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 reacted to taroskin in The Issue Is Not Campaign Permanence: We Need An Iron Throne   
    Hello all,
     
    First up, thank you Todd for creating your thread on talking about campaign permanence. You can find that thread here: http://community.crowfall.com/index.php?/topic/3258-lets-talk-about-campaign-permanence/. Everyone here appreciates you creating that forum for talking about this issue, and appreciates that you are listening.
     
    I wanted to bring up something that may be overlooked and need clarified in a clear manner for Todd and the team to gather feedback from. It's obvious that the team is worried about participation in the campaigns and the image of campaigns as feedback from the hardcore and pvp crowds from several communities have pointed out a dislike of the design setup of the EK & campaigns.
     
    This thread is based around an attempt to clarify this issue for the team to have some feedback to work with, and in response to a post by Todd within the above thread, as I believe people aren't actually asking for that, but rather want their success to be persistent and a "measuring stick" at the very least to clearly exist as a mechanic that drives politics, rivalry, motivation to improve and fuels Campaign warring:
     
     
     
     

     
     
    It should be clearly stated: very few people are having an issue with the campaigns being temporary. This has to be said; all players including the SB crowd know that this is vital to the vision of the game and to the design of the game. We know it'll help with stagnation and making things fun in the long term. However, there could be issues with re-playability and more importantly, issues with players feeling their actions in the Campaigns are meaningless. This does not mean people want to stay in the same campaign forever. Do not take it that way, please! So what does it mean?
     
    It means we want our efforts and actions in the campaigns to have meaning. There is currently a perceived lack of meaning to these actions, which is unrelated to wanting to stay in one campaign forever. People want to move about the different campaigns, reset the board and try out the different rulesets. But they want their actions within those campaigns to have meaning, effect and impact. This is where the problem lies.
     
     
     

     
     
    Our actions within the Campaigns, and our success in those campaigns should have meaning! If the assets and things I lose in the campaigns are temporary, or largely so, then the meaning of success and risk within the game is very low, also. So we need our actions, successes and triumphs within the Campaign worlds to have more effect on the game. I want to know who is top dog. I want to know how I'm doing in comparison to my rivals. I want to have goals that I can aim to achieve. Right now, a lot of this is either greatly diminished by the temporary nature of Campaigns (which is fine), but there is no mechanic to tie it together to make my actions have real meaning.
     
     
     

     
     
     
    Most of the feedback being given is around this problem. Not campaign permanence. So how do we solve the problem? Most of the feedback in this area is about dissatisfaction with the Eternal Kingdoms from the PvP/Hardcore crowd. I realise this is a social, building, trophy area, but there is no reason it can't also give the PvP/Competitive crowd tools to have fun, compete and give the Campaigns real, tangible impact. This can't be as stringently stated as feedback because the design and vision of the game is in Todd & the team's hands, but we can give them the feedback to make such a solution from their vision:
     
    Where are the Thrones that matter? This is a throne war game. But the persistent game has none. Why don't Thrones exist within the EK that guilds can vie for using the power, resources and political capital they have gained within the Campaigns? This would be a true measure of success. There is NO MEASURE OF SUCCESS for competitive guilds right now. Who cares if you have an Ivory Castle. My guild has 7 by now, and 3 guys with massive kingdoms with land bought from the cash shop. We want real, competitive mechanics and political intrigue that persists through and exists above the Campaigns. If the Campaigns are the only mediums of competition, there is no measure of success and  
     

     
     
    Imagine the world of Game of Thrones. It's a glorious world full of backstabbing, strife and political intrigue. The rules are constantly changing and the world is, too. All of that is because of a context. He who holds the Iron Throne rules. Everything within the Game of Thrones happens because of a motivation, because of a reason, because of a context. Some people want power, some want to rule, and some want to just survive. However, there's always a measure of these things at work.
     
