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

Duffy

ACE Investor & Tester
  • Content Count

    386
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from Tofyzer in Guards   
    Counter question: how fast do you think a guard should die? What purpose do they serve? 
    General Theory About Guards:
    Since they are extremely limited in general capabilities (they can’t move smartly or utilize player coordination) they make up for this in their ability to soak and deal damage. This creates a bit of a soft check on the attacking force, if they can’t handle the guards they can’t take the location. This also creates a force multiplier effect for the defenders, giving them a bit of an advantage, something that’s generally missing without the guards. This also means you can’t just run over the location, you need to take out guards and control space as you move deeper into it, creating more thought than just piling in. Something folks wanted more of instead of just circle standing, guards are possibly a way to add some of that.
    Personally I think the guards are starting to add a bit more startegy to capture locations, unfortunately they only seem to do it at higher levels. I’d propose making their base level stronger and evening out the curve as they are leveled. I’m not sure what the actual level cap is, but lowering it with such a change may also make sense.
     
  2. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from giarc in Guards   
    Counter question: how fast do you think a guard should die? What purpose do they serve? 
    General Theory About Guards:
    Since they are extremely limited in general capabilities (they can’t move smartly or utilize player coordination) they make up for this in their ability to soak and deal damage. This creates a bit of a soft check on the attacking force, if they can’t handle the guards they can’t take the location. This also creates a force multiplier effect for the defenders, giving them a bit of an advantage, something that’s generally missing without the guards. This also means you can’t just run over the location, you need to take out guards and control space as you move deeper into it, creating more thought than just piling in. Something folks wanted more of instead of just circle standing, guards are possibly a way to add some of that.
    Personally I think the guards are starting to add a bit more startegy to capture locations, unfortunately they only seem to do it at higher levels. I’d propose making their base level stronger and evening out the curve as they are leveled. I’m not sure what the actual level cap is, but lowering it with such a change may also make sense.
     
  3. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from moneda in Guards   
    Counter question: how fast do you think a guard should die? What purpose do they serve? 
    General Theory About Guards:
    Since they are extremely limited in general capabilities (they can’t move smartly or utilize player coordination) they make up for this in their ability to soak and deal damage. This creates a bit of a soft check on the attacking force, if they can’t handle the guards they can’t take the location. This also creates a force multiplier effect for the defenders, giving them a bit of an advantage, something that’s generally missing without the guards. This also means you can’t just run over the location, you need to take out guards and control space as you move deeper into it, creating more thought than just piling in. Something folks wanted more of instead of just circle standing, guards are possibly a way to add some of that.
    Personally I think the guards are starting to add a bit more startegy to capture locations, unfortunately they only seem to do it at higher levels. I’d propose making their base level stronger and evening out the curve as they are leveled. I’m not sure what the actual level cap is, but lowering it with such a change may also make sense.
     
  4. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from Nueby in Guards   
    Counter question: how fast do you think a guard should die? What purpose do they serve? 
    General Theory About Guards:
    Since they are extremely limited in general capabilities (they can’t move smartly or utilize player coordination) they make up for this in their ability to soak and deal damage. This creates a bit of a soft check on the attacking force, if they can’t handle the guards they can’t take the location. This also creates a force multiplier effect for the defenders, giving them a bit of an advantage, something that’s generally missing without the guards. This also means you can’t just run over the location, you need to take out guards and control space as you move deeper into it, creating more thought than just piling in. Something folks wanted more of instead of just circle standing, guards are possibly a way to add some of that.
    Personally I think the guards are starting to add a bit more startegy to capture locations, unfortunately they only seem to do it at higher levels. I’d propose making their base level stronger and evening out the curve as they are leveled. I’m not sure what the actual level cap is, but lowering it with such a change may also make sense.
     
  5. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from coolster50 in Guards   
    Counter question: how fast do you think a guard should die? What purpose do they serve? 
    General Theory About Guards:
    Since they are extremely limited in general capabilities (they can’t move smartly or utilize player coordination) they make up for this in their ability to soak and deal damage. This creates a bit of a soft check on the attacking force, if they can’t handle the guards they can’t take the location. This also creates a force multiplier effect for the defenders, giving them a bit of an advantage, something that’s generally missing without the guards. This also means you can’t just run over the location, you need to take out guards and control space as you move deeper into it, creating more thought than just piling in. Something folks wanted more of instead of just circle standing, guards are possibly a way to add some of that.
    Personally I think the guards are starting to add a bit more startegy to capture locations, unfortunately they only seem to do it at higher levels. I’d propose making their base level stronger and evening out the curve as they are leveled. I’m not sure what the actual level cap is, but lowering it with such a change may also make sense.
     
