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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Whip

  1. My condolences to the family and all who knew him. A gamer's salute to Coolwaters o7
  2. I made the mistake of graduating as a graphic designer. But I was fortunate enough to start my career in a web technology company. When I found out how disproportionate the paychecks were between graphic designers and programmers, and how interested I was in logic and code, I decided to try and get into it after I was let go after 3 years there. Now, numerous years after all that, I work as a senior full-stack web developer. I remember looking up "What's the best programming language" and "how to start" and all that. Some of the best advice is already given. Mine is to do something like freecodecamp.com or codeacademy.com and then start doing projects and freelance work. Don't give up. Try and fail often. Make friends who are devs. Ask for help. Ask for sessions where they give you advice. Also don't get too caught up in the "latest greatest and best-est of frameworks". Even the most hipster of start-ups can't keep up. Try learning some angular2 or some react and you should be golden. But before worrying about frameworks... get your fundamentals straight. Learn JavaScript, or Java, or C++, or any language... the fundamentals you'll learn with it you'll bring to any programming language. If web, then learn HTML and CSS next, then get into frameworks and servers. Start with freecodecamp or codeacademy. I gave my brother-in-law the same advice and he develops for a hospital's R&D department now.
  3. I think the "Alliances" could be expressed through the feudal system. Guild A Leader = King A with 50 members Guild B Leader = Duke 1 of A with 25 Members Guild C Leader = Duke 2 of A with 30 Members Total Kingdom A strength = 105 members What happens when Guild B grows another 50 members? And... Guild C happens to like Duke 1 more than King A? Maybe Duke 1 of A will declare himself King? And maybe Duke 2 of A will swear fealty to this new king? Kingdom A strength = 50 members Kingdom B strength = 105 members The hunger pressing on... "winter coming" and the ever changing relative power of these feudal systems will force people into alliances.
  4. There's very little consequence to "switching class". Just like there's very little consequence to "switching ship" in EVE Online. You bring the class to the fight that's necessary for the team. In this aspect, if the support class allows people to maneuver around game mechanics and other obstacles the class will ALWAYS be used by the team.
  5. Sorry to "gravedig" this post 21 days after the last post. But +1 to chat bubbles. I know Todd and and Thomas Blair like to mock the idea, implying its silly to have them. And they don't like them for aesthetic reasons. But i'd argue their non-aesthetic but functional value. In every game I had them I was able to connect with other players much more immersively than in games in which I did not have them. Would I have bonded with so many other SWG players if they were not able to express their personalities through mood based chat bubbles? If I had to rely on the chat window in the corner of my screen, definitely not. I mean, we even had 120+ emotes. Again; to scratch the idea from an aesthetically point of view, I don't understand. Functionally it has value has it not? Surely there's a solution. I don't think I would've ever sat with people around a camp fire in SWG if I shared the chat with 120 other people. Or if I had to spend time analyzing who said what instead of just looking at them. You might say there's "groupchat" for that. But there's no emergent social events like the random campfire exchange if someone has to accept a groupchat window. You guys are hitting all the right triggers with your game mechanics. But I'm sorry to say, this is an MMO. If I don't make bonds with people, there will be nothing for me to come back to after the novelty has worn off. Edit: Its early of course. We're alpha, this could be an after release thing like Todd mentions. But the way they discussed the notion felt a lot like someone suggested a silly idea and they were making fun of it... "comic sans". Common guys.
  6. Thank you @Tyrant It was a privilege to hear you talk about your life journey in a nutshell. One of the biggest lessons I take away from it is that its alright to follow your gut from time to time. Other opportunities will present themselves like they did previously and then you can make the most of it again. It gives me confidence in Crowfall to have your wisdom and experience as part of the team. Keep up the good work guys, Whip
  7. Yes, I'm eager to try out the vessels system. Also nice beard!
  8. Are we sure Valkyn is dead (on the graphic)? I thought he just went missing down in the center of the Mealstrom. I still "believe" he's out there fighting a major battle.
  9. Looks great! I love that she's also a redhead /blush
  10. Thank you very much MiracleMax & Blair for putting the extra time in to keep us informed despite of issues that were beyond your control.
  11. Probably the most exciting part of Crowfall I am looking forward to. I can't wait to see it all come together.
  12. I understand your concern, I think. And I agree with most of your concerns. They're worth having. They have to tackle something first though, and they've decided to tackle combat first. I think that might give you the impression that combat is the "be all, end all". During the Kickstarter days however they've expressed their understanding that Combat is a means to an end. That you can't have meaningful combat without a meaningful social system and a meaningful economy. This game development is an iterative process and because of the kickstarter-model they have to try and make it work for us along the way. If it weren't for us, I doubt there would even be a chat system in the combat test. Give it time. These guys have never dissapointed me when expressing their vision. But its going to take time to polish that rock into a diamond.
  13. Very good episode. I like what I'm hearing. Nice work ACE.
  14. I thought this was going to be an announcement to implement chat bubbles but alas. +1 to Chat bubbles. I'm not sure why or how but Chat bubbles in SWG along with the 100+ animated emotes is what contributed most to my social interactions in that game. I don't think it would've been as "immersive" otherwise. You could them make an optional checkbox in the options?
