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

Gradishar

ACE Development Partner & Investor
  • Posts

    1,221
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Gradishar got a reaction from KatzeWeiss in Update from the Trenches: Combat Stats   
    I couldn't agree more. 
    Allow PDMs to stack again. Restore all of the talent PDMs back to where they were. Reduce Protection Stakes to 10/15. Increase resistance provided by crafted armor at the blue/purple/orange crafted milestones.  Add armor enhancements which add HPs based upon the type of armor enhanced (100hps for leather, 250hps for chain, 500hps for plate).  Reduce the DmgMod/HealMod enhancements from armor to incentivize wearing the more restricted armor types. ie leather/chain/plate chest pieces would go from 5/2.5/0 to 3/1.5/0 or even 2/1/0. Review all pens/breaks and reduce them to lower the effective damage. However, maintain their current stacking to encourage coordination and preparation.  Diversity these so encourage more diverse damage types and different spec groups (disease pens/breaks, poison, nature should all be examined to diversity the organic damage which is largely ignored).   
    As an aside...the adding of Resist All to the promotion class will in no way incentivize the wearing of plate or chain. It simply means that the Paladin will be tankier while still wearing leather to maximize their healing mod. 
  2. Like
    Gradishar got a reaction from McTan in Update from the Trenches: Combat Stats   
    I couldn't agree more. 
    Allow PDMs to stack again. Restore all of the talent PDMs back to where they were. Reduce Protection Stakes to 10/15. Increase resistance provided by crafted armor at the blue/purple/orange crafted milestones.  Add armor enhancements which add HPs based upon the type of armor enhanced (100hps for leather, 250hps for chain, 500hps for plate).  Reduce the DmgMod/HealMod enhancements from armor to incentivize wearing the more restricted armor types. ie leather/chain/plate chest pieces would go from 5/2.5/0 to 3/1.5/0 or even 2/1/0. Review all pens/breaks and reduce them to lower the effective damage. However, maintain their current stacking to encourage coordination and preparation.  Diversity these so encourage more diverse damage types and different spec groups (disease pens/breaks, poison, nature should all be examined to diversity the organic damage which is largely ignored).   
    As an aside...the adding of Resist All to the promotion class will in no way incentivize the wearing of plate or chain. It simply means that the Paladin will be tankier while still wearing leather to maximize their healing mod. 
  3. Confused
    Gradishar got a reaction from Trueshot in Handshake Keep/Castle Sieges   
    I don’t champion unlocking AoE caps because its a terrible idea. The larger force will simply have more AoEs. Mechanics which favor coordination, timing and skill is what allows groups to punch up. Effective debuffs, more effective armor/dmg mitigation, group spec benefits, rewarding target calling and effective group movement…not idiotic aoe spam. The Zerg can spam just as easily as the small group…and deliver damage with even less coordination, organization or skill. Why on god’s green earth would we want that?
  4. Haha
    Gradishar got a reaction from Richard_Manjous in Handshake Keep/Castle Sieges   
    Your membership in the largest alliance on the map has nothing to do with your desire to prevent a reservation system to prevent zone locks right?
  5. Haha
    Gradishar got a reaction from Fail_Sauce in Handshake Keep/Castle Sieges   
    Small and medium sized guilds…be content with knowing that any assets you control, you do so because the Death MegaZerg allows it. Rest easy that their benevolence will be forthcoming and that while they can take your assets at any time, they will restrain themselves. Any mechanics which might give you a fighting chance and allow you to defend your assets against a larger force “[are] such a bad idea” and must be prevented to ensure original game design promises that the zergs would always rule. 
  6. Haha
    Gradishar got a reaction from Fail_Sauce in Handshake Keep/Castle Sieges   
    Good thing you’re around to look out for the small guilds and alliances who can’t zone cap multiple zones at once. Thank you for your sincere effort and sticking up for the little guys. 
    As to the issue at hand…
    Reducing the number of keeps PER ZONE is necessary to make this work. Adding more zones to maintain the same number of keeps is the obvious contemporaneous adjustment.
  7. Like
    Gradishar got a reaction from BarriaKarl in Handshake Keep/Castle Sieges   
    No politics for help? They cant immediately ally other small guilds and defend their small keep with 67 against the attackers 83? How does a 15 man guild hold a small keep against a 200 man force now? A force that can zone lock them out from defending completely?
  8. Like
    Gradishar got a reaction from DaddySteven in Handshake Keep/Castle Sieges   
    1) Zone locks were a part of at least 2 sieges this week.
    2) Smaller guilds being “cut out of larger” fights…ie currently participating on the sidelines IF they can get in the zone…vs actually being able to hold assets and compete against the large guilds? That’s the travesty here? A 60 man guild holding a small keep against all comers…vs a 10 man guild holding a respawn…thats what we’re talking about here right? You’ve got me. I’m biased and find that a 60 man guild standing up to a 200 man Zerg is a hell of a lot more engaging gameplay than a 10 man guild holding a respawn for 10 minutes. YMMV. 
    3) The buying your way out of sieges is an issue. The safeguards against that must be real for this to work. Pre-planting fight opportunities…costs associated with planting…costs associated with losing/fake planting…all must absolutely be explored and considered. That “problem” doesnt override the existing problem with the broken system. ACE just needs workable solutions to that additional issue. 
  9. Like
    Gradishar got a reaction from DaddySteven in Handshake Keep/Castle Sieges   
    Your membership in the largest alliance on the map has nothing to do with your desire to prevent a reservation system to prevent zone locks right?
  10. Like
    Gradishar got a reaction from BourbonDad in Handshake Keep/Castle Sieges   
    If I can bring a force to a zone to ENSURE I’m the first guild to feed the hippo to start the next siege on the designated target…I can prevent the collusion/fake guild exploitation to avoid vulnerability. 
     