  6. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from EnsaimadaBlanca in UPDATED REVIEW..where are we??? Not far.. and its sad. :(   
    I play to play the game and win, cards are a part of it so they should be part of the motivation/consideration for mechanics. While there are other reasons to take a holding, it doesn’t negate that the goal of the game is to do the things requires to win. If you wanna play your own sub game that ignores that, you do you, but suggestions gotta work within the context of the game’s rules and goals.
  7. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from EnsaimadaBlanca in UPDATED REVIEW..where are we??? Not far.. and its sad. :(   
    Disagree on handshakes, they dumb down startegy and empower larger/richer groups. It will stagnate the holdings side of the game.
    Picking our own window, possibly within a larger restricted range, and having all holdings (alliance wide when added) be vulnerable at the same time is important to encouraging strategic/opportunistic play and putting downward pressure on the incentives to get big and grab as much as possible. 
    Couple that with fixing walls to only be damaged by siege equipment and making siege equipment the “cost wager” to attack a holdings you should see more startegic play than relying on a siege handshake that turns everything into pre arranged battleground like events.
    Additionally it may be advisable to make repairing buildings less of a complete rebuild, perhaps tier loss per destruction or some % based. But that depends more on final building costs and available resources, will know more after the forts are changed.
     
  8. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from McTan in Vanguard quitting Crowfall .. For now   
    Divine Favor is the only reason to even bother playing. Every guild that’s made a big deal about quitting has been a dominant one that’s feedback boils down to “I want to login and keep winning at big events” which means someone else is losing. If the losing side can’t progress, they by extension have no reason to login to provide the dominant group content. Bit of a catch 22 there.
    I agree on the balance issues and current meta needing some fixes. But the general gameplay loop is finally starting to look like something besides slamming your head into constant siege blobs or circle capping forts endlessly, some tweaks and a feature or two would certainly improve it, but if all you are gonna do is login to PvP...what’s the point? What are you fighting over? What’s the purpose to the action? Mind as well go play a lobby shooter/MOBA or Battleground centric game if you’re just looking for constant action, someone needs to be doing the PvE/Farming or theirs no point to any of this. If everything is decided by scheduled fights why bother if you’re not winning? You have no real chance to progress or incentive to login.
    Getting crafters usable faster would help a ton too, but I think we’ve all been saying that since dregs patch hit.
  9. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from hookem123 in Vanguard quitting Crowfall .. For now   
    Divine Favor is the only reason to even bother playing. Every guild that’s made a big deal about quitting has been a dominant one that’s feedback boils down to “I want to login and keep winning at big events” which means someone else is losing. If the losing side can’t progress, they by extension have no reason to login to provide the dominant group content. Bit of a catch 22 there.
    I agree on the balance issues and current meta needing some fixes. But the general gameplay loop is finally starting to look like something besides slamming your head into constant siege blobs or circle capping forts endlessly, some tweaks and a feature or two would certainly improve it, but if all you are gonna do is login to PvP...what’s the point? What are you fighting over? What’s the purpose to the action? Mind as well go play a lobby shooter/MOBA or Battleground centric game if you’re just looking for constant action, someone needs to be doing the PvE/Farming or theirs no point to any of this. If everything is decided by scheduled fights why bother if you’re not winning? You have no real chance to progress or incentive to login.
    Getting crafters usable faster would help a ton too, but I think we’ve all been saying that since dregs patch hit.
  10. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from moneda in Vanguard quitting Crowfall .. For now   
    Divine Favor is the only reason to even bother playing. Every guild that’s made a big deal about quitting has been a dominant one that’s feedback boils down to “I want to login and keep winning at big events” which means someone else is losing. If the losing side can’t progress, they by extension have no reason to login to provide the dominant group content. Bit of a catch 22 there.
    I agree on the balance issues and current meta needing some fixes. But the general gameplay loop is finally starting to look like something besides slamming your head into constant siege blobs or circle capping forts endlessly, some tweaks and a feature or two would certainly improve it, but if all you are gonna do is login to PvP...what’s the point? What are you fighting over? What’s the purpose to the action? Mind as well go play a lobby shooter/MOBA or Battleground centric game if you’re just looking for constant action, someone needs to be doing the PvE/Farming or theirs no point to any of this. If everything is decided by scheduled fights why bother if you’re not winning? You have no real chance to progress or incentive to login.
