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

Silkhe

ACE Development Partners
  • Content Count

    126
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Silkhe got a reaction from Duffy in Spend an evening making a weapon!   
    The down-sides to active progression systems have been clearly stated many times;  
    It all too often excessively rewards neck-beards and botters/script-writers... while unfairly penalizing active players that work long hours or that are simply unable to play long hours (while not cheating the system).  
    Passive progression is quite fair and even.  It doesn't discriminate.  I certainly hope that it stays in CF (regardless of time-gates and/or required patience).   It certainly could use more tweaking & tuning, but I for one like it, and I generally like crafting/harvesting as well (as long as it is ultimately rewarding & worth my time and energy)  
    But certainly, I am not opposed to a fair active progression catch-up mechanic, for those that start the game later on down the road (or those that are unable to log-in & play for whatever reason).  As long as those players that are 'catching up' are unable to surpass the dynamic passive progression 'max'... and as long as it requires reasonable/adequate effort.  However, this would likely be a difficult system to implement well, and without many issues.   
  2. Like
    Silkhe got a reaction from miraluna in Spend an evening making a weapon!   
    The down-sides to active progression systems have been clearly stated many times;  
    It all too often excessively rewards neck-beards and botters/script-writers... while unfairly penalizing active players that work long hours or that are simply unable to play long hours (while not cheating the system).  
    Passive progression is quite fair and even.  It doesn't discriminate.  I certainly hope that it stays in CF (regardless of time-gates and/or required patience).   It certainly could use more tweaking & tuning, but I for one like it, and I generally like crafting/harvesting as well (as long as it is ultimately rewarding & worth my time and energy)  
    But certainly, I am not opposed to a fair active progression catch-up mechanic, for those that start the game later on down the road (or those that are unable to log-in & play for whatever reason).  As long as those players that are 'catching up' are unable to surpass the dynamic passive progression 'max'... and as long as it requires reasonable/adequate effort.  However, this would likely be a difficult system to implement well, and without many issues.   
  3. Like
    Silkhe got a reaction from KrakkenSmacken in Spend an evening making a weapon!   
    The down-sides to active progression systems have been clearly stated many times;  
    It all too often excessively rewards neck-beards and botters/script-writers... while unfairly penalizing active players that work long hours or that are simply unable to play long hours (while not cheating the system).  
    Passive progression is quite fair and even.  It doesn't discriminate.  I certainly hope that it stays in CF (regardless of time-gates and/or required patience).   It certainly could use more tweaking & tuning, but I for one like it, and I generally like crafting/harvesting as well (as long as it is ultimately rewarding & worth my time and energy)  
    But certainly, I am not opposed to a fair active progression catch-up mechanic, for those that start the game later on down the road (or those that are unable to log-in & play for whatever reason).  As long as those players that are 'catching up' are unable to surpass the dynamic passive progression 'max'... and as long as it requires reasonable/adequate effort.  However, this would likely be a difficult system to implement well, and without many issues.   
  4. Thanks
    Silkhe reacted to Jah in Spend an evening making a weapon!   
    This is just not true. No matter how trained your crafting account is, it will not be as good as one that has invested time and effort into the vessel, discs, gear, and thralls. And of course you need high quality materials, which passive training does not provide. And there is some learning curve to doing it right. And it takes considerable time to craft.
    It is a huge exaggeration to claim that passive training alone can "max" your crafter, and that you don't have to invest anything.
  5. Like
    Silkhe got a reaction from McTan in Fix Passive Training NOW - Consider This Proposal   
    Active training = in game bots running on scripts ...  No thank you!   It is easily 'cheated'.  
    Passive training is there for players that work long hours yet play regularly ...  thanks ACE!  
    Passive training is fine if Done Right ...  they just simply have not yet gotten it right.   Every single player account is bottle-necked or time-gated by it, and that's simply a fair system and frankly a big positive.  
    Current system is too slow at the start (to get to a viable point in certain specializations).   An early One-Time Passive Points Bonus should be awarded as soon any vessel on an account hits max level,  and also another one time bonus at the completion of any campaign, in which the player participated in, and achieved a minimum player score of 'whatever-ACE-determines'.  These two passive skill point bonuses should essentially be enough (for players starting out) to progress to a tangible point of in-game relevance, in whatever spec they choose... having spent their accumulative & bonus points wisely, that is.  
    Keep in mind, that active veteran players will likely always be ahead of (or have an advantage over) new 'active' players that start the game later on down the road regardless, in pretty much any training system implemented.  
  6. Like
    Silkhe reacted to JankeyAF in If you are new to Crowfall, introduce yourself here!   
    Hey everyone!  I'm JankeyAF and I have been a huge MMO fan for a long time now.  This game has been on my radar for a while and now seems to be the right time to jump in to testing.  The druid is what I'm most excited to check out so I'll be starting off with that.  I'm super excited to start playing and seeing everyone in game!
     
