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

ZYBAK

Testers
  • Content Count

    1,216
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from damebix in Hide your kids, hide your wife, and hide your husband   
    Can it hurry up?
  2. Like
    ZYBAK reacted to Scree in Uncle Bob via Mega Alliance?   
    So a few things on this, I actually agree that rewards are probably how you adjust behaviors. Psychology aside, people play games to win, and when they win they expect to get a reward. In some games, being on a leaderboard is sufficient, because it showcases how badass you are. These games tend to focus on individual achievement, and the impact of winning or losing as a team is of secondary consequence. Take for example Counter-Strike; One player can go 30-0 but his team still loses. Ultimately it doesn't matter though, because the rewards for winning are non-existent (ignoring the external awards like an eSports tournament prize for the moment).
    Let's take for example one of the proposals I sent to JTodd. I wanted to acknowledge that players are more likely to join a winning team, if doing so is incentivized (or if no penalty exists for joining that team. Let's use Guild Wars 2 as an example here. There are no real tangible rewards for winning a WvWvW "week". Players can participate on whatever server faction they are currently on, but it is possible with money to transfer to a server. The absence of any real reward structure (beyond a meaningless individual track which only incentivizes individual behaviors) means that players have no reason to join a losing faction and by doing so they are almost assuredly going to lose. This isn't fun. Guess what happens? Everyone transferred off to join the winning servers. It was more fun. For them.
    So how do we solve this?
    I proposed that whatever rewards are finally assigned to a winning faction (or guild), that they are given to individuals on the following conditions;
    The moment you decide to join a faction campaign, you are assigned a locked reward percentage at the time of joining. This reward percentage can range from 0% to 500%. The reward percentage is calculated from two factors; how populated the faction you joined vs the other factions and the score of the faction you joined vs the others. If a guild joins a campaign, the reward percent is locked in for all guild members, regardless of when they actually join that campaign (and that guilds member count is fully realized/considered for determining reward percents going forward). The percentage takes into account things like a new campaign starting up. The difference in points would be negligble and thus at the beggining of a campaign, only the population would weigh on your score. Similarly, later in a campaigns seasons, populations might be balanced but the scores might be lopsided. Adding additional players to that campaign might be desirable to help counter-act the skill of the other factions. In my mind, scoring imbalances would be weighted more than populations, but this weight might simply adjust the longer a campaign goes on. Maybe during the opening seasons of a campaign, the population is all that matters but near the end only score matters in determining awards.
    Ultimately this proposal is designed to do a few things;
    If you want to play with your friends, you can. We don't need arbitrary faction-locks ("this faction has too many players" errors) here. It takes into account that campaigns end and guilds/players might want to join an already-in-progress campaign If you decide to play on a faction that is overwhelmingly ahead, you'll get 0% rewards. That's right, you'll take home nothing.  Guilds can join a faction and not be penalized if other people jump in to try to piggyback on their leadership/presence Target the un-aligned player who has no guild. Why would he care what faction he joins? Oh, I get 300% rewards? Hrmm. Balance achieved. Decentivize team stacking. Sure you might still want to play with someone and that's fine. I just don't want you to be rewarded for that behavior. Incentivize being the underdog. I really like the idea of guilds that purposefully seek out high percent rewards to try to spice up already-in-progress campaigns.  I think the final important note to bring up here is that everyone must acknowledge that Crowfall already has the best solution implemented for dealing with Uncle Bob. Campaigns end. If my proposal fails, and it can because in some cases no amount of manipulation will allow for some games to be course-corrected... the campaigns ending is the perfect solution. The games reset and players go off to the next one (with hopefully better results).
  3. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from APE in Giving Outposts Area Wide Buffs   
    Right now taking and holding outposts is very lackluster. It's boring and usually something people dread doing primarily because there's no reason to grab them other than "points".
    - If you're a PvPer and you're not in the race to win then there's no point in even bothering with them.
    - For harvesters they don't get any benefit whatsoever.
     
