• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


PopeUrban last won the day on April 16

PopeUrban had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About PopeUrban

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Guild
    Flames of Exile
  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Fort Wick

Recent Profile Visitors

1,914 profile views
  1. Murder of Crows AMA

    In my experience in SWG, GW1, Shadowbane, GW2, and EVE, the membership of my own guild and guilds I have been a part of in said games, and any quick google search. Hey here's a few quick links: https://www.dailydot.com/parsec/adult-women-largest-gaming-demographic/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/232383/gender-split-of-us-computer-and-video-gamers/ There are exactly four women among players in my guild playing crowfall right now, with another five waiting for soft launch (of a total 20) and this is similar to my past experiences in MMOs. Like I said, you may be less alone than you think
  2. Chat Recommendations

    1: Yeah sure. Its silly you can't. 2: The entire social/chat interface is currently undergoing a rework because it sucks. We should have other nice things when that drops (maybe as early as 5.7 if we are lucky) like combat log and not having to type out /trade name every time we want to trade. 3: No. Global server chat is important to the social dynamic of a competitive game. Global chat creates drama, drama creates fights, fights drive the content. Players often tend to forget that there are two objectives when designing a social game. Players need incentives to make new friends AND new enemies. Nothing helps players make enemies like things getting a little personal (within the context of the game of course, lets not get out of hand here) I literally can not remember the names of most of the people I kill, or that kill me. The ones I remember are largely due to interaction in chat after fights. My personal desire to kill or avoid certain actors in based only in part by previous combat experience, but also against those interactions. Removing this dynamic from the immediate ingame live chat interface would be a huge mistake in a competitive MMO.
  3. Murder of Crows AMA

    Actually in the realm of MMOs you're statistically not that extraordinary. MMOs specifically trend toward much higher numbers of female players (in the 40%+ range for most MMOs) and in general trend more heavily toward older users. You may be surprised how many of the people around you share your demographic in many of the games you played and you simply assumed they were young men And this is data from a study that's probably about ten years old now (or however long ago it was I had to write a paper on it), so you're probably in even more demographic company now than even those numbers suggested. Edit: See, look, Frykka right there!
  4. Questions for Todd

    I think the game can get away without farming or mounts for release as they're movement and resource acquisition layers that sit on top of the core loop, kinda like that phantom Bard Class to occupy the scoundrel tree alongside duelist. They're different ways to do things players can already do with costs and mechanisms that are internal to them and could almost be campaign specific. Factories and blueprints are integral to the underlying design of the economy though. Much of the randomization, harvesting outputs, and durability mechanics have to be tuned specifically with these implemented to form the bed of a stable item economy as those systems form the base upon which everything else rests. Campaign rewards hinge on item exports, and as such the push/pull in that economy has to be locked down with all of the efficiency modifiers in place. Otherwise you can't ensure campaign rewards are appropriately tuned before asking players to commit to 3+ month campaigns at launch or risk some severely sore players over training paths they committed to under obsolete versions of the system.
  5. Is crowfall fundamentally boring?

    The suggestion that one must BE good at PvP to be good at DESIGNING PvP is what I was getting at. Try not to have an emotional reaction to the term "exploit" as in this context I'm not using it in a derogatory context, or to imply cheating. I'm using it in a very real competitive context. Your first goal in any given PvP encounter, no matter the system, be it physical sports, board, or video games is to first find weaknesses in your opponents. The rules are your opponent just as much as the other players. Your second goal is to exploit every weakness you can find in whichever way is easiest for you based upon your own strengths. All of the other factors you listed are skillsets that can be useful in some bubbles and are completely useless in others. The En Passant rule was added to chess in response to particularly good players learning you could position pawns in such a way that you could render your own front line partly uncounterable by the opponent's front line. This is a rare example of community game design as there were no official rules or administrative body for chess at the time. The players simply saw a weakness, and decided it wasn't as much fun, so they "house ruled" it the same way you might ban a particularly overpowered Smash Bros character among your friend group. Fighting game culture thrives on animation canceling, objectively an exploit of unintended functionality. Later fighting games folded this culture in to their designs AND normalized it. The best players found where the game was most broken and used it. The designers saw where the game was most broken and make it less so. The "moneyball" tactic employed in major league baseball exploited a weakness in how teams were choosing players to field and sign. Other GMs reacted to this and moneyball became the management meta for not only baseball, but virtually all professional sports. The "butterfly" technique in Gunz: the duel redefined how the game was played. The moment players master the technique they violated the core rules of the game and created what was effectively an entirely different experience. The developers did NOT react to this meta and lost control of their game not because they weren't good at PvP, but because they didn't understand how to design for PvP. They didn't want to take the exciting new high skillcap game away from those "butterfly" players that were still giving them money, but they couldn't find a way to marry that with the intended method of shooting, wallrunning, and otherwise more standard play as originally designed. Or perhaps they did. As I understand it you can't "butterfly" in Gunz 2 so perhaps their solution was to simply fork the game. Exploiting weaknesses is how meta are created and change. Learning to see exploitable weaknesses at a systemic level is ALSO useful for designing those systems. Depending on the skill ceiling of your system being good at actually winning your own game may not be very useful. Knowing why other people are winning your game is what's important.
  6. Alliances and Guild Collaborations

    Get used to large groups of players winning things. That is literally the design of the game. You either join one organically through the course of play or join one automatically by joining a faction. The entire campaign system is designed to stress players in to discarding or absorbing smaller actors over time for security and pooling ever more scarce resources. Any person who plays a competitive MMO that then complains about large numbers of people winning things doesn't understand the fundamental rules of waging war in general, and war in MMOs specifically. The trick is ensuring that lopsided campaigns are won quickly, and making sure winning is useful enough and losing punishing enough nobody treats winning as optional. War games only work if everyone has stake in the war, and that means everyone has a desire and incentive to be part of one army or another.
  7. Further encouraging active play.