     
  7. Thanks
    Silkhe reacted to Kryshael in 5.110 TEST Feedback for 4/29/20   
    Possible Exploration Tree change suggestions:
     
    Issues
    1. The centrallized node in the tree should be something that is beneficial for all 3 branches. Unless you are a logger, then getting apples from the current central node is pretty much pointless for the Movement branch and the Mining/Quarry branch.
    2. The Harvest Beeswax node and the Logging Basics node (formerly the Plentiful Knotwood) have nothing to do with mining or quarrying.
    3. The Gathering node in the mining/quarry branch needs to have Runestone Axes removed from this node since there is nothing in this branch that would be beneficial for axes.
    4. The Logging Basics node has the Heartwood Harvest Chance bonus which gives a bonus for an advanced item and there is already a node for this in the Reaping Tree.
    5. Quarry Basics node and Mining Basics node both give a chance to harvest addition items from them (ie. cutting grit and minerals). Logging basics has no such bonus to additional items.
    6. Can get 5 pips into Gathering Proficiency node and Survivalist Proficiency node much quicker than previously since the tree was redesigned. This opens up the second level of the exploration tree much soon than it should.
     
    Suggestions
    Central node
    1. Remove the Harvest Chance: Apples from the central node.
    2. Add Improved Bandaging and remove the Improved Bandaging node since this would be more beneficial to all three branches.
    3. Add Improved Metabolism and remove the Improved Metabolism node since this would be more beneficial to all three branches.
    4. Add Survivalist Small Campfire and remove it from the Survivalist Proficiency node since this would be more beneficial to all three branches.
    5. Add Survivalist Cooking and remove it from the Survival Node since this would be more beneficial to all three branches.
     
    Mining/Quarry branch - with the changes in the configuration that was made last patch; you are able to get 5 pips in gathering proficiency much quicker and can skip to the excavation tree much quicker than you should. Make the req for moving to the excavation tree a % of the mining/quarry branch.
    1. Remove the Harvest Beeswax node. This will be added to the survivalist branch.
    2. Remove the Logging Basics node. This will be moved and adjusted to the survivalist branch.
    3. Remove Runestone Axe Proficiency from the Gathering node. This will be moved to the survivalist branch.
    4. Change the configuration of the tree to look like this:

     
    Survivalist Branch - with the changes in the configuration that was made last patch; you are able to get 5 pips in survival proficiency much quicker and can skip to the reaping tree much quicker than you should. Make the req for moving to the reaping tree a % of the survivalist branch.
    1. Remove Harvest Chance: Apples from the Survival Node. This will be added to Logging Basics.
    2. Add Runestone Axe Proficiency to the Survival Node.
    3. Remove the Foraging node. This will be added to Logging Basics.
    4. Remove Survival Small Campfire from Survival Proficiency. This can be used by all three branches and should be added to the central node.
    5. Add Beneficial Harvest Chance to the Survival Proficiency node. There is no bonus currently to the Survival branch, but there is for the mining/quarry branch. Equal them out.
    6. Remove the Improved Metabolism node. This can be used by all three branches and should be added to the central node.
    7. Remove the Improved Bandaging node. This can be used by all three branches and should be added to the central node.
    8. Add the Logging Basics node to the Survivalist Tree. 
    9. Remove the Heartwood Harvest Chance from the Logging Basics node. This is an advanced item and already has a node in the Reaping Tree.
    10. Add Harvest Beeswax to the Logging Basics node.
    11. Add the Foraging node to the Logging Basics node.
    12.  Add Harvest Chance: Apples to the Logging Basics node.
    13. Change the configuration of the tree to look like this:

     
    Thoughts?
     
