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


ACE Development Partners
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


PopeUrban last won the day on October 29

PopeUrban had the most liked content!


About PopeUrban

  • Rank

Profile Information

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

Recent Profile Visitors

3,246 profile views
  1. High five for you my man. That's all that matters at the end of the day.
  2. They recoup the lost damage in final damage modifier, crit, or whatever else, and potentially exceed it with armor adjustments in exchange for less mitigation. It would take some tweaking of the values, sure, but there's no reason to think we actually need AP on base stats when FDM and weapon damage exist.
  3. Cool theory but that isn't how people actually act in this game.
  4. I have no doubt they do. @jtoddcoleman specifically touched on the "closed loop" crafting problem in a recent stream event. What I doubt is that scarcity is a solution to that problem, or that requiring crafters to practically throw away large amounts of materials to advance in any way alleviates that problem. It seems to me that scarcity and increased sinks can only worsen that closed loop problem. I doubt the presented solutions, not the problem.
  5. So your argument is "This is good because I believe it will be good at some unknown point in the future"? With all due respect (and don't get me wrong I am enjoying this conversation with you) I can't offer feedback on systems that don't exist, that I haven't heard will exist, and that I've heard no plans for. I can only offer feedback on things that either exist or are confirmed to exist by the people in charge of implementing them.
  6. No guild "struggles" to get anything because crowfall at its core is designed to allow everything to be rapidly acquired at high volumes on demand as a result of time constraints in both the season and campaign systems. Your guild requires about 10-12 people to be maximally efficient at every task. That isn't enough people to reasonably take most pvp objectives in a game that, mind you, is structured entirely around pvp objectives. If your guild "struggles" to harvest, your guild is behind the curve, and will remain there until it does not. As a result of being behind said curve, you pres
  7. Isn't not requiring people to do this why you made it a passive skill system in the first place? If they're so standard why weren't they part of the initial design? Why did it take five years to implement this? Why did the team spend so much time touting the advantages of a passive system? If the goal is that active advancement moderates crafting, why do we need the passive trees at all? I understand the function of crafting as a sink, but the assumption is that the sink creates value. People spend gold on keep seeds because that keep seed actually creates value for them in term
  8. If your argument worked we'd already have a thriving economy, thus the answer to your question must be "nobody wants gold because it isn't worth the effort and resources required to sell stuff to people who want to kill me anyway." You're presenting a theoretical model of player behavior that has never actually materialized in five years of testing. Despite long periods between wipes. Despite radically accelerated skill gains. Despite crafting being easier, and despite harvesting being easier, and despite all of the gold sinks added to the game. What has materialized is private circles of
  9. A working economy would require people have surplus to sell and a compelling reason to sell it. This change to crafting advancement makes the already anemic incentives to sell anything of value even worse. That's the problem here. I'm not taking my time to craft good items with this, targeting specific resources for specific stats so people want to buy them. That would be an inefficient way to advance. I'm crafting with literally whatever I can get the most of the fastest. In a guild context that's "everything in materials storage" and in a solo context thats "whatever nodes happen to be
  10. You get those soul gems from harvesting a node that also spits out materials. You're in a closed loop of net positive profit in resources/loot doing either. Crafting, on the other hand is only ever a net loss. You consume resources and loot but you never create it. This is all well and good when you're making items people want to use. It's terrible when your goal is literally just to make as many items as fast as possible and don't care how good they are.
  11. Why would a crafter that no longer needs crafting discs sell crafting discs to their rivals? If I'm trying to capture the vessel market, and I've managed through collective or personal effort to get all that stuff to legendary, I'm damn sure not going to then make it easier for people who want to compete with me in that market to do so. My inclination would be to stockpile them for other guild crafters, except my guild doesn't need another necromancer because they have me. Thus my only logical competitive choice to make here is to throw every single additional soul directly in to a sacrif
  12. Why aren't combat souls or harvesting souls gated by resource acquisition? They can actively produce a surplus of crafting supplies while farming their souls. Crafters, on the other hand, have to stop farming souls to get these things. Crafters have to suffer a net loss to farm these souls. You haven't sped up crafting advancement with this setup. You have slowed it down immensely. If the idea is "if people have to grind out crafts they'll sell items others want to buy" that isn't how this is going to pan out. People are going to make the most garbage items possible out of whatever spare
  13. I caution against the balancing effects too much freedom affords. The less hard limits you have on this kind of stuff, the more you risk making most of those choices pointless and redundant. I think a slight reshuffle of the existing base talents with a few more links could be good since the balance assumes access to all of that by any promotion, and beyond that a measured application of adding more domains to more discs, races, and classes where we can judge they don't create a problematic "too good" interaction between discs or promotion kits. A large part of the lack of diver
  14. TBH I think an AoE is just too strong, which is why I suggested a more powerful but single target power. Combined with the situational advantages of stealth I feel this creates better positional counterplay and risk that lines up better with how the stealth/perception meta works as a whole. It also seems pretty off theme to have a stealth enabling ability that itself breaks stealth when the whole point of the ability is to maintain it.
  15. Also aura emitter. If we're doing it we gotta do it all over.
  • Create New...