn't work when fights are fast paced and mobile, which in turn makes these classes more niche, and used in more strategic defenses and sieges. That is not necessarily an issue if that is how they want them to be designed, but a niche role is and niche role. On paper having tactical roles seems nice, but in reality it means that those roles are simply too niche to be used in larger coordinated play, and it is not as if you can spend all your time in a keep defense or waiting for one. That is the issue with tactical play. Change the terrain and now you are a waste for your group over a more general class. It is something that has been seen time and again with turret builds and classes in a vast majority of MMO's and FPS. Think about games like GW2, WAR, WoW, and TF2, and now overwatch.
  4. One of the things to keep in mind about turrets is that they do not have to be mechanical. All a turret is, is a localized spell, effect, or stationary pet. They could do them in a number of ways to fit the style of the game and class. Runes for example, or totems are good options. I am personally not a big fan of turrets, because they are always semi lackluster. Currently Crowfall is a very mobile game, and turrets play to the opposite of that. If the core skills are too tied into a stationary mechanic, with slow base movement speed, it may very well kill the forge-masters usefulness outside of turtling situations.
  5. 20v20 I would have done 30v30 if it was an option though. Nothing against small scale, but I enjoy guild roaming, its great to get back to back rolling fights with many different groups, nothing beats that for me.
  6. I play games namely for roaming guild pvp. This is not a play style that is widely supported by a lot of developers right now, and often ends up being added on as a side feature. for Rift and SWTOR, open world roaming was next impossible, the servers couldn't handle it, and for those who tried to organize big open world battles, we got crap from the server communities, and even dev's, who accused us of trying to crash the servers. for Warhammer Online, the server mergers, and horrible design choices, coupled with the utterly horrid mini skaven expansion caused the population to bottom out, and it never recovered. There were no fights as a warband strength guild, so that was the end of that. I really enjoyed WAR, I enjoyed roaming as a warband in the lakes, smashing against other guilds, and the rivalries that were created. Even today some guild tags are KOS for me thanks to WAR, I am hoping to get a similar experience on some of the campaign worlds in Crowfall. for GW2 WVW is under supported, it took a long time for it to get any attention, and it's not the area the dev's want to focus on when it comes to PvP, they are more focused on trying to make Spvp into an esport than looking at keeping the meta game fresh, before the match up changes there was a time when you could get decent fights in silver, but now you can go weeks without getting any decent fights, a lot of the campaign is more about 24 hour coverage for the top servers, and you just have zergs that sit in upgraded keeps. If your goal is roaming fights, it's no good, it has also gotten to the point where fights have become more hit and run type deals, which is just not what I am interested in. But there comes a point where you realize that your vision, what you want from a game, and what the developers, and the majority of the players want is just too different. You can give feedback till your blue in the face, but if they want it to be a numbers game, that's what it's going to be, and if they want to focus on Spvp, that's what they are going to focus on. Nothing you can do but move on. That's what happened with most of the games so far.
  7. My biggest issue with GW2 system is that the rally system and their low target limits really favors larger groups over smaller groups, and that is something I hope not to see become an issue in Crowfall. To be clear I am not saying smaller groups should have the advantage but I don't want it to be the case were the general tactic is simply stack every one together, and the side with the larger numbers wins, since they can chain res, they can rally, and they have more access to group res abilities. You can kill 10 for every 1 of your team that dies, but that 1 will rally that 10.
  8. I am not saying that people having to go into certain archetypes or builds is a bad thing, it's how it works in a competitive environment. But depending on the dev's vision on how they would like to see group balance work out, res type abilities are going to be an important factor if they are added. Personally my biggest bugbear when it comes to come back mechanics tends to be that, not all abilities are created equally. I really dislike it when due to a handful of show stopper abilities, or talents / traits the overall group comp gets dominated by a few key builds and archetypes. I am really glad the dev's are not falling into the perfect balance trap, but I would still like to see a bit more diversity endgame, than there is a lot of other games at the moment. Come back abilities tie into this since they tend to be extremely powerful, and nothing is worse then when they try to balance archetypes by giving everyone access to similar but different abilities, that look good on paper, but in practical use are incomparable. Group res vs ST res, melee res on a tanky class vs slow travel time ranged res on a rdps. Dev's wave their hands, "look you have a rez it's all balanced!" when in practical use only one of them is truly effective. Why have so many archetypes and builds, if everyone ends up running the same or nearly the same 2-3 builds on 3-4 archetypes? Or at least that is my grumpy gripe for today.