  8. Confused
    Silkhe reacted to FARNUM in 5.110 TEST Feedback for 4/29/20   
    Am I required to join Winterblades to play this game?
    They do not respect the faction system.
    It is impossible to play a game in which a guild rules the game.
     
  9. Like
    Silkhe reacted to Angelmar in So uh... Illusionist.   
    (1) In 5.100 Illusionist worked on ranged characters and many builds slotted both passives.  
    (2) Melee played a major role in the meta in 5.100 (the LIVE server patch)
    (3) Illusionist does not make ranged OP.  If it did, melee would have been dead and out of meta in 5.100.  
    ------
    Why do melee feel bad now? Because everyone  complained there were no "stackbusting AoEs" in the game.  ACE gave us some stackbusters and they work very well as there is no friendly fire in CF.  Careful what you wish for....  
    Melee also feels bad because we do not have a ton of training and crafting customization was nerfed on top of lack of training (Plate wearers will have more resist in end game gear).
    ----
    Stop with the calls for nerfing and removing discs/minors/mechanics that actually impact how a character plays and thus allows players control and customization.  ACE is removing customization and meaningful choices from players left and right in 5.11.  Sturdy nerf, Blue vessels dropping from 102 attribute points to 60 points. (green/white went from 90 to 60).  Crafting difficulty increased. 

    ACE needs to get the message that they need to INCREASE character customization by giving players more tools that meaningfully impact character choices.... there should be 20 discs on Illusionist's level and players have to make meaningful choices between the options.  Everyone is using discs like sturdy and illusionist because 95% of all the discs have so little impact on how the character plays that they are not worth applying.
    I remember JTC selling us on a game where choices matter and players could fail.  I do not see that vision in many of the changes to Crowfall.  Impactful character customization needs to be buffed.
  10. Like
    Silkhe reacted to McTan in So uh... Illusionist.   
    I've been fighting for buff not nerf for years. It's a better, but more challenging and labor intensive approach. Instead of changing one discipline, you have to change all but one.
    If they go nerf, I'd simply like to see Illusion need to get a slow from some other source. Like a different discipline or, you know, a different player.
  11. Like
    Silkhe reacted to veeshan in Blocking/Parrying Classes and Dodge   
    100% agree, they could even make shift right click dodge and right click parry/blocks.
  12. Thanks
    Silkhe reacted to Ble in Blocking/Parrying Classes and Dodge   
    I think making block/parry conflict with dodge is a mistake.  These classes are built around these mechanics.  It's part of their flavor and a portion of the components that make up the total worth of the class. 
    In PvE its not really that big of a deal.  I think this is maybe why the dev's don't understand the impact of these classes having to choose - in PvP its huge.  Mobility is always an issue.  Your mobility defines space in which you can opperate as a PvP participant.   Mobility probably provides more health than healing.  Positioning is everything.  The duration (before escaping) and consistency at which you can stay on target are both a product of your mobility.
    A solution for this, if you are really adamant about making these classes have some sacrifice to use this, would be to add it to the list of abilities they can slot.  There is already block/parry punish in the game, and it's not going to cause a survivability imbalance.  Also keeping in mind that blocking/parrying already conflicts with the ability to retaliate.
     
