BarriaKarl

So they provide nothing other than points to our group(faction/guild)? I really think making it more interactive and allowing players to upgrade them would be more fun. Start with just a ruined fireplace or ruined camp and upgrade it slowly: War bane -> single tower -> double tower. Players could add, remove or destroy things in them. If you plan to keep the place upgrade it, if you plan to leave and dont want your enemies to get all those upgrades for free you can burn everything to the ground and reset it to level 1. We could be able to buy NPCs (Is this kind of NPCs gonna be on release?), buy some constructions (walls, crafting stations, maybe some small siege constructs?). Make them small keeps. Just a small base. All in all, better than just holding them for points.

Not sure how this test will turn out to be. Brazilian players and beta testing dont mesh that well. If possible and it is not a major PITA would like if we could get some reports telling how much players are logging on this server. Also what is you minimum value to consider this succesful and what you are looking for exactly. Just so we can follow how this test is going. It would certainly make all players you currently have to bring as much new blood as possible with a visible objective.

Which raises a whole new set of issues. Are they really gonna prevent me from using my training? I'd rather they mess with the loot tables. It sounds like the same but for there is a diference with resources drops decaying with season and me just magically sucking at it. I i trained to full pips I want to be five times better than a newbie. Capping and removing skill directly from players seems like a flaw. So don't mess with PH (or even other stats) but with the loot tables directly.

I think the problem is that the times used now are basically there to just annoy the crafter. Not fast enough to be ignored and not too long to feel meaningful, they really only seems there to get in the way. I would like to suggest that: A- If the crafting time is staying move it to the final combine. No times when making the pomel, blade, guard or the likes, only when turning everything into a sword. IMO it is better (AKA less annoying) to bundle the whole wait at once and allow player to go do other stuff. And it would change nothing balance wise. PS.: Can someone bring numbers to this? How many times does a timer appear when crafting a item like a sword? What is the total time consumed? B- Allow for items to be made while another is being completed (In the above style). Could even be a crafting table quality thing. The higher its quality the more items you can have being made in the background. C- Kinda unrelated but also falls in the wasting time area. Try to decrease the number of panels and clicks when crafting. The most pronounced one would be to add a ''send item directly to inventory' checkbox to skip the final and ( useless 99.99999%) take panel. I think the naming panel could also be optional, but I don't remember if there was another information with it.

^The above wording seems to heavily imply the infection will come back in the same place. As in removing the hunger crystal is a temporary measure and not as if the new respaw point is RNG based (it is random, right?). The end kinda makes it clear but it sounds confusing IMO. I had to re-read to understand you meant spared from being infected and not from disappearing at sunlight which was what we were talking before. Might want to make it clearer.

Yeah, we need to know what are the plans for how their looks will be determined. I would bet in adapting to the wearer race but that sounds way too gamey to me. Having the crafter determine it at the crafting phase would raise it own issues. Like, can we change their looks later? Can other races still use that now? If we have more variations for each race (which we will probably most likely have) I would like to propose that looks should only be able to be changed at a crafter (or station if one is already a crafter). Better if some looks are harder to unlock making the crafter more sought after. And, in this case, selecting the look (more accurately race) upon crafting (or buying) would be a nice solution. Oh, and implementing a neutral style would be good, if only so crafters can craft and display their wares in a single style and keep things neat and tidy.

"Or a guinecean riding a centaur riding a horse."

Pretty much what Svenn said. I think making a bigger group that is not a party would be a win-win for everyone. My grip with with huge parties is that it gives too many easy benefits to a large group of people. The easy group heals (which someone even said wanted to see on bigger groups) and the leadership passive are actually (in my book) already a tad too much as is. Double the party size and things will go awry. Too big of a party size seems like favouring mindless grouping. 2 teams of 5 working together seems better than a group of 10 with each half doing their own thing while enjoying benefits they aren't due. And if we are talking about hundreds then 5 or 10 doesn't make that much difference anymore.

I am not sure what bigger groups sizes would bring to the table. Except for exploitable things like the disgustings party one-click powers, the leadership buffs, and the (probable) friendly-fire immunity. All of those could be easily exploited should party size be increased. Five or six (why though?) maximum please. Managing large sieges have nothing to do with the party sizes, more of managing multiple parties kind of thing. The idea someone brought up of creating another large grouping is solid. Like 5 people one party, 5 parties 1 battalion (random name), 5 batallions one whatmachcalit. Each could have their own set of benefits. But please no friendly fire immunity, leadership, and party powers.

Really cool. I just think it has potential to make more close to a profession instead of a free-for-all-first-come-first-served as the article seems to imply. As a explorer being a rare plants harverster sounds hella cool. Some training bonuses would be cool too, maybe a training to harverst a better quality plant or smt.

So Desert, Forest, Highland, and Marsh biomes confirmed? I think the one we have right now is highlander? And desert was confirmed before. Would like a deep forest, and a marsh biome sounds interesting...

The focus is indeed on testing right now and allowing a way to disable that would be a sure way route for EVERYONE disabling it. We would lose some information that is most likely pretty useful for ACE. BUT thanks for dropping by and welcome to the forums.

I think those shards were supposed to buff the Mobs? So, despite not disabling them they will make them harder to kill.

This works too. Thanks, man.

Okay, would it be possible to multistream simultaneously on youtube gaming? I have seen people doing it (other games in developtment too although i can't remember which) and honestly it would be a good move. Youtube is really waaaaay ahead of twitch when the thing is watching. I tried to watch this stream on twitch and it is a no go. I had to watch on source quality (1080?) and not gonna happen on my potato machine. But overall even when I tone the quality down twitch JUST. DON"T. WORK. To prove my point I am currently watching last week stream on YT and it is so damn smooth i almost cried remembering how much i suffered trying to watch the VDO, it makes me wonder why the heck are you people not streaming there instead. I am not trying to be a YT fanboy but it makes sense to stream in multiple platforms since that IS possible. And I doubt Artcraft would have problems with bandwith or whatever comes with that. Worth trying.