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

APE

Testers
  • Content Count

    1,736
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by APE

  1. These will all make for a better experience, but are also QOL and bare minimum must haves. They don't really elevate CF to something special IMO. Making the UI better or fixing storage isn't going to make this an amazing game experience, just a more tolerable one. Fighting over PVE spots and standing in circles isn't enough for me. I don't want to stand in circles and likely ganking people at a disadvantage doing PVE so that I can then do PVE I don't want to do or move on to another spot seems ZZzzzz as is. As I've mentioned numerous times, the base game needs more to do in the short/long term when it comes to land/POI control, conquest, and mult-step victory conditions. Siege needs to be more. Dregs will likely help up the edge but with it we get more need to grind for resources to build and end up with likely the same meh siege design. Looking at what Camelot Unchained and even Ashes of Creation have planned for siege, large scale pvp, PVP influence of PVE, etc, I don't see Crowfall attracting a holding the population likely needed. CU and AoC have a long ways to go as well and have their own issues, but at least they have presented concepts or working attempts at something more then just bare minimum. Besides refineries, caravans, QOL, and general basic game features, CF just seems short on content IMO. The "you are the content" is a joke as all these games say the same thing, some actually put in content as well though.
  2. Yes they need to make the game launch ready or "finished" but the actual core game play design needs to be good as well. Those are two different things. I don't see any features or changes coming that will significantly improve the overall experience. It's more of a systemic issue IMO. Still confused how they thought it would be Alpha ready last year.
  3. Started with a comment made during the last or recent twitch stream. Then followed up with this thread and specifically this comment: From this:
  4. Better then what and in what way? I've been playing Albion Online here and there and it out does CF pretty much on everything except the crafting needing 10310239 steps to make something because it is "complex." Other games do much better PVE, character customization, classes, powers, worlds, lore/history, small/large scale pvp, achievement, conquest, etc. At the moment I'm not sure what single feature is a head of the market to be worth playing it beyond it's something new that an individual hasn't burnt out on yet. Although looking at the current pop, clearly many of us have done that as well or been run off due to the design incompleteness. Fancy build your own continent housing and the crafting system aren't going to keep this game going.
  5. Bit easier to read. Caps and bold not necessary. MMO genre isn't dead or in need of resurrection and CF is definitely not going to make any waves in it. No clue where the 60/40 split is coming from, but would love to have 60% of the game be PVP. More like 90 PVE 10 PVP depending. All of your questions have answers in games that do that stuff very well.
  6. I believe this is an example of the tester/test failing the testee. When they said it would have strategy/RTS like features, I was expecting a more complex system. AQ unlock or even just the multiple (simple) things that went on in Vanilla AV would be much better. Instead we get grindy linear PVE and fighting over who gets to do the PVE as being the main PVP content. We need conquest and a multi-step victory system. So basically you aren't doing anything wrong except logging in looking for a fun game when it is far from near what is acceptable today or 10-15+ years ago. Would love to see a Dev stream a day in the life of a Crow and what they see as fun in this design. There are a few guest streamers on the official Twitch channel and every time I click on one they are grinding mobs or running around looking for people and usually finding a far outmatched group doing PVE that they roll. Thrilling stuff.
  7. This is about weekly news updates, not game patches/updates.
  8. Yes, yes, and yes. Anything that provides greater options or short cuts actually playing is an advantage. Being rewarded an XP potion or Disciplines for winning would provide the same thing as selling them in the store. However, the extent of the advantage in a game which already rewards playing more, having older accounts, buying stuff in the store, or basically low hanging fruit "skill" might not be too devastating. I wouldn't mind seeing your suggestions but they'd need to be earned and open to more players (including losers) not a minority that likely already has every advantage stacked in their favor.
  9. That's nice for a default UI. Can only hope ACE copies this as well at some point. All of that plus being able to turn off or remove some of the current elements or at least parts of them would be good enough for me. I'd remove XP bar, power bar backgrounds, season tracker, gear durability, faction point system from top, and top left corner pre-alpha details (fps, loc, server, etc). Chicken ticker as own element and just one drumstick with a percent/number or remove it all and add another small bar under stamina. Group UI I'd remove my name, at least buffs of others if not debuffs too, guild/faction shields, leaving hp/resource/barrier condensed with names inside health bar. Probably be about 25% of the current size. Buffs/Debuffs I'd split and or make a split between long and short term. Option to remove race/passive/season buff indicators. Maybe just have large icon + timer, no words. This would leave all I need to play the game. Most of which is toggle and resizing and fairly amateur hour when it comes to UI customization in a modern game. There's function over form and then there's removing the form to allow function.
