• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Rikutatis last won the day on February 20

Rikutatis had the most liked content!

About Rikutatis

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

2,261 profile views
  1. I agree with that. But do we really want bows to be "mandatory" for everyone? Instead of just balancing melee and ranged in such a way that both have pros and cons.
  2. CC Problem

    I'm willing to wait and see, but centaur Legio doesn't really feel that mobile right now to make a difference as a melee race.
  3. CC Problem

    Yea 5.3 will help a lot once rangers have teleport, infinite ammo and stun/bleed/execute arrows
  4. I mean, you still had a bunch of rangers. So at least you had that high ranged damage and AoE supress to work with. They had 5 ranged dps, you had 4. It was a disadvantage for sure, but it's not like you guys had almost no ranged dps. It's not necessarily a confessor reign as it was before, but more like a ranged reign. Can you still win with a melee heavy team (say 1 ranged dps on one side, versus 4 or more on the other side)? Yea, sure. But you need to work twice as hard, outplay your enemy at every turn, expect him to make mistakes, and even so it's still not the normal outcome. While your melee are trying to gain position, their ranged are performing actions nonstop. CCing them from range, halting their progress, dealing damage before they can even react. Granted, the open field fights of Tyranny have a lot to do with that. Keep fights in tight spaces might help those struggling melee a lot when they become more common. But the combat balance and class design doesn't help at all, when ranged dps classes have all the best CC and utility in the game. The point is not whether you can still win or not. But that the classes are unbalanced. Compare a knight to a ranger or a fessor in terms of: survivability, mobility, CC and dps. See which one has more value. Ofc if you put an amazing player behind the knight and a terrible player behind the fessor, the knight will help the team more. That's not the point. But put players of equal skill level, one kit just obviously brings much more to the table than the other.
  5. CC Problem

    The CC spam in the game is just obscene. Even worse is the fact the devs gave the best AoE CC to ranged and mobile dps classes (that fessor knockdown is mentally challenged, AoE supress for ranger, who will soon have a teleport mind you, and AoE root for druid and cleric who are supports). Meantime tanks have decent CC, but what they have just pales in comparison to that. And not a single ranged AoE CC. When in fact it should be the opposite lol. Tanks are the ones who should have more crowd control potential. Not dps. I mean... really. Why would anyone care having a small amount of extra hp when compared to ranged dps classes if they get the best damage, mobility and CC in return? That's just objectively unbalanced. That they would even design classes like that makes me worry for the future of combat balance in this game. I mean, sure. Pre-alpha bla bla balance comes later bla bla. Just the fact the classes were designed like this to begin with is bad. Ashes of Creation just released their first pre-alpha version of combat. It looks bland and generic. However it's a bland and generic combat that at least seems to have a good foundation behind it. DPS and supports get 1 single target CC each, tanks have 3 CCs and the only AoE CC in the game. Makes sense, right? As for the hard CC mechanics by itself, I don't mind the hard CC existing. But I think it needs more room for counterplay. Right now your only counter play is retaliate. One every 30s. Not enough. As for DR, according to other people's testing, it will save approx 2 out of 9-10 CCs. That's way too forgiving for the people applying CC. They can just mindlessly spam it. I think retaliate should cost stamina, that way you can manage your stamina bar and retaliate at the right times. That might screw up the Knight, but maybe just give the Knight a considerably larger chunk of base Stamina to compensate. And maybe make DR more punishing for people who just mindlessly spam CC onto a group.
  6. Good discussion as usual, Zybak. Personally, I don't think it's a huge deal either. My major issue was the VIP combat double dipping and Todd already stated they will address that, so I'm cool with this system as it is. However let's not be fooled. There's still other ways to double dip into combat stats, just not as easy as before - although easy is also relative, it all depends on how much money you're willing to put into the game or how smart you are with RMT ventures to turn that into in game power. Also I'll be honest, I never liked the EVE monetization system to begin with, so the fact CF is mirroring EVE isn't exactly great for me. But I know there's a bunch of people who love that stuff, so whatever. Personally, I always disliked skill injectors as a catch up mechanic, it's a system ripe for abuse of all kinds. Does it break the game? Probably not. But it makes it lose credibility for me. Because I have seen other games do monetization in ways that leave zero room for abuse and I know it's possible to do so. EVE is just grey areas and blurry lines all over the place, and I'm just avoiding to use the term P2W, because that's exactly what I think it is. At the end of the day it's not a huge deal, as long as the game manages to nail combat and performance by soft launch I'll be more than happy. However if combat balance, mechanics, performance and whatnot are still shaky after launch, this "sketchy" skill system will just compound the problems for me.
  7. I think the major contradiction in what you guys said during the Stream is that VIP gives only lateral progression and width of options. Blair gave an example at the end of the Stream explicitly stating a VIP could opt to put both of his profession trainings inside the Combat category, in two different combat trees. That's a vertical advantage. Those stats will all add up on the same avatar. Armor + weapons, ranger having 1h + ranged at the same time, etc. An easy solution would be to limit your two Profession trainings to be spent on separate categories only (combat/crafting/exploration). Do not allow VIPs to double dip. They can still spend $$ on tomes from alts or other players to double dip, but at least diminishing returns limits the extent to which they can do that a little more. Not ideal IMO, but better than what we have now with VIP double dipping.
  8. yea, I feel like trees of life as well as fort walls need to be more durable. It should take at least a full team of 5 to take those down in any decent amount of time. Otherwise there's very little incentive to spend the time building them up. Also if this Tyranny map is to be used on Live as the first campaign world, holding a keep throughout the campaign should probably have some sort of advantage. Like premium resources spawning inside for the faction that owns it. Otherwise sieging keeps will only matter at the end of the campaign when the tug of war is tallied in the final countdown. Keeps are too far from the main POI action to serve as waypoints or useful respawn locations.
  9. Rubbish IMO. Star Citizen already has a lot on their plate to be wasting time with tech like this that doesn't really add anything useful or fun to the gameplay experience.
  10. Stand by Me...a Templar story.