    When we come to Crowfall we could look at the Campaigns as wars within this universe. But why are we warring? The things we're warring over in the Campaign will be (mostly) lost, so what's the point? To build a fanciful cosmetic paradise in the safety of the EK? To have fine silks and rare buildings in my own little personal kingdom? So everyone is a king with equal power and risk? No. There isn't really an overarching point to it that has been revealed to us. We're warring mostly.. "just because"... and for the PvP crowd, I'm sorry - that's not enough.  We have no goal to reach, no rivals to care about and no motivation to be the best - because there just isn't a real measure of that. We need that Goal. We need that persistent motivation to best our rivals.
     
    We need an Iron Throne. No.. an ETERNAL THRONE.
     
    We need something in the Eternal Kingdoms that says, "This kingdom, this guild, or this Leader is the most successful this world has known.". We need something to stir political intrigue. To paint targets. To identify who is doing well, who your rivals are and who you need to royally screw over in the next campaign. Without this single, over-arching, binding principle, there is no weight or impact to my actions and success within the Campaigns. We need this unifying mechanic to tie all of the Campaigns together, to tie our successes to real, tangible results and to drive political intrigue, rivalry, alliances and motivation.
     
    We need some mechanic that uses what we accrue from our successes and failings within the Campaign worlds to boost our political capital and success in the Eternal Kingdom or an overarching Political system or within a permanent fixture mechanic within the Eternal Kingdoms (such as a Ruler System for the eternal kingdoms) that is both consensual but with meaning and risk - if you don't partake you are missing out, but if you do you are risking everything for that glory. I want to be able to CLEARLY see who is winning and who is in power. I want to be able to CLEARLY measure my own success against my rivals. I want to have MOTIVATION to do better. None of this exists to the degree necessary for the Competitive crowd.
     
    Without this mechanic we are stuck in an everlasting war that has no meaning, no substance, no risk and no glory. But we'll have pretty castles in the 1,000,000 personal kingdoms of the EK, I suppose. So there's that.
     
    EDIT: Note; the "Iron Throne" is a metaphor. It could be whatever Todd and his team decide fits in with their vision. The important part is this: a mechanic that measures and rewards success in a persistent environment (the EK) depended upon success and resources within the Campaigns, fueling political intrigue and competition.
     
     
     
    Thanks for reading. In closing, I would like to remind you all of the vision statement that this project presented to us. I think it ties this whole post together, and infact highlights the area of concern we all have. We don't want another meaningless trophy. We want to compete to claim the "throne" (metaphor again!). We want to play to crush.
     
     
     
     

     
     
     
     
    TL;DR: The issue with Campaigns and the design shown to us is NOT Campaign permanence. It's the feeling that success within the Campaigns has no effect on the world. There is no persistence, no measure of success, no persisting political intrigue and no fueling of wars. There is no meaning. We need a PvP/Competitive mechanic or a mechanic that measures success from the Campaigns to exist within the persistent world of the Eternal Kingdoms so that the Campaigns, and thus success in the campaigns, have meaning and importance. Without this we are just fighting an eternal war for the next cosmetic magical rainbow carp to hang in our castle. And that just won't do. We are JUST FINE with the campaigns being temporary. We ARE NOT just fine with them heaving nearly no meaning.
  2. Like
    Nyt reacted to chowmeister in Small Cloud-Based Inventory = Guaranteed Reward For Campaign Participation   
    Yah, man, I conceded your point in my last post that anything greater than 0% export for losers would make my idea moot. I was just trying to make a cheeky joke about you writing "I think.." as the English teacher in me immediately labeled it as an opinion. Sorry if it was ill-timed or (more likely) not funny! No hard feelings
  3. Like
    Nyt reacted to sheen in Telegraphs Need To Go (New Gameplay Trailer)   
    You're comparing a forum for a game that is 2 years out to forums for hardware that is important to everyday life. 
     
    A better comparison would be comparing it to other forums for products in development.  Where you will have people discussing what they've heard and the pros and cons of it. 
  4. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from mal in Small Cloud-Based Inventory = Guaranteed Reward For Campaign Participation   
    This is more of your opinion... I think we really need to drop this idea and move on.  Let's see how popular the various campaigns are post-release before adding in guaranteed exports.  With their current system, they have a LOT of flexibility to do A/B testing of campaign rules.  Guaranteed loot is unnecessary as the same result can be made by the devs having campaigns with a minimum 10% loser export.  There's no need to add extra coding for guaranteed loot export slots.
  5. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from ellie in Marriage in Crowfall   
    Welcome to the Nyt Resort EK, where you can enjoy an amazing wedding, reception, honeymoon, and divorce all in one EK! No need to travel between EKs, the Nyt Resort has everything you need in a single EK.
     