  10. 1) Frosty will bring people back and then they'll leave after realizing it is another CF class 10) We need an achievement system of some sort to keep this simple game design interesting. Would really like to see some sort of individual Token based reward. Some how measure everything people do and reward them based on their efforts. Capturing POI, Success attacking/defending during sieges, # of kills with a class and siege weapons, # of boars killed, # of bosses killed, # of strongholds reinforced, harvesting, crafting, caravans escorted (no clue on this one). Make it unknown or not easy to game the system so players have to simply play and see the results at the end of a campaign. More harsh the campaign rules, the more reward tokens possible. Everyone gets at least 1 x Bronze Token for Fighting if they engage in a fight. Someone slaying the map might end up with 10 Gold Tokens (3 x Bronze = 1 Silver x 3 = 1 Gold like Discipline upgrades). Some how measure and split players into a tiered system similar to the current Gold/Silver rewards per faction. Top 10% get 3 Gold, 1 Silver and bottom 25% get 2 Silver, 2 Bronze. The Tokens rewarded would be specific to the role performed. If someone crafts 90% of the time they will get crafting tokens. Someone that is 50/50 Harvest and Siege would get their Tokens split between or can choose. Tokens could be turned into a NPC Vendor or Sacrificed to the Gods. Crafting Token = Crafting title, cosmetic, consumable. Fighting Token = Fighting title, cosmetic, consumable. Titles, Cosmetics, Limited Consumables, EK fluff, XP tokens, etc. Anything that isn't fluff would come at a high cost. Anyone could earn anything over time, regardless if they are in a top guild or solo. Might just take a long time. This system could work for Factions and Dregs. Not simple to implement but would add achievement beyond a winning/losing screen at the end of a campaign. This is a long term goal, but something I believe would keep things interesting on the individual level. As much as guild/faction pride are nice, deep down my guess is we mostly care about ME ME ME. Embargo allows for some gear/resources to be taken out of the campaign, but beyond that there isn't much reward in winning beyond pride which can go flat if it is just the same repetitive steps over and over.
  11. 1-2: Yes we need a conquest system that rewards and impacts the whole region/map/world. 7. Would be interesting if every large POI had a chance to spawn a "boss" of some sort. Including Motherlodes. Imagine banging on rocks and summoning a Rock Golem that might drop some sought after resource. More RNG but would bring an added layer of danger and team prep and not just going out and banging on rocks. Yes. Would love it but doubt it will happen. Even CU isn't redoing the DAoC RR system which surprised me. However there are other ways to reward players for their individual specific efforts.
  12. This is because the UI is medicore to begin with and needs to be cleaned up or given to us to control as talked about a long time ago and similar to what a good chunk of MMOs allow and have for years. It wouldn't need to be EVERY power. There aren't that many non-single target heals/buffs in this game. Believe they already had it where certain powers could hit other friendlies outside of group but they've since changed it. For powers that are group specific and not targeted (buff hits everyone within 10 meters) it could be set to only hit the nearest 5 or specific number. This increases tactics where healers and buffs in general aren't just mindless fire and forget. Or change all the non-target powers to be ground targeted and it hits the first ~5 that step in it which again increases the important of tactics and player positioning of both sides of a fight. In-game UI is supposedly already getting a face lift. Now would be the perfect time to plan for the future, instead of making 20390 versions of rough draft UI. The small party UI needs to be completely redone (shields, extra space, and buffs/debuffs removed or redone), a larger party UI should be less work as most games have condensed name, health, resource, and some indicator of class. Believe they are on at least the 3rd UI dev, not sure what all their duties are. The overall UI seems fairly important though as it is how we all interact with the game all the time, regardless of group size, class, activity, etc. They could also create a system to allow us to customize everything ourselves. I've never used a default UI when this is an option. It has always amazed me that individuals or small groups of folks are able to create (for free) addons that far surpass the game provided versions. Maybe the tech they are using can't allow this?
  13. Thank you. Hopefully ACE at least goes with the more free building stronghold/city and something like spires. They've never really mentioned anything beyond what we have so I'm not shocked this is it, but I guess I expected more then what games managed to do 15 years ago with old tech. I don't understand how they call it a Throne War when there is no throne, war, or conquest beyond random circle POI, etc. Dregs hopefully brings more to the table or I don't see launch going well whenever it might arrive.
