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

Navystylz

Testers
  • Posts

    506
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Navystylz reacted to Kundrya in The clock is ticking on Crowfall   
    Huh? We played US-East campaigns in the beta. First with US-East timers, next with mixed timers. EVERYONE told them that the campaign with the mixed timers for US-West/US-East/EU was the best experience, because the server wasn't dead 21 hours each day and it was cool to play with the entire community. But then, next campaign: US-East with US-East timers only. Communication with ACE is like talking to a wall. 
  2. Like
    Navystylz reacted to Jerek in The clock is ticking on Crowfall   
    You should be locked into a campaign when you pick it, that will prevent it..but they won't do that.
  3. Like
    Navystylz got a reaction from Talos in CROWFALL VIP Membership - FAQ   
    When does kickstarter VIP start? On July 6th does the switch flip on and people start losing their VIP service month by month without ever starting to play at launch? Is it you backers must start on launch or lose your benefits and tough luck for you?
    EDIT: Just seen this in the information now: 
    PROMOTIONAL VIP MEMBERSHIP MONTHS GRANTED AS PART OF THE CROWFALL KICKSTARTER PACK PROGRAM, BECOMES ACTIVE AT LAUNCH. GIFTING OF INDIVIDUAL MONTHS OF VIP SERVICE TO OTHER CROWS CAN BE DONE THROUGH YOUR CROWFALL ACCOUNT PROFILE.
    This is going to create a poorly made dergs show. A lot of backers feel the game isn't ready for launch. We know it has it, it really needs population and live service. But not seeing new players finding it fun, And now one of the most lucrative parts of our backer packages starts ticking away wasted, unless we start at launch. Way to go Ace.
  4. Like
    Navystylz got a reaction from mandalore in CROWFALL VIP Membership - FAQ   
    When does kickstarter VIP start? On July 6th does the switch flip on and people start losing their VIP service month by month without ever starting to play at launch? Is it you backers must start on launch or lose your benefits and tough luck for you?
    EDIT: Just seen this in the information now: 
    PROMOTIONAL VIP MEMBERSHIP MONTHS GRANTED AS PART OF THE CROWFALL KICKSTARTER PACK PROGRAM, BECOMES ACTIVE AT LAUNCH. GIFTING OF INDIVIDUAL MONTHS OF VIP SERVICE TO OTHER CROWS CAN BE DONE THROUGH YOUR CROWFALL ACCOUNT PROFILE.
    This is going to create a poorly made dergs show. A lot of backers feel the game isn't ready for launch. We know it has it, it really needs population and live service. But not seeing new players finding it fun, And now one of the most lucrative parts of our backer packages starts ticking away wasted, unless we start at launch. Way to go Ace.
  5. Like
    Navystylz got a reaction from lichtqu4nt in CROWFALL VIP Membership - FAQ   
    When does kickstarter VIP start? On July 6th does the switch flip on and people start losing their VIP service month by month without ever starting to play at launch? Is it you backers must start on launch or lose your benefits and tough luck for you?
    EDIT: Just seen this in the information now: 
    PROMOTIONAL VIP MEMBERSHIP MONTHS GRANTED AS PART OF THE CROWFALL KICKSTARTER PACK PROGRAM, BECOMES ACTIVE AT LAUNCH. GIFTING OF INDIVIDUAL MONTHS OF VIP SERVICE TO OTHER CROWS CAN BE DONE THROUGH YOUR CROWFALL ACCOUNT PROFILE.
    This is going to create a poorly made dergs show. A lot of backers feel the game isn't ready for launch. We know it has it, it really needs population and live service. But not seeing new players finding it fun, And now one of the most lucrative parts of our backer packages starts ticking away wasted, unless we start at launch. Way to go Ace.
  6. Like
    Navystylz reacted to Cmar in Is CROWFALL the 'Game you signed up for'?   
    I remember buying Crowfall back in 2018... was drunk...
    and the trailer/concept looked awesome... then i got into the beta back then and thought... fml this is not what i hoped it would be. Tried to refund it, got denied... now 3 years later... oh they are releasing? Time to check it out... got into a guild and experimented on the test server.
    Now i think "good that i bought it back then, this game seems fun".
    Iam having a good time so far from a new players perspective. The systems i have seen so far are things i miss in other games. Really looking forward to the time i will play the game until i have enough hours to start hating the game as is common with any game. The more hours you play it the more you start to hate it.
  7. Confused
    Navystylz got a reaction from xKuro_Sensei in A Brief Look at the Ranger - Talent Tree   
    They said at the start, just because something has the same name with what you familiar with, don't assume it's the same thing. In the example Banshee, that active could now be massive. Hitting it could make you reflect a lot of damage and get a lot of healing, basically being a kind of reset you can build into. That would definitely be game changing on certain builds.
    Just like I will assume with such a huge overhaul that all those worthless abilities on majors that barely did anything before expiring will have got buffed to usefulness.
    Just because Banshee has 1 power 1 passive doesn't mean they all do. Could be that some majors have 2 actives. Depending on the abilities one might be more worth than the other.
    Another thing people aren't taking into consideration are more minors. Minors aren't just all passive abilities anymore. There was already 1 that granted an active, and pretty sure I heard them say there will be more one off power choices from minors. 
    This means some combinations can mix up 3/4 minors getting passives/actives they want and 2 majors getting them. They don't want to condense things and make 'hard' choices, only for you to choose things that can't even fit on your bar because bloated choices. 
    Honestly, I don't want to be overloaded with abilities, I want to make my character good in the role I choose to use. When nodes now are a crap ton of survivability between actives and stat chunks, that one choice will change how you play. Be it you are able to be up front and center more, or have to kite. Warden's no longer HAVE to take all the abilities that make them tankier.