    Enjoy that romantic wedding on the beach at sunset or on a mountain peak under the stars.  Stay in a luxurious large castle while your guests enjoy the streets where they can purchase that perfect wedding gift.
     
    While on your honeymoon, enjoy that special 1v1 PvP experience and we'll even provide the divorce papers before you leave.
     
    Nyt Resort EK, your wedding destination!
  6. Like
    Nyt reacted to mal in Small Cloud-Based Inventory = Guaranteed Reward For Campaign Participation   
    Better quote....
     
    Korren, on 27 Feb 2015 - 11:25 AM, said:
     
    "This is why I feel it is important to have different Import restrictions on different Campaigns: some people will feel strongly about starting clean, others will feel strongly about carrying over some rewards.
     
    I don't have a feeling for the % of players who will fall to one side or the other on that spectrum, but luckily, I don't have to.  We'll watch the Campaigns to see which are more popular, and let the good one multiply and the weak ones die off.  Survival of the fittest.
     
    Todd"
  7. Like
    Nyt reacted to teekey in Open Up Ek To Player Voxel Creations!   
    I hope this is a joke
     
     
    I hope this is a joke.
  8. Like
    Nyt reacted to harrowedmind in A Combat System Without Cooldowns, Would You Prefer It?   
    I like mana or stamina bars because it doesn't limit specific abilities or actions, it's an overall limit. This way you can do 2 of the best attacks you have or 10 or the weakest and anything in between and manage an overall character cool down then the magical explination of I just did my fireball spell so I can't do that now but I can do any other spell I want.
     
    Cool down also force combos on players rather than letting them find their own combo abilities.
  9. Like
    Nyt reacted to Taegan in Cinematic Presentation/ Fully Voiced Conversations.   
    While I like fully voiced scenes, I'm not sure Crowfall will be much of a venue for them.  Really not much PvE, and mostly sandbox which won't really warrant voice work.
  10. Like
    Nyt reacted to Arawulf in Lifetime Vip   
    For a $250 pledge you get six years of VIP. Not technically lifetime, but I say that's a pretty good value ($1080 worth of VIP)
  11. Like
    Nyt reacted to s@msonite in A Combat System Without Cooldowns, Would You Prefer It?   
    I see alt of people saying "Well then I could spam a powerful skill if there are no cooldowns".
     
    No, because of the cost. These skills would have much higher costs in a balanced system.
     
    Example:
     
    Energy pool: 100
     
    Aoe Stun: 80 energy
    High damage Nuke: 75 energy
    Low damage slow: 15 energy
    Low damage debuff: 25 energy
     
    You would have to choose what skill to use in what situation. You could spam the slow or debuff a couple times. Or you could save up for the nuke. Maybe the stun is better for the situation.
     
    And there is something wrong with cooldowns. They artificially stop you for no reason other than a made up time limit. Using a mana/stamina only system limits you only by your characters energy. Which fits much better. And is much mroe fluid.
  12. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from Savvy in A Combat System Without Cooldowns, Would You Prefer It?   
    For certain gaming mechanics, yes.  When designing anything that people will use, albeit a car, website, mobile application, coffee machine, or a video game... it all comes down to how can we make the user experience more organic, fluid, and familiar... while keeping things simple.  The closer video game mechanics get to RL mechanics, the more comfortable and familiar experience the player will experience.
     
    Video games have a long history of providing mechanics based on limitations of hardware and software available... most of these restrictions no longer exist, so why are games still holding on to old mechanics?
  13. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from Savvy in A Combat System Without Cooldowns, Would You Prefer It?   
    This can all be achieved more naturally with a resouce (e.g. focus/stamina/mana, etc...) cost system.  It would require even more skill and dynamic reactions than the old CD system. 
     
