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

KrakkenSmacken

ACE Development Partner & Investor
  • Content Count

    5,068
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    76

Posts posted by KrakkenSmacken


  1. 16 minutes ago, Xanderxavier said:

    I respond to changes in information and constructive criticism, perhaps as a regular forum user the information from the ks remains ever fresh in your mind but frankly I backed this years ago in KS and havent exactly refreshed my memory on it often since as I waited for it to be more mature, and frankly im busy, the goal of my post was not disparage the game but ensure its success by exposing for considering an angle that those currently attached to it are likely to "close" to see, my initial suggestion was merely the most obvious solution to an issue I perceived, there are vast array of ways to approach such issues, given time finding one that both matches the principles of the game as you see it and broadly satisfies addressing the issue should be possible, the post stated the issue freshest on my mind having now put some hours into playing the game as a new player, ie the kind of thing a new player with no prior history with the game would most notice.

     Personally being a former student for longer then most and frankly a former computer bum due to coming out of college at a bad time for recruiting I have somewhere between 50,000-100,000 hours of gaming experience (not all in mmos, probably about 40% in mmos), and then I taught myself various fields of game design and now work as an independent game developer mostly contracting to other studios but hey, so I dont have nearly as much time to play in recent years but I still try to keep myself abreast of most major and the odd minor but more interesting titles, still you'd be hard pressed to find many individuals with my experience game wise, more heads do not always make for a better view, as most game developers simply havent played games enough to spot potential problems that arise long term, nor most enthuastic mmo gamers for that matter.

    Based on the replies on this post I see that some of the issues I've seen stem from the unique design, so adjusted my focus accordingly, dogedly sticking to the same viewpoint despite fresh evidence to the contrary is not my style so i freel free to adjust the general tone as appopriate, it doesnt mean theres not an issue of some kind awaiting the proper address, even if in the end the true issue is that the game fails to explain its unique approach adequately to new players as a matter of course, leading to misleading un-realised expectations, that's still an issue in and of itself, i only discovered the whole "vessels" thing from a random comment someone made in game afterall.

     

    I think what I would have to say to that, is you perceived correctly that there are limitations, but incorrectly that it is deemed to be a problem with the design.  Rather, it is a major goal of it.

    Many of us here consider that many modern MMO games are too homogenized in design, and it's hard to differentiate players and styles. 

    If everyone can be a specialized crafter without some restrictions, nobody is a specialized crafter.

    In order to drive home that point, this design forces you to make periodic choices that exclude others.

    You can, pick a new passive training line, level a new vessel, but at some point you will notice that to move forward in a new profession/race/class, you have to start over to some degree.

    One of the big advantages you may not have seen yet to the leveling and vessel system, is that you can "twink" yourself.  If you are playing a end game Cleric, you can use that endgame cleric to harvest/craft/farm everything you need to try your next build exploration, prior to jumping into a new vessel. There is no gear limitations by level, nor grouping limitations by level with your friends.  Got a great purple suit of plate, migrate it to your brand new level 1 Guinean knight after messing around with the Nethari templar.

    In fact, getting twinked and rapid experimentation is probably going to be the more common early player experience, rather than the current slog due to all the resets.


  2. 22 minutes ago, Xanderxavier said:

    The average player will not be interested in actually doing everything themselves, however I do not think it unreasonable to expect that's one purchase price for a MMORPG game should entitle one to experience the majority of that games content within reason (such as 1 char of each race(not both m and f you have to choose), at least 1 of each major class type)), the great grand-daddy for many such mmos, Ultima Online, also encouraged specialised crafting classes, but it provided a total of 7 possible major skills, allowing a wide variety of variation, and allowing ones "crafting character's" to cover a wider variety of content, it also allowed for more variations in combat, the problem I foresee is perhaps by classifying different skills into different "grades" you severely limit ones ability to choose playstyle, there is the old addage jack of all trades master of none, it seems its one or nothing in the current design, they at least get to dabble in the various experiences, atm, the purchase price of the game entitles one to what I consider to small a sliver of the content before it requires you to doll out more.

    Whatever the intended design this is the impression the game gives to a "new player", and as new players are vital to the longevity of mmos and the enjoyment of existing users from a healthy playerbase as well, I humbly suggest more be done to address such concerns, or risk affecting the future viability when its become to late to change it, whilst the title of the post aside im not suggesting that is the only solution to the problem, but if I a backer who plumped hundreds of USD (i got a large keep to) as a new player spot this as an obvious issue I doubt random player x will be awfully enthused about the game once they work it out also, and that's a problem in and of itself worth of at least trying to address.

    Nothing is preventing you from changing your choices.

