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

Andius

Testers
  • Content Count

    955
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by Andius

  1. Right in full release minimum viable gear will be dependent on ruleset. White will be viable in campaigns shorter than a month that allow no importation. Blue will be viable in campaigns that allow importation or have longer duration. Though I guess that's making assumptions about time to create vs. time to consume for equipment.
  2. Ultimately I think "Campaign ends in X days and whoever has the most points at that time" will die as a ruleset. Simple reason is that when there are many campaigns running at any given time, any campaign that isn't competitive will result in a mass unlock to go to a campaign that IS competitive. I imagine because of this that most campaigns will be based on a ruleset that the campaign is easily terminated if one side gets a serious upper hand. For instance: everyone starts with a keep that has a ton of high level guards with fast respawn and the number of guards goes down / respawn timer goes up as the campaign progresses. A group that loses their keep is eliminated. Alternatively, no import campaign with a set number of white vessels each faction/guild can spawn in and they are destroyed upon death. The only way to get more lives is to make more vessels, and graveyards are setup so as to be limited in number / hotly contested. Points of interest are really only valuable in that they give an upperhand in the fight over the graveyards. Once all vessels are depleted you can't spawn in and are thus eliminated. I think you'll see more ideas like that win out over "Whoever has the most points in 21 days" because they will run up until someone takes a clear lead, and then that group will usually win pretty damn fast after that. That's the kind of campaign people will actually stay locked into start to finish.
  3. Well, I think you guys were on to something with the buying guards thing. But ultimately there were a lot of serious problems that I think came from the way you implemented it. People were making rounds killing off guards, people like me were tanking through guard damage to turn them into our guards etc. I think if you went back to the system of buying guards and then: A. Make guards respawn once purchased. B. Wipe guards when a holding is captured. That would address every problem you had with it other than the high costs, and you've since made gold easier to acquire so that's already been fixed. With guards respawning until a holding flips you can't kill of guards for good without flipping the holding. And they still do need to be repurchased after a flip which is where the buying guards aspect would come back into play. So if you went with that system, then you could make it so that players can select a guards class when upgrading it from rank 5 to rank 6. Nobody is going to use spies to select guard types if guards are purchased, and the selection of class is part of purchasing them.
  4. In the short term just more strength. I think anything below three R7s is just too easy for a good solo class in halfway decent gear. If you're speaking what kind of guards would I dream of fighting? Different classes. Having say myrmidon or confessor guard using AoEs of their own against the players who are also grouped up on that tiny point. A plaguelord guard that debuffs healing. A cleric guard healing the other guards. Vary it up a bit from outpost to outpost or even have a new set of guards randomly generated when you flip a point so players have a harder time anticipating what they'll run into while out capping. EDIT: Or let the controlling faction choose the guard types. That would be ideal as long as it was tied to flipping the point or investing into the outposts (So you don't get spies running along with capping teams choosing what they will fight for them)
  5. In terms of capping being super simple on top notch outpost capping classes, and the fact I labeled the paladin templar and crusader cleric as two of those classes, I can certainly explain that. Crusaders are tanking beasts. Not only are they heavy heal output classes, with their block that heals themselves and the general mail + shield setup, a half-giant crusader is a main-tank style class. When capping as a crusader, you run up, plant yourself in the circle, and just start dropping heals. Killing guards? You can, but it isn't even needed. Just shrug off their damage until the point flips. This made it a PARTICULARLY good capper when guards had to be purchased but flipped sides when an outpost flipped. I would ask people with me to stop DPS on guards so we didn't have to buy new ones. Even in the current model though, it's just highly simple to sit on a point and take an outpost. I haven't played Crusader this campaign but I was crusader in the trial of Valkyn and we had a similar capping system back then, and I could solo flip outposts rather easily. Paladins on the hand are perhaps THEE best solo cappers in a system where killing the guards isn't a problem. Outpost guards are clustered close enough together that when you start dropping your paladin AoEs all the guards are inside it. So you're a tanky healer who's dealing damage to all of the guards at the same time, unlike say a fort where the 4 throne room guards are spread out enough you can only put one in your circle at a time. For both these classes if you aren't solo, you're going to be dropping a lot of circle effects that hit the whole tower area and benefit anyone fighting alongside you. Group heals mainly. While you're not going to be Fae hopping over walls or tunneling under them like a duelist at forts, outposts have no walls, and the guards are clustered close together. That's a huge element of what makes these classes so good as either solo cappers or the foundation of a capping team if you're going after outposts. TLDR - If you don't want Paladins and Crusaders absolutely stomping outpost encounters you'll have to put a guard or two outside the range of their circle effects. Or change nothing if you like that these classes are high value members of capping teams as a part of their draw to play them. Either way though if you want outposts to be challenging, we need more or higher powered guards.