    [Edited for grammatical accuracy.]
  11. Haha
    Gradishar got a reaction from Fail_Sauce in Handshake Keep/Castle Sieges   
    Your membership in the largest alliance on the map has nothing to do with your desire to prevent a reservation system to prevent zone locks right?
  12. Haha
    Gradishar got a reaction from Vicid in Warstory: Securing Campaign Victory (Winterblades Alliance)   
    You make a good point. Only getting 50-60% of the slots does put them at a significant disadvantage. 
  13. Haha
    Gradishar got a reaction from KVPRX in Warstory: Securing Campaign Victory (Winterblades Alliance)   
    You make a good point. Only getting 50-60% of the slots does put them at a significant disadvantage. 
  14. Haha
    Gradishar reacted to Quig in Warstory: Securing Campaign Victory (Winterblades Alliance)   
    Got some good copy pastas and additions to the scrublords prayer. What a wonderful post it turned out to be. 
     

  15. New Bug Reported
    Gradishar reacted to damebix in Warstory: Securing Campaign Victory (Winterblades Alliance)   
    From the fort window 1hr before keep sieges start leading up to the siege and then throughout the keep siege window, we never held more than 40% of the zone-capped numbers.  We have no control over 3rd parties, but our parsers had death numbers greater than our numbers, in every one of those engagements.  I don't need to provide proof of any of this, because the result will be the same.  Death is going to (as always) claim victory and that we're a zerg, no matter how much proof is given.  That's what they get fed by their weak leadership, so that's what they believe.  Why isn't Death in this thread? Because they know what happened.  The scoreboard speaks for itself.  4 days left.
  16. Haha
    Gradishar got a reaction from Quig in Warstory: Securing Campaign Victory (Winterblades Alliance)   
    You make a good point. Only getting 50-60% of the slots does put them at a significant disadvantage. 
  17. Haha
    Gradishar got a reaction from CagoriRei in Warstory: Securing Campaign Victory (Winterblades Alliance)   
    You make a good point. Only getting 50-60% of the slots does put them at a significant disadvantage. 
  18. Haha
    Gradishar got a reaction from Jubileet in Warstory: Securing Campaign Victory (Winterblades Alliance)   
    I guess you're just going to have to take my word for it. 
  19. Like
    Gradishar reacted to ACE-Tiggs in Konveryn 2 - Campaign Rewards System   
    Hello Crows,
    First of all, we want to thank everyone for helping us test the Campaign Rewards system for the first time!  We learned a LOT about what works (and what doesn’t) in terms of campaign rewards, and we also identified a number of bugs and balance issues that need to be addressed for our future campaigns.

    Some example reward cards!
    Overall, in spite of the issues, we are happy with the results of the test.  As you can see from the sample “reward cards” above, this system offers a huge degree of variety and flexibility -- so it really shouldn’t come as a huge surprise that we would have a few issues the first time we subject it to real rewards in a real campaign.
    Let’s quickly talk through some of those issues, and how we are going to address them.
    One of the most apparent challenges wasn’t a bug -- it was an issue in making sure that players understand the difference between GUILD rewards (you get one of these reward bundles per guild) and PARTICIPANT rewards (every participant in an eligible guild gets 1 of these bundles). Unfortunately, to complicate the confusion between Guild and Player rewards, there was a bug that caused these token rewards to appear blank on the reward cards and, in some cases, caused them to be unclaimable as well.
    Here is how the design was intended to work:
    Guild Rewards were intended to be the primary source of rewards for campaigns because Player Rewards encourage the use of alts to multiply your rewards… which is obviously not the intended design.  A Guild Reward card could include, for instance, a limited number of rare items.  This scarcity also acts as a disincentive against packing too many guild members into one guild, or one alliance. 