    I look at having to choose between dodge and block/parry and it quite simply does not make the game better in any way, it makes it worse.
  13. Like
    Silkhe got a reaction from Aedius in Alliance Mechanics in Dregs   
    LOL, I'm having flash-backs.   Heard this a lot leading up to the 'Trial of the Gods' campaigns.   Spent all my time prior to, and three campaigns into those Trials on 'Order' Faction listening to those fears?   I suppose there are many that are still afraid of the 'boogeymen', yet this game has yet to offer proof that it is even capable of attracting and sustaining such numbers, and/or those gaming communities?  
    I hope that some day this game is capable of drawing & holding a 'substantial' population... long term.   As the historical evidence being to the contrary, I'm not sure why your so willing to bet on such things.   Name your prize, and I'll discuss accepting your bet.   Either way, I shall feel like I've won in the end.  
    I like alliances.   I already have witnessed alliances in the past two snap-test campaigns.   It was fun and interesting, having to plan around fratricide and build our own damn facilities!  It, for the first time, felt like a true guild vs guild format in comparison to the Factions rule-set?   It is not hard to work around constraints, if you plan appropriately.  It feels more hardcore, as it should, in the Dregs?  And it is Definitely not forcing any guild to NOT form alliances, as claimed.  It feels more organic, and of coarse more difficult after the Faction Rule-Set, and that's personally what I was expecting... for now.  
    For now, 'Green' Alliances will be a double-edged sword, and I'm pretty sure they'll be in the Dregs some day!   I personally want to test what we have, much more thoroughly, and observe the guilds' actions and how they evolve.   I'm tired of the 'faction' mentality that we have already experienced.   The trials were, for the most part, pretty lame to most of the players I met.  I might be wrong?  Besides, apparently this game is not all that ready for too many 40+ vs 40+ battles, performance wise?   I can only assume that alliances, without fratricide, shall likely only promote the large slide-show/lag-infested type battles in the near future.   
    And if the current format causes bigger nastier guilds?...  terrific!    And if other huge guilds show up?... great!    We can cross those bridges, when and if they come?  
  14. Confused
    Silkhe reacted to Grelkon in Alliance Mechanics in Dregs   
    It’s really strange to me that people think that guild v guild means I must be forced to attack anyone not in my guild. Whether foe, or friend.
    Through the Faction campaigns we established some good relationships with some other guilds and I for one look forward to seeing if at some point we can over come the WHoA alliance with an alliance of our own.
     