    You are already rewarded for playing the game by gaining loot from those activities.
  8. Further encouraging active play.

    This. The ability to "optionally" do some repetitive task to accelerate skill gain doesn't actually create player behavior that treats it as optional. Players (and especially players in a highly competitive risk-focused environment like crowfall) are hyperfocused on efficiency. If I tell you "you can do this and max out your crafting stats 2% faster" you're going to see players do that exact thing repeatedly and players will not treat that thing as an optional part of the system. If you can, for instance, get .001 skill points in the logging tree for every tree chopped, what you're going to find is that players now complain that the system is too grindy. The ability to grind out skill points at all creates an assumed imperative to grind out the maximum amount as quickly as possible. Now players are wondering why they "have to grind" out whatever astronmical amount of trees is required to max out the trees. Especially since the intended function is that it takes months of training to max out the tree, you're looking at any active component of the system being so low return that its going to feel like you're asking players to do nothing but grind trees for months. In the strictly time based system, players aren't feeling that pressure. They're encouraged to chop trees when they need to chop them, but also encouraged to do whatever else they feel like. Every activity in the game rewards directly in loot which can be sacrificed, traded, or used to craft, and thus every activity in the game rewards something that can make you better at doing whatever it is you do. I don't want another crafting system that compels me to make 4000 belt buckles that I have to throw away because the economy is so littered with other people's belt buckles they ALSO made to grind with that I can't sell them. I'd in stead prefer to harvest or craft as much as I can actually sell, because what I gain from the sales has long term gain, and more importantly is something I can use to trade for the things I can not craft.
  9. That was a gear discrepancy, not a training discrepancy. You require no training to equip any gear in crowfall. I'm assuming you were wearing no armor and came up against someone with actual equipment and a vessel? Even then I have a rough time believing you were killed in a single hit. If someone is dealing 4k+ with a single ability that's a bug and needs to be sorted out.
  10. Have you actually played crowfall? This isn't even close to a thing that happens.
  11. Yes, that is my question. Is this the intended limitation, or are all guinecians intended to have tunneling ability at some point in the future. I wonder because @jtoddcoleman is still referring to this ability as "Guinecian Burrow" rather than "Duelist Tunnel"
  12. Clerics already use a ranged weapon. I can't use saltpeter rounds, and I'd like to. I don't really care if I can't use the pip gain because I'm not a duelist. I don't really care if I can't use rapid fire because I can't use an offhand pistol. Clerics need more disc options. I'd happily slot it for the mainhand pistol auto, range buff, and ability to use saltpeter rounds, and the passives would be interesting options. You could even make divine order lose its multihit effect with a pistol. Other races can benefit from their whole racial kit as clerics, guinecians can't. Alternately, do a cleric specific pistol disc for guinecians and make me lose some stuff for it (maybe lose my class channel buffs, or ults) like how scimitar druids work. Knights too maybe? They already have to swap trays to use bow discs.
  13. [NA] Flames of Exile (Birds Though)

    Coming soon! Welcome to Flames of Exile Pre-Alpha Build 5.6 Welcome to Bird People To report any issues, bugs, or feedback you have for this propaganda session, please go here: http://foeguild.enjin.com General Guild Fixes: Fix for gender mismatch in administrative ranger vessels. Fixed Fort Wick "starving mayor" bug, added guild members to nobility list. More fixes for social support structures to decrease the number of times I have to hear "vendors are offline" Added Bird People Updated propaganda
  14. Soft Launch

    Except it would. See, when you're selling him an account, you're not just selling him the trains. You're selling him an identity. That's my problem. You're also incentivized greatly to AVOID the intended catch up mechanic and AVOID producing skill tomes so that you can sell the account for higher value (as it has more trains on it) which increases the price point for people who... you know... just want to play the game and use the game's built in mechanic to catch up because less people are actually producing the tomes. Allowing you to sell your account actively harms every other competing system, and makes the entire concept of reputation being tied to an account obsolete. Your friend should buy his own account, (or be gifted a fresh one from the same store page) and buy his own skill tomes, or hey, just turn all your skills in to tomes and give them to him if you don't want to play any more. We don't need some kind of revolving door system where entityofsin doesn't mean anything other than "I happen to have this account at the moment, until I get bored with it and offload it to someone else." Saying "some people will get away with it" is not a reason to do literally anything. Diablo 3 tried that, remember? The logic was "people will RMT for items anyway, so we should run the storefront" and look where that ended up. The RMT storefront became so ubiquitous that it undermined the core gameplay loop. They removed it for that exact reason. Econ and super pilot accounts are so heavily commoditized in EVE through this system that the default action to get in to those activities at endgame level isn't even to train it any more. Its to buy one of the many "off the shelf" accounts people have parked specifically for the purpose of sale. That's not a good system. When someone asks "how do I become X" the default answer should be "play the game" not "pull out your wallet" People get away with robbery. That doesn't mean we legalize robbery because the law against it is unenforceable. We make a law against robbery and attempt to enforce it to the best of our ability because allowing it to happen undermines the core systems of ownership and trade of goods. I'm not saying account trading is unethical, but I am saying that legitimizing rather than punishing it ABSOLUTELY undermines the intended gameplay loop, and ABSOLUTELY undermines the entire concept of reputation and interaction with other players having social consequences.