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

galvia

Testers
  • Content Count

    72
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    galvia reacted to Hungry in Warstory: Thank you, yes, you!   
    If only JamesGoblin were here to Like this.
  2. Thanks
    galvia reacted to Ble in Warstory: Thank you, yes, you!   
    An elf sits on a chair and thinks to himself "Thank you Staff for running your mouth and uXa for manipulating the capture points system, without you guys we might not have motivated our members to come back and turn this campaign around in a single night".

     
  3. Like
    galvia got a reaction from Hud in 5.100 Snap Test Feedback Reports for 7/3/19   
    Just to get out of the bug thread I wanted to continue the discussion around the pip changes brought up there.

    @thomasblair I'd like to make it clear that I think everyone is in favour of flattening the curve in the game currently, but these changes in the current state of the game only practically serve to make crafters/harvesters feel burnt out. @Hungry posted this in the thread:
    I highlighted the part that is most concerning. For that small of an increase it feels like a complete waste of time to harvest that much for that little of a gain. This is an issue with having a live testing environment that is being played like a real game - and unfortunately it's an issue you should consider if you want to maintain a testing population.

    If quality gear will be this small of an increase quality materials will need to become much easier to acquire, and it would help us a lot to know more about your plans for:
    Refineries. Caravans. Player harvesting potentials relative to the other options. In the past you've mentioned how you wanted to increase resource gain, which we were all relieved to see - but all we've seen since then is a reduction in our ability to get quality materials. Beneficial harvest getting nerfed, skinning continuing to be a complete chore (4 hours of farming per blue leather armor set), and the massive gap in efficiency between passive trained players and untrained players create a lot of problems.

    I don't expect a reply in this thread but it may be worth having a harvesting and crafting Q+A sometime soon to talk about the design intent behind these changes cc @Pann. There have been a ton of changes around farming that are worth discussion (for example, are the disc buying changes here to stay or can we expect shadowbane like soul hunting in the future?)

    Last piece of feedback. The patch notes suck and are always missing stuff. It's a guild effort for us to all login and test/look at everything we can think of in the game when a test patch gets put up because we can't trust the notes to contain all of the important stuff, let alone all of the perceived minor stuff.

    Thanks for being so willing to discuss things with the player base and engage with us. You guys get a lot of poorly made socks, but overall we really appreciate your effort.
  4. Thanks
    galvia got a reaction from BenQ in Full wipe ETA?   
    I think a full wipe is probably a bad idea at the moment but a loot/vessel wipe is probably called for. There are a lot of legacy items floating around that are causing some problems right now.

    Hopefully we can see some changes to the passive training tree in the alpha updates. There is definitely a gap between folks who have played since the last full wipe, but they are working on flattening that curve with the changes coming to crafting etc - this is a pretty good opportunity to test those systems.

    Either way shaking something up would be fun.
  5. Like
    galvia got a reaction from Hungry in 5.100 Snap Test Feedback Reports for 7/3/19   
    Just to get out of the bug thread I wanted to continue the discussion around the pip changes brought up there.

    @thomasblair I'd like to make it clear that I think everyone is in favour of flattening the curve in the game currently, but these changes in the current state of the game only practically serve to make crafters/harvesters feel burnt out. @Hungry posted this in the thread:
    I highlighted the part that is most concerning. For that small of an increase it feels like a complete waste of time to harvest that much for that little of a gain. This is an issue with having a live testing environment that is being played like a real game - and unfortunately it's an issue you should consider if you want to maintain a testing population.

    If quality gear will be this small of an increase quality materials will need to become much easier to acquire, and it would help us a lot to know more about your plans for:
    Refineries. Caravans. Player harvesting potentials relative to the other options. In the past you've mentioned how you wanted to increase resource gain, which we were all relieved to see - but all we've seen since then is a reduction in our ability to get quality materials. Beneficial harvest getting nerfed, skinning continuing to be a complete chore (4 hours of farming per blue leather armor set), and the massive gap in efficiency between passive trained players and untrained players create a lot of problems.

    I don't expect a reply in this thread but it may be worth having a harvesting and crafting Q+A sometime soon to talk about the design intent behind these changes cc @Pann. There have been a ton of changes around farming that are worth discussion (for example, are the disc buying changes here to stay or can we expect shadowbane like soul hunting in the future?)

    Last piece of feedback. The patch notes suck and are always missing stuff. It's a guild effort for us to all login and test/look at everything we can think of in the game when a test patch gets put up because we can't trust the notes to contain all of the important stuff, let alone all of the perceived minor stuff.

    Thanks for being so willing to discuss things with the player base and engage with us. You guys get a lot of poorly made socks, but overall we really appreciate your effort.
  6. Like
    galvia got a reaction from Heartsteel in 5.100 Snap Test Bug Reports for 7/3/19   
    @thomasblair I hope it is clear what this signals to the player base. To get that type of armor increase you are investing 60 Chaos embers, + hours and hours of farming the ore and hide (no custard thank you) for a 29% increase assuming you roll max on every single pip which on Legendary Gear is practically impossible even fully buffed out.