    If you guys gave something like a 5% damage buff for having a nearby Outpost and an extra plentiful harvesting point and extra harvesting critical chance it would really incentivize people to want to grab them for reasons outside of points. 
    - It would add some tactics to taking points on the map. Maybe you want to grab the 2 nearby outposts for a 10% damage buff before trying to take a fort. If you're planning on doing a motherload run you'd want to grab nearby objectives first for the buffs and a fallback point. Overlapping buffs might be too much but maybe there could be a limit to how many stacks you could have.
    @jtoddcoleman@Tyrant@thomasblair
     
  4. Confused
    ZYBAK got a reaction from mandalore in Crowfall Memes + MS Paint Rage Thread   
  5. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from KrakkenSmacken in First campaign import issue solved   
    To be honest a wipe might actually make the gear discrepancy WORSE for new players than not wiping. The established guilds have been through many wipes and are very good at starting the war machine back up again and getting everyone geared. The new guys don't have this kind of organization and knowledge and are much slower to get there. 
    However the secondary market will start to develop after there hasn't been a wipe for a while. This disproportionately helps newer/less organized groups get competitive gear.
  6. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from Armegeddon in First campaign import issue solved   
    To be honest a wipe might actually make the gear discrepancy WORSE for new players than not wiping. The established guilds have been through many wipes and are very good at starting the war machine back up again and getting everyone geared. The new guys don't have this kind of organization and knowledge and are much slower to get there. 
    However the secondary market will start to develop after there hasn't been a wipe for a while. This disproportionately helps newer/less organized groups get competitive gear.
  7. Like
    ZYBAK reacted to Jah in First campaign import issue solved   
    These calls for wipes have been happening for years. They didn't start with the announcement of a "first sanctioned campaign" and they won't stop there either.
    Its worth noting that many of the people who argued for wipes in the past didn't actually stick around after they got the wipes they wanted. Frequent wipes are not the lure to new players that some people think they are.
  8. Like
    ZYBAK reacted to Zatch in First campaign import issue solved   
    All fights should consist of 12 people, on flat ground, and in basics. Devs should FORCE this, otherwise its unfair. This is what you want.
    Crowfall isn't a fair game; it never will be. If you can't except that sometimes other people will have better gear, more numbers, or some other logistical advantage then you are in for a rough time my friend.
  9. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from Groovin in ZYBAK 1 - Crowfall Cutthroat Assassin PvP Montage   
    I hope you guys enjoy this. I put a lot of thought and time into it. My aim was to make a PvP video that was fun and would hype people up to play the game. If you enjoy the video be sure to like it and SHARE it with your friends who might be interested in Crowfall!
  10. Haha
    ZYBAK got a reaction from Frykka in ZYBAK 1 - Crowfall Cutthroat Assassin PvP Montage   
    I hope you guys enjoy this. I put a lot of thought and time into it. My aim was to make a PvP video that was fun and would hype people up to play the game. If you enjoy the video be sure to like it and SHARE it with your friends who might be interested in Crowfall!
  11. Like
    ZYBAK reacted to mandalore in Crowfall Memes + MS Paint Rage Thread   
    When Tinnis gets banned that's one less obstacle in my path to highest post count, assuming I don't get banned first. 
  12. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from Staff in Giving Outposts Area Wide Buffs   
    Right now taking and holding outposts is very lackluster. It's boring and usually something people dread doing primarily because there's no reason to grab them other than "points".
    - If you're a PvPer and you're not in the race to win then there's no point in even bothering with them.
    - For harvesters they don't get any benefit whatsoever.
     
    If you guys gave something like a 5% damage buff for having a nearby Outpost and an extra plentiful harvesting point and extra harvesting critical chance it would really incentivize people to want to grab them for reasons outside of points. 
    - It would add some tactics to taking points on the map. Maybe you want to grab the 2 nearby outposts for a 10% damage buff before trying to take a fort. If you're planning on doing a motherload run you'd want to grab nearby objectives first for the buffs and a fallback point. Overlapping buffs might be too much but maybe there could be a limit to how many stacks you could have.
    @jtoddcoleman@Tyrant@thomasblair
     
  13. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from Doomshadow in Giving Outposts Area Wide Buffs   
    Right now taking and holding outposts is very lackluster. It's boring and usually something people dread doing primarily because there's no reason to grab them other than "points".
    - If you're a PvPer and you're not in the race to win then there's no point in even bothering with them.
    - For harvesters they don't get any benefit whatsoever.
     
    If you guys gave something like a 5% damage buff for having a nearby Outpost and an extra plentiful harvesting point and extra harvesting critical chance it would really incentivize people to want to grab them for reasons outside of points. 
    - It would add some tactics to taking points on the map. Maybe you want to grab the 2 nearby outposts for a 10% damage buff before trying to take a fort. If you're planning on doing a motherload run you'd want to grab nearby objectives first for the buffs and a fallback point. Overlapping buffs might be too much but maybe there could be a limit to how many stacks you could have.
    @jtoddcoleman@Tyrant@thomasblair
     
  14. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from Ardrea in Giving Outposts Area Wide Buffs   
    Right now taking and holding outposts is very lackluster. It's boring and usually something people dread doing primarily because there's no reason to grab them other than "points".
    - If you're a PvPer and you're not in the race to win then there's no point in even bothering with them.
    - For harvesters they don't get any benefit whatsoever.
     