  9. My issue is that if you have a come back mechanic do you want to give it to everyone? Is it going to be a passive skill like clicking on a corpse? Is it going to be an active ability? Is it then going to be a discipline? or will it be linked to a specific Archetype? If you make it an active ability and then tie to to discipline or Archetype, balance wise you have made that a must bring. Depending on the cool down and effectiveness, it might be 2-3 people in your guild have to bring it, or everyone has to bring it. That's pretty big from a balance perspective. Your forcing people into bringing a particular build, or Archetype to fill that role, and it ends up somewhat diminishing the value of other Archetypes, or builds that fill similar roles. It is such a power ability that it is really hard not to make it a must bring, and on a tactical level it completely changes combat strategy, focus fire targets, and group composition. An example would be warrior banner elites in GW2, that became a must bring skill to any guild roaming / gvg. Even with a good length CD on the ability, it shifted into a rotation strategy. This helped make warriors a bit more useful in place of another class, that could fill the same tank / dps role, but lacked the combat res. It is not 100% the best example, and there are others but having a come back mechanic can be tricky on the balance if you tie to a particular archetype / build.
  10. My main concern with animation lock is the degree to which it ends up being used. When you look at spec's and spec balance across a whole lot of games, in a competitive setting, a lot of players will lean towards specs that have less abilities that are animation locked. Unless there is a truly massive damage difference, and even then if the ability animation is too slow, and too showy it becomes almost useless, and is replaced by something more productive in rotations. The dev's are going to need to be careful when and where they introduce lock vs. unlocked animations. The other thing to consider is how well locked abilities work in a potentially laggy environment. It is not uncommon for dev's to go back and remove locks after a game launches because even minor server lag can render longer animations unusable.
  11. Well the tricky bit is when you say Asian, you got to realize that the Asian markets are not uniform. Japan is very different from Korea, and China. Japan especially is a hard market to hit. The vast majority of gamers are console / hand held gamers, they often don't have home PC's powerful enough for MMO gaming, and while there are netcafes, and gaming cafes, they are not as big as they are in Korea. You also have to compete with strong domestic production, and in a way almost a bit of nationalistic bias. It's not the best comparison but even with a massive marketing push Microsoft isn't getting anywhere with xbone sales here in Japan. Also the idea of crowdfunding games is still a bit iffy. It took a while to convince a few friends to back, and then payment options weren't ideal for them. A lot of younger people don't have credit cards, and if they do they don't like using them, especially for a foreign website, in a language they are not extremely fluent in. A lot of net shopping, and game payments are done via convenience stores like 7/11 or through prepaid cards like Bitcash or Webmoney. It would really help to have Japanese, Korean, and Chinese webpages, even if they were only a front with a very brief outline and then a forward to the English page. Having better website localization, and better local payment options would really help, but it's going to be expensive and time consuming for ArtCraft to setup, for a market that might not be interested enough to warrant the expense.
  12. For those who haven't tested before I really recommend finding a group of people to test it, because testing is not always easy, or fun. Having people work with you to recreate bugs, and to simply test things out makes the testing experience much better in my experience. It is really easy to burnout at testing, or to get frustrated because the dev's are taking things in their direction, and not in the direction you like. Having more people to test with and talk with helps you see things from different perspectives. If you go in thinking I am only going to play thief, I only like thiefy stealthy classes, and I only like XYZ pvp, so I am only going to test thief, and XYZ pvp, It is really easy to burnout, or to get over attached to your ideal of what should be, and once the attitude of I'm right, and the dev's are wrong sinks in hard it can make testing really difficult. So for newer testers making this a social activity, and not getting letting yourself get too absorbed or emotionally invested in a particular aspect of them game helps a lot.
