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

Darguth

Testers
  • Content Count

    63
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Darguth

  • Rank
    Magpie

Recent Profile Visitors

255 profile views
  1. I don't think Crusaders tend to run their passive, at least I don't. "Always on" defensive passives like Hushed Prayer, Dig In, Sturdy, etc. just push out room for something as situational as the minor bubble on low health targets that's got an ICD attached to it.
  2. I disagree with Phr00t. There should be an innate 2% chance to fail, but only for Phr00t.
  3. Not a shabby idea. Not a shabby idea.
  4. It was wonky, gamey, sneaky, etc. (on both sides) but in the end I think it's all valuable feedback to the development team. They get to review the behavior and see if it fits their vision for the game.
  5. My preference would be to totally de-focus any balance concerns with points accumulation in the Faction CWs and redirect that time/energy/thought cycles on Dregs design and system-creation.
  6. Others have said it but I'm going to lend my voice to the echo: the victory point values have reached absurd levels where being able to just check them at a glance (which is what I want as a player) is no longer possible. I have to actually stop and mentally check the values I'm looking at because they can't simply be parsed instantly like a smaller value might. These need to be brought down by a couple orders of magnitude *or* present it in some kind of graphical presentation. The raw number isn't important anyway, it's the value of my faction relative to the value of other factions, so a graphical representation might be better anyway.
  7. Follow-up idea: Tie a lot of those aura/AOE buffs and CC to melee abilities that are relatively costly with regards to resources and/or higher CDs but with a solid effect or duration and then buff up general ranged damage. Could lead to a flexible class that in RvR combat would spend it's time diving momentarily into the "melee ball" to hand out some solid buffs/protection to the dedicated melee and then disengaging back to range while you recover resources/await CDs. Would make more sense as a mail wearer that you only want to spend part of your time in the thick of things. That said if they want to keep with the relatively hamhanded approach of having Archer = Ranged, Warden = Melee, and Brigand = Melee with essentially no incentive for tray-switching I'm fine with that too so long as there's *some* kind of coherent vision for the role the promotion is meant to play backed with a solid implementation. Tray-switching/stance dancing, and proper reasons and incentives to do it, would just be "ideal" I guess in my view on what I'd want from a Ranger.
  8. Warden really do seem to be lacking a coherent vision. I'm a "brawler" but also anti-stealth? Brawlers want to be in the thick of melee on the front-line. Anti-stealthers want to be protecting the support ranks. I like your general proposal to push Warden closer to a Melee/Support class. Not too dissimilar from a Templar/Paladin but replace splash healing with things like barriers, mitigation buffs, and CC elements. Maybe if they shunted the anti-stealth mechanics to the Archer promotion class it would both A.) make more sense because they're actually useful in a back rank DPSer and B.) flesh out that promotion tree which seems pretty vanilla they could make room for more Defense/Support elements for Warden.
  9. Interesting that you're more concerned with a perceived insult than the behavior that spurred it. My only point is that what's happening is fine. If you're this worked up over it, I really recommend you just step away for a bit. If losing virtual goods unexpectedly, in an impermanent world, on an early test build upsets you, then you probably shouldn't be playing this game. At least not right now.
  10. It matters to me because these forums are a valuable source of feedback for the development team. I'd like my opinion to stand against reactions like yours, so they realize they can cater to a player-base that is not overly temperamental and reactionary.
  11. Proper heads-up defined by who, you? I think the heads-up was fine. I'm playing a pre-alpha test build, even if it's a more "stable' version of the test build than TEST it's still a test build. I set my expectations accordingly. No.
  12. ...you knew a wipe was coming. How could you not? What's it matter if it was a few hours, a few days, a few weeks, etc? *Nothing* is permanent, particularly at this point in development. If that rankles your feathers, you probably shouldn't be investing any time in playing.
  13. That was your mistake. Don't come in with unrealistic expectations and you're less likely to be disappointed. You're testing an MMORPG, not a matchmaking and instanced PVP game. You're on a pre-alpha test build, not an early-access game. If you understand those key concepts, I think you'll be better positioned to enjoy what currently exists and to provide more valuable feedback.
  14. Ya, exactly. My hope is that's "The Plan" for bulk white resources, and it appears likely. With that I think an "upgrade" system to turn white mats into better quality mats at some ratio becomes not only unnecessary but undesirable, given all of the subsequent problems it would spawn.
  15. True, it's not completely finite, but there is a diminishing demand to an expanding supply issue. Which will lead to the same end result, more or less, if it was a finite market. Meaning that market saturation will absolutely happen. As people level out their main vessels the recurrence of needing to sacrifice to level vessels becomes less frequent. Meanwhile passive skill training marches on and people get better gathering gear, etc. producing more supply of white mats. Sacrificing is definitely part of the solution. I don't think it solves it by itself though.
×
×
  • Create New...