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

A9AM0use

Testers
  • Content Count

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by A9AM0use

  1. A9AM0use

    Item bloat

    There needs to be some kind of system in place to exchange this bulk gear/scrap for XP or recycle it into higher tier loot. Something like combining 3 blue maces to make a purple could be a good way to both get rid of this low tier item glut and help low level players get better equipment. If not that, maybe they could be exchanged for campaign points at a special alter. If we end up having to maintain outposts by up-keeping the guards, then maybe these items could be used as that currency.
  2. I'm not sure, but what if certain vendor spots had higher rents than others to encourage players to think before they rush to grab 4 spots right by the gates? Obviously some mega guilds will do this anyway, but having a few vendors packed with decent gear near the gate is a time saver and if they can afford it; why should we stop them?
  3. Maybe there should be a more deliberate distribution of resources on a map. Instead of having all kinds of materials available over all biomes, there should be some rationing regionally. For example: 70% of the iron for a campaign would be in the northern maps whereas the south is more dense with trees. Obviously factions would have different advantages based off what their gates are near, but it would make harvesting an investment and a mildly serious endeavor. Your group would have to plan how to get iron for equipment or how to trade to get it. This might also encourage people to use vendors more seriously.
  4. I'm not sure if there has already been an official statement of how the gods will be put into the game, so please link and tell me I'm wrong if there has been. If there hasn't then I have the idea for God Leader boards and alters. Pretty straight forward, but there would be a leader board for each god and players would do certain tasks like collect skulls or bring x amount of x quality ore and bring them to an alter. For making these sacrifices players could get god specific gear or buffs or they could interact with the campaign more. These alters could be on the campaign map and produce points for factions or give factions buffs/spawn spacial NPCs. Implementing the gods this way will allow players to participate in multiple leader boards and could help guide players through different play styles, so even if they aren't fighting they still have a reason to log on every day.
  5. Though I agree that there is a big issue with PvP balance between new players' and veteran players' equipment; I don't think an item wipe would necessarily fix that. It seems like a cop out to the problem and only postpones having to deal with the core issue that players with certain builds and relationships have access to way more loot/materials than others and they use that to their advantage (I'd do the same in their place). My idea to try and balance this would be to have biomes within the larger campaign with higher tier materials, better drop rates, or higher rank mobs, but the degradation on equipment in this area would be higher than others and regen rates would be slower. Higher risk and higher reward essentially. This creates a watering hole where high ranking players weather harder conditions and take more damage for better loot, so it's no longer about having enough free time to mine for legendary ore, but about having enough equipment and skill to survive and get out. In this area you would also not be able to access your EK, so if you die you lose everything you had. Dying will also be a lot easier in that there would be fewer outpost/keeps in this area for protection. This would also mean that owning the few outposts/keeps would seriously matter. While this wouldn't directly effect how new player harvest, it does mean high ranking players are less likely to stumble on them and gank them because it's less likely they have anything worth taking. Obviously some players will try to min/max all their items to break the game and others will hunt new players just to grief, but it should be difficult for players to get to the point where they can do that and/or sustain that level of superiority.
  6. Standing in circles to capture outposts should change. The current system is fine for a basic template, but there needs to be more investment than a couple hours on a Tuesday night involved in capturing these outposts. I can't count the amount times where my guild and I would capture outposts after a siege only to find they had been taken back right after we logged out. It shouldn't be a game of who wakes up latest. That's why I suggest capturing these outposts be a longer and more involved process. You would start off with attacking the outpost and killing the guards and standing in a circle, but that's only the half of it. You then place down you own crafted guards and feed them/gear them to lvl them up. This wouldn't be like player lvling, but more the vendor cost system for food and equipment. Each step of this process would give your faction points as opposed to it being solely time based, so it's less about who wakes up last and more about who does more in the campaign. Players could also receive some kind of reward if their guards are on a post for a certain amount of time, so individual players have incentives to get involved in larger scale campaign activity.
