• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Verot

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

1,469 profile views
  1. Please, no advantage for $$$

    Possible, but still limited to a certain degree by the very nature of the campaign world being destroyed after a couple of months. Its one thing to trade real life money for items/resources that have some form of permanence to them, its another thing to continually flush that money every couple of months. The other issue is that there are no "safe place" in which to bulk trade resources. The mass of resources at some point has to be transferred/transported to the buyer's desired location which means those resources are at risk. Again, its all still very possible but without centralized banking and safe trade zones it puts a much greater risk on trying to perform these types of transactions.
  2. My gripes with the faction based system

    JTC has already reasoned the Dregs campaign, which was supposed to be the first campaign to release as the "core" game module, will likely be folded into the Shadows campaign rule set because for all intents and purposes that is what the Dregs was going to be. Could it have been something different? Sure it might have actually been solo players duking it out but I have my doubts. I think the important thing that players really wanted out of the Dregs were the limited/no imports, full loot, and friendly fire. There are obvious reasons why friendly fire would not be a good addition to a factional based campaign world and highest among them would be the troll factor. Now the issue of full loot and friendly fire mean different things to different people. On one hand you have purists who say full loot means I get to take everything, inventory and equipped items, on the other hand you have people who think fully inventory loots is full loot, and other who think it should be RNG of 3-5 items from the inventory. Personally I don't see full/unrestricted friendly fire working out in this game where the vast majority of skills are cone/aoe. SB was group immunity only which means your guild/nation could still kill you with misplaced/timed attacks especially when those battles were made up of dozens of players on each side. One of the earlier CF campaign tests followed this same logic, if a player was not in your group then they were not protected.
  3. Please, no advantage for $$$

    The difference between many of the P2W nightmares that have been discussed is that many of their cash shops were unlimited, the beauty of the CF cash grab is that the "advantage" part is limited to $15 a month. No you can't buy the uber sword of doom and dominate, nor can you buy the shroud of anonymity to conceal your name while providing bonus xp. Yes you can drop $15K go build the castle of your dreams in your personal EK, but that has no bearing on game at large as it relates to campaign worlds. $15 that is it. It is an amount that should be attainable for anyone who has a computer that is well equipped enough to run the game in the first place not to mention that ungodly ISP bill that comes every month. That $15 ensures the continued life of the game. Lets also not forget that the lovechild of all NON-P2W proponents, PoE, is pretty damn inconvenient if you dont decide to pull out your wallet and pay for that expanded inventory or resource stacking tabs. Just because it is possible to play for free does not mean you can do so at an efficient level, which oddly enough is pretty similar to what CF is offering.
  4. RNG in this game is horrible

    At least if you fail the final combine give the player some scrap resources they can salvage which can go towards another attempt. The new player experience is going to be a mess. At some point none of us will be trained, the crutch that is crafting potions will be gone, and players are just going to have to smile and take it because the real game is 6+ months down the road. Not exactly a good start when many MMOs fail to retain players after about 2-3 months. I think everyone can understand that they should not be great crafters if they are not speced a certain way but with current testing being what it is, a large percentage of the player base is trying to operate as an island unto themselves, which is not what this game is meant to be.
  5. Crafting in 5.4

    Put that man on the payroll.
  6. 1 Year Time Bank

    Obviously they know which issues are most pressing. I never said I NEED THIS NOW GOSH DARN IT. It is a suggestion and nothing more. You and I can disagree on the merits of said suggestion. Ultimately I have no say in the matter, but I lean more towards complete testing than incomplete testing. How much testing can we expect to get done with less than 1% of players (my made up number) will have access to advanced gear because the bulk of players decided to train Combat/Harvesting. The devs could shed some light on current trends in player training which would be great to shed light high level skill diversity amongst players . The truth is that without some sort of bulk training time that can be applied to skills training then you will never get the robust testing that I think it needs. The key there is I THINK which is simple opinion. A lot of players in past tests were forced to rely on potions to bypass pain in the game and many newer testers describe frustration with the time required to harvest and craft gear. Having a better trained character will give not only the players testing the game but also those who watch videos regularly, a better idea of what the game will be like outside of beginning stages. Again I can understand that some of the more active testers will want to cry foul because they put in a lot of work and this might limit their success/advantage in the test campaigns but there is a big difference between being successful/winning the test and having a successful test.
  7. 1 Year Time Bank

    So you mean that engineers have not designed anything that was not purely meant for testing purposes and will never see the light of day in release?
  8. 1 Year Time Bank

    What one person calls a bug another person calls a feature. Kicking the can down the road is not exactly a model for success in software development, especially when its very easy to have those things tested now.
  9. 1 Year Time Bank

    waste time? I doubt its overly complex to change the value/max time allowed for time bank and then to run a database update to set the value to max. if its much harder than that, which could arguably be done in under an hour, then this entire concept of sliders and easily adjusting values has failed them completely.
  10. 1 Year Time Bank

    They could provide 1 year bonus on the "test" server and leave the normal training progression on live. Its kinda the best of both worlds, get a wide swath of training to ensure skills work correctly. They don't have the time to wait 1+ years before releasing the game to ensure that skills are behaving as intended and to test what mature accounts will look like. I don't fully understand the rushing harvesting yield argument especially now that we can train combat/harvesting at the same time so not a whole lot of dynamic testing of power relationship going on there.
  11. 1 Year Time Bank

    Why wait until April to realize there is a problem when we can identify those issues now?
  12. 1 Year Time Bank

    Again the purpose for asking for a block of training time to allocate, either by tomes or reducing the time needed to complete training skills is to test if the skills are applying their benefit as intended, do we have some decimal issues which will make something OP. Also with the introduction of recipe training requirements how many testers even have access to craft the advanced weapons/armor/vessels. Many of the Group Leader skills are Tier 6+ which means it takes a minimum of 18 days to complete training a single skill. As @KrakkenSmacken said, it will also allow them to test quality of life issues. If the assumption is that the game will not release this year then fine, if they don't wipe skill training between now and then we might get to see a few variations in limited numbers. Yes I understand that "active testers" may have put in more work and want to protect their investment/advantage, but ultimately the game needs to get tested and quite frankly we don't have the time or number or testers with advanced training to get adequate coverage of testing all skills.
  13. Myrmidon 5.3. One morning, one story

    oh man that music is great. can you post gear/stats
  14. 1 Year Time Bank

    5.3 released in mid November so you have about 2 months of training if you logged every day before the 5.4 introduction which allowed you to time bank more than 24 hours. The point is you will never get to "test" a decently trained character to know that everything is working as intended. Unless of course the game does not release this year and there are no more wipes. Basically you have fractured the testing community with some players being invested in time trained on the test version versus those who just started on live with 5.3. The active testers are mostly going to stay with the new version on test instead of live, but if you want to protect your "advantage" instead of actually having the game mechanics tested then so be it.
  15. I'm still curious to see what the stats on a fully trained character look like, are we talking total crit chance through training of 30+%. I'll need to see what the crit cap is the next time I log in.