    The whole winning the campaigns thing is an odd argument too as multiple winners were chosen depending on Faction. Our name was never plastered across the screen, but I do have gold edged badges.
  15. Thanks
    Silkhe got a reaction from Aedius in Alliance Mechanics in Dregs   
    You're simply advocating for 'Alliance Campaigns!' ...  not actual guild vs guild... likely not in the long run  
    And if the campaign ends up with just 3-big alliances, we're back to a very familiar 3-faction war campaign (hmm, I had thought that was to become a separate care-bear rule-set?)  
    and naturally... the top tier guilds gravitate together... because all good buddies... well you know, an easier path & less uncertainty... and (I heard that) they only hang out with like-minded folks anyways, lol   
    and shazam... we are reliving the failed trial of the gods 3-faction war rule-sets, and hardly anyone shows up again?  
    Honestly, why don't you just stick to the Faction Campaigns?   It is what you want, more or less, lol.  After all, you've already proven yourselves there?   Seriously -W- can defend its long standing championship titles  😉
    oops... I meant 'Balance' can defend... err, 'Earth' can defend its long standing championship titles !!!  Yey !
  16. Thanks
    Silkhe got a reaction from Andius in Alliance Mechanics in Dregs   
    You're simply advocating for 'Alliance Campaigns!' ...  not actual guild vs guild... likely not in the long run  
    And if the campaign ends up with just 3-big alliances, we're back to a very familiar 3-faction war campaign (hmm, I had thought that was to become a separate care-bear rule-set?)  
    and naturally... the top tier guilds gravitate together... because all good buddies... well you know, an easier path & less uncertainty... and (I heard that) they only hang out with like-minded folks anyways, lol   
    and shazam... we are reliving the failed trial of the gods 3-faction war rule-sets, and hardly anyone shows up again?  
    Honestly, why don't you just stick to the Faction Campaigns?   It is what you want, more or less, lol.  After all, you've already proven yourselves there?   Seriously -W- can defend its long standing championship titles  😉
    oops... I meant 'Balance' can defend... err, 'Earth' can defend its long standing championship titles !!!  Yey !
  17. Confused
    Silkhe reacted to Jah in Alliance Mechanics in Dregs   
    No, I think you misunderstand the real differences between Factions and a sandbox pvp FFA.
    To be honest, the current implementation of Guild vs Guild is more like a Faction Hybrid than what I am talking about, because the game tries to enforce Faction-like restrictions on the Guilds, such as deciding who your guards will attack for you, rather than giving that freedom to the players.
  18. Confused
    Silkhe reacted to Duffy in Alliance Mechanics in Dregs   
    We need an alliance mechanic, it just makes it easier to deal with mixing different communities of various sizes and scopes. Theirs a dozen groups I can play with but could never merge with as their internal community does not mesh well with mine; and forcing us to merge or die would just decrease the number of active players in the game as people quit due to communities they don’t like or mesh with.
    Given how dregs scoring works the only problem they need to solve is to determine how leaving an alliance affects scoring. Technically it looks like it’s already scoring us based on each guild being a “faction” which is essentially an alliance under the hood based on the faction campaigns. I don’t think it’s a technical issue holding it back, I think it’s a just the scoring ramifications they need to figure out.
  19. Haha
    Silkhe reacted to Staff in Alliance Mechanics in Dregs   
    bad=pver
    a carebear you cant kill
  20. Haha
    Silkhe got a reaction from Nueby in Alliance Mechanics in Dregs   
    Are you missing the faction-campaigns already?   Don't worry, they'll be back again some day.  
    Lol, the evolution of Staff ...  somehow he's turned care-bear; now wanting security blankets & crutches?   
  21. Thanks
    Silkhe got a reaction from Andius in Alliance Mechanics in Dregs   
    Are you missing the faction-campaigns already?   Don't worry, they'll be back again some day.  
    Lol, the evolution of Staff ...  somehow he's turned care-bear; now wanting security blankets & crutches?   
  22. Confused
    Silkhe reacted to DocHollidaze in Alliance Mechanics in Dregs   
    So many years, so many continuing threads trying to tear apart the couple bigger guilds and change mechanics to making having anything over 10 people sub-optimal.
    I'd like to see more forum threads on why other people cannot make big guilds also.
    I mean, if people are so lacking in confidence that they can put together a guild of 20 people, then why the custard are we even bothering with this? Does anybody really think this game is going to be interesting with 5v5 keep sieges?
     
     
  23. Haha
    Silkhe reacted to Jah in Alliance Mechanics in Dregs   
    Obviously.
  24. Like
    Silkhe got a reaction from ZYBAK in Alliance Mechanics in Dregs   
    Just grow your guilds naturally, or convince others to merge into one guild, and strengthen your bonds (and your play) organically.   I like the current forming of alliances under the current (natural) in-game constraints.   It requires more thought, ingenuity, and also the obvious limitations are quite possibly a welcome and necessary 'evil?' in the long run.   
    If we have the types of (nut-cup) alliances you're after, It will only then also help large or strong guilds form their 'mega-zerg' alliances.   The current system coupled with the current Divine Favor influence that directly impacts guilds with overly large numbers, is a very interesting and effective anti-zerg mechanic.   I honestly can not understand the over-all thought processes behind this request... unless, of coarse, significant constraints are placed upon the particular alliance mechanics you're currently after?  Without such alliance constraints, the Dregs will simply become similar to every other previous 3-Faction type rule-set/campaign, and will likely end up just like the 'Trials of the Gods' campaigns that we already tested into the ground?... where one mega-alliance dominates every campaign?...  Umm, No thanks from me!   Those were so boring, and counter-productive, most of the time.  
  25. Like
    Silkhe reacted to Nueby in Alliance Mechanics in Dregs   
    I feel like this idea of green alliances is just another care-bear ploy to satisfy the few and not the many. This is supposed to be a PVP game, if we came here to kiss each other's asses all day then why are we playing?
    If you want to share go to God's Reach.
×
×
  • Create New...