    You can play any number of races and classes, simply delete the vessels your not playing. You get unlimited numbers of free vessels, and maintain all passive training between them, so you can experiment endlessly if you like. You just can't have every option available all at the same time.  This is not League of Legends where you buy champions and constantly expand your library. 

    To be honest, after watching the forums for several years, you are perhaps only the second person I can recall who has said they thought the number of vessel slots was too restrictive. (With the exception of those that use them for bank space because bank space is a problem)

    As I said above, one of the kickstarter bonus awards was +3 vessel slots.  Who says that ACE won't sell additional slots in the future?  I can totally see that as being something to add in later for those interested in a massive library of vessels.  Pay 10$, get another vessel slot, or maybe even earn one as a reward for winning a campaign.

    But now you have moved the goalposts for this conversation from, "every vessel should be able to combat and craft", to "I want more vessel slots".


  3. 1 minute ago, PopeUrban said:

    We need a more reliable way to behead people TBH, but I like this idea. Give a noob a pile of heads of actual players killed. "Here's your armor, weapons, and the skulls of a bunch of people we killed."

    I agree.  I hope the new death mechanics of having to fly away from your corpse encourages people to hang out long enough to lose their heads more often.

    If it did, that would be a huge plus.


  4. 48 minutes ago, Xanderxavier said:

    It wasn't intended in the sense of calling the dev's "douches" merely in the affectation of the more general sense that the system is likely to elicit some expletives from new players now and in the distant future, and no decent design plan makes it to release without adjustments, theorycrafted systems often require adjustment to real world conditions, its easy to sit there and theorycraft a design in isolation that seems to work well in theory, but much like no battleplan survives 1st contact with the enemy, few if any game design documents escape unscathed from actual gameplay testing, nor is a system detailed in kickstarter sacrosanct and unassailable to improvement, perhaps in reply you'd like to address the issues outlined with regards to the crafting system and economy in the long run, and how you think this system could lead to something otherwise it seems your only counter argument is that's what was intended, this does not absolve it from the possibility of improvement before obvious problems develop, i doubt the majority of backers most of which wont touch the game or the forums for that matter till after release care much for the original design of intended systems but rather more the overall engagement, entertainment and longevity of the game post-release, indeed the whole point of testing is to identify and address issues.

    This is the 4th revision I believe to the passive system, disciplines, races/classes and its relation to vessels, and quite frankly is the best one so far. 

    The changes slated to happen are locked majors, with having to spend talent points into the individual powers within the majors. 

    It has always been a goal, that you can screw up your vessel, and have to make a new one. And that you must make a choice between crafting and combat vessels.  

    Many of us happen to like, and backed because of that approach.  It is not going to fundamentally change at this point. 

    EDIT: (Bold)

    The crafting system and economy is supposed to run by discrete individuals, and groups of individuals, trading the skills and abilities they have focused on, with other individuals, and groups of individuals, that have different skills and abilities, just like any other real economy does.  It's really rather simple.  

    The AVERAGE player should be discouraged from the crafting system if it doesn't interest them.  It's supposed to be driven by the achiever players who are bent on achieving crafting and economic dominance in the game. 

    You have 6 slots currently.  You can be capable at one crafting skill in a reasonable amount of time, become an "expert" in a few months, and maximise through gear and vessel upgrades in that time.   You can use a single vessel to do two crafting skills moderately well if you pick the right race and slot two disciplines.  That leaves you 5 slots for building a variety of combat vessels. If you happen to really NEED to devote all your time to crafting, and being good at it, then buy a second account.  But at that point you are far past being the average player. Even with a multitude of accounts, one human simply won't have the time to do everything.

    What is not supposed to happen, is for individual players to be able to do everything for themselves.

    That again, is a different game.


  5. 6 minutes ago, PopeUrban said:

    TBH I rather like the journal idea, but not as a belt slot item.

    This should be a lootable item that accrues xp while held in the inventory.

    Or, like, just remove the rarity requirements from sacrifice.

    Heh, that gave me an idea, shove the XP into the player decapitation mechanic.

    Take a head, and earn the XP that they have earned since the last time the head was taken.  Slows fight clubbing because after one death, your head is gone. 

    You could fight club/give your stored XP once through collusion. But to me that's really not all that bad.  