  13. Their talk of how they want the game physics to work has some unique possibilities for forgemaster combat if they can make it work. If CC if determined by weight, heavier characters suffer less of a knock back than lighter characters, then an interesting mechanic might be the ability to control or modify weight via abilities. It actually has a nice bit of parity since increasing weight would be a two edge sword. You reduce CC, but at the same time you reduce speed, and increase inertia. Would be great if used tactically in the right place at the right time, but equally as devastating if miss used. Which could be a problem. Someone using it to intentionally troll other players. But I think it is an interesting idea none the less.
  14. People like to think zerging players are unskilled players but skilled players and groups do zerg up as well. Going 10 to 20, 30, or 100 might be possible when your fighting unskilled, largely unorganized mobs, but if your facing a larger organized guild, or several organized guilds, then there is a limit to what you can really expect to do, and if your running an organized guild you might not want to have your raid group stomped constantly by larger groups / dog piling, it can be bad for morale. When you talk about 3 way faction fighting, in theory the weaker factions teaming up to take on the stronger faction sounds really good. But the reality is much different, and you only need to look towards existing games EVE, PS2, GW2, and ESO to get a feel for how things usually work. Often the 2 stronger factions go after the weakest, since taking stuff from them is easiest. They don't have the numbers or resources to defend it, so you can push them out of the game. This is extremely common. Weaker factions will also go against each other since they have a better chance for victory or for evenly match fights. Often the catalyst for going after a the big kid on the block is a much loathing or dislike that can either bind rival factions together, or drive them to both attack the big faction for separate reasons. But without persistent server or realm communities it might be hard to build these kinds of cross guild / server / faction rivalries. One of my big concerns after player motivation is the fear of seeing lots of depopulated one-sided campaigns, which will become guild / alliance resource farms.
  15. There are going to be winners and there are going to be loser. The population issue is more about how can you incentives the weaker faction / under populated faction to stay in the fight. In essence to fight a losing battle. There really isn't much to keep people there if they are losing, especially if it's a one sided slaughter. There is not much on the line for them should they lose. It's easier to just leave and go someplace else where you join a winning team, or where you have a more even balance. The last thing you want is to have campaigns simply turn into resource farms, when one faction gains the upper hand. Which is something that is likely to happen in guild matches, in faction battles, and even in the dregs. Example, (X guild has 50 members on A dregs map, coordinating together, let's go to map B it's a better mix.)
  16. One of the problems you can run into with a PvP game, especially ones with open / factional pvp is population balance. Crowfalls campaign design does a lot to reset and redistribute players after a match up and helps to keep the game fresh. But it doesn't completely deal with the very real population issues the game will face. To be clear when I say, "population issues" I am largely referring to situations where one faction or factions vastly out number their enemy factions. This can happen for a multitude of reasons, a lack of morale / community / organization on a particular faction, faction demographics, does your faction have a lot of Russian players? a lot of German players? a lot of oceanic players? Even if the overall populations of the factions are near equal, 24 hour coverage, and peak play times can differ greatly. If your gaming window is 10:00-12:00 and your stuck in a lull for your faction, it can really dissuade you from playing. With Crowfall locking characters to a campaign till completion this can become a very sore spot, and drive people to other characters, further depopulating a faction. The problem is not just limited to the overwhelmed faction either, those on the overwhelming side my not get much enjoyment out of the situation, if you play to fight, but have no one to fight, then you'll lose interest as well. For competitive guilds and players they need a competitive environment, and being in a one-side stomping doesn't help all that much. Other games have in the past tried to rectify this problem in many different ways, and there are a plethora of ideas out there for ways of potentially dealing with it. My favorite was so far has been Warhammer Onlines AAO system. Which drastically increased renown (pvp experience system) gain scaled to enemy population. You could make more renown in a mismatch, than in a balanced match, and it drove people out to claw, scrape, and steal every kill possible, but such a system might not work well with Crowfall. Does the ArtCraft team have any ideas on how they want to tackle the problem?
