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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Mykro

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Ill give an analogy. Would you rather have someone who is very good at playing Magic the gathering design new cards for the game, or someone who is crappy at the game (and likely doesn't understand the intricacies or depth of the game/strategy) develop new cards? I am not arguing that being good at magic the gathering is sufficient to be a good card designer, but it is [close to being] necessary. I don't know about you, but I would rather have Grubby design a future RTS game than some below average player, and I would rather have Dendi design a new MOBA than a player, no matter how much they play Dota 2 just continues to be bad.
  2. @McTan, I just want to tell you that I agree completely with you. I am glad there are some on this forum that are huge fans of the game, however some of this population will dismiss any criticism of the game at all (even if it is a legitimate concern). Whenever a new player posts about how their experience wasn't great, or how they didn't like a feature, the response from these "diehards" is reflexively explaining why their first impression is incorrect. There is a danger in trying to pretend/act/believe that everything is going "dandy", dismissing any criticism as "the person is uninformed", and continue the same path. (The so called group think downfall in decision making.) The most important contributions early on in the development of any game is often from those providing constructive critism. Mctan brings up a great point, there are many [gamers] that do not want to join an MMO after launch because they believe they will be "behind" in progression. I haven't played WoW since 2006, I have never gone back, in part because I worry others are that much more progressed. So Mctan is bringing up a very reasonable concern, and I urge the fan base and the devs @jtoddcolemanto take valid and legitimate concerns (such as this one) with an open mind rather than always reflexively trying to explain why they are wrong. Constructive criticism is how people, companies, and video games are improved. It sure has helped me become a better physician.
  3. you are correct that being good at pvp doesn't automatically make you good at designing pvp, but it increases the chances. As does being bad at pvp, increase the chance you are bad at designing pvp. You are right, I do not know crowfall inside and out, the game was a harvest simulator so I stopped playing after a few days, but my understanding is that there are major and minor disciplines that improve songs, so if you are going to run these disciplines it makes sense to run multiple songs, no?
  4. Here is are two threads where I tried to put out some constructive feedback:
  5. All of the devs work hard on this game, but I agree, I am not sure pvp design is being done by the correct staff members at this time. I do not want to use specific names, but the design lead for the crafting/harvesting system should focus on that. A competitive PvPer (i.e., a grand master or master ranked player [in blizzard pvp games] or equivalent in some other ranking system), and someone with past pvp design should be the design lead for the pvp (not a harvesting/crafting enthusiast). Currently all of the classes in crowfall seem to have a "mish mash" of skills that do not synergize or compliment each other too well. I am fine with having a slightly slower combat pace than most MMO pvp games, but the class, skill, and combat flow need work. The most obvious example of a blatant flaw (in my opinion) is all the of the songs--- so a character should run 4, 2 second cast songs, spam these all match, and this is good pvp design? = / Todd is clearly an amazing game director and intelligent leader. I hope he gets the right people working on the pvp. I am sorry to say, it's not a good sign when the most popular topic on the forums is "is the game fundamentally boring?" 75% of the player base wants a good pvp game, they do not want to play crowfall: the harvest/crafting simulator.
  6. Hello, would it be possible to allow wheel scrolling (wheelup, wheeldown) to be mapped? I would like to bind my power trays to wheelup and wheeldown, however the game doesn't recognize these wheel scrolling as an input. I tried using a program to bind wheelup and down to a different keys (i.e., h and z), but even when this is done, the camera zooms in and out while in game. Thanks!:)
  7. If PvP isn't rewarded/incentivized [as much as PvRock], yes it will still occur, but not as much as those who want a PvP game would want. A historical concept in past MMOs is "do not force PvP players to have to PvE." A player should be able to progress at similar rates no matter the type of gameplay they engage in (PvE, PvP, etc.). Don't get me wrong, there is some incentive to PvP right now -- you can loot players. PvPer's can also wander the world and loot some resources from chests. However, the current high requirements of resources to make gear, the high durability loss on death, and unimpressive loot from chests makes PvP a very ineffective means of progression. If you take a game like Elder Scrolls which rewards PvP, there is a lot of it. If you take black desert, which really only rewards node wars and a daily battleground, you don't see much world pvp -- you see players do node wars and a daily battleground.
