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

PopeUrban

ACE Development Partners
  • Content Count

    2,526
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    32

PopeUrban last won the day on February 14

PopeUrban had the most liked content!

2 Followers

About PopeUrban

  • Rank
    Jackdaw

Profile Information

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

Recent Profile Visitors

2,907 profile views
  1. If people want to do nothing but kill low rank war tribes in GR for bad loot that's their choice. I see no reason to force them to do anything else. As long as there's a clear correlation between risk and reward there are plenty enough incentives to bring people to PvP.
  2. We are not ACE's marketing department. They have trained professionals for that that have assured us they're very good at their jobs and know how to engage the media. We are not obliged to be positive, nor are we obliged to sell more copies of Crowfall. We are not highly trained marketing professionals, we do not work for ACE, and it is not our responsibility to sell the game. This is the actual community, honestly reacting to the actions of a developer whom we have already paid for a product. It is not now, nor has it ever been our responsibility to make crowfall or ACE look good. They pay people for that like we paid them to make a video game. If their trained professionals can not manage our expectations that isn't our problem and until I get a check in the mail I have no intention of making it my problem. I'm not out to be negative for the sake of being negative and neither is anyone else. We are simply being honest. If 5.11 comes out and its the best thing since sliced bread we'll be honest about that too.
  3. Its still kinda muddy though. For instance, if I say "Jah is terrible at this" in the context of gameplay, which am I talking about? Am I talking about Jah the guinecian, or Jah the person controlling Jah the guinecian? Am I talking about Jah being terrible at hunting down stealthers as an in world thematic statement or am I talking about Jah the play being terrible at hitting the required hotkeys to hunt down stealthers? We don't often make a clear line between characters and players becuase they're one in the same most of the time. I don't know Jah the player aside from in the context of Jah the character. I can argue on forums and discord with Jah, but the line between the two isn't always cleanly cut. There's a gulf of uncertainty there that leads to a grey area of muddy interpretations. Occasionally it's obvious when addressing the player (for example remarking on something that has no relevance to crowfall) but its not always obvious where the line to be stepped over is when "towel snapping" and that's going to be a moderation and policy headache.
  4. If we're just going to start measuring crowfall development in jesuses we can toss out the patch numbers entirely. Development status, 2.98 jesuses.
  5. Anyone who has talked to Jah for more than ten minutes could pick him out easily.
  6. FOEX is recruiting and I believe you fit in.
  7. I'm glad you've taken my advice to get over it and we can stop talking about your terrible idea.
  8. You can not systematically code out targeted military harassment and misdirection in an environment that allows players to go where they want, murder enemies at will anywhere in the world, take their stuff, and deny them valuable resources and mob kills by taking those resources or mob kills for themselves. Attempting to do so would result in a drastically different game, because it would require removing those freedoms from the entire player base, leaving us with nothing but a series of instanced battles or a ridiculouslyt restrictive set of pvp rules that would undermine the core concept of the game. The players consistently on the losing end of these strategies that would rather leave the game altogether than adapt and overcome them were always destined to leave the game as they were never willing to engage with the game on the terms that it set for them in the first place. They are not lost revenue because they made an ill informed purchasing decision in the first place by buying a sandbox pvp game and expecting it to be a series of WoW battlegrounds.
  9. If you had any idea who I am you'd know exactly how ludicrous this sounds to everyone that has played the game longer than five minutes. I have literally never been part of a big group in crowfall and am in fact well known for showing up with not enough people and generally sucking at the game. Ask around. And I still don't like your idea. Unlike you I believe that every zerg that stomps me is an obstacle created by other players in the natural course of play and the appropriate response is player action. I do not believe that it is healthy for me to whine about getting my ass handed to me to the developers of said game to change the rulebook when I play the game poorly. That's actually the first rule of my guild. No whining about losing. If you want to feel better either deal with it or be better. I play the game poorly a lot. My capacity for being better is limited, but my capacity for dealing with it is boundless. Not once have I ever complained about my opponents, their numbers, their gear level, or their ability to play the whole of the game better than me. I accept that I play the game poorly and run a small guild and that some people are better at the game than I am. The difference between me and you is that I believe that competitive play means actually attempting to compete, while you seem to believe that competitive play means coddling players who can't be bothered to play competitively. I would rather get stomped by a thousand more zergs than earn one win on the back of whatever insane handicap system you have in mind. If I win a 20v70 fight I want that to mean something, not just be another Thursday afternoon. If I run a successful propaganda campaign that causes significant numbers of soldiers to quit their team I want that to mean something. I want the stakes to be real. I don't need the game to massage my ego. Your problem is you know exactly what it takes to compete in a game like this one and you're not willing to actually compete, but still feel like you deserve to win. You don't. You don't deserve to win if you don't actually try to win. You want the game to massage your ego. You want the game to make the failure of your allies have no effect on you. You want it to tell you that it's okay to not try as hard as the other team. To tell you that raising and maintaining an army isn't a skillset you suck at. To tell you that yes, you're actually so special you don't have to suck it up and join an army to play a game about warring armies. You're not special, and you don't deserve special treatment for showing up and claiming you're not having fun with a game you are bad at. Either stop being bad at it, or stop complaining, whichever works for you.
  10. This is not a dregs only discussion, nor is it exactly a conversation about population control. OP proposes some extremely heavy handed and easy to game mechanisms that would result in faction campaigns that bear little resemblance to crowfall, and goes on to claim that games without some kind of gentlemanly headcount before every battle are doomed to failure. That's a VERY different story than load balancing them at the start of the campaign, and a suggestion that makes me choke on my churro as a player who intends to stay in factions campaigns long term. Campaign start load balancing is an attempt at an equitable start condition. That tracks with what Factions are supposed to be, an equitable start condition for gangs of randos. I've long advocated for removing guild and player ability to self select factions for this reason. The game mode about a collection of randos should randomly assign them to teams for a more dynamic and interesting collection of randos. That's not what OP seems to want. They seem to want some method of dynamic load balancing on a per fight level, midcampaign. Campaign load balancing midway through a campaign does NOT track with what faction campaigns, or indeed any theoretical simulation of a war is. Making sure 10 people can fight off 50 is not a reasonable simulacra, nor is telling 50 soldiers they're not allowed to participate in a siege because their army has too many dudes, nor is hotswapping players to another faction in the middle of a campaign so that it's "fair" Factions aren't "play to fair fights" They're simply "play to join an army rather than build one" and that still implies that once assembled these armies are fighting some reasonable simulacra of a Throne War. You Can Win.
×
×
  • Create New...