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

Oaths

Testers
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Oaths

  1. MYRMADONKED - at the setting up an ambush when part you should have played the metal gear solid exclamation noise after you get jumped. XD
  2. The most fun CSC I have been having is just fighting at the chaos keep before siege.... We always get swamped eventually, but usually there are some good fights after we poke the bear enough. It kind of sucks, but it is unfair to blame a guild for the current predicament even if it is easy to do so. 20 coordinated players are significant in a test environment that is always below 300. The goal is to have thousands of concurrent players, at which point those numbers won't mean as much. (plenty of flaws in that argument I know.) It was fun playing order for a time in zaleena, but ultimately it just wasn't worth it. We were the smallest faction, and after we botched a siege defense our morale just fell apart due to campaign score. I think the game is vastly more suited for 2 faction with it's current populations and objectives. I also think the catch-up mechanics are a lost cause when end campaign capture rewards trivialize spring and summer rewards. Cutting take-over rewards in half might be effective since a functioning city's productivity is almost certainly higher than the spoils of pillaging one.
  3. You really have to give ACE a chance to address this through rule set though. This is the first time that guild politics have taken control of a campaign. I would caution against calling them bad players. They are certainly opportunistic, but that can't be used against them. Do I believe alphas are a good time to spout about elitism and shut out dissenting opinions? Absolutely not. That is pretty counter productive for an alpha. I would argue that the post was not meant for community feedback at all. It was a statement acknowledging that an uncle bob scenerio had been realized. (Edits since alliance carry over as an argument for uncle bob scenerio is tenuous. Maybe it is just that uncle Bob and aunt Maurie decided not to attack each other?). In his post he said that it is game design that caused, or at least precipitated a stacked campaign. I believe ACE will move carrots around for a time, but I imagine their best mileage will come from taking carrots away or reducing the disparity between losing and winning. One important part, that people active on the forums should think about is that pann locked that thread conceding that they didn't want to pass out warnings since it would lead to account bans. Seriously? It is just a game, in alpha, Be nice. (I am not pointing any fingers T_T;) I am thankful that at the very least, lead developers see a problem and they would like to address it as well as possible. Yeah, your right on the money here. I don't know the best way to mediate it, even though I can throw out some half baked 30 second idea, I definitely don't think this has a simple fix. I think that by design ACE intended for the really hardcore players to be drawn to the DREGs (or w/e the GvG campaigns are). Therefore, they would incentivise the NBA players to not play with the more casual player base.
  4. Emergent gameplay is a very dramatic form of sandbox. It has extreme potential for generating strong communities, lasting rivalries, and alliances. Unfortunately though, this requires developers to be shown worst case scenerios that must be mechanically punished addressed through game design. ACE makes no excuses and takes responsibility for what is going on. jtoddcoleman stated that they are aware of this in news and announcements. I recommend glancing over some of his points to see how this will shape the future reward structures of campaigns.
×
×
  • Create New...