    If you guys gave something like a 5% damage buff for having a nearby Outpost and an extra plentiful harvesting point and extra harvesting critical chance it would really incentivize people to want to grab them for reasons outside of points. 
    - It would add some tactics to taking points on the map. Maybe you want to grab the 2 nearby outposts for a 10% damage buff before trying to take a fort. If you're planning on doing a motherload run you'd want to grab nearby objectives first for the buffs and a fallback point. Overlapping buffs might be too much but maybe there could be a limit to how many stacks you could have.
    @jtoddcoleman@Tyrant@thomasblair
     
  15. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from xary in Giving Outposts Area Wide Buffs   
    Right now taking and holding outposts is very lackluster. It's boring and usually something people dread doing primarily because there's no reason to grab them other than "points".
    - If you're a PvPer and you're not in the race to win then there's no point in even bothering with them.
    - For harvesters they don't get any benefit whatsoever.
     
    If you guys gave something like a 5% damage buff for having a nearby Outpost and an extra plentiful harvesting point and extra harvesting critical chance it would really incentivize people to want to grab them for reasons outside of points. 
    - It would add some tactics to taking points on the map. Maybe you want to grab the 2 nearby outposts for a 10% damage buff before trying to take a fort. If you're planning on doing a motherload run you'd want to grab nearby objectives first for the buffs and a fallback point. Overlapping buffs might be too much but maybe there could be a limit to how many stacks you could have.
    @jtoddcoleman@Tyrant@thomasblair
     
  16. Thanks
    ZYBAK got a reaction from Frykka in Giving Outposts Area Wide Buffs   
    Right now taking and holding outposts is very lackluster. It's boring and usually something people dread doing primarily because there's no reason to grab them other than "points".
    - If you're a PvPer and you're not in the race to win then there's no point in even bothering with them.
    - For harvesters they don't get any benefit whatsoever.
     
    If you guys gave something like a 5% damage buff for having a nearby Outpost and an extra plentiful harvesting point and extra harvesting critical chance it would really incentivize people to want to grab them for reasons outside of points. 
    - It would add some tactics to taking points on the map. Maybe you want to grab the 2 nearby outposts for a 10% damage buff before trying to take a fort. If you're planning on doing a motherload run you'd want to grab nearby objectives first for the buffs and a fallback point. Overlapping buffs might be too much but maybe there could be a limit to how many stacks you could have.
    @jtoddcoleman@Tyrant@thomasblair
     
  17. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from Aeriav in Giving Outposts Area Wide Buffs   
    Right now taking and holding outposts is very lackluster. It's boring and usually something people dread doing primarily because there's no reason to grab them other than "points".
    - If you're a PvPer and you're not in the race to win then there's no point in even bothering with them.
    - For harvesters they don't get any benefit whatsoever.
     
    If you guys gave something like a 5% damage buff for having a nearby Outpost and an extra plentiful harvesting point and extra harvesting critical chance it would really incentivize people to want to grab them for reasons outside of points. 
    - It would add some tactics to taking points on the map. Maybe you want to grab the 2 nearby outposts for a 10% damage buff before trying to take a fort. If you're planning on doing a motherload run you'd want to grab nearby objectives first for the buffs and a fallback point. Overlapping buffs might be too much but maybe there could be a limit to how many stacks you could have.
    @jtoddcoleman@Tyrant@thomasblair
     
  18. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from ilogos in Giving Outposts Area Wide Buffs   
    Right now taking and holding outposts is very lackluster. It's boring and usually something people dread doing primarily because there's no reason to grab them other than "points".
    - If you're a PvPer and you're not in the race to win then there's no point in even bothering with them.
    - For harvesters they don't get any benefit whatsoever.
     
    If you guys gave something like a 5% damage buff for having a nearby Outpost and an extra plentiful harvesting point and extra harvesting critical chance it would really incentivize people to want to grab them for reasons outside of points. 
    - It would add some tactics to taking points on the map. Maybe you want to grab the 2 nearby outposts for a 10% damage buff before trying to take a fort. If you're planning on doing a motherload run you'd want to grab nearby objectives first for the buffs and a fallback point. Overlapping buffs might be too much but maybe there could be a limit to how many stacks you could have.
    @jtoddcoleman@Tyrant@thomasblair
     
  19. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from KrakkenSmacken in Giving Outposts Area Wide Buffs   
    Right now taking and holding outposts is very lackluster. It's boring and usually something people dread doing primarily because there's no reason to grab them other than "points".
    - If you're a PvPer and you're not in the race to win then there's no point in even bothering with them.
    - For harvesters they don't get any benefit whatsoever.
     