  6. Yeah if there is going to be super RNG drops, the ones that I'm generally pretty ok with are ones that aren't so mandatory that I feel the need to farm for them in particular, and are instead a cool perk when I find them. The moment I feel like I need to go out and farm for a particular item to be competitive, and it's gated behind a minuscule chance to drop, it switched from "oh neat" to "game ruining".
  7. That won't stop people from coming to remind us that back in their day they had to slay 9,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, boars just to get their first rusty dagger. Uphill through a blizzard in 500 degrees fahrenheit (God only knows what foul element that snow was made of) and they liked it just fine that way.
  8. Well and like I said. Even if I were to say "I want to make a game that it takes FOREVER to achieve anything" I'd opt for slow yet consistent progress over large leaps in power caused by RNG. Like the example I gave with ArcheAge. Progression was heavily tied to RNG in so many different ways in that game. And ultimately I think the reason that they did that was because they didn't want players knowing the time and investment it took to reach the top levels of play. At the point I quit for good I was in the top guild on the server I was playing, we had control over all the content, I was logging in do like 5-10 hours of high end content + top profit trading per day on like 6 accounts, making thousands of gold a night and it still felt like my gear was just crawling forward because of all the different highly expensive gear elements I had to work on. The RNG was there to hide that huge time sink, and give people hope that "Oh hey, maybe my weapon will proc mythic on this regrade." For a few people it did. For most of them it exploded. If you want the grind to be long, embrace, be upfront about it. Hiding longer grinds behind RNG just makes me feel like the devs are trying to pull one over on me and spike my drink with a bunch of grind.
  9. For sure. The TLDR for my post though is remember time to cap is one element in the difficulty of taking outposts. Difficulty of the guard fight is another. Might be cool to experiment with some outposts that offer short caps if you can win a harder fight. The fights right now are simple especially for some top notch outpost cappers like paladin templars and crusader clerics.
  10. "Right now it takes too long for small groups and not enough time for larger forces" Something I saw someone suggest in another thread is forts should take about 10 seconds to capture. It should be like raising a flag or something. I can agree to that with the caveat that all the guards need to be dead before that flag can be raised, and some of those outposts should have a very strong guard. Thinking about your suggestion of a few strategic outposts that can be used as respawn points, that makes A LOT of sense. Since outposts can be captured at any time we can expect the average flow of play during sieges / fort vulnerability to go like this. Move into a zone. Take your full force and capture the spawn point if you don't control a fort or keep in that zone already, go hit the fort. If we are talking 3 rank 4 guards and a timer as your only obstacle to doing that, it won't be that hard. It also won't be that hard for a single cleric/paladin or some other good solo capping build to cap it behind you the moment your force moves on. If you are talking 6-10 rank 10 guards, but an instant capture time for these, that ENTIRELY changes how fights will go down. Suddenly the defenders should be considering how many people they will leave at the fort, and maybe if they should attempt to assist their NPC guards and hold that outpost. When you do take that outpost, it's going to take a lot more commitment than having 1 person come in behind you and recap. And a strong group of 2-3 players of an average group of 5 can still go outpost capping if we say that say the respawn outposts should be the hardest to take. I think it's good to have some outposts that will present a real fight on their own though.
  11. I think overhauled is a better word than tweaked. I don't think they can create a system that will be acceptable for all campaign scenarios other than: A. Breaking items such as minors into components that regularly drop. B. Putting specific minors on specific hard to kill mobs with a 100% drop rate. Either of those suggestions could work for every campaign type. But a single drop with a small drop percentage can't really be tweaked into working IMO.
  12. Champions are a top tier class because of their ultimate (neckbreaker). I believe multiple champions stacking neckbreakers is the fastest way in the game to kill someone, and if not, it's not off by far. Generally the combo is a centaur will run in, use their racial skill that breaks armor then slam down their neckbreaker. I've heard neckbreaker is due to be nerfed. But I don't have any more reliable source for that info other than "word on the street is".