    Maybe you build a melee warden blademaster still and want to take some tankier nodes to support that, with other majors to focus more on melee. Maybe I want to be an bow using Warden, and I eschew taking the tankier nodes in favor of more damage, and I choose disciplines that help me control or kite people and make best use of being a trap master to screw over people who make it to me, gaining distance again. I'm sure there will be new range bow focused majors that will help me do that now.
     
  8. Like
    Navystylz got a reaction from Anthrage in Archdruid or Warden?   
    My 2 favorites. Warden would the better solo.
  9. Like
    Navystylz reacted to machzy in Some concerns...   
    Myself and three other friends who played a lot of UO, Shadowbane, Dark Age of Camelot, etc all tried the current beta. There was a consensus after roughly 4-5 hours of playing: we don't get it. Not good when four people who have an affinity for PvP/hardcore MMO's cannot justify the purchase of the game to themselves or one another.
    Some concerns:
    The game has been in development for over a half-decade now and all that's been produced is a season-based, shell of an MMO that has an endgame similar to Dark Age of Camelot, but with no compelling reason to join any particular faction. Crafting is slightly more interesting than your average MMO, but similar things have been done in the past in different MMO's.
    The goal is to push the boundaries of the MMO genre, apparently, but I've seen absolutely nothing new in this MMO, nor any novel ideas/systems proposed for the development pipeline. Tons of stuff has been ripped directly from other MMO's, especially Shadowbane.
    The CEO doesn't have a good track record for this kind of game. I know he's trying rest comfortably on his Shadowbane laurels, but I am not sure if he remembers that Shadowbane, at release, was nearly unplayable and basically collapsed under the weight of its own ambition and Wolf Pack's ineptitude. In later years, Shadowbane got quite good, but that took YEARS, and there were many serious issues that went unresolved, right up until the time it was shuttered by Ubisoft.
    The game is being released into an ecosystem with mature, competitive alternatives, and it is not even promising, specifically, how to be better than it already is. All the studio can do is make promises at this point, but they are not even doing that. Shadowbane had virtually no competition compared to what Crowfall is releasing into. At best, you seem to get a vague set of guiding principles and a cringey comparison by the CEO about how releasing a game is like having a baby, but it really doesn't mean anything.
    I've seen people critique ACE's incomprehensible/nonexistent marketing strategy, and I agreed initially, but MMO's rely entirely on repeat business, and any kind of marketing push would be based on half-truths, outright lies and euphemisms like the game "featuring a subscription." I am honestly not sure what there is to market right now.
    I am also not seeing the Crowfall stans screeching and hissing at negative feedback, nor lauding every incremental improvement ACE makes to the game. While it's nice to not have to wade through that garbage, it's also somewhat alarming that it isn't present at all. No one really seems to have anything good to say. The best that I am seeing is that combat is okay and that they hope that they will see drastic improvement in all other areas.
    I certainly do not want the game to fail, quite the opposite, but I think that any honest accounting of the current situation is going to conclude that things are not looking good.
  10. Like
    Navystylz got a reaction from Syracus in Ranger's normal attacks   
    Posted this in suggestions, but putting here so people playing Rangers can actually see and give their thoughts on it. I posted this some time back in a list of some things I'd like to see for Ranger, some of which actually got put in the game.
    Suggested before, wondering what others think: 
     
