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

Nyt

ACE Development Partners
  • Content Count

    1,261
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Why Ttk And The Zerg Are Inextricably Linked   
    Sorry, but scaling AOE damage does affect most of those as well.  For example, a ranged AOE with stealth could possibly devastate a group that may be clustered around an embargo, crafting station, any other POI... with a single AOE.  Also, TTK does factor into the AOE scaling as well.  So, they are all factors and intertwined.
     
    I'm still against AOE damage scaling as it's unnecessary in CF and could have some pretty nasty adverse effects, doing more damage than good.
  2. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Why Ttk And The Zerg Are Inextricably Linked   
    Yeah, I just realized that after reading a few other posts, which I have to agree.  If it's tuned too low, players are going to stop playing because nobody likes constantly running from a spawn location after 1-2 hits before having a chance to enter combat.  Especially, since there are no pure healer classes.
  3. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Why Ttk And The Zerg Are Inextricably Linked   
    I was just basing the # off of everything being equal in DPS across the players and excluding any defense abilities, buffs, and armor.  I suppose a baseline could be established by having all players with default (no) armor and their basic attacks with equal DPS per player.  How many players would it take to focus 1-ability kill a single player?
     
    At least with that baseline, you have something to tune against when you start factoring in other things like armor, buffs, etc.
  4. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Why Ttk And The Zerg Are Inextricably Linked   
    Fair enough, my fault for mis-understanding/mis-interpreting your post.
     
    With regards to PvP combat, there is a point where # players vs 1 player becomes overkill within the first attack.  What that will be, not sure.  That's more of a combat tuning issue that will get addressed during testing.  
     
    I suppose the real question here is, what is that magic # that players wish to see for that TTK?  How many players focus targeting a single player is reasonable to 1-shot kill that single player?  5? 10? 20?
  5. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Why Ttk And The Zerg Are Inextricably Linked   
    I agree, and it should.  But, it also needs to be backed by strong defensive force as well.  An undefended or very minimal defensive player force in the fortification should also render such fortification easily dominated by a strong offensive force.  Meaning, you can't expect to have a fortification alone able to withstand a focused "zerg" attack.
     
    That said, the suggestions in increasing TTK, adding RNG, and adding multipliers to players clustered together are unnecessary suggestions.
  6. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Why Ttk And The Zerg Are Inextricably Linked   
    Because most were trained to fight in organized formations and slowly dug trenches in order to bring their siege weapons into range of the fort walls.  They didn't quickly "zerg" a specific wall with siege weapons protected by ranged picking off the enemy from the walls.  They didn't keep moving around to dodge incoming fire, as it would move them out of formation.  American farmers were able to counter "British Zergs" because they didn't stick to formations and valued cover.  There are quite a few differences in strategy learned over the decades.
     
    Add to the fact that we're playing a game where we can respawn (no perma-death like in RL), it nearly nullifies any RL comparison to digital warfare.
     
    I agree with the OP, in some respect, but I don't think we need damage multipliers applied to AOEs.  That makes no sense.  It's not like a clustered zerg will currently take less damage because AOEs are spread.... every player will take damage.  Traditionally, those closest to the center will take the most damage with diminishing damage to the outter ring.  
     
    Still, you will see guilds have a fortification wall destruction force backed by a fort infiltration force.  CF will definitely show which guilds are highly strategic and trained compared to those that ... well... just exist as a guild.
  7. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Why Ttk And The Zerg Are Inextricably Linked   
    You're delusional if you think collision and no-lock ons will prevent a zerg from dropping a fort wall down.  Most players consider a 20+ player group a "zerg" and if organized and trained well, they will have the skill to effectively PvP as a "zerg" unit.  Now, of couse, the collision and TK applied to pug or non-organized zergs will take it's toll.  But, CF will have some of the best PvP players and organized guilds you will see in MMOs.  You won't be able to hide behind fortifications and TTK will be felt strongly.
  8. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Why Ttk And The Zerg Are Inextricably Linked   
    If we went back into the past with our knowledge of warfare today, those fortifications would fall within hours... not days.  A competent lead and focused zerg will trump any fortification, unless you have a zerg on defense as well.  Your example is absolutely horrible when talking about TTK.  A zerg will ALWAYS have an insanely smaller TTK than a non-zerg.... and there is no game mechanic that will stop that.  Increasing TTK will only hurt non-zergs.... and require a zerg to get anywhere in PvP.  Adding RNG to combat is equally as horrible.
  9. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Declaring War on ACE!   
    Now she'll have to take a selfie with the $ for a new avatar.
  10. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Declaring War on ACE!   
    13:00 is late lunch... by 1-2 hours.
  11. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Declaring War on ACE!   
    So much powa!
  12. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Declaring War on ACE!   
    #12 - No EK Subforum
    #13 - No Slayer Archetype
    #14 - No Parenting Subforum
    #15 - Locking Duplicate Topic Threads
    #16 - Top Hat is the only Monopoly Icon badge
    #17 - Not enough bird titles
    #18 - This thread hasn't moved to Off Topic yet
    #19 - What will the combat be like?
  13. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Declaring War on ACE!   
    Wonder how many thought it was a "dislike" button?
  14. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Declaring War on ACE!   
  15. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from intrepidfool in Currency in Crowfall: Why I Don't Want To Be a Goat Trader   
    You're correct.   I doubt that they would upset the EK-CW balance by adding pre-built structures in the store.  That heads toward pay-to-win, especially within the first 6-12 months when resources are scarce.  
     
