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

rutaq

Testers
  • Content Count

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About rutaq

  • Rank
    Hatchling

Recent Profile Visitors

148 profile views
  1. Siege focused games have always struggled with the problem of the varied timezone and playtime of the competitive players. If you go back over the last 20 years you will see a handful of design choices made to help concentrate competitive players so they can "compete" against each other like; focused siege windows, specific servers for local time zones,etc... It shouldn't be a surprise that a game built around competitive play would do best when there are actual players to directly compete / play with. Luckily there are numerous campaigns, God's reach and even EKs to play in. Hopefully they can offer campaigns with suitable times so everyone has a place to play. Also why would competitive players want to play when their campaign victory is determined by "off hours" none competitive activities ? I can't imagine solo circle standing and back capping was enjoyable unless you got off knowing you could harass people with impunity.
  2. So AC Blessed the first God Reach with limited availability graveyards to learn something and they also Blessed us by ignoring the thin skinned complaints and deciding to not wipe again. Keep the faith, all praise the Holy Father JTC.
  3. So this is pre alpha testing, the rewards for the campaigns are the SAME for everyone with just a color difference. There is no reason to throw away anybody's testing time to yet another wipe over the limited availability of some graves. This constant grinding up so we can test again is getting tedious and should be limited at all costs.
  4. I am sorry if I overly generalized too much about population. I was reacting to the tired old excuse of Zerg that has been a mainstay on the forums for the last 6 months. You are correct that at the moment the population is very low and Balance could have 30 people participating at sieges out of a total server population of 75+ with most Order and Chaos folks not sieging. This campaign is the lowest population I have seen in 6 months and Balance certainly could out numbers other factions during some sieges since the other Faction guilds aren't playing/testing. There isn't any easy fix to some guilds "trying hard" besides simply not running trials for a while until they have the next big phase of the game ready to test
  5. I am puzzled why you would think WB and HoA are a Zerg. I have been playing alot , nearly 90% of the sieges since Jan 2019 and have seen the population, there has rarely ever been a numerical advantage on Balance compared to any other faction. Numerous campaigns were filled with sieges where Balance was consistently outnumber and even times when Chaos and Order teamed up bringing nearly 3-1. Now, if you are complaining about the Balance faction being organized and working together, then "Zerg" is the incorrect term and maybe what you're trying to say is that Balance is trying too hard for your liking. I guess we are lucky things are in Pre Alpha.... If the game design of Crowfall is too tough for non competitive PvP players then I guess it is good that we are testing now so they can make adjustments to ensure that it is working as intended.
  6. I understand that people can be put off by the amount of effort dedicated players are willing to put into campaigns but it is the single best way to test the game. When playing a campaign you are testing all the game systems ; leveling, resource gathering, crafting, outposts, forts, keeps, PvP, PvE and exploring. The Test server is fine and can help to identify a focused set of obvious problems but without running through all the game loops you are not fully testing anything. It's too bad there isn't some coordination or direction for testing since the server will be up for so long. The amount of time the game stays in pre-alpha is based on the ability of the dev team to design, plan and implement. The biggest impact so far appears to be the morphing design and not the lack of testers.
  7. It is great that you get some gold and a couple apples when you start out a character but the amount of gold is very high given the current campaign rewards. I would suggest you lower the starting gold to 2 and lower the costs of starting weapons/etc to 1 gold. It is discouraging when pooling starting gold for hours is a more efficient way to make money than actually playing
  8. I support removing /who, it is a cheap way to gather intel and doesn't actually encourage playing the game. Real world scouting should be the primary way to gather intel.
  9. I like that you are thinking of new things but have concerns about some of your proposal. 1. Last hit mechanics are easily abused and generally don't fairly reward the amount of effort people put in to the goal. 2. Not a fan of a 25% tax on labor as an incentive for other people to do stuff, just have the chest spawn materials that players will want instead of penalizing harvesters. 3. Fort Boss sounds interesting but not with a "last hit wins" systems. 4. Sieges take a lot of work, rewarding a single individual that plants the tree for all that work isn't a good incentive. 5. If you rework the Campaign system to reflect sacrifice values of items in chests, how would you reward individual leaderboard players for their activities during Outpost, Forts and Keeps ? Important Notes: The idea of chests at PIOs would help reward the effort capturing them but would be better if they exploded like harvesting a motherload with maybe even a slight increase range of the throw so all the players that contributed would have a chance to vacuum up loot. Timers or schedule Bane systems are important for strategic resources like Keep that take great effort to take and maintain / upgrade because real life prevents people from defending their holdings and off hours sieging with no defenders doesn't actually encourage PvP it avoids it.
  10. rutaq

