virt

ACE Investor & Tester
  • Content count

    94
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About virt

  • Rank
    Magpie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. Good point. And that may be a good reason to give VIP a slight advantage in vertical training. But I don’t think it’s a huge issue either. There are other aspects to VIP that are valuable, like the 30 time bank, among others. So these other factors could go a long way in making up the value at least to some people.
  2. I am not sure I fully follow, but I agree to the extent that if everyone has the opportunity to do some vertical skill training, then it significantly reduces concerns about there being an unfair difference between VIP and non-VIP. My initial suggestion was based in part on this.
  3. Per your own words, I think you are wrong. I thought that Todd said that you can can’t train along the same branch of the tree. So you could train Mage and Knight, but not Mage and Druid. But if I interpreted him wrong (and something Blair said later did seem to contradict it, if I recall), then they would definitely need to institute this restriction. Also, I would get rid of the “basics” skill trees all together, and build those skills into the main lines. They seem redundant and just serve to allow for vertical training under the current system. The skills in the basics categories can be built right into the branches (e.g. Fighter, Mage, Rogue), or bundled into their own Basics top level category of skills, separate from Race, Class, etc...
  4. Yeah, ideally there would be a subscription fee for everyone and everyone would be on the same playing field (or, I should say ideally, a pay-once model could actually finance the game). That’s just not the MMO market right now, and there are many people who just won’t touch a game with a subscription fee. So offering them a buy-once tier is a good way to expand the gaming experience to more people. It is then a matter of keeping the subscription tier valuable enough so that some people keep paying, while also not hobbling pay-once folks so that they feel it is pointless to play. For some people, just the knowledge that there is a subscription level that they can’t (or are unwilling to) afford will make them think that they can’t compete (I think these may be the “P2W purists”). AC will never win them over. But as long as the subjective experience of playing the game does not make it feel like there is a difference between VIP and non-VIP players, then I think AC will have succeeded.
  5. No system is immune P2W concerns given sufficient money. There is always a black/grey market given sufficient interest. MMO game operators don’t have the level of controls to quash them (they would need the power on par with a government that could throw people in jail, and even then who knows). So I don’t know what a “P2W purist” is, but it is sounds like they are unreasonable and naive... to put it nicely. When dealing with this issue, the question is ALWAYS just about how much does a particular system resist the influence of outside money. By reducing the impact of skill gain through diminishing returns, and all the other methods AC is using, that they have baked into the structure of this game, I think Crowfall is probably going to be one of the most resilient systems out there when it comes to P2W concerns. I am glad that AC is getting a thorough vetting from its supporting community, but I think they are on the right direction here, and the system only needs a few tweaks IMHO.
  6. To address this, maybe you could break skills down into 5 top level categories like you have them in the “windows explorer” (Combat, Crafting, Exploration, Race, and Class). Everyone gets one training slot in each of the skill categories. If you want to specialize, you can forego training in up to two categories in favor of training a second or third skill in another category, though there would be diminishing returns in applying the cross-category training slots (say 75% and 50% skill rate, to throw some numbers out there). This would allow anyone (even non-VIP) to specialize and “double dip.” VIP gets you access to additional training slots for Race and Class (one each, at 100% rate) with the same skill tree restrictions as you initially described. VIP gets you access to one additional training slot that can be applied (at 100% rate) to either of the Combat, Crafting, or Exploration categories. As a VIP, you still would be limited to training no more than 3 skills in any one category. I am not sure this fully solves the issue of vertical training... but it seems to address at least some of the issue.
  7. So is voxel based tunneling dead? If not out-right promised, it seemed to be heavily implied during the Kickstarter or soon thereafter. When did this become a stealth mechanic? Seems like AC should at least acknowledge this change of direction... or inform me that I was just in a fever dream and that I'm making things up... which seems equally possible.
  8. Food Rot: Limits of Transportation

    This seems like it would also promote cooking/baking in large batches to feed many people at once at set times (a.k.a. feasts).
  9. Phone App?

    What about an EK-based Tetris/Candy Crush knockoff game?
  10. I'm not sure about cannibalism either. Part of the point of food, as I understand it, is that it ensures that PKers can't live a completely self-contained PK life style. They have to, at least in part, depend on the larger economy. That promotes social interaction, making the game environment richer. A cannibalism skill would circumvent all that, to some extent, so I'm not sure it's a good idea. Maybe you could make it so that it only works in late fall and winter when food is running out or something like that, but then it becomes such a marginal skill that I'm not sure its really worth it.
  11. The import rules should help with this. You could farm in the EK, but you can only sell to others in the EK and those in the outer campaign worlds. But the import limits on the Shadow and Dregs worlds should mean that at least some farmers will have to play in those worlds. Otherwise, no one has food.
  12. Yeah, I'm with you. If it's going to be in, I think they need to dress up the mechanic a LOT to make sure that it adds more than it detracts. Some ideas... Holding a "feast" with expensive food from a well trained chef should drastically reduce the effects of hunger over a prolonged period of time (days or weeks even). This gets rid of annoying hassle mechanics, but still makes food valuable (and burning farms worth it), and it creates an in-game reason to hold plan social events. This could be tied into the changing seasons mechanics also, like holding a feast in early Spring to kick off the campaign (with food you bring in from the EK) and then holding Fall feast with the food harvested throughout the campaign. So it could help create social solidarity, avoid the need to eat an apple every 3 minutes, and play into the economic and strategic layers of campaigns.
  13. So much this. I really like the crows and vessels idea. It adds a lot of possibilities. On the hardcore, vessel looting side of things... when the stake are high, wins and losses shouldn't feel arbitrary or lucky. Two players with equal "twitch" skills should be differentiate-able based on tactical skill, and vice versa. So I'm glad to see that AC is continuing to work on refining the combat system and combat "feel" for lack of a better descriptor.
  14. Ask The Team (Personal Questions) V2!

    How do you guys unwind your brains after trying to hold broad, interconnected systems ideas together in your head for hours/days? I mean other than beer of course...
  15. Structural Rewards For Role-Play

    Yeah, it's about the implementation... and my particular ideas aren't all that great. But I'm just throwing the basic idea out there, and maybe someone can think of better specifics. Yarrr... dere weren't no Salty Maid 'r special handouts givin to da shipwrecked crew. Pretty sure we 'ad most o our enemies over arr knee, wit' out no special booty. You may want to relook at the idea, because handouts and fancy lad talk have nothing to do with it. If anything, I'm just saying that game mechanic that would already be in game regardless of the lore should be aligned with the lore to provide natural incentives to act within the "role" that people are "playing.". So an analogy for one incarnation of this idea might be min-maxing a character. But instead of attribute points, your guild just chooses to always build temples for a certain god/faction. You will get certain bonuses for doing so that you can't get without being "devout." But you also have weaknesses, because you haven't diversified. So there's a tradeoff.