    Getting crafters usable faster would help a ton too, but I think we’ve all been saying that since dregs patch hit.
  11. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from nihilsupernum in Vanguard quitting Crowfall .. For now   
    Divine Favor is the only reason to even bother playing. Every guild that’s made a big deal about quitting has been a dominant one that’s feedback boils down to “I want to login and keep winning at big events” which means someone else is losing. If the losing side can’t progress, they by extension have no reason to login to provide the dominant group content. Bit of a catch 22 there.
    I agree on the balance issues and current meta needing some fixes. But the general gameplay loop is finally starting to look like something besides slamming your head into constant siege blobs or circle capping forts endlessly, some tweaks and a feature or two would certainly improve it, but if all you are gonna do is login to PvP...what’s the point? What are you fighting over? What’s the purpose to the action? Mind as well go play a lobby shooter/MOBA or Battleground centric game if you’re just looking for constant action, someone needs to be doing the PvE/Farming or theirs no point to any of this. If everything is decided by scheduled fights why bother if you’re not winning? You have no real chance to progress or incentive to login.
    Getting crafters usable faster would help a ton too, but I think we’ve all been saying that since dregs patch hit.
  12. Thanks
    Duffy reacted to moneda in Vanguard quitting Crowfall .. For now   
    Any of the large, dominant guilds care to recognize that their being large and dominant contributes largely to what they perceive as a low amount of PvP?
  13. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from McTan in Disbalance in the current DREGS rules   
    It hurts my soul every time someone mentions the map is too big and then expects this game to be fun with 2000 players in the same campaign map we have today...the poorly made dergsshow that would become...
    Force projection is just way too easy right now.
    (Even if performance was perfect)
  14. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from Doomshadow in Disbalance in the current DREGS rules   
    The personal scores by themselves don’t show anything useful, they don’t show anything to do with the ability to accomplish objectives. By themselves all they show is the ability to brawl successfully. And yes I expect the larger group that’s roaming the map looking for brawls to have good KDA numbers. But again that’s one of the reasons objectives matter over KDA: de-emphasize numbers and sidestep the conceits of a video game where we all respawn.
    And again as I said in the other thread: when you hold a dominant position other groups are busy defending themselves from you’re gonna have an easier time doing the PvE activities, that doesn’t mean the overall game is too safe or easy. Using my own group as an example: last campaign we couldn’t farm for more than 2mins without having to fight someone, we never got an “easy PvE experience”. And we weren’t gonna waste time trying to purposefully target the group several times our size doing those activities at most moments, cause when we do they just collapse onto us or call more people cause content. Kind of a victim of your own success.
  15. Thanks
    Duffy got a reaction from ZYBAK in Campaign Scoring - The good, The Bad, and the Ugly   
    You seem to confuse avoiding PvP with avoiding losing battles. You should mitigate risk and avoid losses that set you back, that’s PvP 101. Minimize risk and loss, like setting up a good collection fort location. 
    I had a few DIS players running from me while trying to gank them (poorly I might add) during early morning pig runs. I don’t blame them for running it was the smart thing to do. (I later got friends to come by and we got a few before more collapsed on us and whooped us)
    You don’t dive into fights you’re unlikely to win AND set you back. That’s just a waste of time and energy. Which is why DIS lost in the end, they never bothered to use PvP to actually win, they just used it for entertainment. They rode a numbers advantage and looked for random PvP and killing easy targets while letting the real threats to winning build up their victory.
    When you start viewing PvP as a tool instead of a reward for logging in and adjust your strategy you’ll find much more consistent results. Fighting to fight without paying attention to competing objectives will result in “confusing outcomes” that make you think scoring is broken like last campaign.
  16. Thanks
    Duffy reacted to Jah in Disbalance in the current DREGS rules   
    This is true. It is easy for a dominant force to think it is too easy to farm unchallenged. It certainly felt that way when the Balance faction was dominant.
    One of the tricky design issues around appropriate map size for the population is the ability to project power. With such a small testing population these campaign worlds seem "too large" but that isn't true in all ways. It is actually too easy to project power across the whole map. Whoever has the most people can project power anywhere in the campaign within minutes. So while these maps may seem too large for the current population, in my opinion they are actually too small to prevent a single force from policing the world.