  13. My suggested first class in the Beginner's Guide to Crowfall is templar. In particular paladin templars. Paladins are fairly tanky because of full plate and parry. They also are a healing class so their self-healing is strong. But they have the highest damage output of any mainheal class and it's AoE damage. The net result is you can tick off a ton of mobs, let the group up around you, and AoE them all down while tanking/healing through their damage. And because you are a self-healer and pips regenerate quickly you can go from group of mobs to group of mobs with no time needed to heal/mana up. First rate PVE class, and I know some templars swear by them as a PVP class too. Guilds/Friends are really the only way to address the diversity of the crafting system if you don't have unlimited playtime and a horde of accounts, and the best way to address slow leveling times. For instance last night I leveled a character to 25 that was not a strong solo leveling build (particularly because it's not geared yet) in an hour or two of play because someone helped me out. Solo level grinding is unbearable IMO especially if you're not a paladin templar or some similarly solo oriented class.
  14. @Arkade - Given this conversation has spilled into three topics I'm going to move it to one of the more relevant topics. So I'm addressing your comment that greater population sorts out RNG here. Suppose 10 years from now, CrowFall is the most popular game on the internet. There are 30 million+ active players. J. Todd Coleman and Thomas Blaire are billionaires counting stacks and living the good life. They launch two new campaign worlds. The first campaign disallows all forms of vessel and gear importation and is aimed to be a small to medium sized campaign (100-500 players we'll say) with a fairly quick playtime (1 week). The second is a full import campaign aimed to be massive with a playtime of 6 months. Consider the implications of highly RNG drops vs. predictable drops for both campaigns. In the huge campaign, there is a very good chance you are correct, the population will sort it out if it's highly RNG. But do predictable drops hurt anything? No, in fact I'd argue even there it makes the process more enjoyable for people going out and farming for those items. In the small campaign without imports though, I don't think the population will sort it out. The RNG has huge potential to throw off the entire pacing of the campaign if one alliance is lucky with the drops they need to take an early lead, and another is unlucky. A very important factor to consider when the idea of many campaigns with different rulesets is a core feature. One of these two loot styles works for a far greater variety of campaigns while one does not, unless we want RNG to be important in determining who wins some campaigns.
  15. Right. I'm not against PVE that creates PVP. I'm against doing it via extreme RNG. For instance gathering dust doesn't bother me. Dust drops are very consistent and largely predictable within a certain extent. If you need 1000 ethereal dust for a project you can say "That should take me roughly _ hours" and be correct within a fairly small margin of error if you based that figure on good data such as your average dust per hour in previous sessions of gathering dust with via same skills/methods with the same bonuses. If you say it should take me "_ hours to get the sturdy minor" you have no real expectation that's a correct statement. The chance of your estimation being off by hours is probably greater than it being on target no matter what predictors you use to achieve that "_ hours" estimation. Because there is no predicting extreme RNG. If you want to add PVE grind. Fine, make it a predictable factor. If you're hiding it behind RNG, not only do I think that's a less fun mechanic. It makes me believe your motivation in doing so is a desire to hide the actual grind times. At least in ArcheAge when I started calculating out average grind times for certain gear pieces based on probability, those numbers were astronomical. And they were hiding it behind RNG because they were counting on people not digging up those astronomical grind times or preserving through a "well I might just win the lottery" attitude.
  16. @Arkade - I don't think some need to farm in PVE hotspots is bad. I think the problem is the fact that we have a small chance to get a drop on something we need such as a specific minor (Demons Pact etc.) or Goggles. That one person can go there, receive the blessings of RNGesus and walk away with what they need minutes later, and another person can go there farm for hours, and not receive what they need. The time to farm a specific item should be roughly equivalent for everyone. That's why some of us are saying they should for instance drop "minor shards" and every X minor shards allow you to create a minor of your choice. This keeps the need to farm out in the world, but greatly reduces the random variability in effort vs. output.
  17. In keeping with what was suggested in my Business Research methods class, I have left out the ability to pick neutral! You must take a stance. Also in keeping with the suggestions of that class, I've chosen a poll questions that should give clear actionable information to the Crowfall development team. If people agree, keep these mechanics in! If everyone disagrees, maybe you need to reconsider where you are taking the RNG in this game.
  18. Crowfall is crying out to switch from inventory slots to a weight or volume system. Not only does it just make more sense for this style of game, but imagine if instead of 5 stacks of 200 copper in your inventory you had one stack of 1000 or more. I can't understand why they are going with inventory slots and stack limits when their game performance is suffering from too many stacks and that's why we have such limited banking space. If it actually made the game model better I'd understand it, but I can't think of a single way this system would be better than a weight/volume system. Not even one upside or argument in favor of how they are doing things now other than that it would take work to change. So yeah this drift toward more and more and more items needed to function with stack limits on all these items... it make no sense at all to me. Seems like the opposite of where they should be taking things.