  7. Crowfall is a game all about players generating adventure within the kingdoms. What is the better way to facilitate that then allowing players to create and endeavor quests? These could range from "gather/craft X amount of X" to "kill X player" or "bring X weapon(s) of X stats". Besides basic gather and kill quests, there could be quests to incentivize veteran players to help newer players, like "have a player lvl X or lower in your group during X event". Many larger guilds get new players just because they need the man power to harvest and craft, but this could dissuade that zerg kind of recruiting and make a freelance mercenary kind of playstyle more tenable. These could be posted on forums on campaigns at outposts or forts, which means the quests would be faction locked (Unless maybe certain class or race or perk). There would have to be some limit to who could post a quest, so maybe you could rent space to post your quest on the boards or quests could get more expensive the more quests are posted. Rewards could range from gold to goods to XP (the quest giver could pay gold/goods to have the reward be a certain amount of XP), but to keep people from cheesing obviously you could go up more than one level per quest.
  8. Not a tutorial, but what could be interesting is if there was a system to get guilds or veterans to help introduce new players to the system. Something like "have player of level X or below in your party while you do X" type thing.
  9. For me the biggest difference between this MMO and others is how heavily guilds effect the gameplay. Because there is such an emphasis on joining a guild and team-play, the situation arises where you have vastly different experiences of the game between players who join a communicative guild who captures points and siege; and players who are basically soloing minus campaign wide sieges. These are two massively different game play styles and any system that caters to just one of these play styles or treats them the same will be flawed because it incentivizes one over the others. This isn't such a big deal in other MMOs because in those games you are grinding monster in dungeons to get loot whereas in this game your grinding low level confused players. In CF, the large crafting and harvesting component makes it immensely difficult to keep up with mega guilds who can farm from multiple accounts and having competitive gear is essential to doing well in PvP. People will naturally start moving to bigger and bigger guilds because that is the play style that's being incentivized. There should be some kind of balancing system or loyalty system or reward system in place to get layers to choose under dog factions or guilds. This wouldn't get rid of mega guilds, but it would create a choice for players. Safety in numbers and equipment or better rewards or something.
  10. Crowfall is very team based, so it's important to find a group/guild that allows you to play without getting destroyed in PvP. With the factions being unbalanced players/guilds will naturally choose the largest faction because it gives them the best chance to survive and level up and get better loot. The reward system won't totally fix the problem, I don't think any ONE thing will, but it will give players a reason to choose factions besides the strongest.
  11. Any problem with small player size is going to slowly stop being a problem just because of the nature of a game transitioning from Alpha to full release and more of the backers joining as well as new players. If you want to write off faction play all together as impossible to balance, then why are you playing this game? Its one of the central mechanics on deciding who you talk to versus who you stab. The game already tell you who you can play with when you choose a faction, so why not create a sub system to make choosing a faction a real choice as opposed to choosing the side with the most victories. With the bribes and rewards, players and guilds would be incentivized to join the losing factions to keep the balance of power shifting and to get the different faction rewards.
  12. In the month or two that I have played Crowfal, one of the biggest complaints I've heard is that the factions are unbalanced. I suggest maybe implementing a reward system to incentivize guilds/individual players to choose one faction consistently. These rewards could come in the form of faction specific loot, skins, recruitable NPCs or abilities that can travel between campaigns. Different rewards could be available between individual players and guilds, so there could be some subversion done by individuals/cells against guilds in the enemy faction. Another thing that could be added is "bribery" in that if a player completes a certain number of tasks or campaigns for one faction, then they get a bribe to tempt them to defect to another faction. This creates a kind of loyalty vs infamy system to augment how players will naturally change factions.
  13. I've recently started playing Crowfall and I absolutely love how teamwork and guilds play a huge part in the game. That being said it can be overwhelming for new players to try to find a guild that they fit well with. Many guilds are also having problems keeping their members supplied. My suggestion is that each faction on each campaign get a board where guilds can post quests and rewards for anyone to take. There could be limits for each guild or it could cost to have the quest up, but I believe it would allow the guilds (specifically PvP focused guilds) to stay supplied even if few people are harvesting/crafting and it will introduce new players to the guild and social aspect of Crowfall.
