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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About ConstantineX

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Language

Recent Profile Visitors

511 profile views
  1. Hope to stop by more in the future when time permits for more experience, maybe next time I won't die right off the bat😂
  2. I do like the forced choice aspect of the current system. It wasn't so much that the minors weren't balanced as they felt unimpactful. I know that a minor should be a small thing, but it should change a small facet of my character, and it did not feel as though it did that. I think that removing the slots is one way to fix it that is ok and fairly easy, but if you could rework the minors in a way that made the ones that took passive slots be more impactful and change/introduce more minors that are like elven eyes or reaper and don't require a passive slot but offer just stats or small buffs this seems ideal to me. I figure the non passive slot minors should be scaled to be somewhere in the range of 2 points in your talent tree, maybe more, and then the ones requiring a passive slot have more character altering role defining effects. maybe they give access to a weapon your class otherwise couldnt use, or armor, or a passive that added utility. Spirit whip is a good example as it makes you capable of doing different fun things potentially not available to your class. maybe you put a glider, or repelling rope, or some sort of purely utility active ability on one that is useful and changes your characters play but not in an explicitly combat way. It can help to facilitate more dynamic environment play. I think you can do lots of fun things to make characters unique with minors. The majors are almost like a promotion class in a sense and offer a set of things, the minors can then offer these small nuanced tweaks.
  3. In campaign currently and I have a completely empty hunger bar but am not suffering from the hungry debuff. While this is incredibly convenient I thought I best report it.
  4. It would be a sort of fitting team. Something to possibly look forward to in the future. Thanks @KDSProm, We are NA players but have talked about the possibility of making friends with some EU guilds given how easy it would be to pop over and help out from time to time.
  5. Great job on the Q&A! 2 pieces of feedback if they are useful. 1. When announcing the campaigns I get that it would be a nightmare to list all the uptimes but maybe list one time so that extrapolation on when it might start is possible.( Really minutia but I I'd love it if you did😁) . 2. Coleman is on the right path in trying to beat it into everyone's head that we are testing a game and I'm incredibly thankful for the feature freeze and focusing on the next build of the game. I just wonder if more patience might be pragmatic. I 100% get why it's annoying to answer the same question multiple Q&As in a row, specifically referencing the vendors question. I respected that it was just like an oh this bull**** again moment for those following. I looked for some feedback on it anectodally from my guild and most of the new eyes to the Q&A found it off-putting. I really appreciate the time you take to keep us in the loop and share your thoughts and address some of the concerns the community is having!!!!
  6. Having a little more experience with sieges I thought I might come back to this and say that I feel as though my paladin can be very useful in large team fights. both on the attack and defense of forts you are often spending major portions of combat within a relative field of battle that is somewhat static. Whether the throne room, walls on the way in, or a skirmish in between. In these situations I feel my healing is at least comparable if not superior to other healers. Meanwhile my damage output is far superior and I am able to contribute as a tank that can front line and chase low HP individuals. Where a druid might be a priority target for the enemy team, I am not, or at least not an easy one. I would love to hear if I am overlooking or oversimplifying things, the class is fairly straightforward and boring to play but it does seem effective.
  7. This doesn't take away from anything you said, but for anyone who finds this post and is looking for information the folks @ https://malekai.org/ have got some useful information. Left Ctrl clicking over nodes in talent trees is another useful trick I wish I would have learned sooner. I think Coleman addressed a need for more information and helping guide the new player experience along in the last Q&A so at some point we will see them address the in game information systems and add to them.
  8. I think this is a major issue right now as we cannot even begin to properly put things in to perspective with the low server pops. I flip flop on whether more people in this phase of testing is good or bad. The game is lackluster in many ways and I fear people may burn out on it before it gets off the ground so to speak. As long as it is an open testing environment they should make an effort to close some of these gaps. The most disheartening gap is the time gap. I agree people want to grind. They aim at a goal of attainment and will work to get there. The time gates are so disheartening because the player has zero control over them. At launch they work well and as intended to keep everyone on the same curve, but without any active way to work towards closing that gap you are at the mercy of things out of your control. I like a lot of your ideas Deioth and would be quite happy to see several of your suggestions implemented.
  9. The initial plan for new out of the box support classes really interested me in the kick starter. Seems most of them got turned into disciplines though. A Bard class would have been incredibly cool. Common to pen and paper group games but not MMOs. I do like the templar paladin healer idea. You just play it like its a bruiser and consequently it heals your friends. The level of healing and self sustain does detract from the gameplay all around. Makes everything seem less consequential.
  10. Frontloading gains has some potential if it's done right, I had thought tuning each tree to be more exponential fits the flat curve model that we are supposed to be aiming for. If you could arbitrarily say become 75% complete in 3 trees vs being 100% in one. Jack of all trades master of none vs the masterful route. This makes more sense in crafting than the other two. I could see some potential issues in the combat tree that would need to be worked out.
  11. Minors currently seem like hot garbage. All but 2 of them being tied to a passive slot is frustrating. If you like class/major disc passives, good news! You don't need minors.