    Currently Ranger's LMB  suffers from the damage not being worth the charge up to release each stage of the combo. I guess the mile may vary depending on the promotion. But inevitably someone is in your face smashing it in before you can get too many of these off, and nearly impossible to get them off in smaller scale fights. Going to use some made up numbers just to illustrate the concept.
    1. Rather than LMB just charging up to do a single shot of the combo, let LMB charge up through 4 stages.
    First stage is normal damage Second stage is 1.5x damage Third stage is 2x damage Fourth (fully charged red) is 4x damage 'Aimed Shot.'  

     
    2. Player can release button at any stage to do the damage coinciding with the stage's damage.
    3. If the player manages a fully charge 'Aimed Shot' then the ability to charge shots goes on cooldown for -- let's just say 40 seconds
    If the player hits their 'Aimed Shot' then it applies 'Thrill of the Hunt' buff. 'Thrill of the Hunt' increases Ranger's normal shot damage by 20% Normal shot = tapping the LMB 4. This would serve to buff the stages of charge to be stronger and more forgiven to charge up some worthwhile damage. It would also allow a Ranger who has played well, and gave themselves enough breathing room, to do a good chunk of damage as reward, and buff their LMB tap so they can follow up with better shot damage, without being too strong.
    5. This would be functionality that all Rangers would have, not just Archer. But could adjust the numbers and maybe the amount a Warden and Brigand damage could build up to, or Aimed Shot for to be less than an Archers. Though Archers get the superior range...
  11. Thanks
    Navystylz reacted to PopeUrban in Most Pressing Pre-Release Ask   
    Honestly in my personal experience you can just replace the word "guild" with "nation" or "alliance" and this statement remains true.
  12. Thanks
    Navystylz reacted to srathor in Most Pressing Pre-Release Ask   
    Individual rewards on cards. Earned daily weekly season campaign Things like food, small mats, sparkle dust, exports, imports, 

    Group/murder based rewards, like individual rewards but geared towards groups of 6. Weekly, season, campaign timescales for those rewards.

    Guild based actions/cards/rewards/  Season/ campaign rewards, adding up what guilds have done. Season/campaign timescale Items like siege, larger dust rewards, gold rewards.

    Alliance based rewards. Campaign based rewards the big stuff.  Single use instapot rank 1 bell tower.  5 importable siege engines. Large dust and or gold reserves. Relics for Ek's that last a month once placed.  Still temporary but geared towards the 50-100 man scaled to 500 man groups. 
    My toons that are named, are in UDL. They will stay in UDL. Scoring and rewards be damned. I earned my place in UDL and that tag goes to multiple games. Let us keep and use the things that are bigger than Crowfall.
  13. Like
    Navystylz reacted to PopeUrban in Most Pressing Pre-Release Ask   
    Fair enough, but at the end of the day all it really changes are the shields. A QOL buff for alliances that essentially end up operating in exactly the same way. I'm not opposed to that really, I just don't think based on what JTodd said on stream it seems likely to significantly alter the behavior of players in regards to alliances. As long as players have control of who joins of leaves alliances, those alliances will remains mostly static season to season and campaign to campaign.

    As a QOL buff its certainly a thing we should have always had as it reflects how people actually play the game in alliances.
  14. Thanks
    Navystylz reacted to PopeUrban in Most Pressing Pre-Release Ask   
    So many moving parts with this kinda stuff.
    You can't really solve the "big guy versus little guy" with scoring or population caps because big guilds can very easily just break in to smaller ones if its more efficient.

