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

dubanka

Testers
  • Content Count

    452
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by dubanka

  1. i'm not getting what locking the camera adds to gameplay? to get the 'sneak up' factor, i would assume they'd be able to put in character detection checks based on incoming toon direction, equipment being worn, etc. you could mouselook all you wanted, but unless you were actually facing the right direction, you wouldn't 'see' them.
  2. just take a step back... Why do you need a larger variety of critters? you're not 'leveling' or 'skilling up'...that is all time based. while i'm sure there will be some story driven elements that pop up (potential disc quests or whatnot), this will not be a hold your hand while you walk down the treadmill game. mobs will be (likely) a) guarding poi's guarding/protecting discs c) interspersed to present obstacles/randomness to normal gameplay...like i could see some of the more wild areas fairly mobbed up, as a barrier to whatever it is they are protecting. i don't see there being spawns, like you'd typical see...or great fields of bunny rabbits with great big bloody teeth.
  3. unless you're vn, or have previously expressed a love for wow pvp...I don't believe he was responding to you?
  4. So long as buffs are 'self only' it really elminates the whole buff problem... the buffs become identified as a characteristics of that archetype (fine) there is no buffbot issue/requirement because....buffs are self only. give a few archetypes the ability to dispel buffs, a few more to drop debuffs, and voila we're good. but yeah...generally less is more.
  5. dubanka