    Really cool video Scorn. It stands out from the other pvp videos IMO for the different weather settings used (winter night fights, so cool ^^) and the lore/RP comments peppered throughout it fit the combat that was going on very well. The music was pretty good as well. Good watch!
  11. Sunday Siege Testing!

    Great idea! But capture and siege mechanic appears to be broken since this morning. Unless it got fixed while I was away..
  12. Capture mechanic was bugged this morning. Couldn't capture forts or siege keeps. Here's video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctljMcaFlJA&feature=youtu.be
  13. Some feedback: 1) If a faction (say, Order) caps a fort, once the 30 min timer expires that same faction (Order) can go back and recap that same fort they already own. Thus resetting the timer and preventing another faction from being able to cap it. I'm going to go ahead and assume this is not an intended feature of the capture mechanic. 2) The respawn mechanic feels too clunky. When you die, your map should open up and allow you to click and choose where you want to respawn: either your beachhead, or any fort/keep currently owned by your faction. 3) I have a feeling the 3-faction ruleset is going to be very, very friendly to "the zerg". A bunch of factors contribute to this: lack of friendly fire, lack of strong AoE damage, nerfs to aurora emitter, and the ease of respawning and coming back to the action in less than a minute if your faction owns many of the forts on the map (which they should if it's already the largest faction). Maybe that's acceptable for the 3-faction ruleset, but something to keep in mind for future rulesets. Respawning in particular needs to be balanced very carefully. In hotly contested areas around the map's major POIs, being able to get back into the fight in less than a minute should not be a thing. There should be a certain finality to dying in these fights. Specially because you need to kill one enemy at a time due to the lack of strong AoE.
  14. I thought the size of the map was fine. I mean, the goal is to eventually test a more complete game loop in this map. If all we wanted was to test combat all night long nonstop, then yea. I can see how Bloodbath would be the best choice. But it wasn't really difficult to find the other guilds for fights last night. All the action still seems to be concentrated around the central area with the 3 POIs and forts. Still hoping to test a real siege fight sometime this weekend, just seems like a lot of effort carrying all the mats from the center of the map to the edges just to build the walls and/or catapults. Since keeps offer no benefits, they should have at least left the chests with the needed materials near the catapults.
  15. Oh, my feedback was aimed specifically at the Big Tyranny map. From what I understand, this is the map they are prepping to be used on the live server as the first functional test campaign world with a game loop. In that map, keeps are actually out of the way and far from POIs. So would make sense to give an incentive to hold them for the entire campaign duration.