    I ran a quick test, with no re-rolls on live with 20 pips (I can get 24 but it isn't worth the investment here) and 140~ experimentation skill. Here is a blue scale and ring:



    Now here is white rings and scales on a white vessel, no BS gear, no rings, no re-rolls, just passive training on test with 13 pips.





    The durability is actually higher somehow (maybe a buff?) and the overall stats are very close. I assure you that if I had the same gear and rolled all amazing on these components they would be extremely similar, for a completely trivial amount of effort in comparison. If these changes stay, it will be extremely unlikely that any large guild will use quality ore for anything other than luxury weapons or something, because the difference is not significant in practical play.

    Unless you do something drastic to the output of all of the harvesting professions why would we go past white if the results are practically the same, aside from being completely rich on materials because we can use white to compete until mega lategame? This seems short sighted. I'm all for flattening the curve, but there should be a curve.
  7. Thanks
    galvia got a reaction from JamesGoblin in 5.100 Snap Test Bug Reports for 7/3/19   
    @thomasblair I hope it is clear what this signals to the player base. To get that type of armor increase you are investing 60 Chaos embers, + hours and hours of farming the ore and hide (no custard thank you) for a 29% increase assuming you roll max on every single pip which on Legendary Gear is practically impossible even fully buffed out.

    I ran a quick test, with no re-rolls on live with 20 pips (I can get 24 but it isn't worth the investment here) and 140~ experimentation skill. Here is a blue scale and ring:



    Now here is white rings and scales on a white vessel, no BS gear, no rings, no re-rolls, just passive training on test with 13 pips.





    The durability is actually higher somehow (maybe a buff?) and the overall stats are very close. I assure you that if I had the same gear and rolled all amazing on these components they would be extremely similar, for a completely trivial amount of effort in comparison. If these changes stay, it will be extremely unlikely that any large guild will use quality ore for anything other than luxury weapons or something, because the difference is not significant in practical play.

    Unless you do something drastic to the output of all of the harvesting professions why would we go past white if the results are practically the same, aside from being completely rich on materials because we can use white to compete until mega lategame? This seems short sighted. I'm all for flattening the curve, but there should be a curve.
  8. Like
    galvia got a reaction from Hungry in 5.100 Snap Test Bug Reports for 7/3/19   
    @thomasblair I hope it is clear what this signals to the player base. To get that type of armor increase you are investing 60 Chaos embers, + hours and hours of farming the ore and hide (no custard thank you) for a 29% increase assuming you roll max on every single pip which on Legendary Gear is practically impossible even fully buffed out.

    I ran a quick test, with no re-rolls on live with 20 pips (I can get 24 but it isn't worth the investment here) and 140~ experimentation skill. Here is a blue scale and ring:



    Now here is white rings and scales on a white vessel, no BS gear, no rings, no re-rolls, just passive training on test with 13 pips.





    The durability is actually higher somehow (maybe a buff?) and the overall stats are very close. I assure you that if I had the same gear and rolled all amazing on these components they would be extremely similar, for a completely trivial amount of effort in comparison. If these changes stay, it will be extremely unlikely that any large guild will use quality ore for anything other than luxury weapons or something, because the difference is not significant in practical play.

    Unless you do something drastic to the output of all of the harvesting professions why would we go past white if the results are practically the same, aside from being completely rich on materials because we can use white to compete until mega lategame? This seems short sighted. I'm all for flattening the curve, but there should be a curve.
  9. Like
    galvia reacted to Phr00t in Defender's advantage is too powerful at present   
    It's been debated at length that defenders usually have an advantage in these kind of siege games, given positioning and tactical advantage of being able to stay static versus an approaching force. However Crowfall takes this to another level.
    Let's look at the advantages that a defending force currently have at a Fort or Keep during a siege window:
    1) Positional advantage - defenders are able to sit on walls or in fortified positions, and attackers must move to them. 
    2) Ability to launch defensive siege from walls or fortified positions - Ballista are another topic altogether right now.
    3) High rank guards hitting attackers for 20% of their life per hit, from 100m away. 
    4) Respawn economy - Defenders are able to spawn nearby, without any penalty other than a timer.
    I'm going to focus mostly on point 4) in this post. 
    Testing has shown that the first death penalty incurs a ~90 second respawn timer. https://gfycat.com/zealousmagnificentamericancreamdraft - Proof of 90 second respawn on first death.
     
