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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Ajokoira

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Language

Recent Profile Visitors

169 profile views
  1. Nerf is the wrong request. Are you going to ask for the uniform Disc to be nerfed next? Sparring? Weapon finesse? they all do similar things but you aren't calling for those to be nerfed...yet. This is the first flag people want to run up the pole: this is too strong, nerf it! First, it isn't too strong, it works fine, IMO, however, as @Staff said, stop asking for nerfs, ask for a solution that does not require making something less powerful, ask for a buff somewhere else that would counter that. Maybe Melee get an extra dodge built into their classes so they can stick to ranged better? maybe they get a pull that strips dodge pips instead of having to use two skills? Nerfing everything is just a lazy, no thought, answer that is usually the wrong thing to do. No more nerfs, buff something or give a different solution to solving this issue. The current meta is very ranged friendly and I, as much as anyone else, don't want to see this turn into caster/ranger wars. I do want a viable way for melee to be relevant. To me, an extra dodge, or a naturally faster dodge regen (outside the Major) is a good idea. The big issue as I see it is that melee cannot close the distance before they are whittled down by range and if they do manage to catch them, ranged just dodge away. So, buff the knight pull/Myrm Net so that it automatically strips two dodge pips instead of having to cast a 2nd skill. This way, if we give melee a 3rd dodge in a melee on melee fight you are not auto locked, but a ranged toon would be. Looking at knight and Myrmidon here. Or, and here is an awesome idea, we buff Wardens, Assassins, Brigands so they can actually be useful in large fights and give them the ability to control the field and lock down ranged. It happened to me last night, a stealther of some variety hit me with expose, I immediately double tapped my dodge and was on the other side of the field, no way it was going to keep up. What if expose stripped my dodge? made me stay there and fight? He would have had a kill most likely. I don’t know, maybe my solutions suck however, I am certain more nerfs will definitely suck. Beware of what you ask for, you just might get it.
  2. You won't be stopping me, evidenced by your desire to continue to defend points that aren't even worth considering, being honest. I am not a crafter, I am a gatherer as I stated previously. I do however, have other accounts that are crafters which are not that much of a boon to my guild when it comes to fights. They are support toons, a position that is critical, but not in combat. You see having a sub guild of crafters as something less than the main guild, it's not less, it's different with different objectives. Pretty simple point to comprehend yet you seem to be bent of putting words in my mouth and making non-points to the counter. everyone contributes, just in different ways and if the score in the current system is going to be split between active participants, then it is asinine to have players in the guild that are not contributing to the score. Again, a simple point to absorb. So, your non solution to the issue as hand, which there are plenty here supporting this side of the discussion, is useless.
  3. I am not a huge fan of either of those ideas. The idea behind an alliance and a sub-guild (my personal preference) is that it is mutually beneficial. I don't know you so I won't assume your experience. My point is I am not trying to be arrogant or condescending with these explanations. There are people that enjoy this game for the crafting only, there are also people (me among them) that enjoy the gathering aspect of the game. As a matter of fact, I thoroughly enjoy the idea that I can be out doing what I enjoy and my secondary reason for playing this game can occur and that is PvP. You seem to think that everyone that plays this is here purely for the pvp and in that you are wrong. I have a person in my guild right now that is here for the crafting and the crafting only. I feel like he should be supported in that and not told he is a 2nd class gamer this is a hur dur pvp game, move along care bear! If people want to craft that is awesome! we need what they craft, and they should be made to feel like a part of a bigger endeavor. To quote the real world: Amateurs talk combat, professionals talk logistics. Meaning anyone can fight, but if your army is starving and out of bullets, you gonna lose son. back the fantasy world, swords break, buffs fall off (food), armor breaks, you need people to replace equipment and those people need supplies. My solution, and as many others have suggested it much more inclusive without the burden of completely changing the entire game. I want to point out here that this is not my original idea. I am taking this partly from Lineage 2, prior to free- to play (an open world PvP game with sieges), with a couple modifications. It works like this (I am paraphrasing as I cannot remember the terms they used) The main Guild, this is where the Guild leader, his officers and the majority of the main guild reside. Full benefit from buffs/structures anything that can be acquired from owning a keep/Fort. 100 person limit Pledge guild - There is a permanent guild member assigned here as an officer/leader of the pledges - Pledges have 50% privilege but they can interact and work with the guild without fear of dying. This is for players that want to test drive the guild and are being evaluated by the guild for full membership. 