    Ace is still working out the details on upkeep, taxes, etc... One of their last posts in the dev forum seemed like an overly concept system that was obviously still in the design phase, which I'm sure they'll simplify somehow.  So, we should just not speculate further how that'll get handled.
     
    I do know, that the lack of building tax will take your building down to Rank -1 (ruin).  After you pay the taxes, you will need to upgrade it (using resources from the CW) to 0 (under construction) and then to 1 (first functional state).  You will then be able to upgrade it from there to max rank (to be determined) with more resources.
     
    I anticipate that the resources needed for upgrades will be the primary bartered items.  You're more than welcome to favor minted coins... but I'll only accept raw resources for the items I craft or the non-resource items I export from CWs that I don't want to keep... at least until my EK is built up, which may take a very long time.  
     
    If the tax system is coins only, I'll just use the collected taxes to purchase more resources from you coin lovers.
  16. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from intrepidfool in Currency in Crowfall: Why I Don't Want To Be a Goat Trader   
    They've mentioned it since the beginning and is at the very core of connecting CWs to EKs.  Why else would you need resources from CWs if you're able to drop fully functional buildings?
     
    I don't have a lot of time right now to search around for this, but I can start you with this from the FAQ:
     
    I can somewhat see the confusion though, which they need to make more clear.  Strongholds are full on parcels, while buildings are mini-parcels that drop on top of the full parcels but in pre-determined locations within the parcel.  You'll see a lot of this explained in the most recent EK video.
     
    The confusion may be in the fact that they don't directly refer to these as blueprints, so it's possible that the initial building/stronghold is a very basic version of the building/stronghold (tier 1).  After this, they make it clear that upgrades from the basic require resources from the CW, like mentioned in this post:
     
    http://community.crowfall.com/index.php?/topic/6470-new-strongholds-in-store/page-3#entry168919
     
    I'll search further later and possibly bring up the question on the actual initial building/stronghold drop on how functional are they.  I do know that tier 0 is what your buildings eventually degrade to, which is a non-functional ruin state, which will require resources to build up again.  Every tier upgrade on every building requires resources.
  17. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from intrepidfool in Currency in Crowfall: Why I Don't Want To Be a Goat Trader   
    Sure, you can buy and place plots with coin, but buildings are just a blueprint.... you need resources to actually build the buildings.  Bigger the building, more resources you need.  At release, most everyone (at least all of the backers anyway) will already have plots and building blueprints.... and lack the resources to build them.  If the first CW takes 3 months, then that will be the earliest we'll see resources for EK building.  Players will definitely need resources more than coins.  It'll be several CW cycles (at least) before anyone will really need to spend coins on store purchases.
     
    On a side note: why are so many people being literal on the forums lately rather than using common sense within the context?
  18. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from intrepidfool in Currency in Crowfall: Why I Don't Want To Be a Goat Trader   
    It's all true, and it will largely come down to preference, with the biggest factor being the salvage loss converting coins back to ore and the time it takes to do so with large stacks.  
     
    We do know, that within a CW, usable items (e.g. armor and weapons) hold a higher priority than making a profit.  At least from a guild and PvP perspective.  Most guilds will have at least 1 dedicated skilled crafter and their goal within a CW will definitely not be a selfish profit one, but rather supporting the guild with items, using the ore resources delivered to them by other guild members.  So, within a guild ecosystem, there really is no point to coins within a CW.
     
    Sure, the guild warriors will be looting coins off the enemy, which will have to be salvaged, but coins isn't going to be an efficient or as valuable barter.  Not everyone is going to take the time to salvage items into ore and mint coins.... just to have them on the off chance a non-guild member is selling a relic or better weapon for coins. That's not a smart risk to take within a CW.
     
    I understand the passion of some people really wanting these coins to be some common value item that everything across EK and CW are held to and used.  But, in reality, I just don't see that happening.  It's just not efficient and if there's salvage loss, that would be very wasteful within a CW. I already covered why the caravan inventory reasoning doesn't make sense either.
       