    If your flight time is short, such as when defending a keep or fort, your first death is essentially meaningless and you can respawn quickly. 
    Let's envision a scenario when you are the defending force at a Fort, and you venture outside of the walls to confront attackers. Let's say the fight is relatively even, and each faction loses 5 members during the battle. Given even numbers, this fight essentially means that the attacking force has already lost the battle. Defenders simply wait the 90 seconds, resurrect and are good to go, while attackers need to fly to the nearest spawn location, which may not even be in the same zone if you are sieging a Fort.
    So now each side has lost 5 players, and the attacking force is essentially down 5 members. It takes longer than 90 seconds to regroup, destroy a wall and be ready to push in. Defenders are now all alive, and can resume with their original numbers.
    Attackers must continue into another compromising situation: attacking the throne rooms, or killing guards. Some guards cannot even be reached at this stage, as they will be up on walls that in most cases, cannot be climbed, as most defending teams will not repair ramps, only ladders, which attacking teams cannot use. 
    In the current game, generally you don't even bother with killing guards, because that gives the enemy team more time to resurrect and regroup.
    So the attacking team charges the throne room and the enemy players (and at least 4 guards). Should they manage to kill anyone that didn't die in the first attack, those players can resurrect 90 seconds later and rejoin the fight, however attackers cannot reinforce with new players. Most battles last much longer than 90 seconds, so it's not rare to kill the same person 3-4 times in one siege.
    See this video for part of an example. 
    Just in this video alone:
    Bzra dies 2:15
    Taloc dies 3:30
    Samwell dies 3:45
    Samwell is back in the fight visible at 6:00
    Bzra is back in the fight at 6:05
    Taloc is back in the fight and dies at 6:23
     


    Although the POV person from the video dies, I can assure you that when we pushed into the throne room, we fought Samwell, Taloc, and many others that we had already killed multiple times again. 
    The fight ended when uXa reinforced with superior numbers, but we would have likely lost the battle eventually due to pure attrition, an issue that the defenders do not have to deal with.
     
     
    In summary, defenders have too strong of an advantage in the current state of the game. 
    Attackers must push through long range and sometimes impossible to reach guards, overpowered ballista with invisible spell effects, and advantageous defender positioning. 
    Attackers also have to deal with respawning defenders who are able to rejoin fights at full strength, as Death Shroud doesn't apply when you resurrect at a Dragon statue. 
    And on top of all of this, attackers have to succeed in eliminating the opposing force in one singular push, as they cannot reinforce in a timely manner. Defenders get multiple chances to win.
    All this combined means that for attackers to win a Keep, they must either vastly outnumber, out-skill or out-gear the enemy, or defenders decide not to protect the keep at all. There is no situation in Crowfall right now where an attacking force can squeak out a win and claw out a victory after a hard-fought, even battle. 

    Suggestions
    Add a 3-5 minute death shroud timer from time of death. If a player resurrects via a dragon statue, they have the death shroud debuff until that time runs out. (Players resurrected by allies should not be given death shroud, ACE you have this one backwards in the current game) Remove MKIV ballista from the game or see other suggestions regarding eliminating targeting inside your own keep walls. Tune or tone down fort and keep guards. They are either too powerful, or have too much range, or both. We are not here to fight insane guards, we're here to fight other players. Having NPCs be so strong and possibly turning the tide of battles is not what we signed up for.  Thank you for your interest
     
     
  10. Like
    galvia reacted to ZYBAK in Charging ultimates and other charge powers on target dummies   
    A while back a change was made to make it to where charging ultimates and other chargable powers like Holy Warrior was no longer doable on target dummies. I can somewhat understand the reasoning behind this but it's just pointless when you break it down.
    It's really annoying when you're on the dummies and want to theorycraft or do some gameplay simulations and you just can't without going to the mobs to charge up your powers. You can charge your powers by afking while rank 1 mobs smack you in complete safety in the beachhead.
    Is there literally a single person playing Crowfall who is against being able to charge up powers on the target dummies?
  11. Like
    galvia got a reaction from Raindog in 5.92.0 Feedback Reports for 6/6/2019   
    Hey folks and @vkromas @jtoddcoleman, have a bit of feedback for you around sieging in 5.9x from the perspective of a smaller guild but a very active one. Currently sieging is extremely defenders oriented for a couple key reasons, and it is making sieging without an overwhelming force pretty arduous. There are two primary contributing factors to this problem:

    First, balistas need to be looked at. Currently the fire AOE they shoot out creates no visible ground AoE but ticks for thousands of damage. If you do not instantly react to your health going down during the fight you will likely die without healer intervention, and even with healer intervention if you don't instantly run out of it you're in big trouble. You can check this out in action in YUMX's Slaughter of Kurro WarStory, I've linked directly to the part of the video that demonstrates this. There is a red circle AOE for the attacker, but nothing for the defender, and you can watch many players die to this bug.

    The Fire AOE is a unique and great mechanic for it's purpose, but it also is being used for what I think are unintended purposes that really stall out sieges. Which brings me to my next point of feedback on balistas - they should not be able to fire into your own keep. Currently the prevailing strategy on defense is to have a group of stealthers on defence spread out around the keep walls after the wall has been breached, holding onto MKIV balistas and waiting for the attackers to commit to an entry path to the tree of life. These evasive characters will place balista along the walls as the defenders push in, or when they have sight on them, and dump fire AOEs and healing boxes onto the clashing forces. This destroys the offence unless they can crush these players spread out across the entire keep before burning to death, and it strongly benefits the defending team to fight under the cover of balista fire into their own keep (standing in healing and damage circles is currently the strongest way to survive and fight). You can secure a single area of the keep but it's a losing battle to the combined might of the fire AOE and the defensive forces positioned favourably already. If balistas can only fire outward (as they do in real life) this would save a lot of balista headaches.