  14. Agree with all your points but have some questions related to SB as I played it too little and far too long ago. I wonder if CF's depth is limited by what SB had and my hopes of anything greater are completely empty. Land Control: Did it only consist of city ownership? As in own a city own the land? Was there any POI or greater land capture mechanics that pushed conquest beyond siege and timers? Siege: Did SB siege have more to it then what we have in CF's version? Was there multiple layers of walls to go through or just main exterior? Was there doors? Battering rams, boiling oil, traps, etc? Climb walls or ways to bypass them? I remember reading something about Spire that provided buffs/debuffs to the area. Watching videos like this... I wonder what about CF is new or altered. Seems like they straight copy/pasted most of it. Also reminds me why I went quickly back to DAoC after trying SB.
  15. True and while CF technically has a constant threat of PVP, it is rather pointless. There isn't much constant threat of others actually impacting the world in a way that will make a lasting influence on the world or others beyond gaining more points because points = winning in this complex game design. Which I guess any system will boil down to, but there can at least be an attempt to make it seem like it is more then it is, like crafting. Personally I don't log in and wonder who has grinded mobs X hours while I was afk, I'm concerned about what I can actually impact in my playtime. This is where conquest and what not matter and don't really exist in CF. Beyond circles and banging on a tree of course. What is consider "logistical" or what makes this design a strategy-like game? Seems to be that it's just a matter of having aged accounts and grinding more then others or at least more efficiently. I don't see much deep strategy going on. Maybe caravans and controlling POI will bring this, but will have to see. Went from we were going to be starving to death by end of winter to nope, just flip enough circles more than others by the timers end. Dedicated guild members and being able to organize is clearly a large strength in team based game but isn't really strategy or anything special, you have it or you don't. "Then some PVP skill" <--- Extra sad face
  16. No clue about the "constant" PVP or what that means to anyone, but here are a few things they did claim once upon a time: Since the game does NOT use a standard advancement mechanic (kill monsters = gain experience = level-up) and instead uses passive training (skills increase over time) it poses the question, “Why fight monsters at all?” Players control the universe, to shape as they see fit. Alpha testing for certain features of the core module will begin at the end of Summer, 2015. There is a limited micropayment shop, which can only be used to buy things that do NOT affect the balance of the game. The shop only sells cosmetic (non-balance affecting) items, game time, and additional space With each passing season, the World grows more deadly as the land is consumed by an unstoppable legion of undead -- The Hunger. The Worlds are made of voxels (like Minecraft, only much less blocky) – which means the entire World is destructible. We are harnessing VoxelFarm technology to generate an endless succession of unique and interesting Campaign Worlds for you to mine, shape, conquer and destroy. Each World is different, which means that the game of territorial conquest will be different in every Campaign. The beginning of each Campaign is like the first round of Civilization: players are dropped into a harsh environment, surrounded by Fog-of-War. The Worlds are filled with deadly monsters, haunted ruins, abandoned quarries... Craft weapons, scavenge armor, secure a stronghold, forge alliances and conquer the World. Allies. Enemies. Empires. Betrayal. Risk. Conquest. Since each Campaign World is unique (and time-limited) we can change the rules of the game from one to the next! What rules? Things like… The closer a World is to the center, the greater the risk -- and the higher the reward! Heroes are created using a deep character customization system, with user-selected Advantages and Disadvantages. Though each role is initially balanced for distinct specializations, players will have MANY ways to customize their hero's stats, appearance, abilities and gear!
  17. Being hostile in general does little to move a conversation forward. I get we all love to attempt to one up each other and some how win the internet, but does make these discussions pointless when devs come in and lock the thread. Ignoring people or just particular comments is sometimes the much more productive and powerful move.
  18. For the most part these discussions are mostly about "what if." The title of this thread is "what would it take to get you playing again" not "what do you love about the current model that keeps you logging in." Until this thing launches or reaches a state where I know what it will look like for realzies, it is still in the "what if" stage and looking at changes coming, ACE is treating it as such. To me it seems like for whatever reasons they have built the game around their crafting model instead of around player conflict, interaction, or general players controlling their own happy little destiny which is what I picture when it comes to the vague concept of a "sandbox." More of a Crafting Sim then a Throne War Sim. It isn't an either or. We can have great crafting, harvesting, social reliance, and have "meaningful" PVP with actual systems built for it that encourages PVP on a regular basis. That's my thing, it isn't about removing or changing what is, but adding more to make a better overall experience. People complain about the grind(s) because that's all there is. We need more to do or at least I do. Having played so many games and seen the variety of content possible, to basically be told to gank one another doing PVE to create our own content, I just shake my head. It does come down to who is making the game. It isn't surprising that the game is so PVE heavy with those behind it. I don't know the background of each and every dev currently, but I don't get sense that there is a strong PVP/conflict experienced team, obviously could be very wrong. Same goes for combat and player customization. Not surprising that a lot of CF is just a knock off of Shadowbane for better or worse. At least we don't have click to move I guess. Might have missed it or forgot, but don't remember anything from Koster since 2015. Even then, the little I remember reading seemed to be high end conceptual stuff that doesn't exactly translate directly into a game. They talked up the importance of social interaction, dependence, EKs, economy, etc and look at what we have... Could just be we are ever still in pre-alpha and things will magically change come alpha, beta #2928, beta #20392 or something but no clue at this point. With each update, just seems like the spend more and more resources trying to make crafting into some blockbuster feature when in reality I don't believe that is going to draw in a crowd. Sometimes when 99.9% of other games do it another way, it might not be so bad. Believe they have a lot more likelihood of being another play once and forget MMO then being the next EVE if they keep this path.
