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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dominate

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Orion Spur

Recent Profile Visitors

710 profile views
  1. Despite some players' wishes, Crowfall is not really an RPG. Nor a 4X game. I don't know where all that is coming from, other than marketing hype and pipe dreams. Like Crowfall is going to be old-school Traveller plus EVE plus Star Citizen plus Tera plus Everquest Next all rolled into one. Prioritize and communicate, ACE. IMO roles should be tertiary. First a core of group MOBA, second a twist of voxel survival big world CW, and third a dash of RPG. Don't be afraid to rein in the "role" people, if necessary. I won't be offended if you have to reassign the Combat Tree into the ATs, because you can't really make all the roles equal combat with the resources you have - harvester, crafter, builder, scout, trader, cook, EK king, etc. p.s. Going to look up Fortnite. Sounds fun!
  2. Overall, I would say the progress seems excellent coding of archetypes, passive training, combat, crafting, landscapes and buildings mixed game-limiting MMO performance, artwork poor game-defining features: group combat, skill trees, AT abilities, EK integration, Campaign Worlds, POIs It's also possibly excessive? questionable-ROI fantasy features. e.g. crafting, spawning, inventory juggling unknown? AT build variety via Disciplines TL/DR: grats on major work on the building blocks!! now for the tough game part...
  3. Too early to tell whether I'll play it at all.
  4. [pulling out Excerpts, numbered] 1. Not only do I agree, but 1) someone pointed out that just diminishing returns everywhere can still lead to "exponential" advantages, due to multiplicative effects, 2) no offense to ACE, but I frankly don't trust them to carefully implement strictly diminishing returns everywhere and keep them that way over time. It's not a trivial problem. They would be far better off just giving nodes a cost weight, removing all the pre-reqs unless they obviously made sense, and doing something like Vectious suggested. 2. You've overstated Krakken's point, IMO. We want them to love their started role... we don't need them too. Too see it just look at any survival game, or any game where players are willing to grind out 100 levels for the privilege of playing the end-game. It's not pretty, but it's extremely common. And honestly we can't predict players' willingness to grind out early Crowfall because we don't even have a game loop or real CWs. 3. Agree with the recipe point, somewhat agree with the crafting crap point. On the former, I've posted about moving the Recipes up front or just deciding how partial training of these nodes will be implemented. Perhaps they could just move the nodes and let us select the specific recipes we learn after X number of points in those nodes. Regarding crafting crap with just grey/white resources and no experimentation, this is the same issue as #2 - it's OK if you think of early Crowfall as a survival game. There are many suggestions out there for speeding up training in Campaign Worlds, while not necessarily speeding up account-based passive training for subsequent Campaign Worlds. No traction so far... 4. Couldn't agree more. That announcement got a solid groan from me. Then another one, when I saw how many forum posts supported it. We seem to have a lot of players that want to either retain their edge from Beta, or obtain it quickly on soft-release.
  5. QUICK SUMMARY of catch-up ideas so far. Hopefully other players will chime in. (Please PM me for corrections to player attributions. Accuracy matters; ego shouldn't; many ideas here are found in other threads) ------- No change needed, and/or table this for later. [Bramble] Scrap the passive system. [Various] Pay. Various ideas as to how, possibly via VIP, never beyond existing players. [Yoink / Anthrage] Automatic, to lowest-common passive % [Ringhloth] Automatic, based on time since release, fixed increment. [Yumx] Automatic, to fixed % of highest player. [Tark?] Automatic, to a reasonable level to play a role. [KrakkenSmacken] Crafted items. [SirGeorge] Just fix the trees for strict diminishing returns. Incl. Fibonacci series progression. [Frykka & Destrin] Only a subset of trained nodes are active. [Vectious] Diablo3-like seasons (reset plus overall accelerated training). [VikingNail] Campaign World training resets, but each CW completed increases the training rate. [Srathor] Training acceleration, gated by actively playing the game. [Yoink] #9, #10, and #13 combined. [Gromschlog] Automatic, based on time since release, increasing increment, UT only. (Plus 9 & tree mods.) [Mivius.] #6, and the same is available to current players as a reduced training "reset". [Izalea] ------- @Ringhloth, any ideas for a Cosmic Encounter-inspired catch-up system? Perhaps not, which is why you switched to Seafall...
  6. That list was worth more than a Like. Thanks, lol.
  7. 1. Somewhat agree. ACE claimed they wanted gear to be relatively throw-away, but lately we're getting away from that. Meanwhile, the Crafter Union is growing... demanding significant rewards for their risk/grind/inventory. Gifting gear is so easy it could throw all other true skill measures out the window. I believe they can have both if they channel crafters into siege warfare (or EKs) instead of personal gear with 400% bonuses. Soon. 2. Completely agree. They should stick to those goals fervently unless they develop a game where it's clear they can relax them. The "roles" people are clamoring for should nothing more than the sum of controlled, reasonable advantages executed in fun, unique ways. Raw power is not such a role. 3. Completely agree. Players seem to be OK with that, as am I, as long as the gear & training power is kept in check. Unlike #1 & #2, this is acceptable "Game of Thrones". (#2 is Marvel Comics. They can design in Heroes, but only with careful effort.) Other players are pointing out we don't want battles to just be Eve's spreadsheets & N+1 win; I don't think they apply. 4. Somewhat agree. There are some creative ideas out there on CWs that could pan out. Crowfall is already an arena-ish game, despite others throwing "MOBA" around like an epithet. It's also a survival game. We just have somewhat relaxed starting conditions & bigger maps and let you blow crap up. I'm in favor of limited starter / testing campaigns and/or resets, but realize there's a zone-like feel if you take it too far and resets aren't popular. Their best designs for CWs will be around good implementations for creative competitions - e.g. Faction & God Wars - not power-restricted campaigns, like the billions of wasted, power-leveled Zones available elsewhere.