    The second thing, which is less oppressive but still bad, is the defenders rez advantage on defence. I believe that the defenders should have an advantage around resurrecting during a siege, but currently it is way too forgiving for the defenders. As it stands right now, even if you breach at the dragon statue, the defence has MANY opportunities to continuously reinforce their line after dying while the offence often has 5+ minute run backs after dying if a res is not possible (which it often isn't, due to the number of archers and the fact that the defenders can still fight you). The typical flow for our successful breaches looks a bit like this.
    Breach the wall after defending our siege equipment. Hope that the defence loses players to start up the longer respawn timers. Enter the keep and begin clearing out balistas that are being spammed while being poked at by the defence. This gives them time to setup blight bomb traps, spread people out around the walls. Hope we haven't lost too many people to bugged fire AOE or the defenders. Once we feel relatively safe on a particular entry vector, rush in with our whole force and hope we can win the tree of life fight. This means committing forces that can no longer clear out balistas, placing our own that aren't being threatened by archer fire, and hoping we can catch the defence in our own firebox from the 1 - 2 balistas we have space to put down. There are tons of counter play to this strategy by the defence, outside of the archer advantage and their ability to fight us in the first place in an even matchup between the two forces. We attempt to win the fight on the tree of life through fire AOEs and the defenders abilities and the archers. Killing a tree of life takes time with pesky defenders healing it and killing us. If we kill defenders, they rez and are back in the fight in a minute without death shroud and right beside their allies. If we die, that player is likely out for the rest of that push. If we start to lose the fight, we need to immediately back up to the bane tree. Retreating is a good way to lose straggling players in the keep. On a lost push we often don't have enough time to try again before our respawns make it back to the fight, and we are forced to fight on the banetree with a reduced force. Our time becomes a lot more precious when only a single bane tree spawns as well which is a common bug. On the banetree fight. If we kill their players, they respawn very quickly and can reinforce the fight - we usually kill 1 - 2 players every 30~ seconds against an organized force which means a minute respawn timer isn't always enough to actually gain a numbers advantage and meaningfully push them back. This gets worse as we lose players, because they are 5+ minutes out from reinforcing us, whereas the defenders are back in the fight within 1 - 2 minutes. The assaults we've won this campaign are a result of one of two things:
    An overwhelming force. We crush the defence with numbers and gear and they can't react in time before we take the tree. A huge tactical error on the part of the defenders. Wiping them out on the bane tree very quickly, they all die to a firebox, they don't realize they can spam balistas, etc. I'd suggest either increasing the respawn timer on fly back for rezzing, increase it when as siege is active, or make it ramp up faster in severity while siege is active. There are a ton of ways to fix these gameplay problems, but overall this is much better than the previous death shroud mechanics that could be easily circumvented.
     
    TL;DR
    Balista fireboxes need to show a ground AOE for the enemy + an animation for the shot. Balistas should only be able to fire out of the keep or on a sharper angle, so that you can't fire into your own keep. Balistas shouldn't be able to be placed by the attacking force on a defenders keep. Defenders have too significant a res advantage and stalling advantage against attackers. I love you longtime.  
  12. Like
    galvia got a reaction from coffee4ever in 5.92.0 Feedback Reports for 6/6/2019   
    Hey folks and @vkromas @jtoddcoleman, have a bit of feedback for you around sieging in 5.9x from the perspective of a smaller guild but a very active one. Currently sieging is extremely defenders oriented for a couple key reasons, and it is making sieging without an overwhelming force pretty arduous. There are two primary contributing factors to this problem:

    First, balistas need to be looked at. Currently the fire AOE they shoot out creates no visible ground AoE but ticks for thousands of damage. If you do not instantly react to your health going down during the fight you will likely die without healer intervention, and even with healer intervention if you don't instantly run out of it you're in big trouble. You can check this out in action in YUMX's Slaughter of Kurro WarStory, I've linked directly to the part of the video that demonstrates this. There is a red circle AOE for the attacker, but nothing for the defender, and you can watch many players die to this bug.

    The Fire AOE is a unique and great mechanic for it's purpose, but it also is being used for what I think are unintended purposes that really stall out sieges. Which brings me to my next point of feedback on balistas - they should not be able to fire into your own keep. Currently the prevailing strategy on defense is to have a group of stealthers on defence spread out around the keep walls after the wall has been breached, holding onto MKIV balistas and waiting for the attackers to commit to an entry path to the tree of life. These evasive characters will place balista along the walls as the defenders push in, or when they have sight on them, and dump fire AOEs and healing boxes onto the clashing forces. This destroys the offence unless they can crush these players spread out across the entire keep before burning to death, and it strongly benefits the defending team to fight under the cover of balista fire into their own keep (standing in healing and damage circles is currently the strongest way to survive and fight). You can secure a single area of the keep but it's a losing battle to the combined might of the fire AOE and the defensive forces positioned favourably already. If balistas can only fire outward (as they do in real life) this would save a lot of balista headaches.

