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

DocHollidaze

ACE Investor & Tester
  • Content Count

    665
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

DocHollidaze last won the day on December 9 2017

DocHollidaze had the most liked content!

About DocHollidaze

  • Rank
    Rook

Profile Information

  • Language
    English
  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

1,030 profile views
  1. Well, come on, this isn't the final version of the game. The most compelling version of the game, Dregs, hasn't even dropped yet. The game IS centered around PvP it's just the current test version of the game is Faction based, which is lame, has poorly though out resource distributions which make it hard to find people to gank, there is not much fighting because people are also taking a break till Dregs so gear is not being broken much which means less resource needs, and the siege timer system encourages people to not fight over a fort till the last 10 minutes of the siege window. So at the moment, the only PvP you will find is in the last 10 minutes of the siege timer for a fort (if people care about the current campaign, which if it is not a trial they don't) and also at keep sieges every other night of the week. The game is very much PvP focused just not many people are playing right now, which in my mind is not surprising.
  2. I'm quite sure people who actually play and are invested in winning campaigns will have a different feeling about losing a campaign because of a hacker on the enemy side. It's one thing for a hacker to fk with your game in something that like ESO or WoW that has no longterm impact, or a MOBA game where the match is over in 20 minutes, I think hacker causing problems in a competitive game with longer time investments like CF would be disastrous.
  3. If you look at the overall USP for the game, it's not hard to see why the combat when pitted in isolation against another MMO's combat would come up short. Take Black Desert Online for example. It has a really compelling action combat system IMHO. The rest of the "sandbox" is mostly sandbox on rails though. Unless something dramatic has been added? Similar with ArcheAge - the sandbox experience is mostly on rails and within confined boundaries. Same with Albion Online. Supposedly with CF Dregs guilds will be able to build fortified cities wherever and completely own that. That's pretty fuking compelling, and I can see why the micro gameplay may have received less attention in order to accomplish the macro, as the OP puts it. There are already so many action combat grinders out there like BDO and ArcheAge being rereleased every 2 years. I hope combat gets improved, but if they don't build out Dregs with the proposed core feature set I doubt it will matter if combat is better.
  4. None of the website store or kickstarter mounts are importable a the moment. Presently, you can go to an NPC vendor in the campaign temples and buy the standard mount for 1200 gold. You can loot a recipe to upgrade that mount to a faster epic one, which costs a bunch of leather and some chaos embers.
  5. So, the Vindicator spec has a talent that adds 30% slashing damage bonus (default cap btw) when activating Holy Warrior. But here is the thing, and yes I know for vets this is known, but I am checking in on this. So, when you activate Holy Warrior its default activity is to convert all damage to Holy Damage, which can't be mitigated. So, does this talented Holy Warrior boost your slashing damage by 30% and then convert to Holy damage, or is it the other way around and the 30 slashing dmg bonus is lost to the void? I know a lot of vets believe it is the not optimal version, but has ACE ever acknowledged this and weighed in on the behavior?
  6. They're probably just going to soft launch after they are satisfied with their polish and bug fixes post-Dregs release. Todd essentially said anyway that the terms alpha/beta are meaningless in the context of their project.
  7. There is no content to be had in campaign worlds because of the half-baked siege timer system and high level resources spread out everywhere in numerous supply. And even then, the resource levels are high enough in Infected that I personally see no need to bother harvesting in campaign world. So yeah, all the recommendations in the OP are spot on.
  8. You complain constantly about uncle bob and yet don't see how gating advancement completely behind access to resources will produce more uncle bob. Either way, IDGF too much because ACE is going to time-gate advancement in some form another because every MMO does. If they don't this will just be a long term MOBA.
  9. "The first flaw is it offers new players a reason to log off for a week and come back, or forget to come back and not come back." Or they could log in, play, kill mobs, accumulate gold, buy higher quality gear, etc. Just saying.
  10. Watch how people would then complain that they can't advance their characters at all because the top guilds completely control access to the rare and required resources in your theoretical alternative system. #PlayToCrush No, what ACE would actually implement is a system like Albion Online where instead of grinding mobs for a few hours (white) or days (blue+) to get your vessel to 30, you grind mobs for weeks and months to get skill training nodes unlock actual upgrade stats.
  11. Already pretty low pop compared to Albion Online when it was pre-alpha. New people will come in, see an even more deserted game, and say #deadgaem, byeee. ACE just needs to finish getting Dregs (the real game) into release. amirite
  12. If Passive Training does stay in the game and there is a soft-launch, and ACE does implement catch-up mechanics, I could see some kind of BIG post-soft-launch promotion for the real prime time that includes a bunch of catch-u-mechanic voucher/items to people purchasing the game.
  13. People who rarely play or have not been playing long don't feel like they have much to lose. That is not surprising to me. Time and energy spent trying to be successful in this game is certainly something that is expended, ergo lost. That wiping of effort is keenly felt by folks who log 20+ hours a week in this game every week for the last 9 months (beginning of big content release of 2019) Some people like to snicker at WB for "tryharding" but honestly - for the folks saying this phase of the game needs to be tested to be prepared well for launch and live, well there you go, WB has been testing and showing what effort might look like to try and win/succeed in this game. Your welcome? lol ok, sorry I'm not sure what valuable test info will be gained by having people who log in maybe 3 times and quit as the body of testers for this so-called essential testing operation. A full wipe is likely to cause the people actually doing the bulk of playing and testing, to not want to do much playing and testing. In my mind it is a catch22. The catch22 is primarily a result of many people being tired of playing Crowfall 5.X So, TLDR - a full wipe is not likely to cause the kind of testing that people think a wipe will enable.
  14. When people here say they think the game at a zero start state needs to be tested, what many are actually saying is they want other people to log in and test it for them because many of the folks in this and the other thread don't really play the game anymore to the degree that is required to actually test this stuff.
×
×
  • Create New...