    We don't have a CD on our abilities in RL, there's really no point to having it in a game.  For example, when I swing a bat, it costs # physical energy (stamina), and if I keep swinging it and swinging it, the more energy I lose and it doesn't replenish until I stop and take a break.  If I start throwing a ball, I'm draining more energy and not replenishing until I stop.  This is all very natural and without a hard CD.  Continuing the example, I can chose to throw 3 balls or 1 bat with the amount of energy I have remaining... or, I can reserve 1 energy for a possible dodge/escape and use 2 energy to throw 2 balls.
     
    The old CD system... and fixed rotations... are antiquidated.  Time to evolve.
  14. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from Savvy in A Combat System Without Cooldowns, Would You Prefer It?   
    I have to agree in that everything my character does, should drain a physical and/or mental resource on my character.  This will naturally apply a cooldown for some abilities.  For example, say my magic user has a very OP nuke ability... sure, I can cast it, but it costs #physical (for the body movement) and even higher #mental (for the spell itself)... and/or have a "focus" bar.  IF I use this ability, I will be left drained and unable to cast most other abilities for a certain amount of time.  If I continue to cast smaller resourced abilities, it'll be a long time before I'm able to cast that OP nuke ability again.
     
    W/e resource is used, the recharge should have different rates for in-combat (still using abilities) and out-of-combat (not using abilities).  This will lead to stronger group tactics as they can strategically plan out what types of attacks group members should spend their resource on... while weaving in and out of the combat front line.  Spammers will naturally be penalized with a slower recharge and weaker abilities.
     
    The old ability CD system is ready for retirement.
  15. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from bahamutkaiser in Telegraphs Need To Go (New Gameplay Trailer)   
    After dealing with them in WildStar... along with the many issues with them (e.g. lag between PvP players cause the telegraphs to be out of sync on the screens of both players and w/e the server thinks they are), they're not necessary and can cause more issues than provide benefit.
     
    AOE attacks (e.g. from spell casters) can still have some sort of rune circle before their spellcast animation cycle, but to have them for every type of attack is unnecessary.  We've gone many, many years without them and WildStar proved that it's just overkill and unnecessary.
  16. Like
    Nyt reacted to stiler in A Combat System Without Cooldowns, Would You Prefer It?   
    Lower options?
     
    Without cooldowns the options rest more in the players hands usually in terms of what ability they wish to use in what orde.r
     
    When you have cooldowns you generally get into a habit of "rotation" of abilities, where because of the cooldowns you are forced to cycle through a list of skills since the game takes away the ability to (Generally) use the same skill until the cd is up.
  17. Like
    Nyt reacted to whizkid in Suggestion For New 'amber Digital Edition' Tier For Backers.   
    did u read or understand what +ALL PREVIOUS REWARDS mean? what u are proposing affects not only the amber patron level BUT from Amber onwards ... or they would have to build another branch just for your proposal...
  18. Like
    Nyt reacted to whizkid in A Combat System Without Cooldowns, Would You Prefer It?   
    this really depends on the number of people involved its its a 200vs200 large scale battle it would be a nightmare for the server if there is no CD..., besides looking at the game mechanics one should also consider if the server is able to handle network traffic load, and bear in mind not all players are playing with low latency ie. <100ms...
     
    my 2 cents
     
    p/s: I remember shadowbane the server froze for minutes not seconds and when u finally unfreeze u just lost a city and that is ANTI-fun cause 200+ players just lost a couple of hours getting on time for the siege just to lose it due to server issues...
  19. Like
    Nyt reacted to Slink in How Can Mounts Add To The Game Experience?   
    I'm interested in seeing a realistic type of mount/horse system:
     