  15. You can't please everyone... but now that its my turn to be displeased its a sour grape indeed. I had never given it much thought before... but the massive amounts of emotes and chat bubbles in Star Wars Galaxies were in my opinion the main contributors to the sandbox role-playing experience that I still reminisce about over a decade later. The emotes are coming... I get it. But the dismissive way in which they talked about, in my opinion, these core components for building relationships with players makes me worry about how invested I could really get about running after a caravan if I have no way of expressing myself to the world around me. I remember the nights with 2-3 people around a campfire and feeling the privacy of a chat bubble. I understand these are features that take the back seat at this time of development. But I'd say give it a second thought and consider their value. People that don't feel connected to the world and why they are doing things will not stay in the game. And the best answer why you do things is because of the relationships you built with people.
  16. I don't understand this part, Thomas. Did you mean the attackers don't have this advantage?
  17. This game is an unholy union between EVE Online, Game of Thrones and Walking dead. (@OP) If what you're afraid of actually happens... i'd say working as intended. But take solace in the fact that there's dying worlds, caps to guilds/alliances and that not everyone can win... that should help change the political arena of things more than in something like EVE. This changing political arena is part of the game you signed up for. Nobody likes losing... but you're gonna do a lot of it. I think everyone will.
  18. The devs have total freedom though... Like pang suggests: they've said in a video they'll generate the map using default building blocks but will go through it for quality control. They can move trees around or buildings... switch buildings for other things. I guess the extend to which they will make the world unique is up to their own whim and resources. I wouldn't worry. We don't know if they'll generate worlds with 12 building blocks or 7000 building blocks... If its not fun because every campaign world is largely the same then we'll complain its not fun and I'm sure they'll take it to heart. Also, the topic title is terrible. It contributes nothing and acts as pure click-bait.
  19. Also consider the possible game-play here... Imagine maximum alliances sizes of 1/5th of the campaign player base... In a perfect world you end up with 5 sides. But no, there will be many more because people are proud, stubborn and rigid. Team 1/5 might have an abundance of lumber but is in need of stone Team 2/5 might have an abundance of stone but is in need of lumber Team 1 and 2 might make the decision to trade resources together. Strengthening them both.. causing a risk for one to be able to overtake the other... But its just a sensible win/win at this point of the campaign. Very interesting stuff.
  20. Disclaimer: sorry if the math doesn't add up. I'm being quick. This is the information we have on guilds and sub-guilds. If there's any more please let me know: Bending the knee: Sub-guilds & Alliances: So we know a few things: Guilds will be limited in size. I've heard the numbers 100 and 300 being thrown around. It might work like a document type database as Todd suggested. This means: Instead of a member you could have a sub-guild which in turn could also contain 100 to 300 people. We don't know yet how deep this might go. Imagine its 3 layers deep with a King, Dukes and Counts. A king has 299 Dukes, who each have 299 Counts, who each have 300 Members. That's close to 2.6 million players So I doubt it'll work like that. If I had to speculate they would either Put a limit in depth based on their hierarchy titles (King, Arch-Duke, Duke, Count) with a restriction on how many "vassals" respective titles could have:Example: maybe a primary guild will be 100 people max, but you can have only 10 sub guilds, who in turn can have only 50 people... who in turn can have only 10 sub guilds who can have only 20 people... Now you have the same three layers, but they make only 690 players maximum. and/or... they limit the total amount of separate objects that may exist in their array. For example... A king may have 99 Dukes if he wants... Who in turn can have 99 counts if they want also... but if the total size of the structure hits 700 people then nobody can "recruit" anymore. I know we're on the speculation train here... but I'm certain they will balance this in terms of how many people participate in a campaign world. For example, if a Dregs campaign server contains 5000 people maximum... then I could see a cap on total array elements be 1000 people max. Essentially 1/5th of the server per group. My mind's eye (while managing my expectations) sees a campaign world start with "many kings" all saying "the throne is mine by right". But this "bending of the knee" mechanic might shift groups of players as objects into other guilds. A game-play mechanic where one's loyalty moving from campaign to campaign will be remembered. It would be even more intense if it were so that the king and his bannermen would get a larger fraction of the embargo. And dukes would get < kings but > counts... People that didn't bend the knee or were not able to fit into the cap would end up with 0%. It would also be cool if at the end of the campaign world this entire structure falls apart and resets for the next campaign. And all these objects are separate objects again. This would raise the stakes even more for people to want to be on top of the pyramid. I very much look forward to ACE fleshing this out more. During the kickstarter this concept was the one thing that made me feel like it was Christmas eve.
  21. You can knock people down causing them to be immobile or you can kick sand in their face literally blurring their view down to like 10%. Its not as easy as simply pressing a button though. Try not to think of this game as a 1 v 1 game and it all starts making sense.
  22. I don't know whose quote it is but I once read "The best King is a slave to his people". It resonated with me because in terms of guild leadership I always felt that says a lot about trust, transparency, ownership and effort. A value system you and I seem to share. I would raise my glass to that one if it weren't morning so I'll raise my cup of coffee and I don't really drink anyway. What you have listed is a series of challenges and your value system in how you intend to overcome them. To me that indicates a mindset towards conflict resolution rather than conflict avoidance. An active approach rather than a reactive approach. Which I always felt is key for guilds and online communities. Now add a dash of luck and success could follow.
  23. Nice work ACE! I really like it! Question for the others? Is armor going to be class specific? Or is a chainmail vest going to look the same on all archetypes? If I'm a ranger and I wear a chainmail vest, could it be that it has over-the-shoulder-ranger-fur... but when a knight wears the same chainmail vest the fur is gone and looks completely different?
  • Create New...