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


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


taroskin last won the day on April 6 2016

taroskin had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

1,246 profile views

taroskin's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)



  1. Removing instant sneak doesn't fix the plethora of rogues sitting around at disc drops, vorg, running zones that can't attack eachother unless they bring a scout. That was just a flawed concept, and it needed fixing. Sorry but "bringing a scout" should not be the only way to properly engage in the smallscale/solo elements of this game. And yes, there are various awful/clunky workarounds (coming out of stealth to let your enemy get the jump on you/bait him, using ground target AoEs, and so on) - but those are just that; ineffective, awful, clunky workarounds.
  2. Can still get GM stealth if you really want it. I think they're just less invincible in small scale. Scouts and thieves are no longer the only things seen in smallscale, and non-scout rogues can actually fight eachother in smallscale now rather than stay in stealth forever - I don't think that's a bad thing?
  3. Based on the game mechanics, action combat and the pace of combat we've had, adding in friendly fire in a basic form would be disastrous and make so many abilities and group compositions worthless/extremely difficult to use. I really don't think friendly fire adds that much to the game - it will make the game 100x more complicated to balance. So I'm hoping they skip it!
  4. In regards to a location, should we specify for what type location or a generic name that might be applied to all types? Eg "Blah Blah Forest" - would this be inappropriate because it may be potentially applied to a non forest?
  5. Bit of a random question, but will the Disciplines themselves ingame be getting a more robust tooltip alluding to their lore or capabilities beyond the more 'technical' aspect of the power descriptions? EG, " Using ancient secrets and techniques developed long ago and preserved by the Holy Church, Undead Hunters can seek out and track undead creatures, protect themselves from their blighted touch, and bless their weapons with the power to kill even the dead. "
  6. Apologies for stealing the thunder! I'd echo your sentiments - opening up this large customisation is very much so a major feature. I'm sure people will be much more able to create the fantasy of their own character and feel like it is just that - their own. That's a very hard thing to get right in MMOs.
  7. don't look at me like that cw, you're making me blush
  8. http://massivelyop.com/2017/05/16/crowfall-is-shifting-away-from-race-bound-class-archetypes/
  9. I think you caught me mid editing! My bad, you may wish to check above, particularly the last two paragraphs. That should clear up the intent. What I'm saying isn't that current combos = entirely bad. It's that... well, read the last paragraph for that. They don't serve a function in some cases ( since we've established that unique or long animations can serve the same interactivity element) because their use cases can be erratic and the cool or unique part of the ability becomes super de-emphasised or doesn't feel as good as a result.
  10. If I am casting an ability, and as such an animation is showing on my character that is unique to that ability and it has 2s cast time, people around me have up to 2 seconds to notice my animation that is telegraphing my intent, and react accordingly. (stun/move/dodge/blah) If I am in attack chain 1 of a 3 combo chain, and the third combo is the "big deal", and it takes 2 seconds to get from combo 1 to combo 3, then people around me have up to 2 seconds to notice my animations of the previous two combos, which are telegraphing my intent, and react accordingly. (stun/move/dodge/blah) Is there really any difference between "something is coming" and "something is about to happen"? The above scenario shows that, given the same timeline, they are pretty much the same in terms of counter-activities. Notice an animation, which acts as a telegraph, and react accordingly. The only difference here is that in scenario two, there are more things happening (dealing damage while telegraphing my combo, other secondary effects etc). Whether or not the casting player actually cares about those things happening (or if they're even relevant in terms of the intent of the final combo effect) is a different matter. In scenario two there can of course be more interactivity, for example, if I'm snaring someone on combo 1 and leading up to a huge PBAoE damaging attack on combo 3 (synergy) - the problem is that we are also seeing less synergetic things than that, like the first combo being a personal damage shield and the last being a potent area of effect ability (little to no synergy/not even the same use case). It's these second ones that are particularly annoying because using those combos feel like you're wasting your time or wading through trash to get to your true intent/use case. The key question that I see failing in some combo chains is this: "When would I want use this ability?". The later combos (combo 2&3+) sometimes have completely different answers to that question than the early ones (1 &2). Without that question being similar throughout the combo, or evolving synergetically (eg, 1 being an attack, 2 being a cc, 3 being a devastating damage effect on nearby or cc'd dudes - naturally play into eachother & work well together), then some abilities will just feel weird to use in some instances.