    Honestly the only real way to address this issue is to make sure there are appropriate tiers of risk/reward campaigns so that the "little guys" and the "big guys" don't have reasons to try and compete in the first place. If the "little guys" want to compete at that level, their only real option is and has always been adopting the patterns of the "big guys" and that's just not a behavior pattern you can change. People wanna win, and they're always going to do whatever it takes to win. "Big guys" are always going to serve as an impenetrable wall moreso than a conquerable obstacle due to far more efficient logistical and command structures and the idea that "a bunch of little guys" can gang up on the big guys just never really pans out because the big guys are always much more likely to be the thing standing in the way of the little guys, and allying with them rather than each other is always the most efficient means of removing those obstacles.
  15. Like
    Navystylz reacted to yianni in Most Pressing Pre-Release Ask   
    This ... and bring back conquest PENALTY. People are buying as many keeps and only building a belltower. Losing it means nothing because there's no penalty anymore. 
  16. Like
    Navystylz reacted to Cembrye in The sad trajectory toward Crowfall being DoA   
    My two cents is I still have faith in the ACE team to balance and address various concerns.  I say this as a Shadowbane veteran (lo those many years ago!  It is starting to sound like Grandma talking about the great winter of 09').
    For those around at that time, the forums were likewise filled with very spirited debates over PVE, PVP, etc.  The sad reality is that Shadowbane was ahead of its time for the technology then in use.  No matter what you did, once you had more than X players operating in a certain space, the 2003-era tech would grind and sputter to a halt.  IMHO, while a lot of people left that game because the "burn it down and lose all" mechanics were too drastic for their taste, I think far more people left because of the inability of the tech to meet the lofty goals of the designers.  
    We are in a different place now.  I think they made two decisions early on which I am sure were tough calls, since they meant ratcheting back on the dreams of many for a seamless single persistent world.  The "Uncle Bob" problem, of a single dominant guild alliance crushing the life out of everyone else, was real, so they created the time-limited campaign mechanics.  To create a thread connecting guild play in campaigns with a persistent world, you have the kingdoms mechanic.  I don't think any game out there in development now is attempting these novel approaches.
    The proof will be in the pudding.  I think the designers have access to a lot of data driving their decisions.  Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but there are times when 2-3 eloquent and persistent forum voices can make it seem they speak for everyone, when you may have more players silently enjoying the direction being taken.  I remember from the Shadowbane boards hundreds of posts claiming that the real solution for players leaving the game was that people just needed "to toughen up" - as if playing an MMORPG was some sort of fraternity hazing ritual, instead of a sought after form of relaxation.  I think ACE learned some lessons from those days.  The problem of weaving PVP into a MMO environment that is inviting, not forbidding, to new players, is not an easy one.  Exhibit A were the sad last days of many Shadowbane servers, in population death spirals, dominated by the remaining "hard core" who finally realized that a de-populated server where they crushed everyone left no one to fight anymore.  In the end this is a business, and you need customers coming in the door, not the reverse.
    Nothing I've said hasn't been said before, and perhaps better, by others.  But I thought I'd pop in and offer Grandma's words of wisdom about the frigid winter of 09'!   
  17. Like
    Navystylz reacted to McTan in The sad trajectory toward Crowfall being DoA   
    Yeah, I'm totally in for making sure people with only a couple of hours here and there find value. To me, that value is easiest to realize if the guild goals are really obvious, long, and visible. Like ranking up a complete city over a ton of time, and maybe not even finishing. There was something immensely satisfying about donating enough gold to build a wall piece in Shadowbane, even though in some sense that single wall piece gave you almost no power increase (it did come to fruition when an entire wall section completed). The same could be said for getting your bank to rank 7 and being able to finally put in the priest trainer everyone wanted...and now you have to rank the trainer.
    In other words, it's those little things, that are obvious progress, and definitely give some tangible benefit, but didn't break the power differential in some extreme way.
    You may be right about the dying worlds not being feasible. I had always envisioned dying worlds meaning 3 months minimum, to get that sweet spot of Shadowbane servers. More recently, I've resigned to expecting 1 month maximum.
    Anyway, there is a lot of good things being said and thought about in this thread. I definitely want to make sure that the counterpoints from @Anthrage are valued. For your question to me about what I would change, I thought a lot about it while I traveled today for work. I tried to really make coherence between the many thoughts I had, and I'll try soon to make that happen.
  18. Like
    Navystylz reacted to Alot in The sad trajectory toward Crowfall being DoA   