25 person size restriction. Sub guild - This is where Alts are housed. Mainly for crafting/gathering they share the same standard as the main guild as well as privilege. 25 person size restriction with a maximum of 4 subs guilds. Alliance guild - Completely different guild, which has aligned itself to the main guild for the purpose of mutual benefit. Privilege within alliance owned structures is allocated by the main guild leader (or his designated officers) or taken away. They do not suffer friendly fire, they can benefit from heals etc. You can join an alliance or guild immediately the first time around, but once you have joined if you leave, you must wait 24 hours to join a new alliance or guild. If you are kicked from the guild or alliance, you can rejoin another guild or alliance immediately. Pledge members can leave whenever they want with no penalty. Will this benefit large guilds? it absolutely will, but lets be honest there is no perfect solution to stopping the zerg. If they want to zerg the entire game, and they have the numbers to do so, they will. What this will do though is give guilds a tool to evaluate and retain members, have alts to help support the war effort that may not necessarily want to be front line fighters, and allow an alliance that makes sense. An alliance where you can kill your alliance mates is absolutely asinine. Its hard to take that suggestion seriously. Back to the point, there has to be a way for the little guys to have the opportunity to influence the campaign, in a meaningful way while retaining their identity. Some people enjoy picking flowers, some enjoy turning those flowers into potpourri and some people enjoy beating people to death with a potpourri stick and if this game is going to go beyond a neat idea, the devs should really consider the ideas (the real ideas) that have been floated in this thread as it will appeal to a wider audience. imo. More people = more fun. At least in games.
  4. Sub guilds and alliances should be a part of Crowfall. Being able to band together, or take full advantage of systems in place should not only be available it should be encouraged. Big guilds, mega-guilds are always going to be there. As long as people tie their egos to the false sense of accomplishment that games provide there will be a place for them to gather and be around like minded people. Same thing for casuals and all in between. This doesn't mean that more casual and plain fun seekers don't enjoy competition, far from it. But when you know for a fact when you take the field you are going to be outnumbered and crushed it starts turning people away. Yes, of course the mega guild will use the same mechanics, but the point is it will allow smaller guilds that want to maintain their identity to band together, without friendly fire and being able to take full advantage of victory, to at least give these big guilds a fight. Competition is good, it creates innovation, team work, and a host of other things. Its boring just being able to crush an entire map without any effort. Being able to have your "fighting" guild work along side your crafting guild would make things much easier and give all guilds a great way to compete and contribute and even help own a fort or keep. From what I have read the card system is liked, but most guilds want to own a fort or keep and they should have the ability too. Alliances also add a deeper level of strategy to the game as well as politics. Some people play games simply for the political angle. Eve is a good example of that. They love the intrigue, drama, and everything else that comes with politics. Some people enjoy crafting and want to make the best gear they can, but they do not necessarily want to fight a battle to do it. So they join or align themselves with a combat guild and help support. Stop thinking from your own personal enjoyment of the game and try to include as many as possible. Adding alliances and/or sub guilds will give many more people the opportunity to enjoy the game, it will create a challenge for the larger guilds and is the right thing to do. The biggest issue with these PvP games is the sorry attitude: "I do not care if the game dies, as long as I have fun and win". That needs to go away, that attitude is absolutely counter to having a successful and fun PvP game.
  5. As to the affects, that is a great idea. Why drop though? I do not see the benefit to that at all. Imparting too much physics will turn this into a hunt simulator and not a fast paced pvp game. Adding wind calls, drop, leads, shooting up hill, shooting down hill, etc. will just make ranged classes not fun to play. What is really needed, imo, at this point is a way for melee to reliably close distance and lock down a ranged player.
  6. I noticed last night while playing my assassin, that 2 out of 3 times, I would try to attack from stealth, my bar would be stuck on the stealth tray, prohibiting me from using any attacks from my melee tray. A person I was grouped with was having the same issue. This was in infected.