  12. I wonder if it's in regards to animations. Like a half giant and centaurs neckbreaker are different animations. Sure the powers may functionally be the same, but visually they are not, in the coding they aren't just transplants I venture. So as others suggested all 3 lmb are seperate animations, and dif animations for the seperate races. Kind of spurious to suggest them to be different powers, but from a workload perspective they likely had to do all the work of 1500 powers in a sense right?
  13. My point was in regards to passive training. I don't enjoy the level of grind required to manufacture equipment in the game, I don't like rng loot drops on mobs, leveling a character is mildly annoying but I do think it falls correctly on the line.(commons and rares at least, epics and legs could be reeled back a bit) If progression is not fun or rewarding it's a grind. If anything in the game offers you said progression for a minimal time investment as I have suggested, and you still feel it is a grind, that's a reflection of a lack of fun content. My point is aimed to specifically address a piece of the puzzle and round some of the rough edges. I can agree it's not a super fun puzzle currently but I don't think passive training is the culprit at large. If I was foolish enough to point that finger, which I am, I would say a lacking player base is what is making our game world empty and devoid of meaning. I honestly believe this in some small way will contribute towards helping that issue. Maybe removing passive training would to, but I think it has good utility and would advocate for it to remain but be altered in some similar fashion to my proposal.
  14. The intention of the 25% component was that it would be nearly given it's entirety in an hour play session doing nearly anything, crafting, killing, farming. The Zeta portion would absolutely be a grind mechanic, and that is in my opinion a valuable asset to the game for players that join late. It will reward them for whatever they are doing and make them feel as though they are directly contributing to their advancement in the game. The smart way for a new player to approach that is to try many different things and feel that all of this trial and error is not lost but is them actually progressing. The idea is to mesh the aspects of both harmoniously. I think passive training works very well at keeping a forward edge to the game locked in that players cannot exceed. Allowing players that join late the ability to take direct control over catching up to that curve is an excellent way to maintain motivation to play the game as they transition from useless to viable. The idea of getting rid of the passive tree is surely not grounded in the idea of taking progression out of the game is it? The concept of an MMO without progression, which can almost always turn into grinding, seems foolish to me. Is it more so the focus on progression of item acquisition? If the aspiration is to create a moba meets fortnight game where I just hop on and start fighting, I have to fundamentally disagree on the direction in which I wish the game to go.
  15. I would like to first identify a few of the flaws of the passive training system. The first flaw is it offers new players a reason to log off for a week and come back, or forget to come back and not come back. I think the daily active user standard of measurement is important and this leads to low daily users. The second flaw is the mentality of being behind. In general if time is the only means of advancing, and I wasn't here in time I cannot recoup that shortcoming. Any player that cannot function as less than will not play in that condition. The third flaw is that nothing I do in game impacts this in any way, it carries a tyrannical connotation in the minds of many players. If a person wants to be a crafter and that is all they want to do in this game, they are pushed to play the other parts of the game while they wait, or far more likely they leave. I actually like the passive system, I see it as an egalitarian mechanism to keep those with more and less time to play on a relatively even playing field. It creates a forward point of progression in game that all players share. However even knowing that I like these elements and conceptually I am fond of it I have found myself resenting the system at several points in playing. I do not think that the system is bad, I think it needs most of all a catch up mechanic. Not only a catch up mechanic, but an inbedded daily quest that is whatever you want it to be. I propose that your passive leveling points be split into 2 resources. Arbitrarily named X and Y from here forward. Resource X is 75% of the point pool and resource Y is 25% of the point pool. Resource X functions like passive training now and simply accrues. However Resource Y requires you to complete a set amount of activities that yield experience to gain them. Not in a 0 or 25% fashion but that scales as you complete tasks. Ideally I think you might tie these events of experience to the corresponding tasks but for ease of implementation all tasks should suffice, and may be better. This rewards the player that logs in every day and plays, this small incentive to log in and play every day will give me a mission, a task to do, on those days IDK what in the world I want to do in game. Then before you know it I have been on for 4 hours and I am playing. This also combats to some degree those of us who have multiple accounts, of which I am one. This way my alt account cannot craft as well as that guy who is devoted to crafting without me logging in and playing it every day. Now that our resources are separated we can discuss the catch up mechanic, the real reason for separating them. The above is happy consequence. Resource Y, cannot be caught up. It is tied to every day and you get it or you don't. However Resource X is the clock that is kept track of and is given to players when they join. Well not given, but access is granted. We will denote resource X of the past as Zeta. Example: Player Bob joins one year after launch and has 1 year of Zeta in his bank. If we just gave Bob Zeta he is liable to ruin his account for his desires because he doesn't know pip from tip. Instead we treat Zeta like Resource Y and reward Bob for his actions in game. Now Bob not only has an avenue that he is in control of to close the gap, but it requires he gets in the game and plays it and learns its functions. If we extrapolate Bob's scenario to 2 years after launch and assume him and his friend Ted have both never missed 1 day of training. Ted has 24 months of x and 24 months of y, which is 24 months of training. Bob has 24 months of x and 12 months of y, which is 21 months of training. Ted still has a 12.5% advantage by virtue of the time he spent playing and is not robbed of his efforts. Bob knows that margin is only getting smaller and does not feel he cannot compete. I think this a viable conceptual solution and would love to hear feedback on where I was shortsighted or foolish. P.S. the catch up curve is 25% difference from Bob and Ted at the moment Bob Joins and steadily shrinks
  • Create New...