  19. Yeah for me "dead" = if there is ever a prolonged time the game's servers are up with with less than 100 players online. Niche = if there is ever a prolonged time the game's servers are up with less than 1000 players online. Failure = When a game that aimed to be niche is dead, or a game that aimed to be mainstream (and was on a mainstream budget), is niche. A bit arbitrary of a definition but I wouldn't call a game dead just because I can find a group within seconds. That can happen in any game depending on who you know, what time of night it is, etc.
  20. Yeah that's what I've been suggesting all along. When I came back I was like "Sweet craftable discs! They took the are RNG out?" "Nope. You still need a specific item to make the specific disc you want and it's just as RNG." "Are you serious..." So close to greatness but yet missed by so much...
  21. I think the period in MMO history we are in right now is the race for the next EverQuest. What do I mean by that? When MMOs launched there was no set formula to make an MMO. No model everyone was basing their game around. No right or wrong way to do it, no models that "always fail" and no models that were considered "safe". And from that soup of innovation rose EverQuest. And people loved it at the time. Then WoW came along and said "That's a nice model, let's take it, polish it up and base our game around it." Then everyone else said "Wow, WoW is really successful. Lets base our MMOs around this for the next decade or so. Seems safe." But remaking WoW isn't safe anymore. Everyone is tired of hell of it and so big companies aren't making MMOs anymore. And we're back to a state of rampant innovation and no set rules on how to make an MMO being up for debate. I fully expect that from this generation of kickstarter MMOs at least one model will become the next big thing. And then a huge company is going to sweep in, say "Thanks for doing our R&D for us!" launch a high budget polished model of their game and it will be the new WoW. And then there will be a ton of knockoffs of it.
  22. <shamelessplug> Looks like I may be needing to do some major updates to my gathering guide and crafting guide when these changes hit. </shamelessplug>
  23. Sorry, when I stop talking about it for like 2 pages and the majority of those posts are you and other people still fighting about it, I might have some more comments to make eventually. I don't really consider that to be "bringing it up again" though when it was still the obvious primary subject of conversation in this topic after I try to let it go.
  24. The playerbase may not be massive but the amount of it that's drifted over is significant enough with this small of a palyerbase I think the word "massive" applies, and calling it a "falsehood" and getting in a huge argument over that is downright petty. And speaking of pettiness and dishonesty: Why would someone who cares about truth so much cut out "I praised Order as a faction" then post a quote of me praising Order as a faction? Cut the pretense that you give have a damn about truth. It's tired and disingenuous. You are a propaganda machine for Balance plain and simple and the only "truth" that matters to you is the "truth" that furthers those objectives. The only "falsehoods" your going to call are the "falsehoods" that hurt Balance. Everyone knows it, everyone's tired of it. I can agree to disagree. The points we're arguing here are very open to interpretation so reasonable people can disagree without being lairs. Not sure why you're so insistent to paint me as a liar here other than that you clearly can't handle people saying things negative about your precious faction. I dropped it for a couple pages and you just keep going. Get over it man.
  25. Sorry if making a sarcastic statement with rings in the plural offended you so much. Yes I am only directly aware of one instance. I assumed there may have been more. I used hyperbole! I admit it! If the court of public opinion says that makes me a liar (and I highly doubt it does outside you and the screaming banshees on Balance) then I will willingly submit to my 20 noodle lashings. As to the massive drift statement. I can only cite one particular example of an entire guild migrating go Balance since I've been here (which is one more than I can cite moving from Balance to Order or Chaos). I've talked to plenty of people who know a player here and two or there that left for Balance at some point. Sorry if I can't make you a comprehensive list of every single player who's switch sides. Obviously other people have experienced the same reality a me because some of them of spoken up about it. The point is, like my brother and his wife had to teach my nephew when he was five years old. Just because someone says something you disagree with doesn't mean you get to call them a liar. You have yet to cite any claim I've made that's empirically false. I can cite at least two examples of you twisting my words including one were you straight up deleted the first part from a quote I made because it directly contradicted the narrative you were trying to make. Yet you and others on Balance are running around talking about how the "truth matters" and I'm using "libel" and "slander" against you. I think it's time you drop the facade that the truth matters to you more than me, and your real intent here isn't what it always is, propagandizing for your faction. Now can we agree to disagree and shut up about it or are you going to keep coming back every 3 posts to shout about the "truth"?
×
×
  • Create New...