  7. Actually as things stand now, Winter Blades and the other larger guilds that have the idea that: we don't care if we kill the game as long as we win and we have fun, is what is most in danger of killing this game. However, there is nothing that can be done to force people to play on an even playing field that will work within the confines of what we now have. I would suggest a couple things. 1. Recapture - give the guild that recently lost a fort/keep a bonus in the amount of time it takes them to recapture. using arbitrary numbers, say it takes Guild X that is attacking 2 minutes to switch the circle from neutral to owned by guild X, it would only take guild Y, the defenders, a third of that time to flip it back. Crude idea, but the point being, one giant war band can't run all over the map just taking what they want, they would have to thin themselves and defend at some point. We also need larger maps, that would help also. 2. A tiered victory system. Using arbitrary numbers. Based on participants. So if you have 50+ unique players participate in a campaign you compete directly with the other 50+ player guilds. 25 - 49, are a different tier, etc. Also, make holding multiple keeps/forts cost heavy taxes. You get points based on the first Keep/Fort you capture, subsequent captures mean they are heavily taxed with resources. So each tier would have a 1st place, so on and so forth, so even small guilds get a bonus for holding a keep and participating. Again, I realize that this will be exploited. Basically get rid of winner take all, and spread the wealth so smaller/ starting guilds can be competitive. 3. When you take a Keep/Fort - 50% of the resources return to the defender, and the Keep/fort resets to 0. Meaning you do not get to profit off other guilds work, you get to start from zero. With this, make characters, or accounts rather, that have no combat training not count towards guild numbers so if you have 10 combat accounts, and 30 crafters, it does not matter as pure crafting accounts do not bring much to a fight and will matter less and less towards direct combat as time goes on. Just some thoughts, I doubt very much that there is going to be a system that comes a long and solves all the issues.
  8. Being able to destroy (in this case a sentinel) outside siege times seems like not working as intended.
  9. Potential exploit/Something not working as intended. It is possible to stack bank boxes you can get from the buff in a keep/fort in order to jump over a fort or keeps walls and commence killing guards and destroying object inside. Seem like this is probably something that should get put on the blotter to get fixed.
  10. But really Twitch is not. as to the rest of your trolling, off topic post. No, I am not, but I am sure you will get the opportunity to speak with them soon.
  11. Twitch is no measure of player base. So, again, nice try on that straw man. Anyway, this conversation has gone on long enough in this thread, start a new one, or PM me.
  12. Fair enough, then maybe don't comment? I mean knowing what you are talking about is a good foundation for a discussion. Just saying. At any rate, PM me if you really feel the need to discuss this further, I won't be discussing this topic in this thread any more.
  13. You said there was no competition, the people that play eve had no where else to go, and while these games may not compete with Eve, they are certainly viable options. Star Citizen (https://www.businessinsider.com/star-citizen-has-raised-over-250-million-squadron-42-set-for-2020-2018-12) for an "unheard of game it had 2.2 million backers in 2018, that numbers has increased) If you have not heard of this game then you are really out of touch. No Mans Sky is very famous for it's recovery among other things. Everspace, while less popular than those three, still had a peak of 679 players in the last 30 days. Just because you don't know about them does not make them "unpopular" Star Citizen had over 300K players, Elite: in the last 30 days 4625 with a peak of 12,325, not record smashing however, certainly not "unknown" and No mans Sky had an average of 5695 with a peak of 10,852. What was CF's count? 150? 200? I am not sure, the point is these games are all pretty popular among people that enjoy space games. @ToadwartI will also point out that this discussion is derailing this thread and has absolutely nothing to do with topic, other than me proving each of your statements to be wrong. I suggest you stop trying to setup straw man arguments and return to the discussion being had, or send me a private message, but this thread is not the place to discuss other games. As I have said a few times now, we have a system, it needs some work and that is what we should be focused on in this thread, not other games and their popularity.
  14. https://www.elitedangerous.com/ https://robertsspaceindustries.com/ https://www.everspace.game/ https://www.nomanssky.com/ Just a few I have played or found in a 30 second google. ED/Star Citizen are both PvP space games and MMO's, everspace is a different take of the genre of space games, and No mans Sky is technically a space survival game, but as you can see there is a variety of space games for all tastes, these are but a few. There are choices beyond eve, which is actually more a spread sheet simulator than anything. More to the point, it doesn't matter. This is the system we have, it just needs some tweeks and it will be fine. imo.
  15. Comparing a single player PvE focused game to a MMO PvP game does not make much sense. While a lot of the system will cross over, that does not necessarily mean that they should. What works in single players games does not necessarily work in multi-player games. Obviously, I like what Duffy is saying and at the end of the day we just need to be able to get crafters into the game and wanting to stick around.
  • Create New...