    I hope when we get higher populations we also get much larger campaign worlds, so that no matter how dominant one group is, they can't effectively police the whole map. They have to focus on regions.
  17. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from APE in Campaign Scoring - The good, The Bad, and the Ugly   
    You seem to confuse avoiding PvP with avoiding losing battles. You should mitigate risk and avoid losses that set you back, that’s PvP 101. Minimize risk and loss, like setting up a good collection fort location. 
    I had a few DIS players running from me while trying to gank them (poorly I might add) during early morning pig runs. I don’t blame them for running it was the smart thing to do. (I later got friends to come by and we got a few before more collapsed on us and whooped us)
    You don’t dive into fights you’re unlikely to win AND set you back. That’s just a waste of time and energy. Which is why DIS lost in the end, they never bothered to use PvP to actually win, they just used it for entertainment. They rode a numbers advantage and looked for random PvP and killing easy targets while letting the real threats to winning build up their victory.
    When you start viewing PvP as a tool instead of a reward for logging in and adjust your strategy you’ll find much more consistent results. Fighting to fight without paying attention to competing objectives will result in “confusing outcomes” that make you think scoring is broken like last campaign.
  18. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from Tofyzer in Campaign Scoring - The good, The Bad, and the Ugly   
    You seem to confuse avoiding PvP with avoiding losing battles. You should mitigate risk and avoid losses that set you back, that’s PvP 101. Minimize risk and loss, like setting up a good collection fort location. 
    I had a few DIS players running from me while trying to gank them (poorly I might add) during early morning pig runs. I don’t blame them for running it was the smart thing to do. (I later got friends to come by and we got a few before more collapsed on us and whooped us)
    You don’t dive into fights you’re unlikely to win AND set you back. That’s just a waste of time and energy. Which is why DIS lost in the end, they never bothered to use PvP to actually win, they just used it for entertainment. They rode a numbers advantage and looked for random PvP and killing easy targets while letting the real threats to winning build up their victory.
    When you start viewing PvP as a tool instead of a reward for logging in and adjust your strategy you’ll find much more consistent results. Fighting to fight without paying attention to competing objectives will result in “confusing outcomes” that make you think scoring is broken like last campaign.
  19. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from McTan in Disbalance in the current DREGS rules   
    The personal scores by themselves don’t show anything useful, they don’t show anything to do with the ability to accomplish objectives. By themselves all they show is the ability to brawl successfully. And yes I expect the larger group that’s roaming the map looking for brawls to have good KDA numbers. But again that’s one of the reasons objectives matter over KDA: de-emphasize numbers and sidestep the conceits of a video game where we all respawn.
    And again as I said in the other thread: when you hold a dominant position other groups are busy defending themselves from you’re gonna have an easier time doing the PvE activities, that doesn’t mean the overall game is too safe or easy. Using my own group as an example: last campaign we couldn’t farm for more than 2mins without having to fight someone, we never got an “easy PvE experience”. And we weren’t gonna waste time trying to purposefully target the group several times our size doing those activities at most moments, cause when we do they just collapse onto us or call more people cause content. Kind of a victim of your own success.
  20. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from hookem123 in Campaign Scoring - The good, The Bad, and the Ugly   
    You seem to confuse avoiding PvP with avoiding losing battles. You should mitigate risk and avoid losses that set you back, that’s PvP 101. Minimize risk and loss, like setting up a good collection fort location. 
    I had a few DIS players running from me while trying to gank them (poorly I might add) during early morning pig runs. I don’t blame them for running it was the smart thing to do. (I later got friends to come by and we got a few before more collapsed on us and whooped us)
    You don’t dive into fights you’re unlikely to win AND set you back. That’s just a waste of time and energy. Which is why DIS lost in the end, they never bothered to use PvP to actually win, they just used it for entertainment. They rode a numbers advantage and looked for random PvP and killing easy targets while letting the real threats to winning build up their victory.
    When you start viewing PvP as a tool instead of a reward for logging in and adjust your strategy you’ll find much more consistent results. Fighting to fight without paying attention to competing objectives will result in “confusing outcomes” that make you think scoring is broken like last campaign.
  21. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from Nueby in Campaign Scoring - The good, The Bad, and the Ugly   