  8. Yes Eve has a dedicated base which has played the game for a long time, however it also hasn't been that successful at maintaining a high server population. What is the average view count of twitch users streaming Eve? What is the average server population for Eve? My guess is not that great. So saying "this is how Eve does it, so it must be a good system" isn't necessarily true... Again, I am truly just trying to help the devs, my goal isn't to troll for no reason. The main selling point of CF, and the most anticipated in-game activity, will be its dynamic pvp system. In my opinion, this this dynamic pvp system has a much better chance to maintain the game's popularity, than creating a Harvest Simulator (which will turn off many PvPers from day one and only retain a few hardcore harvesters who enjoy this).
  9. But currently getting the skills from the skill tree to make crafting/gathering easier takes a very long time to get. The game needs to make a good first impression on new players, and saying "well in 2 weeks you may be able to make gear slightly easier [and give up combat stats in order to do this]" -- isn't a good approach.
  10. I remember in a video Blaire made a comment along the line of: people would make these awesome +10 swords, but never use them because they didn't want to lose them on death, so they would just use their crappier gear (this isn't the exact quote, but it was the same overall concept). CF needs to not be that.. gear needs to be fairly easy to replace and without such high durability loss on death. Also the game needs more ways to encourage/reward PvP. I know some systems are still in the works for this, but I think a fairly easy and fun addition would be people dropping body parts on death (i.e., Mykro's ear) and these are used in creating vessels and/or potions. Lastly the campaign map (tyranny) is way too big for testing purposes -- its not fun to run around 30 minutes just to find a fight. Everyone says "well this is PRE-ALPHA!!" yes that is true, but they want to release this game within the year, and currently the game isn't retaining people because it simply is not fun. It is just 24/7 harvesting and a few minutes of PvP here and there. Changes will come, I am sure of it, but people need to have fun playing a game (even in the pre-alpha setting), for a game to meet its highest level of long term success. If the game turns off a lot of people now, some of those people will never return, and will probably also discourage their friends from trying the game. I say this all because I want CF to succeed, but right now the game is not fun, and that is why the testing servers are essentially dead. Sorry to be frank, but sugar coating feedback and creating a group-think environment that everything is great and dandy is a dangerous potential pitfall for any company. Mykro, MD
  11. I agree with the overall message of this post however, currently the game is Quarryman Simulator / Lumberjack Simulator. Hopefully they do things to make it easier to get descent gear and do more things to reward pvp. Reducing the mats needed to make gear in half would be a good first step.
  12. Thanks for the replies. I can craft a more complete response later (when im not at work), but I do agree with gear taking too many resources currently. I think some of the basic ingredients (like iron ore, hides) should be reduced by maybe a third. You make a good point that things like factories aren't in the game yet, and that the game isn't fully developed at this point-- and that is why I am bringing this topic up now, so it can be reviewed early on, not after launch once players have developed opinions of the game. Thanks again all. Good discussion.
