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

Verot

Testers
  • Content Count

    515
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Verot reacted to KrakkenSmacken in Is Release any closer   
    I'll agree on this. 
    Basic tools should have the base line durability bumped up. If it's trivial to get a new one, (in the field, only three wood, etc), then why make it a grind?
    Intermediate, not so much, because the + on them is actually competitive with some crappy rolled advanced tools.
    But to be fair, you can chop down the knotwood trees in three swings now, so you do get about 30-1 wood conversion ratio. and it takes me all of 20 seconds to make a new one.  
  2. Like
    Verot got a reaction from Gaiawyn in Multi-account summerized   
    I'm not trolling, you listed out a couple of problems all of which I think are trivial at best. I get that you are saying you don't have a problem but you started a thread for people to talk about the problems of multiple accounts and some things to consider when proposing solutions.
     
    A) Player specialized as a group will always trump jack of all trades solo player with multiple accounts (its not even close).
     
    B] Ban players using illegal software which violates TOS. Combat is not tab targeted so the focus fire issue is not a concern. There is collision in this game so another huge detriment to someone trying to play a group  by themselves. We have not seen any buffs yet which last an excessive amount of time. In summary most of the things that lend themselves to wanting/needing multiple accounts to "compete" are already eliminated by current game mechanics.
     
    C) See above, points. Any player dual boxing has twice as much to lose and risks doing so by playing a game which does not lend itself to efficient multi-boxing. As to network performance issues from players AFK in a keep, there is a very simple solution. Kill them and take their stuff. There is no skill training benefit from being logged on when you are AFK so whats the point of leaving bots sitting idle somewhere?
     
    In my mind players looking to have multiple accounts in CF are not doing so with the intent to multi-box but rather will log in and out of the various accounts depending on what they feel like doing on a given day. Will someone try to multibox and run their own group, probably, but good luck to them considering the risks and environment in which we play.
  3. Like
    Verot got a reaction from Gaiawyn in Multi-account summerized   
    Again, you are making a mountain out of what is not even a mole hill. A group of players who specialize will be far more productive than a player who wants to TRY to be self sufficient. The solo player has nobody to protect him while he gathers resources. The solo player is not harvesting resources when they are out fighting other players. The solo player does not have any resources coming in while they are busy crafting. Blue prints can only take you so far and even that will require a non-trivial time investment to get a print which is worth doing a bulk run for. The solo player is at a disadvantage in just about every scenario you can come up with versus a group of players who specialize and work together.
  4. Like
    Verot got a reaction from Gaiawyn in Multi-account summerized   
    You are attempting to create solutions to a problem that you are making much bigger than it actually is, and at the same time its apparent you put little effort into your proposed solutions.
     
    If you require me to play for 2 hours to get 20 hours of passive training, I will simply log my alt account on when I go to sleep and stash him running into a wall somewhere. People who want multiple accounts will have multiple accounts, its going to happen. There is nothing wrong with having multiple accounts, it does not grant a significant advantage over other players. Perhaps the multi-account player is a little more self sufficient or has various play styles available to him/her but they still have to play the game to benefit from that. The player still needs to harvest/craft/fight. Any time spent on one account is time lost doing something on another account. 
     
    To me the greatest advantage of running multiple accounts is to allow me to fully play the different archetypes I want without being hamstrung. I like to play both ranged and melee combatants and I enjoy alts because it breaks up the monotony of playing the same thing all the time. As it stands now, even as a combat specialist I can't play both a ranged and melee combatant as the skill trees branch rather quickly and force me to play one style or the other. In the same context that players will get more options by investing in VIP, players can attain additional options by having multiple accounts.
     
    Many players have already figured out that having 3 accounts is better than having 1 account with VIP, with what we currently know about VIP. I can pay $90 and have 3 accounts which can be trained in a way that is conducive to both the archetype and role desired for each character without having to be a jack of all trades. With VIP the currently known primary benefit is being able to train 3 archetypes at once ($15/month = $180/year). This benefit is really only good after several years of game-play, unless the 3 archetypes you pick all have a similar play style, for example all 3 are melee combatants.
     