    Okay, why would you assume that part of the post was about you?
    You know what, forget about it. This is not productive. 
  19. Like
    Navystylz reacted to Jah in The sad trajectory toward Crowfall being DoA   
    I see. You have difficulty comprehending what you read and that leads to strawman arguments. Ok.
  20. Like
    Navystylz reacted to AgentZer0 in The sad trajectory toward Crowfall being DoA   
    IMO, siege mechanics are all wrong in this game. Throughout its inception, the defenders have always had the advantage in a siege. If you compare this to IRL, it is a direct contrast. Realistically speaking, IRL if you are getting sieged, you are at a great disadvantage already with limitations on mobility and resource gathering. Getting sieged is generally the last step in one's own defeat but in this game it is the opposite.
    IMHO, if your Keep or Castle is under siege then you should be at your most vulnerable state as you would typically be cut off from resupply of food, weapons, etc... The main issue here is that isn't actually the case in Crowfall. There is no real need to maintain a supply line and they give you a convenient respawn point inside the Keep allowing you to reinforce as needed while at the same time your attackers do not have the ability to build Siege camps. They have to capture a respawn point that's available somewhere on the map that may or may not be convenient enough to efficiently reinforce your invading force.
    They advertise the game as a Throne War simulator but I've yet to see the throne we're all supposedly fighting over. What is the benefit of this throne? Why would I want to fight over it in the first place?
    My last point on this subject is the fact that the GvG concept for the Dregs has become wholly irrelevant with guilds forming unofficial NAPs. Why does this game need an alliance system for the Dregs? The whole point is to pit the guilds against each other. If this is what the player base truly wants, just take The Infected and apply the Dregs ruleset to it. There is no need to create an Alliance/Vassal system for these type of campaigns when we already have The Infected which is designed for like minded guilds to band together under the same banner.
  21. Like
    Navystylz reacted to Belantis in The sad trajectory toward Crowfall being DoA   
    @Pystkeebler I agree with the above. In fact, the pinnacle of Dregs which are sieges should lead to pillaging if successful. By this I mean that "stuff" from the enemy Keep should be available to the winner of the siege. It should be "stuff" from the enemy players. Right know it is easy to stock it away in banks, this has to change. We need Keeps to be alluring loot wise. That means they have to become loot Piñatas that contain all the hard work of the gatherers.
  22. Like
    Navystylz reacted to BarriaKarl in The sad trajectory toward Crowfall being DoA   
    It isnt a problem of 'easy come, easy go' than it is a problem of 'easy to compete'.
    It is a fact that most of all players only play at primetime. Some place a bit of farming here or there but most of everything is decided on those few hours.
    Every group has a handful that plays during the day and carries the weight of that, while the rest basically siege log. What isnt decided on primetime is made by those crazy few (Im one of them) be it running caravans, running forts, capping/decapping outposts. Everyday i basically see the same guys doing it.
    I get that people have family. kids, work. That is obvious. However, that doesnt mean all important stuff should be inside these select few hours.
    There is no reason forts cant go out multiple times during the day for example. Most of the forts 'nerfs' came because they were giving incredible rewards for 1 hour of participation. Why farm gold or dust when you can just take forts and get free mats for 24hrs? Why run caravans?
    Hotzones are a step in the right direction. Still havent tried them but what we need is people playing the game the whole day.
    I for one can say there is way more YGG players that could be playing during the day, the problem is they arent as crazy as me to log to do boring stuff that doesnt feel rewarding. And with nobody else trying to stop me from doing said things they dont NEED to log.
    New guildies would log and ask me what Im doing. Well, running caravan. Capping outposts. "Oh, do you need help?" "Not really." (Yes, i could have them tag with me, but i know that stuff is boring so id rather not lie to them, plus it is awkward when nothing really happens)
    There was no objective to do that would feel rewarding as a group. Now that i think back to it, i havent heard of those newbies in a while.
    If at least there was enemies roaming and stuff then the PvP would make those activities interesting. But we need some promise of fun to bring those players online. People dont log based on a chance of them having something fun to do.
    Just check Infected numbers compared to Dregs. No rewards other than pvp. What ruleset has more GUILDED players on out of primetime during the day?
  23. Like
    Navystylz reacted to Angelmar in The sad trajectory toward Crowfall being DoA   
    Re: "Pvpers dont want to lose their shinies".  Okay, well ACE introduced gear loss after 1.5 years of doubling down repeatedly on making the game more "easy come" and the masses lost their poorly made dergs and ACE had to pull gear loss on death from the game.  The casuals do not want gear loss or to accept "easy go".