  6. 2 hours ago, Xanderxavier said:

    Ok so i played enough now to get a handle on how it works, and yeah got a bit of a concern, your limiting folks to 6 character slots, and atm your making us choose between a char good at combat or good at crafting, well that sucks comes to mind, each char should have 2 combat major discipline slots and 2 crafting major discipline slots, not just 2 slots to share between both, it means those chars I spent my time lvling and turning into crafters are now nothing but pretty lawn ornaments if I ever want to use them for anything but crafting, thanks.... yeah bad design, if you had unlimited char slots then sure make people split em if you want frankly even then you shouldnt but hey its bypassable, but limited char slots dont be douches, you shouldnt have to sacrifice multiple char slots to crafting and make the characters have a disadvantage vs those who became combat only, this seriously discourages the average player from engaging in the crafting system, which is a bad thing, a tiny number of crafters and few gatherers will end up with a horrid economy of high priced crud that only a few big guilds will be able to afford as a matter of course forcing everyone else to be equipped with lousy gear all the time, and no one likes dying cos their gear sucks cos they cant do crafting cos the game itself doesn't allow you to do so alongside combat in the 1st place.

    Frankly your whole system is in need of changing, neither minor explore or major combat disciplines  should overlap with crafting, and visa versa, you shouldnt have to sacrifice your ability to craft to fight or visa versa or frankly gather to craft etc also, given your extremely limited char slots , if this stays as is its heading for a bad road come release.

    You are describing exactly what has always been the intended design. The Kick starter packs even came with a +3 character slots bonus for early participants. 

    If you don't like it, that's too bad, because it's what has been sold to us all for years. Looks like you want a different game than what was promised and is being built.

    Oh and you might want to tone down the use of disparaging language calling the devs "douches" on your very first post if you want anyone to pay attention to your opinions.

     


  7. 5 minutes ago, srathor said:

    Come on folks this is just my friends stuff. For the recent postings. Show us some good bags from around the world.

     

    To what end? 

    ACE already said in a live stream they know about it, will work on it, and it's not an easy fix.

    Do you want them lamenting in sackcloth and ashes and cutting themselves in mourning supplication for vexing you so?


  8. I would really like them to add a guild level faction pre-select.  If your guild leader joined X faction, welp then your in that faction as well.  No getting separated from your friends, AND no ability to cross join multiple factions within a guild.

    Sure you can hang your alts out away from your guild and do that, but at least you have to do at least that.


  9. There is also the different sizes metas to think about.  Building for "best of" in each of these categories is different. What handles 1v1 well, like an assassin ganking a harvester, is often pretty useless in a 20v20 hallway situation. 

    • 1v1
    • < 3v3
    • <5v5
    • >5v5
    • >10v10
    • >20v20

    Except for a couple of obvious builds that seem to work anywhere.

     


  10. 14 minutes ago, srathor said:

    It is simply a name for the vessels. Not for the account. Sheesh derail much?

    Over time vessels change roles when you have storage and white vessels and greens and blues with different stats and focus. Delete and re leveling just to change the nametag on the vessel is a lot more work for a player. 

    As I move from the common vessel to the no handed green I would like to move that 4th vessel to the top of the list and rename it to Lawn Crafter Green Nohand. 

    User interface's should help. Not make it harder. 

    Rename, and re-order/sort/filter on the vessel select page would be a nice thing.  

    Nicer would be pulling the "name" altogether, renaming it "Notes" or "Description", and allowing a full text field (1k limitish) you can put useful notes in and search/sort on.

    Bank fix would be a higher priority to me than that nice to have.


  11. 1 hour ago, PopeUrban said:

    You set containers with people's names on them. I'm at work or I'd dig up a screenshot but this is exactly how we tracked mining input on an EVE outpost because we didn't have logged containers at that outpost.

    That could work, and I would be happy if it did, but ACE has to have "set containers" functionality to support it.


  12. 16 hours ago, PopeUrban said:

    I disagree about the logs.

    Having robbed people in logged and unlogged systems, and been the victim of being robbed in both logged an unlogged systems, I vastly prefer the systems without logs.

    A robbery in a logged system is trivial to track down and the spy only gets one shot at it. This really restricts their gameplay. A robbery in an unlogged system can go virtually unnoticed and requires a bit more finesse on the part of the investigator. I would not have had all the fun of sleuthing out a whodunit in archeage and nailing the criminal, or slowly bleeding a neighboring guild for months if we had logs. I wouldn't want to remove those possibilities from the metagame.

    In general I am not a fan of free intel in sandbox games. EVE's API and local chat really altered the way you *must* play the game, and did so, IMO, for the worst.

    Permissions alone are all that is required for a reasonable level of bank security.

    As long as you've got custom access rights and containers there's no other thing you could do with logs you can't do with containers. You can audit and assign loot to containers and they work just as well for tracking where your stuff is going.

    Bank logs are overkill spy meta killing nonsense that just encourages laziness with bank rights and ensures every robbery is a massive bank-clearing disaster that you don't see coming until it hits you in the face. Quite frankly it makes the entire interaction between your intel officers and enemy spies extremely binary and predictable.

