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

ColdSlither

Testers
  • Content Count

    214
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ColdSlither

  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.
  13. http://community.crowfall.com/index.php?/topic/6499-meaningful-ek-contribution-to-campaigns/?p=175004 "If there aren't enough materials flowing from the Campaign worlds, we can increase the Campaign rewards. We can do this by increasing capacity (how much you can take out), or even by addressing flow (how often you can export). "
  14. They have said they may tweak the frequency of exporting from campaigns, which actually suggests that it's not only when a campaign ends, necessarily.
  15. No way should a character remain in a world indefinitely after logging off, but when not resting in a safe location they should remain for a significant time period. But 5 or 10 minutes at most.
  16. I kind of agree, in premise, but I'm not sure how limiting benefits translates to the "Throne War Simulator", if that's truly what they want. I mean, if you are Stannis Baratheon, you aren't sitting around going "I won't accept the Northern Clans into my alliance because I want to win the throne with as few men as possible". Instead, you'd be happy to snatch up every group and take the throne with a 99% to 1% numbers advantage on your enemies if you could. But, I think the real problem with the "Throne Ware Simulator" idea is giving the smaller & mid-sized groups a reason to hold out and not take sides. I mean, in Crowfall why would a group like the Iron Islands say "F you" to everyone and just raze cities in war? Why would another group sit back and defend their turf to the death, but not take sides in the victory? They've captured these lands and want to hold them works as a motivation in a story, but in Crowfall, these lands aren't permanent anyway.
  17. We need to see a lot more before we can determine how much value, if any, these structures actually have. Player built, or not, they are all temporary, because the campaigns are going to end anyway. How much value to a group does a fortification have when the campaign is going to end in a few months? Is it different than the value of the same fort when the campaign is going to end in a a few days? What is the actual value, in the game? Does the guild get anything for owning that fort when the campaign ends, if they are not the winner? There's a lot we need to know before we can safely say what value people might place on these structures.
  18. I'm not completely sold on the idea of early victory conditions or differing campaign lengths under any circumstances. We will have to see if play out a number of times to be sure, of course, I'm just not sure about these concepts for the overall health of the game because of what I think they can do to shaping player behavior. The ability to "win" changes things drastically. And with the fact that these are lengthy campaigns, and not just some half hour battle, wins of any kind are going to be very rare. I mean if we assume an average of 3 months per campaign, the "best" guild out there might get 2 wins in a year (you could say 4 I suppose, but if that really happened that one guild won every campaign then ACE failed to prevent Uncle Bob regardless of resetting campaigns). And campaigns might be longer than 3 months. So, with the scarcity of wins and the scarcity of even being able to try to get a win, it seems (again just speculation) likely that a lot of players will flock to short campaigns if they are offered. Also, people will try to rush to create the victory conditions in campaigns where the length can be shortened this way. Add fealty to the mix and I think a lot of people will end up kneeling for game length reasons. I understand that "politics" are supposed to be a part of the game, but I have concerns about the community as a whole quickly finding that "sweet spot" in terms of risk/reward and just forming a general agreement among each other to kneel once one team captures a certain number of points/resources to get campaigns over with and onto the next one. That doesn't feel like the political game to me, just gaming the system.
  19. For MMOs a common reason to stop playing a game is: The game starts out great at release. As the developers listen to more and more people complaints, they make changes to the game in significant ways from what it was at launch.
  20. The problem with giving everybody %export from the dregs, is that it will make it by far the most populated campaigns. I think it's already going to be pretty populated due to the fact that the top resources are there. If everyone is guaranteed to be able to bring something out, there's no reason for every player, no matter their inclination, to have a character on a dregs campaign. In fact, it would become almost a necessary condition of playing the game.
×
×
  • Create New...