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

Atraeus

Testers
  • Content Count

    56
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Atraeus

  • Rank
    Magpie

Profile Information

  • Language
    English

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. That question was raised in the thread. Short answer is that EK's would act mainly as a status symbol for your guild. My solution was to make them into a progressive cross campaign kingdom that you can build up using excess resources obtained from the campaigns. That is the purpose of the export system. The import system I've deemed as useless and game breaking.
  2. I agree with all of these points, but the alternative of craft once and done sucks too. Once the character progression is done, there is nothing left to do other than Timerfall. People will just start to make new characters, and you'll be stuck crafting for those unless your guild decides otherwise.
  3. I feel ya Arkdin, giving back to the people definitely seems like a big shield play.
  4. Yes I agree. They need an overhaul of the vessel import / creation system to support my dream of a full progression. But for now I'd be happy with a simple (white to legendary) gear progression that would reset on each campaign.
  5. Yes agree. To be fair, I only entertained this side discussion about EK's and the economy because someone asked about it. But I think you have the right idea here. Anyway, if ACE wanted to test the basis of my theory, all they would need to do is run no import dregs back to back when players have achieved the max level of passive progression, and collect metrics on the population. If they can prototype the entire progression (from a level 30 naked white vessel to an orange immortal beast) into a DREGS campaign, it would be EPIC
  6. I still think you can trick out your EK if you wanted to. My solution was to keep exports so that you have somewhere to stockpile your riches and heirlooms from all of your campaigns. Various parcels could have extensive resource costs that you would have to earn collecting from each campaign. As far as being a cornerstone of the player driven market... I can see trading in resources and heirlooms, but not gear. I have yet to see competitive crafted gear from an EK. Why would any guild spend the time to craft this for other players? It is way easier to just go take a gold fort or farm wa
  7. I think this fits the definition of a "game you can win" rather than specifically a MOBA. Imagine if you could import your monopoly money to other games of monopoly.
  8. Determined solely by gear, vessels, discs, stats, quality of resources, food, potions, and upgraded benches Using the materials to build up an EK or other cosmetic upgrades. People seem to like this concept and have some kind of reward for doing well in campaigns. I personally wouldn't mind if they just removed exports as well and made the game self contained.
  9. I hate to reply to my own post, but this is an example of the kind of progression that makes sense to me. It is what I mean by "put the whole game" into a campaign rather than 1/4 of it. Sorry of my ignorance of "lore" or whatever, but something like this solves so many issues, I just hope that other people are able to see the light and what I'm going for here.
  10. The fact that gear and vessels are that hard to obtain can be dialed down to support the appropriate progression cycle of a campaign. The benchmark I think they should shoot for is that if your guild focused only on progression during a campaign (and not the throne war), you could have epic/legendary vessels and gear by the end of it. I mean think about it. When was the last time you actually tried crafting gear for your guild in the middle of a campaign because you needed it to win fights? As far as I know, most guilds just wait until the end of a campaign to do all the "crafting upgrades
  11. Yeah, I hear ya. I left pigs and forts out specifically because they become less relevant the smaller your guild gets (especially when you're landless). Often times if we intercept a pig run we just slaughter the pigs because we don't need the stuff. This again is because of the way the progression works. Perhaps if we had no gear it would be more impactful for us, but most of us already have stuff from previous campaigns. Gearing up vessels for us is just an activity we have the ability to perform in any campaign at any time. My argument is that restricting the progression to the c
  12. @MacDeath@Durenthal Posted here if you want to continue the discussion:
  13. I'm not sure how many of you feel this way, but these are my thoughts running with a small guild for most of my Crowfall experience. To me the gem of this game is about the progression within a campaign, and in my opinion, the progression should end with the campaign. Here are the reasons why: We love to kill you and take your stuff, and we can't do that if you import all of your gear through multiple accounts and need new gear once in a blue moon Importing your gear and vessels denies us of ganking you at resource nodes because there is no point to mine them in the campaign
  14. Is there some tool ACE uses for benchmarking large fights, and if so can we have it? My system always grinds to a halt, and there are only rumors about how to improve optimization. It's not like I can just walk into a big fight whenever and start messing with performance options to see what works for my system. Either that, or maybe a performance log option where I can just run a utility, dump a log, and send it to you, and you can tell me where the bottlenecks are. I'd like to be able to do what I can from the client side, so that drastic measures like reducing the update rate of hp b
×
×
  • Create New...