    Simplistic mounted combat that includes physics for charging, you can't really do a lot of fancy attacks on a horse after all. This would need suitable counters in place. Mounts can be attacked and killed Players can breed mounts in some way and/or npc's sell mounts relatively cheaply Mounts never despawn(except when the owner also logs out) and can be stolen A horse loyalty/training system, well trained mounts are easier to control for the owner and are significantly harder to steal/control by the thief NPC and Player owned stable's in town that let you safely store your mount, could charge players for this and be another gold sink. Player owned stables can be damaged and releases all the mounts stored in it as it takes more and more damage A certain degree of randomness in controlling the mount, much like riding a real horse, it takes time to stop, hard to turn especially at speed, constantly need to adjust direction as the horse drifts left and right on it's own but is easier to control on a road. Mounts have stamina and can't sprint forever Mounts move slightly faster and drain less stamina on roads. Mounts can be startled or stubborn and sometimes ignore your commands because of this, ties into the loyalty system. Possibly a skill that lets you have greater control over your mount Possibly a skill that lets you have greater control of mounts that are unloyal to you, allowing for an easier time in stealing other players mounts. Mounts used for transportation of resources/goods.
  20. Like
    Nyt reacted to s@msonite in Telegraphs Need To Go (New Gameplay Trailer)   
    Disregard skill cielings, skill floors, animations and all of that.
     
    Ask yourself a question:
     
    What do you want to be looking at?
     
    Your opponent?
    or
    The ground?
  21. Like
    Nyt reacted to raeshlavik in Character Artwork And Character Looks Creation   
    I'm with Teekey here. In character creation these days you have options that are simply invisible in-game.
     
    No one, and I mean no one, will know if you have lip type 3 or lip type 7 once you hit 'okay' on the creation screen.
     
    Options to make characters unique should be things that actually make a visible difference - skin colors / patterns, height / weight, broad facial types encompassing eyes, ears, facial structure, patterning, etc., and visible bits like wings, horns, tails.
     
    All else is invisible when your avatar is 300 pixels tall.
  22. Like
    Nyt reacted to silk in How To Ruin A Pvp Game. . . And Other Topics   
    PLEASE don't build a lovely pvp game and ruin it by creating incentives to avoid PVP.
     
     
    Seriously.  So many games (both those designed for PVP and those where it's an afterthought) have done this over the years.  
     
    I'll try to keep this short, but it likely won't be, apologies in advance.  Summary at the bottom.
     
    It all comes down to risk/reward.  A game has to be designed in such a way that in the majority of cases (not all), players have more to gain than to lose when engaging in pvp, especially in the small scale, more random encounter type.  If the opposite is true, for whatever reason, players will actively avoid fights unless they are assured of victory.  This very quickly leads to less fun, and declining populations, which is a nasty spiral.  
     
    For example, when repair costs in Shadowbane were lowered drastically, in combination with gold drops being slowly raised over time, you had a lot more people engaging in "random" fights, instead of running/recalling away, because there's always a chance to win, pvp is fun, and a death no longer meant 20 minutes of farming to pay off the repair cost.  
     
    In UO, if you were running around red looking for people to kill, you never wore your best stuff, until you had a lot of it, and usually a sizable pack of other players to run around with. You were much more likely to lose your GM poisoned Vanq katana (for instance) than you were to loot another one. 
     
     
    Again, I'm going with the assumption that we are looking at a full loot system in crowfall.  If I'm wrong and on death you just lost the contents of your backpack, much of what I'm saying will still hold, since it seems like resources will be much of what is at risk when people pvp.  
     
    If your equipment is at risk when you pvp, you must be able to cheaply and quickly replace it, and get back out to PVP more.  Further, the functional difference between "good" gear and "the best" gear needs to be quite small.  In a perfect world, the COST difference between "good" gear and "the best" gear is also correspondingly small.  If you are playing, and come upon a group of players 50% larger than you, you MUST NOT have the incentive to run away.  The design must be such that you say "lets give it a shot, we aren't sure, even likely to win, but if we do, it will be worth it".  If you lose, the design must be such that you say "lets re-arm real quick and go out and take another shot".  It must not be "Eh, we have no chance against their numbers, and I can't pay for another set of armor, we have no shot, I'm gonna log."  
     
    Likewise, if you are running around in "good" equipment, and come across an even sided fight with an opponent who has "the best" equipment, then you have to be able to say "we can totally take them, their gear doesn't give them that much of an advantage".  If they are 50% more powerful because they have better gear, and you have a very small chance of winning even if you play well, you are gonna run away, and the strong group is gonna get tired of people always running away from them.  Both groups of players will quickly get bored and quit.  
     