  17. What I am hoping for is more of a rotating balance. Perfect balance is an illusion, but it is important that game play does not become too static. If certain archetypes / disciplines / tactics become locked. As in they become the only competitive or viable builds, it can be a problem, especially over time. In my experience it is important to shake up the dynamics from time to time to keep combat fresh. If a particular build of a class, using a particular setup, is used by a massive majority of the community for a very long time, while other setups become unused, then tweaks need to be made.
  18. I tend to have a main, and then alts. But with the way campaigns work I may need to adjust the way I play a bit.
  19. I like how a woman who is experienced in community management and knowledgeable about the genre, having worked on other games for years, who joined artcraft after the kickstarter was started, and after the initial goal was reached, has been summarily turned into nothing but a "hottie" used for hype, and or cleavage. Or at least that's what I would say if I wasn't 100% sure that OP isn't just trolling to troll.
  20. To have gender locking, the races need to have gender. Do rocks have gender? Do they reproduce sexually? I don't have an issue with gender-locking if there are good lore reasons for it. I feel it adds a lot of depth to the story. Some people like the idea that in game, not everyone should be able to do everything. Fantasy doesn't have to be PC. In my opinion it's best when there are restrictions, because it gives the world a bit more realness to draw you into the story. And no matter what the dev's do there will always be people complaining. Why can't I be a fishperson, why can't I make a half elf / half hamster champion? Why can't I be Goku, or the Hulk?
  21. I am not a huge fan of combat pets. The balancing is never quite right. If pets are buggy / weak or have a bad AI, then they become useless and classes with pet mechanics are useless. If pets are too strong, too much dps, or buggy "attacking through walls" then pet classes become OP. In large scale pvp they suffer from being completely destroyed by AoE, and if you give them collision they can become an annoyance to friendly players. When you have pet summoning skills tied to items or in this case maybe disciples, they either become useless to the point no one uses them, or a must slot for everyone. A good example is rift. When the pets were good everyone spec'd for pets, when they were bad, no one did. I know the dev's are not aiming for perfect balance, which is a good thing, but pets that are useless arn't that much fun, and having everyone in a competitive environment run pets, isn't that great either. I'd rather not have them personally. They require a lot of extra server calculations, pixels, and development time, that I feel could be better used. I know some people really enjoy pets though, so I can understand the reasoning behind the stretch goal.
  22. Still very niche, but that's not as much of an issue as it normally is. Crowfall isn't aiming to be WoW 2.0, it's not going to be dependent on trying to get millions of monthly subs, or box sales to make up for development costs, or to satisfy investors. I really feel that Crowfall can be successful with a player base of 200-300k.
  23. my thought is that abilities that destroy voxels might have longer cooldowns. Digging might actually be tied to specific disciplines. Aoe skills might make wholes but they might not be suitable to dig with even if you have a big zerg. As long as tunneling is tied to something, I don't think this will be a big concern.
  24. Alpha's can be a lot of fun, and they can really be something special at times, but they are not for everyone. A lot of people these days have been getting into alpha's or early closed testing thinking that they get to play the game early, with a bit of dev access, but the reality can be a bit rough. At times the dev's really need you to test systems, and it is not unusual to test / play / replay a zone or map or class dozens of times to provide need feedback, and check for / reproduce bugs. By the time the game launches you might have gone through a map, or played some bit of content so many times that it might not be as interesting to do again on live. For active testers burnout can become a big issue. There is also the cases where people can become too attached and too emotional when it comes to class / skill balance. As a tester you can tell them if the skill works or doesn't work, and you can provide feedback as to whether you think it is well balanced or not, but your not a dev, it's their game and they have their own ideas about what should do what, and how they should do it. So it can get rough and frustrating for people who have very strong opinions on how a class should work / play, when their views don't match with the direction things are going. I'm not advising for or against pledging high enough to get into the alpha. I think that's great and Crowfall could use the support! But for those pledging with the Alpha in mind, my hope is that you don't get too overzealous. It can be really easy to hype yourself up to no good effect. Or at least that has been my experience.
×
×
  • Create New...