  13. People are joking in chat that the name of the game should be "Lumberjack Simulator".... and unfortunately that is kind of true. At the current design, the game is very similar to Age of Conan Bori --- which people joked as boring because people just pve against rocks and trees all day (devs should research this if they are unaware of how this project turned out for Funcom). A little bit of harvesting is fine, but hours upon hours is not. People are not going to stick with a game that is all about the exciting ACTION harvesting (except for a handful of die hard harvesters). Another problem I see is the significant loss of durability on death -- I understand the concept on why its in the game, but an inadvertent consequence of this is to discourage pvp. Unless you know you are going to win, there is no point in fighting because you lose so much durability on your gear when you die. The game is in danger of becoming one which discourages pvp, and instead encourages "PvRock." I would recommend dramatically reducing durability loss from death. Also please see another post I made about "NPC Workers" (or thralls) which do the actual harvesting for you: I really want this game to be great (I wouldn't have bought a $500 pledge pack otherwise), but I also don't want to play Lumberjack Simulator and PvRock or PvTree all day. The game should encourage PvP, not discourage it. In order for this post to be more useful, does anyone have any other ideas on ways to encourage pvp more? One quick idea, could be that when you kill a player there is a chance they drop an ear, or a scalp, or some other body part that is used in the crafting of vessels/potions. Any other ideas? Thanks, Mykro, MD
  14. Hello all and devs, Thank you for your time in reading some of my thoughts! ========================================================================================================================================= Introduction: =============================================================================================================================== I have always been interested in game design. Roughly 10 years ago I had an idea similar to crowfall, when I was thinking about the possibilities to combine the best elements from MMOs, real time strategy, and 4x turn based strategy games. In my view, MMOs strive at combat, player progression, immersion, and community development, while RTS and 4x games excel at tactical strategy and adaptation to the enemy. Crowfall is incorporating many of these elements, which really excites me. Nonetheless in an attempt to help contribute to the game, I do want to mention some of my current concerns, as well as propose some design ideas that hope can be helpful to the devs. My biggest concern at this point is the possibility of Crowfall becoming too focused on harvesting, making the game “boring” for some/many players. Below is my idea to help address this concern without straying too far away from what Crowfall is meant to be and what is realistic: Making forts and claiming resources is a really fun part of the RTS and 4x game, however actually doing the physical harvesting (at least in my opinion) is not as much fun. I know active harvesting was added to help this issue, but this only partial alleviates the problem. ==================================================================================================================== NPC Workers system: ====================================================================================================================== As is currently the case, players would start out having to harvest materials, and create their initial capital; however, the guild could eventually build NPC housing within the capital, which allows for production of NPC workers (thralls). The NPC workers would then do the physical harvesting (i.e., the boring part), while players would need to protect their workers (and do other things in the world). These workers would have to leave the fort to mine (i.e., gold) and while they are doing so, they are vulnerable to attack. The guild can however build a barracks, where they can train footmen to help protect the workers. The footmen, however, are only powerful enough to ward off ~1-2 players, and so when the workers get attacked, the guild had built a watchout tower to warn the guild their workers are under attack. Unfortunately, the attacking guild, had attacked the defending guid at a different location 5 minutes previously, limiting the number of reinforcements they can quickly send to help the footman defend. The footmen are killed and two workers are stolen and returned to the attacking teams base. The [above] defending guild now rethinks their plans a bit, this time making a fence to block out attackers, and also upgrading the watch tower to be able to detect stealth. The defending team also produces a flame tower that a player can use to defend, as well as a NPC turret which shoots projectiles at any attacking players. ================================================================================================================================ Guild Research trees: ================================================================================================================================ To change gears a little bit, and look at how more guild strategy can be added to the game (to incorporate more RTS and 4x elements). One idea I had was that the first fort a guild makes is their capital, and in the capital a library can be built, which allows the guild leader (or officers) to choose what is researched (i.e., a research tree like civilization). Maybe the team wants to build one strong capital, so they construct many farms; or maybe the guild wants to do a quick expansion and makes a settler who can make another fort; or maybe the guid wants to rush siege weapons (and an NPC giant) so they can attack another guild and expand by claiming another guild’s capital. Other ideas could include a defending guild researching the Pantheon research line, and unlocking the ability to summon a God to help defend their capital. The God creates a lightning storm, striking the attacking players. In turn, the attacking guild decides to retreat to live another day, and then they research Divinity to gain the favor of Gods allowing them to weaken the Pantheon defenses. The idea is the research tree allowing for different strategies, as well as being able to counter what other guilds are doing. ================================================================================================================== Conclusion: =================================================================================================================== I know the above ideas are large in breadth and would require a lot of work, but it could be a long term goal, which is slowly built towards. It also is fairly in line with the vision and current elements of CF. To repeat myself, I do think it's important to think about what players are doing on a minute to minute basis, and if that involves having to harvest 50% of their time, it will be a turn off to many players. Allowing for fun strategy and engaging activities will make a more popular game. ================================================================================================================ An aside: =============================================================================================================== The last thing I wanted to bring up, which may have already been throughout, is what is going to stop guilds from just mass recruiting and zerging? I.e., Will there be a cap on players allowed in a guild? In an alliance? Will there be a limit on the number of players a guid can have in the campaign at one given time?
  • Create New...