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

Akede

Testers
  • Content Count

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Akede

  • Rank
    Nestling

Profile Information

  • Interests
    Gaming, Drumming, Project/Program Management
  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    NYC

Recent Profile Visitors

572 profile views
  1. First off, good topic. I do somewhat agree with Tinnis that getting answers to important Qs generated via the Shoutcast could be answered by ACE. Maybe an ACE CM could shepherd the Qs to the appropriate ACE person and then provide the Shoutcast with feedback. Maybe they participate in the Shoutcast only to provide answers the following Episode. Don't want it to turn into a Q&A as ACE already does that regularly. When I first read this and saw multiple 'guilds' suggested I was SMH. After reading Nitris' explanation, however, I do like the idea of having more than one citizenship. Multiple guilds, though, really dilutes the importance of guilds in general. In ESO it was like belonging to a number of chat groups and there was no sense of guild membership. And for my thoughts on guilds in Crowfall: Succession: Guilds should exist after a leader falls/moves on. Some sort of succession capability should exist so the guild doesn't need to reform following the loss of a GL. Guild Asset Management: Any guild assets e.g. banks, vaults, chests, etc should be tied into a decently robust accounting system so guild leaders can monitor the additions and removal of their assets, especially with crafting. As a guild leader I should be able to learn what the guild gain/loss is at any time by guild member. e.g. Did Akede turn around his losses from last week and is he still in the red or did he dig out and is now in the black? Same as #2 but for guild infrastructure expenses for structures, their walls, keep towers, etc. This should apply to construction as well as siege repair. Guild Ranking/Access System: Allow guilds to build their own access model. Don't constrain them into a model of a fixed 2 or 3 levels. If they want the granularity and PITA of having 20 access levels, g-d bless them. I'm thinking of the Discord Roles model when I describe this. Guild size cap: I understand the need to place a limit on how large a guild can be in Crowfall. Please consider the following: BDO launched with a 100 member guild cap. While 95% of the guilds could manage under that cap, some could not with several hundred members wanting to be in the in-game guild. The level of administration needed for onboarding and membership management was too high for a guild fielding > 100 members. People want to play the game, not spend their time updating spreadsheets. Things like waiting lists and transfers required out of game listings of information so membership teams could manage. Perhaps there could be a way of linking these guilds purely for administrative management and providing no other benefits. As a guild officer, in a guild with > 100 members, I should be able to determine the capacity of any of the in-game guilds associated with the same out-of-game guild. This would include being able to move blocks of members across in-game guilds to facilitate transfers and keep friends playing together. Searches for members should be able to span multiple in-game guilds "linked" by the same out-of-game guild.
  2. @keegan, I'm not going to argue this out in Discord as I see little mileage/value but please consider some of the views being expressed as they are quite polarizing... Player A. "I want P2W...i have a job and disposable income. Dont work at walmart if you wanna win..." Player B: "Or how about have games that aren't trying to force you to either make it a job, or use your existing job to enjoy it." Player C. "I think it's naive to suggest that the only reason someone doesn't want to pay to win is that they are in a sub-optimal economic situation. Consider that some people value sweat equity/hard work as a more important element in gaming than how many zeros you have in your 401K balance. Why should the CFO of a Fortune 500 company have an advantage in a game she plays with a first year college student who waits tables part time? She should be entitled to win because she has more disposable income? The college student may be more skilled and a much better player but won't stand a chance against the gear the CFO bought." Player D. "So a filthy casual, who happens to be a millionaire, should have an in-game advantage over the guy who practices daily with the intention of going eSports pro in a year?"
  3. Yeah, how many in total can access TEST in 5.3, 3,500? Expectations should be set low for #s of concurrent players in pre-alpha testing.
  4. As mentioned above this in 5.3: Ranger now has the Alertness ability which lets you become acutely aware of your surroundings increasing your Perception by 25, Attack Power by 50, removing the Exposed state and detecting enemies in Stealth for group members and yourself. This ability can be slotted into the Ranged, Melee and Harvesting ability trays. Key to note that all group members with the Ranger can detect enemies in Stealth even when they are harvesting.
  5. @Destrin good point about the limited to no imports into a CW. I'd like to see ACE clarify in the FAQ that VIP Membership tickets cannot be traded/sold(crow to crow in game) in a CW but only in an EK. That would address my concern.
  6. The Question for Episode 2 suggests that ACE has microtransactions already designed which are NOT cosmetic and would be game-altering aka P2W. Isn't this a false premise? Are there currently any microtransactions which would effect game-play in the Campaign Worlds? I think your topic is a good one and will generate interesting debate as P2W topics always do. My concern and the reason I'm posting this is that your Episode Question (specifically "halt the practice of microtransactions at launch" suggests ACE currently plans for Crowfall to be P2W at launch through micro-transactions. That could paint a false premise and turn off many people from the suggested implication alone. My feelings on the subject are micro-transactions are fine and very positive for developer revenue generation. Micro-transactions should only be cosmetic and never provide an in-game benefit else the game is P2W. I detest P2W games and am critical of them whenever the opportunity is presented. The only concern I have with the current micro-transaction system relates to Pricing FAQ #9: 9. CAN I TRADE VIP MEMBERSHIP TICKETS TO OTHER PLAYERS? Yes. This means that people who purchase the game but don’t want to pay a monthly subscription can still become VIP members by providing goods and services to other players. One year bundles of VIP, purchased at a discount, may not be traded. The reason I am not happy with this is that a whale can buy a truckload of monthly VIP tickets using $ and then trade those tickets for resources/gear/goods/services in Campaign Worlds. Thus with $ they can buy rather than play the game. An economy will develop as has occurred in other games around this trading ability. This sounds to me exactly like Archeage's Apex system where whales swipe for Apex, sell the Apex for gold which can then be used to buy from the Auction House/Marketplace. We all know AA is P2W and it lost many customers due to being so. I don't like that someone can swipe their credit card and earn something that requires a risk/reward system (in Campaign Worlds) to obtain. It cheapens that system and the game. Blizzard in WoW provides a micro-transaction to purchase a monthly subscription which can, in turn, be put on the Auction House. Yet the best gear is dropped by raid bosses and is character bound. The best goods/services can't be created and traded, it is earned through gameplay. That eliminates any P2W concerns. I'm really hoping that I misunderstood this FAQ or am missing some key piece of information because this is a critical customer retention issue for me and as a backer I'm very concerned. ACE needs to change this approach to VIP ticket trading or Crowfall could be labeled P2W and I really believed that ACE was committed to NO P2W. One way to address the goal in the FAQ would be to design the VIP ticket in such a way that way so that it binds the goods/services traded for it to EKs only. I don't know if that's feasible but it would mirror the spirit of how the VIP Membership was designed. Thanks, Ake
  7. Hamster crafting ftw!

×
×
  • Create New...