    The second thing, which is less oppressive but still bad, is the defenders rez advantage on defence. I believe that the defenders should have an advantage around resurrecting during a siege, but currently it is way too forgiving for the defenders. As it stands right now, even if you breach at the dragon statue, the defence has MANY opportunities to continuously reinforce their line after dying while the offence often has 5+ minute run backs after dying if a res is not possible (which it often isn't, due to the number of archers and the fact that the defenders can still fight you). The typical flow for our successful breaches looks a bit like this.
    Breach the wall after defending our siege equipment. Hope that the defence loses players to start up the longer respawn timers. Enter the keep and begin clearing out balistas that are being spammed while being poked at by the defence. This gives them time to setup blight bomb traps, spread people out around the walls. Hope we haven't lost too many people to bugged fire AOE or the defenders. Once we feel relatively safe on a particular entry vector, rush in with our whole force and hope we can win the tree of life fight. This means committing forces that can no longer clear out balistas, placing our own that aren't being threatened by archer fire, and hoping we can catch the defence in our own firebox from the 1 - 2 balistas we have space to put down. There are tons of counter play to this strategy by the defence, outside of the archer advantage and their ability to fight us in the first place in an even matchup between the two forces. We attempt to win the fight on the tree of life through fire AOEs and the defenders abilities and the archers. Killing a tree of life takes time with pesky defenders healing it and killing us. If we kill defenders, they rez and are back in the fight in a minute without death shroud and right beside their allies. If we die, that player is likely out for the rest of that push. If we start to lose the fight, we need to immediately back up to the bane tree. Retreating is a good way to lose straggling players in the keep. On a lost push we often don't have enough time to try again before our respawns make it back to the fight, and we are forced to fight on the banetree with a reduced force. Our time becomes a lot more precious when only a single bane tree spawns as well which is a common bug. On the banetree fight. If we kill their players, they respawn very quickly and can reinforce the fight - we usually kill 1 - 2 players every 30~ seconds against an organized force which means a minute respawn timer isn't always enough to actually gain a numbers advantage and meaningfully push them back. This gets worse as we lose players, because they are 5+ minutes out from reinforcing us, whereas the defenders are back in the fight within 1 - 2 minutes. The assaults we've won this campaign are a result of one of two things:
    An overwhelming force. We crush the defence with numbers and gear and they can't react in time before we take the tree. A huge tactical error on the part of the defenders. Wiping them out on the bane tree very quickly, they all die to a firebox, they don't realize they can spam balistas, etc. I'd suggest either increasing the respawn timer on fly back for rezzing, increase it when as siege is active, or make it ramp up faster in severity while siege is active. There are a ton of ways to fix these gameplay problems, but overall this is much better than the previous death shroud mechanics that could be easily circumvented.
     
    TL;DR
    Balista fireboxes need to show a ground AOE for the enemy + an animation for the shot. Balistas should only be able to fire out of the keep or on a sharper angle, so that you can't fire into your own keep. Balistas shouldn't be able to be placed by the attacking force on a defenders keep. Defenders have too significant a res advantage and stalling advantage against attackers. I love you longtime.  
  13. Like
    galvia reacted to Hungry in 5.92.0 Feedback Reports for 6/6/2019   
    There is always more work to be done. They still need to provide avenues of progression that players with few friends and less gear to level more efficiently than they do now. They are adding gear drops to wartribes, caravans, fixing XP awards from kills, and XP for all activities at some point we just need it sooner rather than later.  I have a guild I run that supports each other and we are all farming these mobs for discs anyway, so these targeted farming methods is how we level since it is so much more efficient for us than solo avenues we would never bother doing anything else.  Some random Order player that is playing the game with no guild is stuck getting 50 XP a mob and using bandages every 3 pulls. I've been there, it sucks butt.  With my initial post I wasn't trying to say that leveling was fixed for everyone, just I was one of the nerds who farmed wartribes and ancients every respawn timer when 5.9 came out (when people were still playing the game) and the buff to their drops makes me much happier.
    I think I'm in the minority when I say people on the forums overblow the grind. My green cleric alt was made by a white vessel necro pre-goggles and using white gear with no jewelry until about a week ago and I performed just fine in PVP. Most of my guild was in white armor and all but a few select DPS players with white weapons (DPS got blue runic) and blue jewelry. Weapons and jewelry are the least resource intensive stuff to make.
    We are all in blues everything now but it's been how long since the wipe? And most of us only play 3-4 hours a night. I think they still need to add systems to lower the grind but I don't think it is as egregious as most people say. Either that, or we have different expectations about how a sandbox PVP MMO works.
    The reason we need a grind loop, in my opinion, is because the difference between a sandbox MMO and a MOBA or something is how we vie for wealth, resources, and power. If none of those things are at stake we are simply fighting for the sake of competition. Which can be fine, but Crowfall will never be as purely competitive as something like Dota or Quake so why bother trying to bring that same experience.  I don't see value in Crowfall being a persistent MOBA.
     