    OCC

    pointless bump to stay off of page 2.
  6. Definitely looks solid. hits all the points noted here a nice added touch of awesomeness would be if we could toggle the format of some of the display icons...currently its all very rounded...a chunkier square look would be nice, or maybe it's the ability to 'just' change the dynamic of the display shape (like changing a line size). I'm sure it will be there, but color toggling for the display (chat?) items would also be nice. hold out from ye old mud years was make sure the 'important' stuff splashed nice and bright across the screen.
  7. well...i just hope all of yall are misunderstanding and are incorrect. i'd much rather see an updated version of the shadowbane model (free tree/city placement within non mob/event zones on on the map) than either the darkfall model (more or less what is being described, claim existing ruins, upgrade) or the Archeage Model model (building structures only on specifically designated parcels on the map) here's to me being right
  8. you seem really hung up on the belief that none of the long term sb players actually play other games, and do so fairly well. anyway. Actually i dont think the videos we have seen illustrate what 'they are looking at for their combat' at all...they illustrate some of the individual skills and movements...giving you an idea of how that character might function in an engagement...but again, just wagering, I think they are looking at a combat model balanced around groups of players, not individuals. Individual skill counts for something...more so the smaller the fight gets...as you scale up those numbers group composition, interaction and reaction speed typically play a much greater roll than the skills of one player. but feel free to hang on to the notion...you can be that guy screaming, "...LETS DUEL!!!!!!..."
  9. OK, since a couple decided to to billy internet badbuttox, here, i will clearly state what has been stated. Q: Can we get more clarification on what state buildings and strongholds will be in when initially dropped on a plot. TB: They'll be in ruins I think JTC: When you stumble upon one that was dropped by the system not by a player, it would be in a ruin state. When a player drops one specifically it should start initially in the construction states...blah blah blah ranking upgrading -1, 0, state 1. pretty simple blah. The clarification here, is on the 'one' and what 'one' represents. The question referenced buildings and strongholds (again so sorry internet warriors for generically saying 'city' and not 'stronghold')...but the answer did not differentiate. now when you factor in we have a faq reference for finding elements, that combine and create a bloodstone tree, which you would build your 'stronghold' around...well when i put those together i seem to think that we will be able to create a city grid...a la the EK model, at places other than the designated ruins. this is not to be confused with 'placing a parcel anywhere in the world'... so yeah...clarification and all that.
  10. The topic has come up in a couple threads about 'what will be the general dynamic of city building'?. Will city building consist solely of finding a ruin, claiming it, then building it up? Will city construction allow players to independently create cities throughout the map? i thought kinda closed the discussion with an answer of what seemed to be 'all of the above' ... but there is enough wiggle in what was said, or rather not said, where that has come into some dispute. So from a ruins standpoint...what would be the benefit of of developing a set of ruins over placing a city (assuming you had that option). I read previously that ruins would be a site where we would find thralls...would city development on a ruin site eliminate this potential? So my developing it, am i trading future resources for near term resources. Would developing a ruins site present any design limitations (besides it's preexisting static location)...like a 'tier 2 ruin site can only be developed to x, whereas a tier 5 site can be developed to z'? If we are able to place our own cities on the map...will there be limits (a la post ToO sb) on how many city sites can go in any given geographic area? I would assume there would be limitations on city proximity to each other...would there be any advantage to build your own city, vs take over a ruin besides the obviously geography piece? I guess i wouldn't have that much issue with a ruins only approach...even in sb there were 'top tier city locations' on any given mapsets where players sprinted to grab...as they generally granted superior access to spawns or control of resources...and in each restart, a lot of cities popped up in pretty much the same location. Oddly, the main reason i'd like to see player created cities, is that it gives the population a chance to screw up City placement, design and construction should be just another layer in the game's strategic fabric...another element that demands a level of competence in order to be successful. I don't think we really get this if our city options are 'canned'.
  11. like driving. 16-25 year olds have reflexes and senses that should make them superior drivers compared to the 'aged masses'. however the opposite is true. They are, by far, the worst drivers because a) their brains aren't fully developed from a 'judgement' standpoint...ie. risk they lack the experience to recognize hazardous situations before they actually occur and c) they know better...so anything old custards tell them with regard to a & b is categorically disregarded. I will hands down give the whipper snappers the gold star for 'mechanical combat' twitch skills, reaction time, time to stare at a screen to develop the required muscle memory to make actions automatic...all that poorly made socks fades as you get older, and your time becomes more valuable/occupied. as it pertains to crowfall, and BACK TO THE OP'S QUESTION, i don't think this will matter a whole bunch...yeah it will matter if you wind up solo, in a dark alley, against some kid who has 10hrs/day to play video games...but, just like Shadowbane, individual contests of skill are likely to be more the exception to the rule. This will be a team based game...what I see mattering more is how well groups of individuals operate together...unit cohesion. Of course, that's just on the field...just like Shadowbane...the macro game of territorial control and politics will ultimately decide who wins servers. so yes, i will cede to the knowledge that my 6 click mouse combo speed will likely pale in comparison to the OMG ELITEZ!!! But we'll see...i'm betting it won't actually matter that much...
  12. not when they're the same pvpr a lot will depend upon how things like city building, territory control and logistics (ie. how impactful are gear/food/etc.) get worked out. i honestly think that the first stages of beta are going to be make or break for a lot of the 'more casual'...the '2016 pvpr'...as anecdotally, i think a fair portion of the ~3k alpha participants are sucky playing sb loyalists...and once that big blob of read meat (beta1) comes crashing into the servers they'll get their first ever taste of 'real' open world pvp. it will be a real unknown how the faction/arena trained vets of wow/gw2/aa/etc. take to this environment. Re: OP I really believe they are setting out to make the spiritual successor to shadowbane...how they look to solve the two core reasons why sb failed will go a long way to determining how well they stick to that. Obviously i'm discounting the issue of 'bugs'...as i don't think anyone goes to to purposefully release a bugfilled monstrosity like sb was at release. so 2 things. 1. SB ate its young. It was a brutal environment that required players have a guild, and a city to work out of. team play was an absolute mandate. so you got with a guild. you spent countless hours farming to build your city, rank buildings, trainers, etc. The big bad wolf comes by drops a bane on you, rips down your walls at 4am, and camps your tree with 4x your numbers from basement till bane live. You have no chance. city go boom. GL of your merry band of misfits says, F This, his/her core most follow suit. Your guild dissolves. You are not right back where you started. Homeless and guildless. A lot of players, at this point, simply say f it at this point and walked away and never looked back. In it's early years, i would say roughly 50% of the losing guild's population would disappear, and never come back. Losing was just too harsh. EK's are cf's solution...sort of...to this (can build something that can't be wrekt). 2. Stagnation. In SB, it was possible to kill a server as most of the early-dominant release guilds demonstrated...and later the Chinese hordes that came once sb asia got shut down. It's like #1 on a server wide scale...but no where to run/rebuild...resistance was a daunting task, even for those conditioned to fighting uphill battles. CF hopes to alleviate this with servers that reset regularly. The challenge here will be to balance the task of creating/building assets on each server something that requires effort, but not so much that we dread a restart. It's easy to say, ok, Bob wins, and press the restart button...potentially a bit more difficult to get all those players to be chomping at the bit for another shot at the title. the line between, 'damn we almost had that one, can't wait for the next shot'...and, 'damn, thats hogwash, we should have had that if it weren't for those zerging cheating asshats at the end...custard this game'...is a pretty small one. what i hope will be comparable is that pvp will be primarily group centric, with strengths and weakness of various arrangements and we get the feeling, like in sb, that your actions effected the game world permanently...no experience was ever exactly the same.
  13. dubanka