    If you guys gave something like a 5% damage buff for having a nearby Outpost and an extra plentiful harvesting point and extra harvesting critical chance it would really incentivize people to want to grab them for reasons outside of points. 
    - It would add some tactics to taking points on the map. Maybe you want to grab the 2 nearby outposts for a 10% damage buff before trying to take a fort. If you're planning on doing a motherload run you'd want to grab nearby objectives first for the buffs and a fallback point. Overlapping buffs might be too much but maybe there could be a limit to how many stacks you could have.
    @jtoddcoleman@Tyrant@thomasblair
     
  20. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from miraluna in Giving Outposts Area Wide Buffs   
    Right now taking and holding outposts is very lackluster. It's boring and usually something people dread doing primarily because there's no reason to grab them other than "points".
    - If you're a PvPer and you're not in the race to win then there's no point in even bothering with them.
    - For harvesters they don't get any benefit whatsoever.
     
    If you guys gave something like a 5% damage buff for having a nearby Outpost and an extra plentiful harvesting point and extra harvesting critical chance it would really incentivize people to want to grab them for reasons outside of points. 
    - It would add some tactics to taking points on the map. Maybe you want to grab the 2 nearby outposts for a 10% damage buff before trying to take a fort. If you're planning on doing a motherload run you'd want to grab nearby objectives first for the buffs and a fallback point. Overlapping buffs might be too much but maybe there could be a limit to how many stacks you could have.
    @jtoddcoleman@Tyrant@thomasblair
     
  21. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from Arnminster in Giving Outposts Area Wide Buffs   
    Right now taking and holding outposts is very lackluster. It's boring and usually something people dread doing primarily because there's no reason to grab them other than "points".
    - If you're a PvPer and you're not in the race to win then there's no point in even bothering with them.
    - For harvesters they don't get any benefit whatsoever.
     
    If you guys gave something like a 5% damage buff for having a nearby Outpost and an extra plentiful harvesting point and extra harvesting critical chance it would really incentivize people to want to grab them for reasons outside of points. 
    - It would add some tactics to taking points on the map. Maybe you want to grab the 2 nearby outposts for a 10% damage buff before trying to take a fort. If you're planning on doing a motherload run you'd want to grab nearby objectives first for the buffs and a fallback point. Overlapping buffs might be too much but maybe there could be a limit to how many stacks you could have.
    @jtoddcoleman@Tyrant@thomasblair
     
  22. Haha
    ZYBAK got a reaction from Navystylz in 5.8 LIVE Feedback and Bug Reports for 1/8/19   
    Complete damage immunity bug! A bit odd since he can attack me. In chat he said his combat log had negative damage taken. I didn't get any combat log entries for damage done. 
    @jtoddcoleman@Tyrant
     
  23. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from cyjax in Giving Outposts Area Wide Buffs   
    Right now taking and holding outposts is very lackluster. It's boring and usually something people dread doing primarily because there's no reason to grab them other than "points".
    - If you're a PvPer and you're not in the race to win then there's no point in even bothering with them.
    - For harvesters they don't get any benefit whatsoever.
     
    If you guys gave something like a 5% damage buff for having a nearby Outpost and an extra plentiful harvesting point and extra harvesting critical chance it would really incentivize people to want to grab them for reasons outside of points. 
    - It would add some tactics to taking points on the map. Maybe you want to grab the 2 nearby outposts for a 10% damage buff before trying to take a fort. If you're planning on doing a motherload run you'd want to grab nearby objectives first for the buffs and a fallback point. Overlapping buffs might be too much but maybe there could be a limit to how many stacks you could have.
    @jtoddcoleman@Tyrant@thomasblair
     
  24. Like
    ZYBAK got a reaction from Groovin in Crowfall Epic Moments #2 - Thriving On The Chaos   
    Some more epic moments I've had during the patch 5.8 campaigns in Crowfall. I'm saving my absolute coolest stuff for my PvP montage but these were also pretty cool moments that didn't make the cut.
  25. Thanks
    ZYBAK got a reaction from Ungood in Groups appearing on you.   
    View distance and specifically nameplate distance isn't very far in this game. Also in the Spirit Bank meta ganking groups have to be particularly good at catching people by surprise. Whatever group killed you might have approached in such a way to minimize your reaction time. 
×
×
  • Create New...