    From the EVE players I know that operate in nullsec they say the thing that makes the game exciting are the things they have to lose if they don't perform. Territory, money, items, prestige. That is how I felt playing Shadowbane as well.  From what I understand that IS the point of this kind of MMO.  The problem is right now there aren't enough people playing for pretty much ANY PVP to happen between all the PVE, and spirit banks along with no true ownership of holdings makes it so the only thing that is ever at stake is who wins the campaign.
  14. Like
    galvia reacted to Hungry in 5.92.0 Feedback Reports for 6/6/2019   
    (Disciplines, crafting resources, and accessories not pictured)
     
    This was acquired in a single hour of work by 2 people.  Thank you for making the wartribe drops more generous as it really helps reduce the grind.
  15. Like
    galvia reacted to Duffy in 5.92.0 Feedback Reports for 6/6/2019   
    Siege equipment in general needs a look at, right now using ballistas to actually counter catapults and players is mostly a waste of resources unless the attackers don’t realize how easily a few ranged players or a single catapult shot can destroy them. 
    This helps reinforce the desire to utilize them (and they are too effective here) to defend the tree room or internal areas, albeit they are still easy to destroy if someone can get into the position to do so.
    I think maybe they were originally too balanced around folks utilizing Siege Engineer, but no one wants to run it now that theirs a longer term cost to doing so. We only sometimes have new folks on common vessels running it.
    Trebs have fallen out completely, tho they have the problem of entirely negating any defense besides sallying out, which requires a strong advantage anyways - which means no reason to fight inside the walls.
    As for respawning, I’m not sure yet, it’s definitely a lot better than it used to be. But I’m not convinced defender respawn is problematic yet. I also somewhat feel like the intention of a siege is that you should be bringing some larger numbers to overcome the inherent advantages, otherwise you shouldn’t be sieging. I’m not sure, need to dwell on it more and maybe experience it more from the attackers viewpoint.
  16. Like
    galvia got a reaction from Hungry in 5.92.0 Feedback Reports for 6/6/2019   
    Hey folks and @vkromas @jtoddcoleman, have a bit of feedback for you around sieging in 5.9x from the perspective of a smaller guild but a very active one. Currently sieging is extremely defenders oriented for a couple key reasons, and it is making sieging without an overwhelming force pretty arduous. There are two primary contributing factors to this problem:

    First, balistas need to be looked at. Currently the fire AOE they shoot out creates no visible ground AoE but ticks for thousands of damage. If you do not instantly react to your health going down during the fight you will likely die without healer intervention, and even with healer intervention if you don't instantly run out of it you're in big trouble. You can check this out in action in YUMX's Slaughter of Kurro WarStory, I've linked directly to the part of the video that demonstrates this. There is a red circle AOE for the attacker, but nothing for the defender, and you can watch many players die to this bug.

    The Fire AOE is a unique and great mechanic for it's purpose, but it also is being used for what I think are unintended purposes that really stall out sieges. Which brings me to my next point of feedback on balistas - they should not be able to fire into your own keep. Currently the prevailing strategy on defense is to have a group of stealthers on defence spread out around the keep walls after the wall has been breached, holding onto MKIV balistas and waiting for the attackers to commit to an entry path to the tree of life. These evasive characters will place balista along the walls as the defenders push in, or when they have sight on them, and dump fire AOEs and healing boxes onto the clashing forces. This destroys the offence unless they can crush these players spread out across the entire keep before burning to death, and it strongly benefits the defending team to fight under the cover of balista fire into their own keep (standing in healing and damage circles is currently the strongest way to survive and fight). You can secure a single area of the keep but it's a losing battle to the combined might of the fire AOE and the defensive forces positioned favourably already. If balistas can only fire outward (as they do in real life) this would save a lot of balista headaches.

