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


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Helix last won the day on August 1 2018

Helix had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Mom's Basement

Recent Profile Visitors

6,570 profile views
  1. I think they should just let you level by whatever means you want to. You should get xp from killing players (with severe diminishing returns), capturing objectives, etc. This way you're always progressing by doing things you want to do, rather than things that are forced on to you (grinding mobs).
  2. Dislikes: Grinding mobs is really the only way to level up your character. What about allowing us to gain experience from killing other players (with extreme diminishing returns), capturing point or turning in objectives. Performance is still not great, especially when it comes to the backend. Extreme hitching and teleporting in large scale fights. Combat is still very floaty. No real feedback. Most classes play like a flowchart.
  3. I don't think the kickstarter went of their way to really single out any specific size of a group, but they did use that shadowbane nostaglia. Shadowbane was a zerg magnet of a game, and a few of those groups are playing crowfall so you do the math. The idea was to have multiple types of campaigns with different rule sets. That really depends on the population tho, and there's no indication that every single person playing on the god's reaches right now would hop over to the FvFvF campaign. Many playing on the gods reach are doing chest runs, and or leveling up alts and then importing into the dregs.
  4. I've played nw for the last two years. Those 50v50 sieges will probably be exclusively to the most organized and largest guilds. It used to be based on a lottery as to who actually got to be the leading guild in the siege, but since awhile back I believe contribution also plays a factor. This means a large guild, actively doing things that causes the zone to switch into conflict will have more priority over smaller guilds doing the same thing. Why shouldn't they? They're doing all the work. Small guilds will be beggars at the feet of larger guilds running the sieges to fill what vacant slots they have. This is not hyperbole; I've seen this happen. Basically what it sounds like is you want a perfectly fair game, and that's something crowfall was never destined to be. An open world pvp game is exactly what it sounds like, anything can happen. There's no stipulations as to when, where and how many. Can large and small guilds co-exist and thrive in an open world pvp game? It really depends on what goals the small guild has, and the realization that they'll never be able to compete on the same level as a larger guild; but no. The bigger fish will inevitably devour the smaller. Most guilds that played FvFvF in the past didn't even really play for the "faction". There's no faction pride for this game, and as a smaller guild you'll be along for the ride as the big boys take forts, keeps and leave you nothing.
  5. You don't think NW and Elyon will have huge zergs ? 😄. Small guilds won't even have chance to lead a siege on a settlement with the way that game is atm. Elyon is another humongous zerg fest. Some of the complaints are valid with crowfall, and some are just people not willing to play the politics side of the game and form alliances.
  6. That's literally the game. You run around and you smash people; there's not a whole lot else to do. They're looking for ANYONE; who they find it doesn't matter. You make it seem like they're intentionally seeking out small groups, when that couldn't be further from the truth. Why shouldn't they kill you? You're the enemy and the enemy should be crushed. This isn't a sport game, and they are not required to give you quarter. Zone caps suck because they're easy to abuse, but I don't see them going any where. Changing guild size, removing alliances, etc, none of that is going to actually solve the problem. People will be back here complaining about the exact same things just like they did when Last Oasis put in caps.
  7. You're confusing guilds with alliances. An alliance might have 500 members, but I have yet to see an alliance field 500 players. The most I've seen an alliance pull is ~150, which is a lot no argument there, especially since the zone cap is 200. That's split between 4 guilds tho, so capping guilds to 50, when they're already pulling that number isn't going to solve the imaginary problem people are concocting. Basically guild caps won't solve anything. That guild of 20 guys is just going to get bull dozed over by that guild of 50. Alliances will be just as big. Reduce the amount of alliances in a guild? You'll still get the same alliances, it will just require a little more effort to coordinate but the result will be the same. No alliance system? You'll still get alliances. Cap how many people from one alliance can be in the zone? Split the alliance and the result is the same. There are small things you an do however. Like a buff/debuff which effects an alliance which has more / less when it comes to damage/survivability. Kinda like disarray in albion. "The gods look favorably on you..." because you're at a disadvantage. That's something I wouldn't mind seeing.
  8. I think this is a real technical limitation on their back end. They gave abilities / aiming a wide birth to compensate for the desync between client and server. Like in that video I posted earlier in the thread, you don't even need to be facing the target to hit them. This also means pin point targeting really isn't a thing.
  9. Not sure why so many people fixate on the guild cap. There is no guild in game that has 500 concurrent players online at the same time. Most guilds are sitting around 30-60.
  10. I feel like this was the conclusion they came to with combat.
  11. Ya think that's bad? Side stepping ranged attacks is also not really a thing.
  12. This would never happen. Every alliance / guild has insulated it's economy. Everyone donates to the crafters for the benefit and progression of the guild / alliance. There is transparency as to where the gold is going and how it's been used for. What you're suggesting is a tax system like albion, which never really turned into what you're suggesting, and that's a game where personal wealth actually really matters. As an individual, I don't really have much use for money, but my guild / alliance does. The guild / alliance provides everything, from vessels, gear, etc and we provide for the guild / alliance. It's a mutually beneficial relationship. Just like when people think big guilds will trade with their faction. Why would these guilds trade with enemy guilds, even if they're on the same faction in infected, when they know they're going to fight them in the dregs? The same big guilds you encounter in the dregs are the ones you'll be seeing in the infected as well, and supplying your potential enemies with equipment is silly.
  13. Politics was always supposed to be a big part of the game (just like it was in shadowbane, and in every other mmorpg with large scale pvp). Removing alliances won't remove the politics that creates alliances, which means you'll just get an alliance without the mechanic. We had friendly fire originally, and honestly it just didn't work with the type of combat currently in the game; it wasn't really a deterrent.
  14. Small individual guilds will never accomplish anything. An alliance of small to medium guilds? Maybe you'll have a chance. Crowfall is a game of politics / alliances for the good (or bad).
  15. Shadowbane's biggest problem was at launch and for many months after it was a barely functional product, and even when it functioned it was a buggy poorly made dergs show (at least when I played). The zero sum nature of the game just further compounded problems. Shadowbane was full of great stuff (base building, sieges? Two things not really a thing back then), but terrible terrible execution. Kinda like crowfall....
  • Create New...