    Insert the same example for groups of higher and lower leveled characters, or with higher or lower levels of training, etc etc etc.  
     
    To create pvp, you must offer good rewards for the victor, along with a bigger target on their backs, while not punishing the losers.  There are all kinds of ways to do that.  You can offer a sliding curve for experience/currency/resource rewards, where guilds that are bigger are worth more, guilds with higher K/D ratios (or some other measure of effectiveness) are worth more.  If my group rolls into a zone and sees a group of some elite guild, a group of some newb guild, and a couple other groups in between, it should be worth it to go after the elite guild (and its rewarding the victors with more opportunities to fight).  
     
    To do this properly means abandoning the typical treadmills present in PVE MMOs.  You should NEVER have a huge leveling curve, or a huge equipment/gearing curve.  It should be fairly quick and easy to level, and to level alts (especially in a game that looks to have so much character diversity).  It should be quick and cheap to mas produce "good" gear for everyone, and even "the best" gear shouldn't cost you much more in time or resources.  Make it fairly painless for players to have many fully leveled and FULLY GEARED characters.  This will only enhance the pvp spec variety and keep people interested in your game.  Do this right and you create a game that is accessible to both casual players and hardcore players, by taking the "grindy" aspects off the players and putting them on the shoulders of the guilds.  
     
    The "treadmill" has to move to the territory/city/conquest side.  If you keep the difference between "good" and "best" gear/trainers/buffs/whatever small, then you can very easily tie "the best" things into building and ranking a city, and holding territory. Don't have a city?  Then your "good" stuff is still plenty good enough to compete with someone who has a fully ranked city and can make "the best" stuff, which is hopefully only 5-10% better.  Give the casual players with low amounts of playtime the ability to have a fully leveled and geared character, and be able to contribute in pvp by working within a guild.  Give the hardcore players the opportunity to level a dozen or more characters, experiment with them, try new tactics, explore new specs.  Doing this will make the barriers to entry low, keep population high, and keep the endgame meta dynamic fresh. 
     
     The city/territory side also has to have a careful balance.  The risk/reward should be higher here than anywhere else, but still not so high the losing a city is devastating to a guild.  City and territory conquest has to be accessible to the small guilds, while offering the large guilds rewards and bragging rights, and making them worth taking on by other guilds.  
     
     
    TL:DR
     
    Don't create reasons to avoid pvp, even when outnumbered or underleveled/geared.
     
    Re-equipping and getting back out to pvp should be cheap and easy.
     
    The combat effectiveness delta between low and high levels, gear, training should be kept very small.  
     
    Combat should be rewarding to the victors without punishing the losers.
     
    It should be fairly easy and fairly cheap for players to fully level and full gear many characters, in contrast to every other PVE MMO on the market.  
     
    The "treadmill" should be on the city/territory conquest side, should be player driven, and should be on the guild as a group, not on any individual, so that both casual and hardcore players have a reason to stay.  
     
    Risk/reward for territorial control should be higher than anywhere else, but not so high that loss of a city/territory leads people to stop playing.  
  23. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from the sorceress in Telegraphs Need To Go (New Gameplay Trailer)   
    After dealing with them in WildStar... along with the many issues with them (e.g. lag between PvP players cause the telegraphs to be out of sync on the screens of both players and w/e the server thinks they are), they're not necessary and can cause more issues than provide benefit.
     
    AOE attacks (e.g. from spell casters) can still have some sort of rune circle before their spellcast animation cycle, but to have them for every type of attack is unnecessary.  We've gone many, many years without them and WildStar proved that it's just overkill and unnecessary.
  24. Like
    Nyt got a reaction from mythx in Telegraphs Need To Go (New Gameplay Trailer)   
    After dealing with them in WildStar... along with the many issues with them (e.g. lag between PvP players cause the telegraphs to be out of sync on the screens of both players and w/e the server thinks they are), they're not necessary and can cause more issues than provide benefit.
     
    AOE attacks (e.g. from spell casters) can still have some sort of rune circle before their spellcast animation cycle, but to have them for every type of attack is unnecessary.  We've gone many, many years without them and WildStar proved that it's just overkill and unnecessary.
×
×
  • Create New...