  19. Well said. If only studios believed or were able to do this.
  20. WoW PVP servers have a "constant threat of PVP" in the open world along with BG/Arenas with "constant PVP." To me it is silly that such a game out does a game that I imagine most of us are attracted to because of the focus on player conflict. I don't really see an open world game such as this having 24/7 PVP across every step of the map, but the reasons and rewards to PVP and systems/mechanics in place to encourage it are missing from Crowfall's design. Standing in circles, smacking a tree once a day, and fighting over who gets to fight monsters is not what I pictured when they hyped this thing up. There is more that they could do that would make PVP or just conflict as a whole more frequent if not constant where what we do impacts others and outcomes more then who gets more points at the top of the screen. Even the get points and win model can be made more complex and interactive between players. Obviously having more players would help any design, but I don't see the servers being packed long if they don't expand on what I believe is a rather basic model. AV in Vanilla WoW had more PVP/PVE moving parts then what we have in Crowfall (if my memory serves me right). If the goal is just who can out grind the other and herd cats better then guess they'll get it done. Will fall very short of what it could be though. This completely depends on how decay and how obtaining gear is implemented. I could use a mace once and it could break or I could use it 500 times and be at 50% durability. There could be a way to repair items as well. If gear was relatively easy come/go which ACE seems to be going more towards, actually being able to use the gear more then once or twice a day will hopefully not break it to pieces.
  21. While this seems to be their plan, I would like to see a bit more complexity/strategy to it then just gank those mid PVE fight so the victors can then try to play the RNG slot machines without being ganked themselves. Something more like Darkness Falls from DAoC. Totally lock out good PVE content until XYZ conditions are met. Or Relics that provide guild/faction wide benefits. This causes players of different play styles to work together across the map/world. If a guild or faction can control everything all the time, they should have won the campaign already. Some PVP rewards like RR wouldn't hurt either... CU better launch in my lifetime.
  22. Looks good. Few questions about how "random" this will be: Will loot drops be based on NPC type? Ex: Can a Champion NPC drop Pistols? Will item quality be based on NPC rank/difficulty? Will items go up to Legendary or have a ceiling to keep high end crafting more valuable? Believe this addition will do good for the overall experience and game loop, but still hoping we see more PVP systems added prior to launch. Fighting over PVE stuff is fine, but there isn't much for larger strategy or conquest.
  23. I doubt there will ever be a "next big thing" with MMOs compared to EQ/WoW. At least not until tech takes it too another level. MMOs take too much commitment in a world with too many things available. That's why lobby games that let people get in and out are so popular. Ashes is likely the only one with the design to draw in a larger crowd but it will need to hit most if not all of its goals well. Reminds me of BDO which I enjoyed but the Eastern pay/grind model let me down. AOC might have the right balance between PVE, PVP, cosmetic shop, sub, "players change the world," combat, and looks good to be the cool kid on the street.
  24. There's strengths and weaknesses to every targeting system, but to me it comes down to implementation and how it works (or doesn't). CU is supposed to be more of a hybrid targeting system, with tab and free aim depending on the player/ability. Along with the A.I.R. spell interaction system, physics, and players being able to tailor each ability to their liking, I can see CU's combat being preferred over more open action systems. Not sure if the every body part is a target will make it, but that adds more challenge to any targeting system. CF's system could of been better but they backed away from physics and aiming to rely on raycasts and cone/aoes. To me it isn't that much different then tab if you can point your mouse in the general direction of an enemy or likely ball of enemies. It's possible CU's system will end up being fairly strategic which ACE seemed to initially want but got shot down due to the first implementation. Never got a chance to build it out.
×
×
  • Create New...