    The second thing, which is less oppressive but still bad, is the defenders rez advantage on defence. I believe that the defenders should have an advantage around resurrecting during a siege, but currently it is way too forgiving for the defenders. As it stands right now, even if you breach at the dragon statue, the defence has MANY opportunities to continuously reinforce their line after dying while the offence often has 5+ minute run backs after dying if a res is not possible (which it often isn't, due to the number of archers and the fact that the defenders can still fight you). The typical flow for our successful breaches looks a bit like this.
    Breach the wall after defending our siege equipment. Hope that the defence loses players to start up the longer respawn timers. Enter the keep and begin clearing out balistas that are being spammed while being poked at by the defence. This gives them time to setup blight bomb traps, spread people out around the walls. Hope we haven't lost too many people to bugged fire AOE or the defenders. Once we feel relatively safe on a particular entry vector, rush in with our whole force and hope we can win the tree of life fight. This means committing forces that can no longer clear out balistas, placing our own that aren't being threatened by archer fire, and hoping we can catch the defence in our own firebox from the 1 - 2 balistas we have space to put down. There are tons of counter play to this strategy by the defence, outside of the archer advantage and their ability to fight us in the first place in an even matchup between the two forces. We attempt to win the fight on the tree of life through fire AOEs and the defenders abilities and the archers. Killing a tree of life takes time with pesky defenders healing it and killing us. If we kill defenders, they rez and are back in the fight in a minute without death shroud and right beside their allies. If we die, that player is likely out for the rest of that push. If we start to lose the fight, we need to immediately back up to the bane tree. Retreating is a good way to lose straggling players in the keep. On a lost push we often don't have enough time to try again before our respawns make it back to the fight, and we are forced to fight on the banetree with a reduced force. Our time becomes a lot more precious when only a single bane tree spawns as well which is a common bug. On the banetree fight. If we kill their players, they respawn very quickly and can reinforce the fight - we usually kill 1 - 2 players every 30~ seconds against an organized force which means a minute respawn timer isn't always enough to actually gain a numbers advantage and meaningfully push them back. This gets worse as we lose players, because they are 5+ minutes out from reinforcing us, whereas the defenders are back in the fight within 1 - 2 minutes. The assaults we've won this campaign are a result of one of two things:
    An overwhelming force. We crush the defence with numbers and gear and they can't react in time before we take the tree. A huge tactical error on the part of the defenders. Wiping them out on the bane tree very quickly, they all die to a firebox, they don't realize they can spam balistas, etc. I'd suggest either increasing the respawn timer on fly back for rezzing, increase it when as siege is active, or make it ramp up faster in severity while siege is active. There are a ton of ways to fix these gameplay problems, but overall this is much better than the previous death shroud mechanics that could be easily circumvented.
     
    TL;DR
    Balista fireboxes need to show a ground AOE for the enemy + an animation for the shot. Balistas should only be able to fire out of the keep or on a sharper angle, so that you can't fire into your own keep. Balistas shouldn't be able to be placed by the attacking force on a defenders keep. Defenders have too significant a res advantage and stalling advantage against attackers. I love you longtime.  
  17. Like
    galvia got a reaction from Surelia in 5.92.0 Feedback Reports for 6/6/2019   
    Hey folks and @vkromas @jtoddcoleman, have a bit of feedback for you around sieging in 5.9x from the perspective of a smaller guild but a very active one. Currently sieging is extremely defenders oriented for a couple key reasons, and it is making sieging without an overwhelming force pretty arduous. There are two primary contributing factors to this problem:

    First, balistas need to be looked at. Currently the fire AOE they shoot out creates no visible ground AoE but ticks for thousands of damage. If you do not instantly react to your health going down during the fight you will likely die without healer intervention, and even with healer intervention if you don't instantly run out of it you're in big trouble. You can check this out in action in YUMX's Slaughter of Kurro WarStory, I've linked directly to the part of the video that demonstrates this. There is a red circle AOE for the attacker, but nothing for the defender, and you can watch many players die to this bug.

    The Fire AOE is a unique and great mechanic for it's purpose, but it also is being used for what I think are unintended purposes that really stall out sieges. Which brings me to my next point of feedback on balistas - they should not be able to fire into your own keep. Currently the prevailing strategy on defense is to have a group of stealthers on defence spread out around the keep walls after the wall has been breached, holding onto MKIV balistas and waiting for the attackers to commit to an entry path to the tree of life. These evasive characters will place balista along the walls as the defenders push in, or when they have sight on them, and dump fire AOEs and healing boxes onto the clashing forces. This destroys the offence unless they can crush these players spread out across the entire keep before burning to death, and it strongly benefits the defending team to fight under the cover of balista fire into their own keep (standing in healing and damage circles is currently the strongest way to survive and fight). You can secure a single area of the keep but it's a losing battle to the combined might of the fire AOE and the defensive forces positioned favourably already. If balistas can only fire outward (as they do in real life) this would save a lot of balista headaches.

    The second thing, which is less oppressive but still bad, is the defenders rez advantage on defence. I believe that the defenders should have an advantage around resurrecting during a siege, but currently it is way too forgiving for the defenders. As it stands right now, even if you breach at the dragon statue, the defence has MANY opportunities to continuously reinforce their line after dying while the offence often has 5+ minute run backs after dying if a res is not possible (which it often isn't, due to the number of archers and the fact that the defenders can still fight you). The typical flow for our successful breaches looks a bit like this.
    Breach the wall after defending our siege equipment. Hope that the defence loses players to start up the longer respawn timers. Enter the keep and begin clearing out balistas that are being spammed while being poked at by the defence. This gives them time to setup blight bomb traps, spread people out around the walls. Hope we haven't lost too many people to bugged fire AOE or the defenders. Once we feel relatively safe on a particular entry vector, rush in with our whole force and hope we can win the tree of life fight. This means committing forces that can no longer clear out balistas, placing our own that aren't being threatened by archer fire, and hoping we can catch the defence in our own firebox from the 1 - 2 balistas we have space to put down. There are tons of counter play to this strategy by the defence, outside of the archer advantage and their ability to fight us in the first place in an even matchup between the two forces. We attempt to win the fight on the tree of life through fire AOEs and the defenders abilities and the archers. Killing a tree of life takes time with pesky defenders healing it and killing us. If we kill defenders, they rez and are back in the fight in a minute without death shroud and right beside their allies. If we die, that player is likely out for the rest of that push. If we start to lose the fight, we need to immediately back up to the bane tree. Retreating is a good way to lose straggling players in the keep. On a lost push we often don't have enough time to try again before our respawns make it back to the fight, and we are forced to fight on the banetree with a reduced force. Our time becomes a lot more precious when only a single bane tree spawns as well which is a common bug. On the banetree fight. If we kill their players, they respawn very quickly and can reinforce the fight - we usually kill 1 - 2 players every 30~ seconds against an organized force which means a minute respawn timer isn't always enough to actually gain a numbers advantage and meaningfully push them back. This gets worse as we lose players, because they are 5+ minutes out from reinforcing us, whereas the defenders are back in the fight within 1 - 2 minutes. The assaults we've won this campaign are a result of one of two things:
    An overwhelming force. We crush the defence with numbers and gear and they can't react in time before we take the tree. A huge tactical error on the part of the defenders. Wiping them out on the bane tree very quickly, they all die to a firebox, they don't realize they can spam balistas, etc. I'd suggest either increasing the respawn timer on fly back for rezzing, increase it when as siege is active, or make it ramp up faster in severity while siege is active. There are a ton of ways to fix these gameplay problems, but overall this is much better than the previous death shroud mechanics that could be easily circumvented.
     