  8. Some players, in a twisted sort of logic, point to those same nodes as evidence of clear AT roles and easy catch-up. "There's no problem because everyone can quickly earn all that power." ACE simply messed up those curves and front-loaded some trees, e.g. Champion's +100 AP and Confessor crits. Give ACE credit for trying different power *profiles*; e.g. high crit in one AT vs. high AP or final damage in another. That's fine. Also, for generally having AT returns diminish with high Tier costs for large rewards -- also good. I'm not sure how the catch-up issue is solved by stretching the AT Tree to be like Combat. First, Combat provides far more overall power, so would be expected to take longer to earn. (It's actually a better example for addressing catch-up.) Second, the AT Tree is less complete at the moment since it lacks Promotions. (Completing it could make the trees comparable and wouldn't solve either the power curve or catch-up issues.) Third, the Combat tree has equally bizarre gating and disorderly diminishing returns. I'm tempted to think that the whole thing is just first pass, trial stuff. I like the core idea, but we would need to consider at least two counter viewpoints: No, hardcore PvP players will expend absurd energy to obtain small 5-10% advantages. What they won't do is get excited about 5-10% gained over years, and they won't care if larger bonuses are available elsewhere in the game, e.g. Vessels or Gear. Corollary: nerf the passives, you might want to nerf the Marketing of an innovative passive system. They don't need to have a strong effect if the sum total of such benefits are perceived as strong.
  9. I'm glad to be able to comment early on this, because I don't have a strong opinion but hope players think hard before answering. ACE is a small shop and will probably need to push the release out earlier than a AAA developer would. If so, the catch-up players will be the majority, not the minority. We want them to play. We may need to accept an aggressive catch-up mechanisms than otherwise seems "fair" until we have a stable, playable release to compete with other games.
  10. I don't think there's any question combat has improved or that the release pace has increased. It's pure opinion, however, whether the combat skeleton is good enough for the game itself. I'm personally convinced that they could still take combat in many directions that could accidentally tank the game. They don't seem to have anything really figured out yet. E.g. root vs split-body, good combo mechanics, the right duration for animations, the right CD for skills, what makes each class skill set truly unique, how i-frames vs evasions will work, what to do on CC escapes & skill breaks, how defenses will mitigate offenses, whether rage & essence & stamina are all good ideas, etc. Short story: they have a long way to go and certainly aren't screwed yet, but mostly because they haven't committed.
  11. I think the Dregs are going to be tougher than anyone expects, simply because the devs will be cautious about the markets. Guilds will sprint to where the money is, in the Infected & the Shadow. Hopefully it won't just be zergs and N+1, but so far the devs have been silent. God's Reach has the potential to have the best competition, but the low rewards and spoiler Balance might have the opposite effect and drive away participation. If Viking gets his way and the power curves aren't flattened, Dregs will wind up the "end game" and be ruled mostly by power curves, numbers, time, and grinders. With, of course, some skill and strategy, but not as much as he claims is relevant. Viking himself will still play if something is added that promotes a high skill ceiling. If not, he won't play; I don't agree with others he's here just to stroke his ego. If the power curve is flattened and gear is throw-away, as promised, there will be enormous pressure on the Discipline system and grouping functions to make the game fun to play. Again, Viking is right that boredom will set in. The trees, combat, and everything else is just not interesting enough to maintain interest more than 3-6 months. I agree that the key counterparts to power curves are the import / export rules, resource availability, and Attributes. ACE is not getting my respect yet, in designing systems pro-actively that lock down rules such that other areas can be tweaked. They're doing the opposite - holding their cards close and setting up everything to be tweakable. I'm pretty positive even the basics on the CW page at https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/crowfall/crowfall-throne-war-pc-mmo are completely wrong. They'll have to do something far, far more complicated with CWs if they allow persistent trees and gear, including considering normalizing the CW rewards or tying rewards to CW durations. The details of why are complicated. Keep a close eye on Attributes, and how they'll be implemented such that CWs aren't just the standard "level-restricted zones" in disguise. With low payouts and locked in durations. Ouch.
  • Create New...