    Ultimately what all this bellyaching boils down to is that some players don't want someone else to have any advantage over them. This however is an unrealistic expectation, some players have more time/skill/money/etc and why should they be inhibited from playing they way they like just because you don't think its fair. ACE has done a reasonable job of maintaining a realistically fair playing ground for all players. Focus on yourself and don't worry about what other players are doing unless its an obvious exploit (dupe/hack/etc).
  5. Like
    Verot got a reaction from Mayhem_ in Multi-account summerized   
    I'm not trolling, you listed out a couple of problems all of which I think are trivial at best. I get that you are saying you don't have a problem but you started a thread for people to talk about the problems of multiple accounts and some things to consider when proposing solutions.
     
    A) Player specialized as a group will always trump jack of all trades solo player with multiple accounts (its not even close).
     
    B] Ban players using illegal software which violates TOS. Combat is not tab targeted so the focus fire issue is not a concern. There is collision in this game so another huge detriment to someone trying to play a group  by themselves. We have not seen any buffs yet which last an excessive amount of time. In summary most of the things that lend themselves to wanting/needing multiple accounts to "compete" are already eliminated by current game mechanics.
     
    C) See above, points. Any player dual boxing has twice as much to lose and risks doing so by playing a game which does not lend itself to efficient multi-boxing. As to network performance issues from players AFK in a keep, there is a very simple solution. Kill them and take their stuff. There is no skill training benefit from being logged on when you are AFK so whats the point of leaving bots sitting idle somewhere?
     
    In my mind players looking to have multiple accounts in CF are not doing so with the intent to multi-box but rather will log in and out of the various accounts depending on what they feel like doing on a given day. Will someone try to multibox and run their own group, probably, but good luck to them considering the risks and environment in which we play.
  6. Thanks
    Verot got a reaction from KrakkenSmacken in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    The difference between many of the P2W nightmares that have been discussed is that many of their cash shops were unlimited, the beauty of the CF cash grab is that the "advantage" part is limited to $15 a month. No you can't buy the uber sword of doom and dominate, nor can you buy the shroud of anonymity to conceal your name while providing bonus xp. Yes you can drop $15K go build the castle of your dreams in your personal EK, but that has no bearing on game at large as it relates to campaign worlds.
    $15 that is it. It is an amount that should be attainable for anyone who has a computer that is well equipped enough to run the game in the first place not to mention that ungodly ISP bill that comes every month. That $15 ensures the continued life of the game.
    Lets also not forget that the lovechild of all NON-P2W proponents, PoE, is pretty damn inconvenient if you dont decide to pull out your wallet and pay for that expanded inventory or resource stacking tabs. Just because it is possible to play for free does not mean you can do so at an efficient level, which oddly enough is pretty similar to what CF is offering. 
  7. Thanks
    Verot got a reaction from entityofsin in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    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. 
  8. Sad
    Verot got a reaction from touchmybow in 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.
  9. Like
    Verot got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Myrmidon 5.3. One morning, one story   
    oh man that music is great.
    can you post gear/stats
  10. Like
    Verot got a reaction from Xarrayne in Myrmidon 5.3. One morning, one story   
    oh man that music is great.
    can you post gear/stats
  11. Haha
    Verot got a reaction from Tinnis in Myrmidon 5.3. One morning, one story   
    oh man that music is great.
    can you post gear/stats
  12. Like
    Verot got a reaction from DeHei in 1 Year Time Bank   
    As a suggestion for current/future tests can we give each account a 1+ year time bank to allocate as they see fit for each of major categories. For many people its hard to do a lot of the testing because they lack the appropriate training to enable certain mechanics.
    The only catch to this is that currently the concept of a "global use" time bank does not exist. To be clear I would like to be able to allocate 1 year to Race, 1 Year to Class, and 1 year each to Combat/Crafting/Harvesting. I'm not worried so much about "specialization" at this point because that would complicate matters by implementing a new system where players tag which professions they want to receive training in.
    An alternative would be for them to create uber skill tome books, but as far as I know that mechanic is not yet implemented, or just massively reduce the time it takes to train skills for a couple of test cycles. By massive reduction I'm talking instead of skills working on a 3 day multiplier make it a 3 hour multiplier, so tier 1 skills take 3 hours to complete and tier 6 take 18 hours to complete. At this scale, a couple of weeks would be enough time to progress pretty far into the trees and to ensure the skills are applying the benefits they are supposed to.
    Thoughts/suggestions?
     