    While I really like the spy play possible without logs, the negative to this that your not talking about is guild's being able to track income sources, so they can properly attribute credit, whatever that means, to those that deposit.


  13. Looks like you may not understand or are making assumptions about how they will operate.

    With the statement "having the forts to capture between those times" it seems like you think that everything is going to be locked down at certain points, but that is not the intent of the system.

    The system will open basically "as many forts and the population can support" at a time, so there will always be something to fight over.  You just don't get to pick "any" something you like, it's a limited exposure to funnel more people to the points that are vulnerable at a given time.

    Look at it this way.  At 4pm, forts A,B, and C open up. At 5 PM X,Y, and Z.  Then 6 PM A,Y,C open up.  3 AM, only A is open. 

    There should almost always, if not always, be something to fight over, just not everything. 


  14. 11 minutes ago, Nazdar said:

    @PopeUrban @KrakkenSmacken Thank you for the thoughtful discussion.  You bring up good and valid points.

    @Jah  My opinion of your non-rebuttal remains unchanged.  Lazy.  Trite.

    Let me break it down:

    This solution successfully encourages PvP in controlled times/places.  Despite the accusations, I think everyone here gets that.  However, it comes at a cost.  There are other game design solutions that could have had the same effect without over-regulating the tempo of the game.

    This change literally moves the game in the direction of a match-based game.  If you look at the announcement, you will see screenshots that literally resemble a lobby for a match-based game.  While sarcastic, it seems entirely reasonable to complain that design is shifting (in an unhealthy way) towards being more of a MOBA than an MMO.

    The false dichotomy here is that was the best and only solution to the problem.  With a little creativity, I believe we could have the best of both worlds.

     

    Also, you may think me a troll, but I complain because I care.

    I never said it was the "best" solution to the problem.  ACE has to live within a time, development, and historically built systems restrictions. 

    There may be better ideas for solutions that could eventually emerge from more dialog that may not actually be viable, or even possible.  Given the current state of development, and the need to eventually release.  Signal to noise ratio is real, and ACE very often has to guess what is in fact the best solution, when multiple possible options are available, given their unknown internal limits.


  15. 6 hours ago, MrErad said:

    Doubtful on the quitting in 1 month and it shouldnt take that long to  gear.  A lot of the fun is testing new builds even if their white vessels & currently its a slog without the gold.  The other issue is why are the mobs worth 50xp only on white vessels.  Basically the current leveling mechanics make it feel like how blue/epic vessels behaved when leveling off of mobs but now applied to white vessels.  Either lower the xp curve on white vessels or increase the xp on the higher rank mobs if gold is to be more valuable.

    The issue isn't lack of gold, the issue is on the dependency of needing gold as a crutch in the first place.  When the "XP for all the things" comes into play, the "slog" will be abated.

    58:50

    https://www.twitch.tv/videos/406031529

     


  16. 17 minutes ago, Nazdar said:

    Simply put, this is a major deviation from the concept of freedom and emergent gameplay.  

     

    @Jah You can shake your head and tell me that I don't understand the change, or you can form a rebuttal to my, albeit sarcastic, extremely valid argument. 

    That's a false dichotomy. Emergent gameplay comes from within the rules that guild gameplay, not from free for all unlimited behavior.

    League of legends has very emergent gameplay, yet the maps never change, and the goal is always the same. The rules of engagement are very fixed, yet from the champion select phase to the building of gear as the game progresses, a very emergent game process develops.

    Magic the Gathering also has very emergent gameplay, despite being highly structured and organized.  (Must have at least 60 cards in a deck, cannot have more than 4 of any non-basic land, can only lay one land a turn, etc)

    Next time you have a game of Risk, try just picking up and chucking pieces at the other players, or take two turns in a row, and see how "free and emergent" the other players consider that to be. 

    Bottom line, no matter the game, there are rules, from how long it takes to mine gear, to when/where the best time/places to attack are. The more you limit options, the more creative players have to become.

     

    Quote

    Lesson #18: Restrictions breed creativity

    Of all my lessons, this is the one I'm most associated with. In fact, if you're a longtime reader, you've heard me say it many times in this very column. This lesson is tied into a myth about creativity. Many people believe that the more options available, the more creative a person can be. This is a myth because it contradicts what we know about how the brain works. The brain is an amazing organ. It's very smart. When asked to solve a problem, most brains check their data banks and ask "Have I solved this before?" If the answer is yes, the brain solves the problem the exact same way it solved it last time.

