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

ColdSlither

Testers
  • Content Count

    214
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. They've already stated that every class isn't going to be balanced vs. every other class. This is good. I am fine with finding myself in situations that are too tough for me to tackle, regardless of how hypothetically "good" the player on the other end of the keyboard is compared to me. This is an MMORPG. Not Street Fighter. Not a MOBA. Big parts of the game include things like planning, scouting, preparation, exploration, & world building. It sounds like some people want to be able to wander obliviously around the gameworld and think if they are "good" enough, they should have little to fear and be prepared for any situation that comes up. That should not be the case. If you wander somewhere uncharted, without any idea of what's ahead of you, without a diverse group around you, you should be aware that you may find yourself in a (relatively) impossible situation at any moment. That's what makes the game an MMORPG in the old-school style they are harkening back to, like early UO. That's what differentiates it from a MOBA or a Shooter or a Fighting Game. A big part of the draw is the uncertainty and the risk/reward choices you need to make in regard to exploration. You may go out on your own and find a treasure trove of valuable resources you don't need to share with anyone. Or you may get blindsided and destroyed before you know what hit you. That's what makes it an open and dangerous and dynamic (and emergent) world. That's what separates it and makes it the genre that it is. The less balance the better IMO (comparatively to modern MMOs, which have gone too far in appeasing the complaints of the "Overpowered/underpowerd/nerf this/why can't I have everything" crowd) .
  2. You know what? I've never actually read the Tully post on the forum Rules of Conduct, because I've never really thought about doing anything I thought would break any rules. With that said, the rules as listed are pretty strict. However, people appear break most of these rules all the time without penalty. Take that as you will. http://community.crowfall.com/index.php?/topic/332-forum-rules-of-conduct/
  3. Player Skill vs. Character Skill: How much impact are character statistics and gear going to have on combat vs. player skill?
  4. ColdSlither

    Entourage!

    Entourage was a weird period piece when, for some reason, being a douchebag was cool for a couple years in the early 2000's. The show got pretty terrible pretty quickly and I'll wait for it to be on HBO to see the movie.
  5. I've stayed out of all these topics, but I might as well chime in with a few thoughts: 1) This is totally normal. Somewhere early on, somebody mentioned "when you have 100 people posting out 15K, you should look at changing things". Well, that's just not true. For almost all games, a very tiny percentage of the playerbase posts on the forums. This is particularly true when the game is 2 years from release and there are few details about it. Expecting a huge volume of consistent posters at this point is just not going to happen. 2) There is a certain segment of the population, for whom I'm not sure why they even want a game with any game mechanics. It appears they would need only the following to accomplish what they want. An Undmoderated Forum for socksposting An App that calculates how many people you've swayed from these forums to log on at the same time as you. Because it sure sounds like the game they came from consisted of talking trash on the forum and then logging onto the game to have whichever side had the most players win. I'm not sure why a game is needed to measure this. 3) Again. This game is still years away from release. There is just no need for waging forum wars at this point. The vast majority of players that will be in this game come release are not going to be here for years. While there are a handful of cross-game, "gaming club" type guilds following this, the vast majority of Crowfall specific guilds don't even exist yet and won't for quite some time. It's far too early (for me) to look for a guild, or join a guild or start a guild and I'm actively following this game and checking in on the forums daily. 99% of eventual Crowfall players aren't even doing that much. 4) Crowdfunding as a whole is going very strong. The Bard's Tale 4 kickstarter just reached over a million in 48 hours. And to circle back to the first point, (about number of posters compared to backers) after inXile kickstarted Wasteland 2 with over 60,000 backers, there were only probably 25-50 regular posters for quite awhile during the early development on their forums. It grew as development got closer and spiked when people were able to play alpha builds. Next year, these forums will be much more active, once people start getting their hands on it and seeing more. As Alpha rolls into beta, new guilds and alliances and rivalries will begin to form and the forums will be more active. At that point, they will need to make a decision on where they want the political discussion to go, but without a game to play, guild politics shouldn't be anything that ACE should worry about supporting. Completely unmoderated discussion will never be allowed here and, that is simply a change in the internet and the world, that people need to get used to. It wasn't like that 15-20 years ago, but now days companies are legally liable for what is posted on their message boards in ways they weren't in the past.
  6. But that's still assuming mechanics that haven't been confirmed. Right now we don't even know if these structures can be built from scratch. As stated in the video, you find this ruined small keep and you can build it (if you want) into the large one. A large guild very well may not be able to build 5 or 6 small keeps, if you have to find them existing in the game. Say there are 5-10 (or whatever number) of up-gradable structures scattered throughout a CW. This group can certainly try to break into smaller teams and take over a handful of the other keeps, but they may not be able to. It very well might not be the case that a larger group could just "plop down" 3 or 4 smaller forts in place of a Castle. They may have access to only 1 Fortification structure and have to decide what to build it into.
  7. I know what you are saying. I just disagree. Again, this will go back to the point that we don't know enough about rulesets and such, but it sounds like, to me, from everything they've said they are intending to design the campaigns to be able to won by guilds that aren't necessarily just the ones with the most numbers. Now, maybe they will succeed at this design, maybe they will fail, but that appears to be what they are aiming for. So, the existence of a large structure tells us nothing other than that there are large structures to support large groups. A smaller guild with a medium sized keep may be just as successfully suited for the purposes of earning victory points as a large guild in a large castle. All these numbers and sizes tell us is that the smaller group is more suited for defending the smaller fort and the larger group is more suited for defending the larger castle. So I totally reject your statement that the more successful you are you will be associated with the large structure. Has ACE stated anything that says that the most successful group should be the largest groups? Or that a 25-50 person guild of highly skilled players could be the top guild in the game?
  8. I think you are looking at it all wrong. "natural progression for victory"? How does that follow? As far as I can tell, you don't win campaigns by the tier of fortification that you build. We haven't seen anything that says that, so the only way that having a fortification leads to "victory" would be in how it impacts your ability to win/earn points for the campaign. If you upgrade to the largest castle and only have 15-20 people to defend it, you are probably going to have an impossible time keeping the walls up, because you can't defend it. If you can build a smaller outpost in a location that allows you to more efficiently defend it, that would be a better option. I don't think construction is going to be an A->B->C->D game where you have to have the top-tier building to be effective. If you have a large enough guild, or large enough alliance, you will be able to make use of the largest castle, at the cost of needing to man it with more people. I'm just not sure where you are getting the idea that the top tier building is best in all instances.
  9. Seems to be only the case for the tier 3 keep (which is what most of the video was showing). The smaller keep he showed with wouldn't require anything near that number. Remember, he said you might find that small keep in the CW and then you could upgrade it to the larger ones. And those are just the keeps. Remember that's already a step up in size from Forts. I think it's clear, from those videos, that supporting a Large Keep (and presumably Castle) will require large numbers, like you are talking about. But that doesn't mean that we will have, or need to have, a number of Large Keeps and Castles in the campaign worlds. Small or Medium Forts might be perfectly serviceable for most groups.
  10. People will need to plan their fortifications based on their size, not just try to upgrade to the "top" building option. This is a good thing!
  11. [OLD MAN] Kids these days...In my day we watched shows when they aired or not at all[/OLD MAN]
  12. In fairness, he didn't say anything in that post that isn't from already aired TV shows.
×
×
  • Create New...