    TL;DR
    Balista fireboxes need to show a ground AOE for the enemy + an animation for the shot. Balistas should only be able to fire out of the keep or on a sharper angle, so that you can't fire into your own keep. Balistas shouldn't be able to be placed by the attacking force on a defenders keep. Defenders have too significant a res advantage and stalling advantage against attackers. I love you longtime.  
  18. Like
    galvia got a reaction from JamesGoblin in 5.92.1 LIVE Bug Reports for 6/13/2019   
    Fell through the world in the area of 3901 3111 in Rae. There seems to be a wide area there that you can just fall into.
  19. Like
    galvia reacted to Pann in War Story of the Week: Galvia   
    Congratulations to Galvia whose video has been selected as our Crowfall® War Story of the Week!

    FULL STORY
    (Note: We're switching these announcements from Fridays to Wednesdays.) 
  20. Thanks
    galvia reacted to jtoddcoleman in my frustration with crowdfunding, explained   
    Hey folks, just a quick note, apparently some people took my statement on yesterday’s livestream that “I will never do crowdfunding again” as frustration with community feedback.  Nothing could be further from the truth; this game wouldn’t be here without you and frankly won’t be successful without you.  
    That said, I was being earnest about my feelings on crowdfunding; I think it’s a particularly challenging way to develop a game for a few reasons:
    1. You have to build excitement/hype at the beginning of the project, and it’s impossible to keep that excitement up for the duration of the project.  That means your fighting an uphill battle of fatigue in the press and the audience going into launch.  Not good.
    2. Supporting a “live” service for the duration of development, with the accompanying build process, deployment pipeline and operational environment is very expensive and time consuming.
    3. The process exposes all of our missteps to the world, and that sucks.  No one would prefer to make their mistakes in front of a live studio audience.
    4. The nature of the beast is that you're putting undercooked systems and unbalanced tables in front of players.  As you know, this can often lead to experiences that are not fun. Managing expectations and keeping players happy is especially difficult under these conditions.
    All of that said, I apologize if it came across in any way as a swipe at you guys.  It absolutely wasn’t intended that way.  It can be hard to get feedback some times, but I want to make this game great for you and I fully recognize that we can’t do it without you.
    Next time, I’ll go get the funding lined up first and ask you for your feedback —without also asking for your money.  That’s all.
    Thanks,
    Todd
  21. Thanks
    galvia got a reaction from JamesGoblin in Warstory - Day 1 Destruction   
    The Trial of Maeve started with a bang! Here's a video showcasing a bunch of fights I got into in the first hour of the campaign.
  22. Thanks
    galvia got a reaction from Groovin in Warstory - Day 1 Destruction   
    The Trial of Maeve started with a bang! Here's a video showcasing a bunch of fights I got into in the first hour of the campaign.
  23. Like
    galvia got a reaction from JamesGoblin in 5.90 LIVE Bug Reports for 5/17/2019   
    Illusionist makes you T-pose now.

  24. Like
    galvia got a reaction from JamesGoblin in 5.90 LIVE Bug Reports for 5/17/2019   
    Brigand traps can be placed multiple times and are triggering multiple times on individual targets currently.

    Good buff for the most nerfed class in 5.8, probably not intended gameplay.
  25. Thanks
    galvia got a reaction from JamesGoblin in 5.90 LIVE Bug Reports for 5/17/2019   
    Looks like Balista AoE is ticking extremely high and the ground AoE is not appearing currently. Had a number of players die very quickly to a single balista shot in the Tree of Life room tonight without any indicator that they were in a danger zone.

    Two points of feedback on that:
    1. Please make the AoE show up again, and maybe add a sound effect.
    2. I'm unsure if it is intended to be able to fire on your own tree in the first place.
×
×
  • Create New...