    Re: No hardcore PvP Game can be successful.  The counter-example was, is, and continues to be EVE.  That game that ACE attempted to market itself in comparison to back at kickstarter "Game of Thrones meets EVE Online".  Yes, EVE also made QoL improvements in the last few years and has taken steps for accessibility, there is nothing wrong with that or taking some steps in Crowfall. 
    The issue is the masses and Easy Come, Easy Go advocates in this community are removing the drivers that keep people in game and creating content. For example, lets look at forts:
    Forts once upon a time dropped gold, dust, building materials, and crafting mat blocks w/ good returns.   Easy Come Folks:  "Its not fair that guilds are putting in time to contest forts and stockpile gold and dust for future CWs."  ACE: Remove Gold and Dust. Forts drop building mats and crafting blocks w/ good returns Easy Come Folks "Its not fair that guilds are putting in  time to contest forts to gather crafting mats for future CWs."  ACE: Nerf quantity, quality, and refine returns on crafting blocks. Forts drop building mats. Easy Come Folks "its not fair that guilds are putting in time to contest forts to gather building mats for future CWs."  ACE: Gear Only Import System (which is actually good tool for their toolkit, btw--the kickstarter vision always included some "fresh start" CWs.) Forts drop building mats, but you cannot stockpile them.  Guilds stop caring about forts once they build their keeps.   Forts still contested for points, but they're equivalent to 4-5 outposts so.... not a big deal.  Where'd all the people go to contest forts (75% of the nightly siege windows)?  Well there is not a lot of reason to contest a fort unless you are (1) building a keep at start of CW or (2) bored. Re: Gear going from "40% to 200%".  This is just pointless hyperbole and demonstrates a serious lack of ingame knowledge of how Crowfall worked from 5.8 to Present.  For example a non-heavy legendary mace in 5.8 capped out around 110-140 and now ~108-110 (they removed damage ranges for a single value) or roughly at 20% change over that time.   (Alot, I can PM for screenshots if you would like.  It might help your understanding of the game and how its developed for your future posts).   The more relevant issue is the curve is very flat, the difference between a purple and a leg is ~5-10 damage (sometimes even less so because the overall crafting stats have been nerfed repeatedly, and thus the chance to roll well on legendary materials has decreased).   
    I can farm up blue/purple mats for a bag full of weapons in couple of hours--okay I'm set for the next month+ of pvp.  It is even easier to get high end gear now that you only need one good roll and can print stamp copies via factories.  It just takes some mineral farming.   Finally, wartribe loot, especially armor, is highly competitive with crafter gear until you are maxxed out on crafting or working with purple/leg mats (or both). 
    So when people are wondering... why cant I find anyone out farming to gank/fight.... they answer is they are not there because they do not need to be.  They put in their handful of hours last weekend and are ready to just log in for keep sieges and log out. 
    Re: "Can you also share the evidence you have that the cause of Crowfall's population decline is a result of flattening power disparity, as opposed to, say, not being accessible or appealing to new players? Or a multitude of other explanations?"
    Where is your evidence alot? I've actually been playing this game consistently since the original hungerdome.  Should you take the time to read my post, I already stated the lack of progression system/rise of easy come,easy was only one of the factors driving down concurrent population.  The only evidence you or I can provide is that in 5.8 the concurrent peak pop in just the main trial of gods campaign was 300+ for ~1-2 months and tailed off from there (we had /who to provide actual counts back then).   Thanks to Scree's not we now know that Crowfall is lucky to have 100-200 people online across all worlds, EKs, GR, Infected with the Dregs CW peaking around 100 for siege only and less than 50 most the rest of the time. 
    ---
    @DocHollidaze I am all for QoL changes, improving the NPE, getting rid of passive training, making a robust 3 faction RvRvR system (e.g. the one we had in trial of the gods) for noobs and causals to fight it out in.  What I am against is removing the incentives for players to actually play Crowfall outside of the keep siege window.  The fort example above is prime example of ACE removing all the incentives to contest a fort outside of boredom or initial build up. 
  24. Like
    Navystylz reacted to DocHollidaze in The sad trajectory toward Crowfall being DoA   
    As somebody who has advocated making the game offer more for people to do in a 1 to 2 hour timespan, I can't say I've ever expected to be "competitive" with just investing a few hours.
    But I certainly demand that my short amount of playtime isn't wasted on mindlessly boring activities that contribute to a largely meaningless and uninteresting outcome.
    If the game is supposed to make people grind, make the grind worth it.
    But if the grind gives you a lot of power, and that contributes to uncle bob, also consider that maybe many of the game design philosophies in play here are mutually incompatible.
    Embrace the reality that the game design concept of Dregs was potentially DOA before it even hit the drawing board. And by DOA, I mean able to be designed and attract sufficient numbers of people to make the game mode viable.
     