    Is it sad....

    more of a snack than a meal.
  14. every city was it's own nut to crack....geography...was it on an island, bordered by rivers, wall orientation , wall layout...both internal and external. if you spec tailored to defend your city? or take your opponents? it's just an extra element in the tactical/strategic layering that would be a shame if they left out.
  15. how they are built will go a long ways to determining the fun factor of the sieges
  16. no, you are incorrect. Hacks involves players manipulating data in a manner the game did not mean for it to be manipulated. ie. running faster than inted. teleporting to map points seeing other players./mobs outside of the normal visual range (ie. radar) what i'm saying is that players should have the option of seeing the data the game is already tracking on their char. hps. check mana. check stamina check resolve? check now seeing another players resolve level, if it was not meant to be seen? Now that would be a hack. you seem pretty focused folks being the 'best players'. some players just get a kick out of playing with friggin formulas. and wtf does that have to do with whether or not we can see the data on our own characters or not? troll on anonynail.
  17. the problem with the 'little info as possible' position...is that someone(s) will create some utilities that will give players 'all the info possible'. so then the devs find themselves of constantly having to police versions of that, whereas they could have just give us the option to see as much information as we want. dont create laws you can't enforce...
  18. well, i don't think i'll get the answers from the anonymous nail that i'm looking for here.... so i'll finish up my involvement by in this lovely thread by saying that I, along with 30ish of my no skill having long term sb player guildmates are looking forward to cf ... and hopefully, it has enough of a hook and depth for crappy players like us to invest a few years of our time into...
  19. i don't think you should see your opponents (like an opponent health bar). but i think the player should see their own.
  20. yeah you're correct, i ddin't see his post mentioning he was a procing until after hit posted. the priests of that era were hilarious tho...GM O stance, dual wield from bw, Elf Int...they just exploded people.
  21. ok you mentioned yoou were procing. this mechanic was also changed so you couldn't just make your balanced dagger tossing scout (or priest...the early bw chucker priests were hilarious). the mechanic changed so you actually had to hit your target for the proc to fire. but again, you prove my point...beta knowledge means that you would have had an understnading of how procs worked, what were the good ones, etc. It took a good bit for the mmasses to catch up...and as they did, things got nerfed or buffed.
  22. it's actually called 'game mechanics' with post ToO mods (ie. weapon mods not available at release) you could hit the speed cap. leg of alac would have been your fastest weapon...giving you 3, maybe 4 attacks per hand, per animation. of course going this route would have made you horrible gimp. as the way to go, especially 'back then' would have been warlords of slaughter, as you'd be getting the stacking warlord dam per hand...especially nasty when honed (but you didn't do any honing back then) . but even warlords of slaughter would have been gimp as a scout since you only got 25...well they raised it to 25, i think at release it had been forgotten about, so they were at like 5. but yeah, even the most mundane of 'late sb' would have schooled you...based strictly upon your lack of understanding of the game's mechanics at the time. which is my point... you can't categorically say that the early guilds were better than the later guilds. it was a different game. it was more than just who could put the most poorly made socksty builds on the field...which is what 'your period' of sb amounted to.
×
×
  • Create New...