    Spirit Bank

    I agree that Spirit banks should be limited to better match the game design goal so the testing we are doing better matches the end state. Also the current system is impacting other systems like gathering, looting, crafting, etc in ways that are not obvious and skewing testing results. There is little physicality to transport in the world atm, everything is just pulled from your Spirit bank at the time of need : o Crafting resources are fully protected and easily accessible after you run to your Keep behind the protection of guards. o Siege equipment is just a click away after you have made the run to the the enemy keep with no risk of losing anything along the way. o Harvested resources are easily rescued to the Spirit Bank while harvesting in dangerous areas and worse, things can be banked while being attacked. The quickest and easiest fix for the moment would be to add a Spirt bank chest in the Temple area that is the only way of opening the Spirit bank while in the Campaign, leaving the current functionality alone for outside of the campaign in EK's etc.
  11. Crowfall is actually a Throne War MMO not a simulator. I agree that there is certainly plenty of room for improvement but some of your fundamental complaints seem to be about core MMO systems that are likely to always be part of Crowfall. 1. Building your character and gear takes time and is the primary focus for all MMOs, It the single largest thing MMOs have to actually encourage players to play in the world. The amount of time may be adjusted but overall this is the single biggest core feature of MMOs. 2. Action combat during pre alpha can be rough in large groups, I agree it can be frustrating when key abilities are lagged or the game play drags down to a slide show. Hopefully the new controller work in 6.0 will help. 3. Circle standing does need to be reworked. In it's current form it adds almost nothing to game play. 4. Uneven numbers of combatants in open world PvP is part of every PvP MMO outside of battlegrounds. 5. Movement speed is slower than last campaign but running away is possible, it just isn't guaranteed. If running away always worked then the game would be nothing but chasing people until one side gets bored and gives up or hit a runegate to the safe city/temple. 6. Crowfall death and respawn is pretty standard for PvP MMOs. It prevents defeated players from jumping right back into the War and gives you a delay and slight risk if want to come back as quick as possible (crow, respawn and wait out death shroud). 7. 1 v 1 combat will come down to a bunch of things; player skill, understanding your class and of course gear. So if each players has similar skills then gear will be the deciding factor, again there are PvP games designed to eliminate gear differences but those are not MMOs. The current bug with boards is not part of the crafting game design and will certainly be fixed during pre-alpha. I agree with most of your recommendation: PvE is one of the few game loops we have that encourages players to be in the world outside of sieges and again it is a core element of MMOs even PvP MMOs. I do agree that resource available need to be looked at because there are some like leather that seems neglected but we don't need a drastic nerfing of PvE grind. The PvE grind drops off once you get your character built and with campaign imports you won't be constantly regrinding your vessel. Adding even more customization to character builds is good though it may be difficult to balance and encourage ongoing nerfs. Forts and Outposts do need a rework to be something that encourages PvP and hopefully something that can actually be more impactful to the overall War, buffs, spawn points, resource caravans, etc... Nerfs are annoying but the game is only in pre alpha so there will be TONS of nerfs coming and lots of rerolling characters. Sadly that is part of the alpha testing reality atm. I don't want to be dismissive but if everything you complained about was removed Crowfall would be more like a mutated Battle Royale, MOBA or FPS than a Throne WAR MMO.
  12. It was nice to see ACE address the concerns about the lack of PvP and circle standing during today's Live Stream. Looks like they are adding capture windows for Forts, adjusting number of outpost to match the population and a new notification system that gives players time to rally so capturing / circle standing encourages PvP. The even mentioned weekly timers so they could cut down the frequency of sieges and fort captures.
  13. I agree. 1, the capture timer would be useful, the amount of back capping and off hours circle standing is embarrassing. 2. Sieges are the focal point of the the game atm and no show Sieges/Banes aren't fun for anyone. Sieges should matter, they should add systems and mechanisms to bring together active players (attacking and defending) and not be a simple... "Hey come to the siege at least an hour early tonight any maybe there will be fighting but probably not...." 3. Removing Outposts would help reduce the circle standing but long term perhaps instead linking outpost to forts so that you have to take all the outpost tied to a fort before you can siege the fort would be better. Heck... linking Forts to Keeps with a similar system would help with Sieges as well, you need to take outposts before you can capture the Fort and you need to hold the Fort before you can seige the Keep. I understand ACE is trying to entice players to play in these recent campaigns by giving rewards but sadly they actual game play is lacking and if they want to retain players they will need to divert some of their resources to improving game play sooner than later. The current game play that focuses on circle standing, logging in 1+ hours early to avoid queues for mostly no show sieges is not going to encourage players to stick around to keep testing for very long.
  14. I don't see much deviation of the project especially since the kickstarter had such little detail about grind specifics. Given the team had such strong Shadowbane roots it seems hard to imagine the game would stray so far from the original to remove the game layers that require time investments, like levelling characters, building specs groups, rolling perfect gear, farming to build cities,etc... Being an old Shadowbane player it seems like as the project develops it is getting closer to what I expected. The locked character/class/race MOBAish Hungerdome was the radical departure for me and I am happy that they have flushed out the design more to make it closer to Shadowbane and allow for the complexity, effort and organization that main stream games avoid in fear of scaring away players that are averse to investing time and effort into their PvP games. Also as a new player that has worked to grind up resources to craft decent gear, leveled vessels,etc. Your assumption that grinding makes you invincible is unfounded, it makes you tougher sure but certainly nothing close to invincible.
×
×
  • Create New...