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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About danderions

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. *Note this post is not aimed at miraluna, but merely quoting it and responding to the EVE reference. Funny, because EVE having the passive skill tree is one of the biggest reasons why myself and 5 others from a hardcore competitive guild background lost interest in the game less than a month in. The problem isn't necessarily the passive tree, the problem is time-gating power, efficiency, and quality of life bonuses from new accounts. It's already an uphill battle to be competitive in an established server, now add hardcaps your efforts cannot surpass. Instant motivation buzz kill. Crowfall is literally a competitive pvp cutthroat environment from the get go (this ain't EVE with plentiful space to farm in peace). Small disparities matter. Yet the passive skill trees are all each a are large disparity for gathering, crafting, and combat. Ideally we'd see a rule-set that as the Campaign duration progresses, everyone's accounts unlock passive skill points at the same rate. Oh, gear is the biggest difference you say? How do you get that gear? From harvesting and crafting, both of which are time-gated hugely in efficiency and high end output by passive skill trees. These are far worse offenders than the combat passive boosts.
  2. Greatly dissapointed by the vet responses so far in this thread. While the original post comes off as a bit whiny, the point being spoken is absolutely true: The passive skill tree is a huge barrier to new players and a massive advantage to those who have been fortunate to have months of training into it. Active gameplay should award/contribute directly to points towards to respective passive skill trees. Players need to be able to invest into catching up. The crafting/gathering/combat boosts are very noticeable. As a new player who joined Winterblades as a recruit, I came to the exact same conclusion as the OP for gathering. It is a waste of time to try to gather when there were other characters who can easily obtain at least 4x, that's a low end estimate, of what I could in that time frame in value. I'm not interested in being held back because I bought my account later than others in a play to crush competitive game. Like the OP, part of why I've spent more time offline recently is waiting on passive skill trees too catch up to a point where my time is valued the same as other players. The above does not mean I'll be at the same efficiency of resources acquisition, or combat prowess, or crafting knowledge of those who have already invested the time and have passives. We all understand that playtime invested is useful in that aspect even without passive skill tree training. It does mean there isn't a hardcapped barrier I can't reach because my account was created later. This is a competitive game, these things matter. If the campaigns reset passive skill trees, and gained at a very accelerated pace, at least for our one ruleset beta experience until more campaign modes and rulesets are released, then this wouldn't be an issue. New players are the blood of all MMO's, you should consider game design that doesn't directly custard them over through time-gating. Killing their motivation to log in and work towards being a badass isn't good.
  3. The melee/ranger class disparity has close to nothing to do with blob mechanics. If ranger was the godlike class in meta, you would see 50 rangers in a ball instead of melee. Blob mechanics have everything to do with AoE caps and lack of friendly fire. For example, one of the glaring advantages of standing next to allies with 5 target caps, you are limiting your enemies ability to focus fire you, while friendly AoE heals smart target only players that aren't at full HP, meaning whatever player is focused will get more of the heals while taking less damage due to 5 target caps. The game is encouraging you to "blob", it's extremely effective in mitigating the majority of quick deaths in large scale combat. If focus and quick deaths are limited, then overall DPS/healing becomes one of the most deterministic factors, whether that be through additional gear or players, and blobbing up tighter just means you get to put that overall DPS into a smaller subset of the fight while maintaining the advantages of blob PvP with target caps and no FF. In addition, the "death ball" strat is only further encouraged by 1 point objectives. Forts, keeps, outposts etc. are very small confined structures with 1 point of interest, it's bad design. I'd quote myself from page 1 in the zone caps thread, but quickly, zone caps are bad and timer based PvP is bad. Need to build mechanics and encourage organic PvP in multiple locations in order to take objectives. Build actual victory conditions to work towards, cap points are awful when you get points for being afk. Player activity in the area after capturing an objective is what should be rewarded.
  4. Caps are bad*, forced timers are bad*, and people will find ways to abuse them. Uncap zones and let people lag out. *Generally speaking, some rare timed events can be good. Provide incentives, create game mechanics, actively encourage people to spread their forces instead. If keeps are the few good rare timed blob events... focus your efforts on the "meat and bones" of every day activity, forts and outposts. Encourage players to fight, farm, and craft actively around these areas. Make forts and outposts integral to activating keep timers. The changes proposed for future campaigns which are adding more timers and increasing rarity of sieges will just force these issues to the forefront of the discussion, even more than now.
  5. Having 2 healers in a group is so sought after because every healer class has very limited self healing capacity compared to their potential healing output on other players. Healing is actually weak overall when comparing healing per second vs damage per second between classes, then you add in some of the self-sustain particular classes have... Stacking 2 healers in a group covers the blaring self-heal deficiency along with adding a lot of healing throughput sustainability due to the group rescource regen abilities/passives. Ideally you'd run as few healers as possible, but never have them solo. 1 healer groups are actually a very weak group comp if facing organized opposition. This is mitigated in large scale combat due to organization and focus becoming more difficult along with the performance issues this game suffers from. Aside from healing, I'd really love to see the friendly fire outside of group, never got to experience it but this game will largely be about who has the larger blob without friendly fire and current 5 target caps.
  6. -1, and I'm a Winterblades recruit. Smacken outlines my exact thoughts. The replies so far are almost entirely +1's from -W- members. Circle standing is no fun and solutions need to be implemented. But in the alpha game state, you are asking to essentially remove things for casual players to do. I don't think the intent of the post is to make Winterblades win harder, which they would absolutely with proposed tweaks, that's just an unfortunate biproduct of the suggested tweaks to try to encourage the point system to reflect actual combat/conquest. Yes I would love for this awful "point" system to be removed entirely, points are dumb as hell and will just be min-maxed at the expense of fun or engaging player interaction. Give actual conquest conditions to meet to win.
  • Create New...