  25. Thanks
    Navystylz reacted to McTan in The sad trajectory toward Crowfall being DoA   
    I said the following in feedback tonight. I am sad to make this thread, but if the circulating rumors about impending launch are true, it's more urgent than ever.
    "Crowfall's guild-level game loops remain broken due to non-existence. The logic of hardcore PvPers who said they would quit if they have to PvE was flawed. We actually quit when there is no PvP. There is no PvP when there is nothing to fight over. There is nothing to fight over when there is no demand (desire) for things in the world. 
    You cannot have this game work without major city maintenance. Without persistent, massive gold demands...it's just not going to work. And, combine that with needing to get that gold from Dregs, not Infected.
    I wish it would work differently; I wish the way you built the game could function, but it will not. The sooner you accept that and make the necessary alterations, the better. I'm sorry you listened to the people you did, but they were wrong.
    If what they said was true, that they would only and all play if there was no PvE demand...where are they? Please note, they are all playing games with much more PvE than Crowfall. Or games that aren't MMOs because they don't have the attention span for the genre. Either way, they aren't here and they won't be back."
     
    Over the years, a few quiet voices have advocated for a truer sense of MMOrpg experience. They weren't flashy. They don't explode on the forums. They are level-headed and well-reasoned.
    Many of them were quiet guild leaders, who have suffered through trying to organize people to play Crowfall in the hopes that it would encourage their guild to build a stronger identity and make memories together. Many times their posts actively went against the posts of some of their members or vets, who don't understand the grind of trying to lead people in this game.
    I will say once more what they have said, in many different ways.
    Crowfall will be DoA in its current state. There is literally no denying it. Look at the sheer volume of passersby, who stop in, play for a few hours...never to return. Crowfall lacks something to anchor us into the world. The keeps, even with import restrictions, are claimed with walls within 7 hours? It is anathema to a genre built around digital commitment to the world. 
    Long ago, and many times since, you devs stated that it was important to recognize the shifting landscape of MMO playerbase. But, you misread your tea leaves. It was never the case that the answer was to make our time spent playing MMOrpgs of less value (no value), and to allow your endgame to occur in a matter of hours. It was always the case that you needed to make every second spent in the game have great value, because there is an overwhelming sense of need and desire. Need for gold, because of a desire to build and conquer. Now, it's all over before I'm done with work on the west coast. In fact, my alliance capped the castle in 50 minutes. Good for them, awful for Crowfall.
    Many of us over the years have put a lot of hope into Crowfall as being the spiritual successor to games we loved. Games that were brutal, and hard, and demanding, and ruthless. Games where we would stay up too late, and get up too early, and put off chores, and put off other responsibilities, because we loved to spend our hours in those games. NOTHING has changed since then, we are all begging for you to make such a game again. Instead, you're following the failure-lined footsteps of games that recoiled from that. They dumbed everything down, made everything easy and convenient, quick and painless.
    We got lobbies, and queues, and cash shops, and free-to-play, and quick leveling, and skip leveling, and respecs, and loot boxes, and loot treadmills, and any list of awful mechanics.
    What we want, but many of us fail to say, is to waste our time in this game. To crave every piece of trash loot, and every scrap of leather, and every coin that drops because it helps us and our friends have fun and gain influence.
    There is a simple, but unavoidable truth. You cannot build a successful game by aiming it at people who state they do not have enough time to play your game. And that is what you have done here.
    I hope that the devs take this thread seriously, lest the long march of the Dwarves (and the rest of our brethren across these storied guilds), move quickly toward other games on the horizon.
×
×
  • Create New...