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

rutaq

Testers
  • Content Count

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    rutaq got a reaction from Angelmar in The End of Nightcapping--Congrats ACE   
    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. Like
    rutaq reacted to Scorn in The End of Nightcapping--Congrats ACE   
    I do wish there was more incentive to fight over Forts during their active windows instead of only as it is about to 'lock down'
    The Forts are still garnering points during that time, but there's rarely any activity.

    I also think the final Fort should probably unlock a bit sooner than it does to cater a bit more to the players that play in the afternoon.


    The biggest issue though is that the population the game currently has is usually spread too thin across all of these different zones.
    I understand the desire to have multiple zones and maps but it becomes problematic when the game feels empty most of the time.
    IMO this is due to having very few reasons to centralize on a location besides Sieges.
    Zone and Parcel Ranks are higher than ever which allows people to farm pretty much anywhere as even the locations that aren't the best are pretty damn good.
    Earlier this week we saw what seemed to be a zone crash just after a siege as players began a fight and the zone wasn't even capped.
    This shouldn't be a thing, the zones need to be stable enough to handle the zone cap fighting inside them if possible.
    Stress testing that is more difficult with a spread population.

    Overall though I do believe there is less burnout due to 'circle standing' but I'd like to see even more fighting and reasons to fight.
  3. Like
    rutaq reacted to Xarrayne in 5.100 LIVE Feedback for 8/9/2019   
    New siege schedules for forts and keeps feel much better to play with; we get some breaks from "must-log-in-for-keeps-tonight" and don't feel pressured to stick around at all hours in fear that we might get backcapped as soon as we close the client... Having less outposts that are faster to cap is also appreciated, and though the fort capping seems a little too fast we might just need to catch up a bit with the new meta! Double siege on Saturday was also a nice touch.
  4. Thanks
    rutaq reacted to ACE_FancyHats in Targeted Healing Breaks with New Targeting System   
    Hi ya'll, 
    We are aware of the issue and it's awaiting a fix. I've shared the submitted video's from @Hungry with the team and the issue is known. 
    Thanks!
  5. Thanks
    rutaq reacted to Ble in Targeted Healing Breaks with New Targeting System   
    @thomasblair  @jtoddcoleman  Recent changes to your targeting system have been great for offensive ability targeting, but they have also largely eroded the integrity behind landing heal spells.  Please help:
     
     

    Used to, in Scenario 1, you could land that heal with a left shoulder target easy peasy. You could even land the rescue when the enemy between healer and friendly was almost FULLY eclipsing the healer. Now, with the new targeting, that heal will not miss, but will auto target one of the nearest enemies even though you are clearly targeting a friendly.  You'll see whatever target-side animation your heal does happen on an enemy.  They do not gain health or benefit from any buffs or hots given by the heal.
    It gets worse. You'd think Scenario 2 is certain to land. Actually, even at greater Friendly to Enemy distances, that heal will go through the friendly and auto-target the enemy directly behind him with the new targeting system.
    As shown in Scenario 3a, in order to land that rescue, the friendly must find a path out of the enemies so that 1) there are no enemy within 3 meters and 2) there is no enemy directly behind them.
    The healer still needs to make a left shoulder heal.  If the healer tried to heal the inside shoulder, shown in Scenario 3b, it would instead auto-target to the enemy accordingly.  The enemy "snap-to" of heals is quite expansive.  It feels to me that every enemy is running around with a 3-4 meter wide hitbox and the spells are auto-targeting to the enemy to whose center your target is closest.  This is fine for pew pew.  But you need to give your healer spells that same level of intended-target snap-to.  They cannot be expected to try and navigate a system like whats currently out there and still be dependably effective.
    I know that @Hungry has already put up videos showing this, but if necessary, I can make videos to go along with each of these scenarios.
  6. Like
    rutaq reacted to Yumx in Warstory: 8 v 20 Fight outside of keep   
    The first siege in the Trial of Arkon, Order showed up with 20 people to start with, and we had not built our walls up.
    We met them at one of the walls.

    Later in the evening Order had even more people, and it ended out in a long stand off inside the keep.
     

    _______________________________
    We are recruiting!
    Looking for 2x flex players and 1 support player!
    Check us out here: GUILD THREAD
  7. Haha
    rutaq reacted to Ble in Regarding God's Reach graveyards   
    But but the myth behind why we lose is predicated on huge disparities between vessel quality... I cannot accept your facts, they do not fit my narrative.
  8. Haha
    rutaq got a reaction from Xarrayne in Regarding God's Reach graveyards   
    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.   
  9. Like
    rutaq got a reaction from oneply in Regarding God's Reach graveyards   
    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. 
  10. Like
    rutaq got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Regarding God's Reach graveyards   
    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. 
  11. Like
    rutaq reacted to Ble in Regarding God's Reach graveyards   
    @Pann
     
    I would also highly recommend that the only motherloads available in a gods reach be rank 2-3, so you cannot farm blues in GR.
     