    Most of the time, this is efficient. It lets you avoid relearning tasks each time you do them, but it causes a problem with creative thought. You see, if you use the same neural pathways, you get to the same answers, and with creativity, that's not your goal. So here's the trick I've learned. If you want your brain to get to new places, start from somewhere you've never started before. That's why I make sure to begin each expansion from a new vantage point. This forces me to think in different ways and create new problems to solve, which results in new ideas and new solutions. What this means is that restrictions aren't an obstacle but rather a valuable tool. You can make use of restrictions to help you be more creative.

     


  17. 1 minute ago, Grivyn said:

    So players that cant be bothered about forts now are just going to magically decide "hey this forts timer is open, I think i'm going to stop farming for non-existant necro googles and go attack/defend it". The only ones that give a damn about this are the ones that DO care about being the "Campaign winners, my badge has a better colour" types. The change wont help at all, in fact it will cost the game players period.

    For players that "can't be bothered", and think "forts are useless", explain to me how this impacts them in any way shape or form.


  18. 8 minutes ago, Bazgul said:

    The no gold start really penalizes the ranger. A new player building  a ranger as their 1st character is not going to be able to buy arrows for a long time, seeing as spider no longer drop gold and merchants buy nothing. The basic crafted arrows are junk, way less damage than purchased arrows, which seems odd. I know character creation was being exploited, but can we have random drops from creatures with gold or gear being a possibility? 

     

    It's not odd.  Basics anything is junk.  Have you tried to "upgrade" to intermediates?  There are tables in the temple that anyone can use to craft them, for very little.


  19. Just now, Sloppy said:

    It doesn't have to be unlimited tabs, but I'd like to see:

    1. A tab for each player so a crafter can dump gear they crafted for pickup.
    2. A tab for each crafting type. (so all blacksmiths could share a tab etc..)
    3. A tab for each rank so stuff can be dumped for recruits etc.

    I'm not a fan of tetris banks either, so please remove that! :)  Make it text based if you like!

    I would sort of prefer filters to be honest. 

    MTGArena does a pretty good job of filtering out cards to build decks.  Adding a filter option that lets you pick what you see with an auto sort would not impact the data structure on the back end, but move the manipulation of it where it belongs, in the view layer of the application.

    4WhMLfc.jpg

     


  20. 4 minutes ago, Grivyn said:

    This backcapping circle standing you speak of happened ALL the time not just while the US/EU slept. Outside of those that cared about winning these faux campaigns or getting a different colour on their badge noone cared about losing a fort or outpost. Keeps gave a crafting buff so you would get folks showing up and even then they got tired and bored with the daily repetition of it. Forts give you NOTHING you can't do by spinning up your EK or going into one of the many other player ones. I have no issue with major objects like Keeps having a timer, I have issues with EVERYTHING having timers. So once again give players a reason to attack/defend the forts not artificial handholding.

     

    I've said it before, and I'll say it again, the purpose of forts is currently bypassed by the massive import/export limits, AND the ability to reset those in 30 seconds of lock/unlock.

    The moment they actually enforce some control on imports and exports, when you lose a keep, holding your forts is going to be critically important. Lose them all, and suddenly you're in a very difficult posistion with no imports left, or at least rationing them.

    The related reason is, when exports are tied to score, everyone is going to be more interested in the points that they can all but ignore currently if they choose to.

    Right now, the only reason to even craft in them if you have no keep, is for the crafting score points for the gold badge


  21. 1 minute ago, Zatch said:

    Probably arent going to get unlimited stack size or tabs. Too much potential information to store database wise. 

    Stack size is not "more information", it's less.   

    It is much smaller to store one row with a "count" column than several rows, each with counts that are all at 100.

    Quote
    Type Storage (Bytes) Maximum Value Unsigned
    SMALLINT 2 65535
    MEDIUMINT 3 16777215

     


  22. 8 minutes ago, tavarian said:

    I dont know maybe I need to see it in action but right now it doesn't sound good to me having some imaginary timer let me know when it's time to play.

    Honest question, because your a new poster, have you seen the current free for all that is modeled after "take things at any time" in action?

    It's been universally despised for it's night capping, and lack of PvP content because people simply wait for the enemy to leave and go take it back at their leisure or susceptibility to the play style or willing to stay up later than other people and stand in circles. Our guild had ONE New Zealand player who "out preformed" everyone a couple of campaigns ago, simply because he could stand in circles all "night" long.

    Around 4 months of this has already done pretty much nothing to encourage PvP.  I can't honestly believe anyone who has actually been playing and watching with any regularity would still support that model.

    Forget the ideology, and look at how it has already been performing in a practical way.

×
×
  • Create New...