    Because I like Red and others don't need to know exactly what I pledged as it should be irrelevant to discussions anyway.
  19. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from intrepidfool in Currency in Crowfall: Why I Don't Want To Be a Goat Trader   
    Since coins are an item, this would require you to export the coins, which you may only get a %.  So, why do all of this ore to coin crafting within a CW when you can just barter (pay) with items of more value within the CW?  You can't build your EK with coins, you need the raw resources... sure you can pay the taxes and buy someone else's ore, but that could also be a loss outside of the EK.  Especially within the first several CW cycles, raw resources are going to be FAR more valuable than coins, because everyone will need the raw resources to build their EK.
     
    I think we've reached a point in this discussion that we'll just have to wait and see how things pan out in-game.  Some of you are betting purely on coins, while I just don't see it realistically turning out the way you're hoping.
     
    "Hey, we deal with raw ore or ore bars... if you want to trade coins, go see those Obsidian guys."
  20. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from intrepidfool in Currency in Crowfall: Why I Don't Want To Be a Goat Trader   
    I have a feeling that you're going to be disappointed when you discover that the system didn't turn out exactly like you thought/wanted.  Read my prior post.
     
    The ONLY value that Ace is injecting into CF is crafted ore coins used to pay for CF services like taxes.  There is no central AH, nor any monetary conversion system.... everything else within the game is purely a dynamic barter system.  Players have the option to tie everything to the coinage, but how supply and demand works, and no central AH, that most likely won't be the case.  
     
    FYI, raw ore will be more valuable than crafted coins, because it's a base to which all items can be crafted.
  21. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from crayolakitty in Mmo Crafting The Bane Of My Existence.   
    Ace has mentioned this quite a few times as a design goal, which was one of my attractions to CF.  Finally, an MMO that treats crafting as a playable role for those that love crafting more than fighting.  Crafting has always been a viable role in most MMOs, but it's always been a "side-role".  CF is making it a dedicated support role, much like healing roles in most MMOs.
  22. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from crayolakitty in Mmo Crafting The Bane Of My Existence.   
    "Damn! Another faulty chest piece.... and another.... and another! WTF!!  Ah, all of this gold is tainted.... with too much blood!!!!"
  23. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from Krogar in Add-On   
    Very nicely written, Pawkette!  
     
    I would just add that WoW's UI would be nowhere close to where it is today without their addon support.  The community evolved WoW's UI.  One of my beefs with Blizzard is that they absorbed MANY WoW addons into their releases without any mention or thank you to those that worked on the original addons.  It's great that you no longer require an addon, but Blizzard could have done way better at acknowledging the great contributions from the community. /rant
     
    Additionally, the MMO UI would not have evolved nearly as much without those MMOs that provided addon support.  
     
    Same goes for non-MMO games, which wouldn't have opened the door to Indie games without the introduction of modding.  Valve wouldn't have existed if Quake didn't have modding support.
     
    Sure, there's a bit of extra planning and development to support an addon infrastructure, but it also adds far more value to an MMO, by the community, for FREE (excluding the investment in creating the addon infrastructure).
     
    World of Tanks is another great example of community added value via addons.
      IMO, providing community addon support greatly extends the longevity and community, as they are able to contribute more to the game beyond regurgitating news bits and posting opinionated articles.  That sense of ownership can be golden.
  24. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from naturalnuke in How to Recognize "You"   
    Unfortunately, like warcrimes pointed out, the gameplay elements within Crowfall doesn't really support the ability of using an account-wide name, unless accounts are joined to a single guild and any political espionage would require a secondary account.  If this is the case, they could implement an account "family" name, which can be used as a suffix or prefix, in which case should probably just be the same account name we use in the forums.
     
    For security reasons, I prefer not having my account name used for authentication purposes.... like Ace currently has implemented.
     
    GW2 uses an <account name>.<account id> as a complete identifier.
     
    Personally, I've grown accustomed to having a unique name in every MMO, that I have an array of names I use for various characters, which are typically always available.  Use a unique name and not a popular one (e.g. the many versions of Legolas in LotR).... problem solved.
  25. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from Albert Rock in An Invitation.   
    I thought that you had to drop your pledge down a bit due to medical reasons?  Who's EK will you be using for this?  I have a nice sized EK, but it may fill up with guild members first (priority), and/or renting space out to other traders.  Although, it doesn't hurt to open up little shops in multiple EKs though.
     
    A few things to consider, EK Monarchs will have the ability to impose a tax on all trades within the EK and the following from the FAQ:
     
     
    All of this sounds good on paper, but we'll have to see just how feasible it will be toward release, which we have well over a year and a half to go.
×
×
  • Create New...