    You seem to confuse avoiding PvP with avoiding losing battles. You should mitigate risk and avoid losses that set you back, that’s PvP 101. Minimize risk and loss, like setting up a good collection fort location. 
    I had a few DIS players running from me while trying to gank them (poorly I might add) during early morning pig runs. I don’t blame them for running it was the smart thing to do. (I later got friends to come by and we got a few before more collapsed on us and whooped us)
    You don’t dive into fights you’re unlikely to win AND set you back. That’s just a waste of time and energy. Which is why DIS lost in the end, they never bothered to use PvP to actually win, they just used it for entertainment. They rode a numbers advantage and looked for random PvP and killing easy targets while letting the real threats to winning build up their victory.
    When you start viewing PvP as a tool instead of a reward for logging in and adjust your strategy you’ll find much more consistent results. Fighting to fight without paying attention to competing objectives will result in “confusing outcomes” that make you think scoring is broken like last campaign.
  22. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from SAM_BUKA in Disbalance in the current DREGS rules   
    The personal scores by themselves don’t show anything useful, they don’t show anything to do with the ability to accomplish objectives. By themselves all they show is the ability to brawl successfully. And yes I expect the larger group that’s roaming the map looking for brawls to have good KDA numbers. But again that’s one of the reasons objectives matter over KDA: de-emphasize numbers and sidestep the conceits of a video game where we all respawn.
    And again as I said in the other thread: when you hold a dominant position other groups are busy defending themselves from you’re gonna have an easier time doing the PvE activities, that doesn’t mean the overall game is too safe or easy. Using my own group as an example: last campaign we couldn’t farm for more than 2mins without having to fight someone, we never got an “easy PvE experience”. And we weren’t gonna waste time trying to purposefully target the group several times our size doing those activities at most moments, cause when we do they just collapse onto us or call more people cause content. Kind of a victim of your own success.
  23. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from Nueby in Disbalance in the current DREGS rules   
    The personal scores by themselves don’t show anything useful, they don’t show anything to do with the ability to accomplish objectives. By themselves all they show is the ability to brawl successfully. And yes I expect the larger group that’s roaming the map looking for brawls to have good KDA numbers. But again that’s one of the reasons objectives matter over KDA: de-emphasize numbers and sidestep the conceits of a video game where we all respawn.
    And again as I said in the other thread: when you hold a dominant position other groups are busy defending themselves from you’re gonna have an easier time doing the PvE activities, that doesn’t mean the overall game is too safe or easy. Using my own group as an example: last campaign we couldn’t farm for more than 2mins without having to fight someone, we never got an “easy PvE experience”. And we weren’t gonna waste time trying to purposefully target the group several times our size doing those activities at most moments, cause when we do they just collapse onto us or call more people cause content. Kind of a victim of your own success.
  24. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from ConstantineX in Campaign Scoring - The good, The Bad, and the Ugly   
    We did figure it out, the weird bit is that Top cards are broken into Quartiles based on those who scored in those areas. What's weird is that if you tie with someone you both get the better quartile and it's possible in certain scenarios (when only 5 guilds qualify) for it to then skip one of the quartiles. This seemed to happen in Fall for Top Wealth, it rewarded +5,  +4, +4, +2, and +1. Skipping +3 since two guilds tied. Still seems a little weird to me, but I think that's what happened.
  25. Like
    Duffy got a reaction from BarriaKarl in Campaign Scoring - The good, The Bad, and the Ugly   
    Did any of the top guilds actually try to fight each other over score cards or did they just try to look for general fights or avoid fights? Avoiding a fight is as important a part of strategy as engaging in one, especially if it's one you know you can't win. Concentrated strategic effort could have mitigated how much effort was directly tied to PvE (plus with longer seasons and several sieges per season to act on those potential scoring targets). Right now the timeline is too condensed which creates an emphasis on PvE instead of an ebb and flow of PvP to nab things, PvE with chance of PvP to build them up, and then PvP to take those objectives or destroy them before they count for scoring. There needs to be a flow to the actions and strategic choices, just running around brawling anyone and everything should never be the path to victory, you should be making important choices. Likewise PvE alone should not be able to gain you a win, and technically that seems true for the most part. We'll know for sure when theirs longer campaigns with more time to act.
×
×
  • Create New...