    To that end, the initial set of Player Rewards for this first Campaign was limited to Export Tokens only (i.e. the ability to export more of your campaign winnings back to the rest of the game).   We’re already discussing this internally, and recognize that many players will want these rewards to be more substantial to make these cards more enticing.   We’ll take a look at this, in light of the issue with alt accounts that I noted earlier.
    In terms of this current campaign, however, the bugs mentioned above, we are granting an additional +25 Export Tokens to all players who were active in this round of campaign testing.  We also added a few test items to these bundles as well, to help us track down the issues so that we can fix them for future campaigns.
    The information about whether a given reward was a “one per guild” or “one per campaign” was included in the mouse-over text of each item -- but we can absolutely see how this was confusing.  To fix this in future campaigns, we will update the Campaign Reward Card interface to make it MUCH more clear whether a reward is “one per guild” or “one per player”:
     

    As a thank you for playing, we will be reviewing the “per guild” reward bundles and increasing the rewards for this last campaign, because we understand that a lot of players did not understand the distinction between these reward types.
    Additionally, we have reports that if a guild leader was not active in the campaign, they were not able to claim the guild rewards in some cases.  (In another case, we know that a Guild Leader did claim the guild reward -- but was unable to claim their own player reward, as a result.)   Gaining one reward in a given category also seems to have blocked other rewards in the same category -- for example, winning as the “Top Guild for Wealth” should not have blocked you from also getting the reward for being one of the “Top 20% of Guilds for Wealth”.
    We are looking into these issues one at a time, and we will make sure that all of the guilds get the rewards they deserve.  That said, please be patient and remember that it is the holidays for our team, too.  We expect to have these issues resolved before the end of the next campaign.
    Lastly, we want to thank everyone for helping us stress test this system -- Thanks for your patience while we work through this and complete the action plan above.
  20. Like
    Gradishar got a reaction from Zendarith in Vessels are major turnoff and lead to non competition   
    The guild that just won that 2 week campaign, did so with entirely default vessels. We crafted our first vessel on 8/30 (our Necromancer) and we crafted two additional vessels (a blacksmith and a runecrafter) since then. Yes, vessels are a significant upgrade and progression in this game. I would argue that no crafted item is more significant than getting out of default and into at least green. However, your impression of a steep curve from green to orange is misinformed. I’ve crafted a ton of vessels over the past 4 years...but very rarely were they anything higher than blue. The juice just wasn’t worth the squeeze. ACE significantly flattened that curve and the attribute progression that would at least make you consider upgrading just isn’t there anymore. Now, with that being said, I do agree with you that the time and effort and complexity behind vessel creation is too much. Minerals are too time consuming to harvest. Philosopher Stones are not impactful enough to make (at least not given our existing training). The process is too complex and interdependent IMHO. But that also doesnt mean that the sky is falling.  I am hopeful that with this renewed interest in streamlining crafting (the ability to batch craft bars was a very positive step in that regard) we will also see a similar streamlining of the harvesting process itself. Hang in there man...it’s not as bad as you’ve been led to believe. 
  21. Like
    Gradishar got a reaction from MacDeath in Vessels are major turnoff and lead to non competition   
    The guild that just won that 2 week campaign, did so with entirely default vessels. We crafted our first vessel on 8/30 (our Necromancer) and we crafted two additional vessels (a blacksmith and a runecrafter) since then. Yes, vessels are a significant upgrade and progression in this game. I would argue that no crafted item is more significant than getting out of default and into at least green. However, your impression of a steep curve from green to orange is misinformed. I’ve crafted a ton of vessels over the past 4 years...but very rarely were they anything higher than blue. The juice just wasn’t worth the squeeze. ACE significantly flattened that curve and the attribute progression that would at least make you consider upgrading just isn’t there anymore. Now, with that being said, I do agree with you that the time and effort and complexity behind vessel creation is too much. Minerals are too time consuming to harvest. Philosopher Stones are not impactful enough to make (at least not given our existing training). The process is too complex and interdependent IMHO. But that also doesnt mean that the sky is falling.  I am hopeful that with this renewed interest in streamlining crafting (the ability to batch craft bars was a very positive step in that regard) we will also see a similar streamlining of the harvesting process itself. Hang in there man...it’s not as bad as you’ve been led to believe. 
  22. Like
    Gradishar reacted to Anthrage in 6.2 Bombshell   
    If someone is put off at the thought of a loss of items and progression during a Beta, then they should not be participating in said Beta. Surely in 2020 we have reached the point where people are mature and intelligent enough to understand the unavoidable requirements of a development process and the potential consequences when you playTEST a prerelease product. No prewarning? An insult? Are you kidding me? It's an insult to someone's time and effort alright, but it's not the OPs...
    Unbelievable.
  23. Like
    Gradishar got a reaction from Aedius in Alliances   
    I guess it depends on how you define "small." By Eve standards, all of the Crowfall guilds are small. 
  24. Haha
    Gradishar reacted to corvax in One month in and I'm pretty much done.   
    See there's the problem right there, he 's a F'n bow hunter.... Won't even hunt during rifle season when everyone else hunts.
    I hope the deer smell your troll posts from a mile away and stay just out of range of your tree stand. 
  25. Haha
    Gradishar got a reaction from Magrathea in One month in and I'm pretty much done.   
×
×
  • Create New...