  14. Just applied and I'm really excited! I missed the link for the discord though, could you post it? Edit: Found it on prior post!
  15. Crowfall wants there to be lots of intrigue like back stabbing, alliances, and other player interactions. I suggest there be some sort of system to tell whether a player is trustworthy or untrustworthy so that it isn't a complete guess when you play with someone else. The system would keep track of who any player is affiliate with like faction and guild, it would tell how many times they had killed someone in their own party/guild/faction, and the more team kills a player had the redder their name would get. There would also be a skill players could get that would let them turn their names green or red at their will. Would this system be effective and/or add to the game?
  16. I love the idea that each map gets to be explored and that the info is traded as a commodity. That really adds to the immersion of the game and to the experience of starting a new map for every campaign. I think it should only be an option though and not the standard, like it should be an option for campaign creators/admins. I think that Crowfall players could make some really interesting maps with choke points or dead drop cliffs or thick forests ready for ambushes so taking that ability to create away from the player is taking away some major creative tool.
  17. I'm with Tipsy, I'd love for the Eternal Kingdom to be destructible and for factions to be able to explore the eternal kingdoms for new lands and resources. My take on this would be that each faction has a capital realm where their hall is, this realm could be raided but never taken over. Then a faction can send out some sort of exploration party to find other eternal realms to colonize them. On these colonized realms players could gather resources or grind or something like that in between campaigns. These islands could also be a place for PVP and it would be like capture the flag in that whichever faction controls a point or several points controls the island. What do you guys think?
  18. You guys are right that Crowfall is supposed to be mainly PvP but my concern, and why I think having better NPC combat is a good thing, is that players aren't always going to be online or do jobs that they don't want to do. NPCs are around to be a substitute for players when players aren't around and to do what players don't want to do. Let's say you want to raid a small town so you and a few friends get together and attack. Well you show up and there are no players there so you loot and burn everything. That wasn't fun at all because there was no challenge. Maybe I did go too far with the training but having NPCs defend land or something is necessary because players will not always be online to protect their stuff. Another thing is that NPCs do jobs players don't want to do for instance patrol streets or watch borders. NPCs can do jobs that are normally boring but need to be done so other players can have fun and attack. For instance you want to ambush a guard tower. What player would sit in a guard tower for literal hours on end on the off chance someone attacks? That is why having NPCs is important, they do boring jobs so others can have fun. A side note to this is giving the king the ability to say where guard towers are or where patrols go so being a king of a kingdom feels more powerful but that is a whole other note.
  19. In most MMOs NPCs serve as nothing besides cannon fodder or quest givers. I believe they can be so much more in Crowfall. They should effect the gameplay and be more than just sacks of XP for players to kick around. In gameplay players should be able to use NPCs as soldiers/militia and order them around in combat. This would create huge battles even if there were only a few players playing at that time. This would also allow players to use tactics like flanking or ambushing in combat instead of just charging in head first. Another reason why there should be more intimate NPC combat is it would open up the ability to train NPCs to be better soldiers thus creating value in NPCs and giving NPCs a fighting chance when they have to face players in combat. This training could be done through winning/surviving battles or being trained by the player or at a training building. Players who own land could send these soldiers on patrol or order them to raid or guard land or guard a caravans thus giving players more versatility in their gameplay because would be able to do several things at once without having to be spread incredibly thin. (This could also added to the mercenary system that is on another suggestion page) Another idea is that these soldiers or any NPC lost in battle would not respawn thus giving weight to the deaths of NPCs because ti cot time, money, and effort train them and now that they are gone you have to do it all over again and while you are training another NPC you will be down a soldier.