    Additionally, I would highly recommend that the Wartribes have only Captain's as their bosses, no King's and such.  I don't think its right to be able to access blue weapons in GR.
     
    As GR sits right now, I fully expect most Chaos guilds to be farming in GR.  Especially for minerals, since any color works for Ambrosia.
  12. Like
    rutaq reacted to mandalore in Warstory: Thank you, yes, you!   
    Yes.  Please document any shenanigans, exploits and custardery and post them so it can be fixed, documented and either challenged or “handled” by the dev team.  There’s a reason witnesses are unreliable and this well I saw it done 3 weeks ago by a char I can’t remember nor can o exactly repeat what happened but it was wrong and I know mentality is weakness defined. 
  13. Thanks
    rutaq reacted to Ble in Warstory: Thank you, yes, you!   
    So you guys profusely accused us of hacking and healing a tree.  Ended up, you're just not very good at the game and didn't know Balistas healed.
     
    Now you make another accusation, again unfounded.  Jah asks you to back that up.   Set aside common decency requiring there to be proof behind allegations, but your own track record of haccusations based out of ignorance justifies the request as well.
     
    You've got no credibility.  At this point, anything you say needs to be backed up with proof, otherwise you're in agreement that its not to be taken seriously.
  14. Haha
    rutaq reacted to gracen in Warstory: Thank you, yes, you!   
    this isnt court Jah. I am not going to play this part of the politics with you. I already told you we rolled up on a keep where this was happening. We just attacked and lost, outnumbered yet again go figure, and moved on with our life. The issue we have is when we follow the guide of our enemies, it is persecuted. laughable at best.
     
     
  15. Like
    rutaq got a reaction from RikForFun in Jah's Reports on the Trial of Maeve   
    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.
  16. Like
    rutaq got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Jah's Reports on the Trial of Maeve   
    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  
  17. Like
    rutaq got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Jah's Reports on the Trial of Maeve   
    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.
  18. Like
    rutaq reacted to Dwarfknight in Forced retirement?   
    I believe you slightly contradicted yourself with the these 2 posts. The play to win mindset is breaking the game in any way possible. I don't mean using bugs or exploits to win (when exploits and bugs are found report them) but finding every way to use the legit mechanics of the game to win. This shows the devs whether or not the features and systems are working the way they intended or if they over looked something during design. I understand players being frustrated because they feel that they are only playing to test and that is hampered by others "Playing to Win". What I feel these frustrated players don't realize is instead of just giving up out of frustration or finding excuses why they can't play, they should instead be playing to win as well as that is the best way to test all the intended features and get them ironed out if they aren't working. If the entire community was non competitive then the devs wouldn't see if the game design is working like they hoped it would until launch. By treating the testing as if it were a Live game and playing  you are actually giving them the testing data they need. This is the point I believe you made with your 2nd post while your 1st post seems to go against this idea.
  19. Like
    rutaq got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Forced retirement?   
    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.


     
  20. Like
    rutaq got a reaction from TheMap in Forced retirement?   
    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.


     
  21. Like
    rutaq got a reaction from Hud in Forced retirement?   
    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.


     
  22. Like
    rutaq reacted to Jah in Spirit bank - location locked (soon tm) after v5.90+   
    I do not like Recall. I'd prefer it was simply removed from the game.
    Making it home safely with your loot is a fun, risky activity. Recall ruins that.

  23. Like
    rutaq reacted to VaMei in Spirit bank - location locked (soon tm) after v5.90+   
    No more banking in their face when you ganked. No more banking while harvesting in case you get ganked. Loot drops to a local fort will need to be a frequent thing. Actually having a local fort will need to be a thing. Getting loot safely from said fort to your keep will be a whole new thing. Gankers will flourish, farmers will cry, guilds will complain about needing to provide security for their gatherers (further lowering resources gained per manhour spent); but in the same breath they'll be forming raiding parties to take the others team's stuff.
    I think it's a needed change, but it'll be interesting times.
  24. Like
    rutaq reacted to soulein in Siege Windows - Official discussion thread   
    There should be an initiatory event, rather than having a guaranteed vulnerability window every x hours/days. The attackers should have to commit to the attack by crafting the Bane Tree which beings the scheduling event, followed by the siege event. Finding the materials for crafting a Bane Tree should be prohibitive/expensive, making offensive operations costly and deliberate.
  25. Like
    rutaq reacted to DocHollidaze in Siege Windows - Official discussion thread   
    The people who complain about this feature don't want fights. They want to be able to cap stuff without fighting, so your explanation will unfortunately fall on deaf ears.
×
×
  • Create New...