  11. I appreciate that ideal. It's of course a way to produce an interative combat system. However.... Can't an animation show me that? I can see, for example, in Shadowbane when someone was casting an important spell. This gave me time to get out of the way, to stun them, to displace, etc. Why do so many of the unique and cool effects need to be buried in generic chains that (sometimes) don't otherwise connect to the "idea" of the final ability? When I want to use an specific effect it produces the scenario where I have to go through a bunch of stuff I don't care about. That reduces the feeling of combat speed and combat responsiveness to me because my intended result is delayed massively. Why do I need generic filler attacks before that last telegraph? Delay & animation is the defining interaction - the generic attacks add little to it for that purpose other than perhaps reducing the pace of combat and giving people even more time. There is so little difference between noticing a combo right now and noticing a certain animation, or as you described, "during the cast". If the generic filler attacks are just that - fairly generic and filler - then they will be treated as an extension of the real abilities (combo 2 or 3 in this case), and as such, any information gleaned from them would be "during the cast". Allowing interrupts or other cc, displacement or dodge abilities - the most important factors here are (1) delay and (2) visual telegraphing. The fillers are not necessary for those factors, are they? What I mean to say is, some of the abilities just seem to have combos, "just because". It de-emphasises the fun/unique/powerful parts of the abilities for an unclear reason. It also makes some of the abilities just kind of weird - I want to launch this cool ass AoE effect now. So... I need to spend the next while getting there by building or casting some personal DS/shield/blah? The result is also that use cases of the 1st combo in the chain can be so quite different to the final combo in the chain, which makes the previous ones feel wasted & combat or responsiveness feel slowed down.
  12. Huh? They specifically stated they were taking example from TERA & WILDSTAR combat. Surely then, that invites comparison to the games it takes inspiration from?
  13. The "combos" in Crowfall aren't actually really combos, since they are all the same ability they are in fact not "combinations" of anything - they're attack/skill chains like in GW2, for eg. You might say semantics, but... I always found it really weird they were called combos. It invites the thoughts of something much more highly complex/intriguing than basic attack chains, so is a little bit of a let down due to expectations. Some of them feel rewarding (last I played) but others felt very underwhelming, esp. due to the anim locks. By the time you get to the combo that you actually wanted the effect of (eg a knockdown), you have telegraphed that fact for a couple seconds (or more) at least by using filler attacks you don't really care about, and the target(s) can/will be gone.
  14. For me it's mostly because of being busy with other things in life right now in terms of participation. But I'm not really all that enthused about testing anything currently. However, honestly it's not that attractive. Combat is incredibly.. just static and boring right now. It's far, far, far too slow with far, far, far too little movement. It just wasn't what I had expected. I hope it will improve, but honestly, what I consider to be the problems seem like real structural/foundational design decisions; the pace of movement being awfully slow, the lack of movement abilities, the flow of combat, the charge up/animation lock on almost everything being unnecessarily long, etc. If you look on that kickstarter, for example, you see the knight sidestepping and quickly side-attacking, slashing in quick stabs, etc. It moves twice (or more) as fast as what we really have, but also with actual movement alterations. The game feels like you're playing in slowmode most of the time, with little visceral interactions. Few abilities feel fluid, combined with some strange/un-intuitive mechanics such as the dizzy state or managing combat mode. It's just not visceral or very exciting combat. And that's almost all we have right now (combat); so if what they're showing me isn't really all that fun, I can only give them my 2c so many times before I just stop contributing. It doesn't seem to be changing majorly enough for me to begin having fun in the testing environment rather than just be giving my time for proper testing (which I will do, but only when I can/haven't other things that would be more enjoyable to do).
  15. To anyone buying a gaming based laptop, I'd suggest you look into Thunderbolt 3 and do a little research on that, specifically in relation to external GPUs. Over the next 4-18 months we will see e-GPUs become increasingly more viable and commonplace. This allows your laptop or notebook to game within a few percentage points of the power of a Desktop without causing your laptop unnecessary load or expense. You'll have a desktop grade GPU in a housing unit at your desk. Come home with your laptop, plug in and now you have (basically) desktop grade graphics power. For more casual reading on this, a good first stop is looking at the Razer Core. It is being paired up with a laptop that is more of an ultrabook (integrated graphics), but plugs into what I described above. This allows the laptop to be extremely thin and more about battery life, build quality and usability rather than gaming - but at no sacrifice to gaming at home due to just plugging in to that enclosure. Unfortunately, this tech won't be backwards compatible as it relies on the USB type C port, with thunderbolt3 functionality. It will also require the laptop's manufacturer to support some of the functionality (similar to how optimus worked for switching between discrete GPU/integrated) via BIOS updates. The bottom line is if you're looking to futureproof a gaming grade notebook, you might want to look into those with Thunderbolt 3 port functionality, or better yet, a laptop built specifically with e-GPUs in mind. It's looking like this setup is becoming much less of a gimmick and much more functionally viable - we'll see in the coming months.
  • Create New...