  13. Like
    Verot got a reaction from Teufel in 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.
  14. Like
    Verot got a reaction from ArcJurado in Choices No Longer Have Consequences   
    I'm all for the double dipping, as it is still a choice if you want to specialize or not. VIP should be the norm. Non-VIP players could use skill tomes to overcome any power curve issues in combat that might stem from double dipping. Players will be able to go hybrid crafter/combat or specialize and go crafter/crafter. If you force the splitting of profession training to different professions, the only thing you are doing is delaying the time it takes for them to be able to play the way they want. If you provide a carrot that allows them to get to the part of the game they want sooner without making it P2W then you might just entice more players to pick up VIP, which is a good thing for the long term health of the game.
  15. Like
    Verot got a reaction from ArcJurado in Choices No Longer Have Consequences   
    I understand where you are coming from, however without the introduction of a slew of new skills etc all this system does is speed up the time that hybrids become viable. At some point players were going to reach a level of training where they can start training a new profession. The specialist path is still an option, unless they force you to pick 2 of the 3 as some are advocating (I'm against this). At least with the ability to train 2 nodes in the same profession, albeit different trees, it still allows for specialist characters to exist. The combat/crafter will still be limited on how effective his/her gear will be compared to a player who fully trained in crafting.
    There are still a few unknowns. Exactly how far do you have to train down one tree in order to unlock the next? 50%, 75%? How will they handle the ability to train 2 races for VIP when in the beginning there is only 1 tree available? Will basic tier 1 skill trees allow you to bypass the one node per tree restriction?
    While I don't expect everyone to share my opinion on this matter, I personally see this change as good for the overall health of the game. Accounts will still be very unique in terms of skill selection and play style. It allows for small to mid size guilds to be effective. It has the potential to restrict some of the alt account issues we were inevitably going to see. It also helps with some pretty significant logistical issues as well as logical issues. I'm a master at mining copper nodes yet fail to grasp the concept of those pesky iron nodes etc.
    To me the far greater issue that cropped up today was the skill tome mechanic. What is most concerning is that many in the community immediately saw red flags that were addressed in a very inadequate way, almost to the point that it made it seem they were well aware of the issue but pushed it through for other reasons (read, cash grab).
  16. Like
    Verot got a reaction from groovykool in Choices No Longer Have Consequences   
    The only problem is that its not just a catch-up mechanism, it is a funding mechanism that also solves the catch up mechanic issue.
  17. Like
    Verot got a reaction from groovykool in Choices No Longer Have Consequences   
    Found the P2W advocate.
  18. Like
    Verot got a reaction from groovykool in Choices No Longer Have Consequences   
    If the devs don't implement a cap on total training time, then they might as well admit that this mechanic is a money grab, not a catch up mechanic.
  19. Like
    Verot got a reaction from groovykool in Choices No Longer Have Consequences   
    Those choices/consequences are diminished significantly though. There is still a price to pay for choosing a bad path, but now you can correct that error much more quickly, if not completely. If you have the resources, diminishing returns be damned, you can not only correct the error but completely overcome it.
  20. Confused
    Verot got a reaction from Grayjay in Eye Candy Missing   
    So, we have to wait until then to work out the tease? Normally these things unpack themselves in a more timely fashion, otherwise the community tends to forget about them, especially when the term soon is used. 2 months.... soon.... same thing i suppose.
  21. Like
    Verot got a reaction from BarriaKarl in Eye Candy Missing   
    On Oct 31 we were teased with some pretty sweet art that was supposed to be followed up on with some more, which would allow us to "tease" out some new feature or reveal. Oddly enough we have had no follow up and the previously mentioned tease no longer seems to be available. 
     
  22. Like
    Verot got a reaction from elvo in Action Harvesting, and defeating harvesting bots (Dev video included)   
    When is free loot not fun? When is killing cheaters not fun?
  23. Like
    Verot got a reaction from makkon in 5.3 Playtest Feedback for November 03-06, 2017   
    I would suggest putting all of the Race attributes/bonuses as part of the character creation. 
  24. Thanks
    Verot got a reaction from JamesGoblin in 5.3 Playtest Feedback for November 03-06, 2017   
    also ran into an issue with harvesting wood, it said I had to equip and axe even though i had the ax equipped, the only way I could harvest wood was to to punch it. I even tried crafting and equipping a new ax but it still did not work.
  25. Like
    Verot got a reaction from JamesGoblin in 5.3 Playtest Feedback for November 03-06, 2017   
    I think their system works well as designed in regards to buffs/auras and tray swapping for the reasons @thomasblair mentioned.
×
×
  • Create New...