  20. Hello everyone and thank you for taking the time to talk about the hunting mini bosses idea. I have read the comments and seen the poles and a majority of you like the idea for both campaigns and eternal kingdoms, which is great. A slightly smaller amount like the idea just for campaigns which is reasonable; the same amount of people don't like the idea though which is also reasonable and you bring up some good points about the idea not adding enough to warrant it being added or that it takes away from PvP. With this post I hope to add some ideas to the mix and continue the conversation and show that this idea is different from PvE that has already been implemented and that it won't take away from PvP. 1. Torguish floated the idea that these mini bosses could loot killed players and take the loot to their lairs. This is a really cool idea because it adds another reason why players would hunt down these mini bosses and destroy their lairs. 2. Different monsters could have different attacking habits like some monsters could only attack at night, always flee when players attack, only attack NPCs, etc. This way players with more experience can seriously benefit from their experience and use their knowledge to their advantage. 3. Players with certain skills could get the mini bosses to attack their enemies thus making the mini bosses both a weapon and a liability for both teams. 4. Mini bosses could give players points toward campaign goals which would make them relevant to campaigns. 5. Mini bosses could drop trophies to be hung in barracks or guild halls or sold for profit which would make hunting them more rewarding because you can show off your kills or make money . What do you all think? What would you want to see/add?
  21. So while playing Dark Souls I had the idea of mini bosses in campaigns and/or in eternal kingdoms. These mini bosses would spawn in random places with a lair and they would attack villagers,buildings, and even players and try to take their loot or kill them. The only way to stop these mini bosses would be to hunt them down to their lairs and destroy the lair so the monster have no place to respawn once killed. The player who destroys the lair also gets to keep the monster's treasure. Kings of the realm could also be able to hire people to hunt the monster but only the king, this means that vassals, dukes, and etc. must go to their kings if they need help thus more enforcing the hierarchy. This also makes specializing in hunting or tracking more valuable in PvE and more valuable in general because now their can use their ability to find lairs easier thus hunt the monsters more effectively and get some rewards. What do you all think? Could this be in interesting gameplay mechanic?
  22. I think if we have blessed items we should also have cursed items or the ability to curse players in the same way they are blessed. Sometimes the cures last a few hours or days and some times it is forever. These curses could also vary in casting range and in severity. I mean at the very least it gives players a reason to not be completely horrible to each other and have a little social courtesy.
  23. i love the idea of taking prisoners but it could get a little sticky. I suggest that prisoner should only be allowed to be taken for 24 hrs or less. This means there are real consequences to getting taken prisoner but nothing too atrocious. Prisoners should also be allowed to pay bail or do something to get out early thus giving incentive to get prisoners and all the trouble. Also only some weapons or abilities should be able to let players take prisoners so like blunt weapons or using rope on a player when they are stunned or something like that. Another cool idea is when a player is taken prisoner or killed his/her position in politics should be given to the person under them until they are out. This means that while a prisoner is taken all their lands and teases are given to someone else until they get back. Thi creates a lot of political intrigue and back stabbing possibilities.
  24. I agree the eternal worlds seems kind of empty without any threat but it shouldn't be like a campaign world, there should be combat but rules to the combat. For instance factions should be able to siege other factions castles but the faction should have to have a huge vote and the majority has to agree to a war or each faction leader should have to agree that their faction will have a war. At the end of this war the winning faction should be able to loot the castle but not take it so even if a faction losses tremendously they still have a place to call home...even if it is just a smoldering pile of rocks. There should also be areas of PvP in the eternal world like roads between castles and outside towns so it makes travel seem more intense and encourages team work when traveling and raiding. In all there should be cobalt in the eternal world but regulate it to some extent.
  25. A9AM0use

    No Npcs

    Considering owning a fief/land and collecting taxes is a significant part of the game having no NPCs seems like a big mistake. I want this game to be as massive and immersive as the next guy but who wants to be given land and then forced to farm it for food to sell while other players are off raiding. I mean yes it would be immersive but there is a line where immersion messes with the game being fun and that line is crossed when players who have to pay a monthly subscription have to spend hours farming their land or something while they could be raiding instead. That also takes me to raiding. Raiding and assaulting villages/castles will be so so so much more fun if NPCs are fighting thus making the battles larger and more intense because would it really be fun to assault a castle and then attack like 5 players inside. NPCs need to populate the worlds so they seem alive at all times and not just when a lot of players are there. And as an extra note what other MMORPGs have no NPCS? None, and there is a reason why.
×
×
  • Create New...