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

nihilsupernum

Testers
  • Content Count

    546
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

nihilsupernum last won the day on February 19

nihilsupernum had the most liked content!

About nihilsupernum

  • Rank
    Rook

Profile Information

  • Language
    English

Recent Profile Visitors

462 profile views
  1. I like it, but I'd change the wording slightly to avoid complicated % splitting or last-minute alliance swaps suddenly changing campaign outcomes: Any score earned by alliance members is counted toward the alliance owner's total instead of the guild's total. This way, being a member of an alliance is like swearing fealty to the owner's guild. The owner would be responsible for compensating alliance members fairly and sharing the campaign rewards if that was part of the deal. If a guild leaves an alliance, they keep their owned objectives and they begin counting toward that guild's score (
  2. I think there is another way: Reduce the effect of gear/stats on combat. No one gets a significant advantage - only a slight one. Eg. a player decked out in full legendary might only be 10% more effective than one in full white vendor gear. Pros: Makes the game more about skill than about gear New players don't feel as far behind old players Cons: Makes gear/crafting less important in the game. Players might care less about harvesting/crafting Potential economic effects from ^
  3. I see where this is coming from, but also think that the main risk in the game comes from *numbers*, not gear or skill. Regardless of what gear a player is wearing, the biggest threat to them in the game is going to be running into a larger group. The players that will feel safest running high quality gear will be the ones that *know* they are the largest force on the map. I personally also don't like this "Sunday finest" way of thinking about gear. If I work hard and put together a nice set of gear, I want to use that gear and not be constantly making risk calculations about whether
  4. I like this idea. It feels bad to lose durability when testing skills or just using movement skills that put you in combat just for the enjoyment of bouncing around the world. It would be nice if the engine supports it, but I suspect it might not. Do not like. As I've said elsewhere, losing something you need feels much worse than taking something you don't need (and can't easily sell), so it biases player behavior in a more risk-averse way. Given that the game already has pretty steep costs for death (gear dura loss, time spent flying to respawn, sometimes loading screens), I'd prefer
  5. If you want to be ranged, you should pick Ranger or Confessor. Confessor is kind of like a ranged caster Assassin with its burst + stealth ult. Ranger can be more of a stereotypical pew pew class, and you can have stealth with Brigand. Assassin can use a bow (and I personally like running one), but it's mostly for utility, not damage. You use it to pin down enemies at range, apply effects/CC, or give you a bit of reach to kite or finish a fleeing opponent. You are not a "ranged Assassin", but a melee Assassin with a few passable ranged options. I like it, but just be aware of what yo
  6. In a story beloved by economists it’s said that Milton Friedman was once visiting China when he was shocked to see that, instead of modern tractors and earth movers, thousands of workers were toiling away building a canal with shovels. He asked his host, a government bureaucrat, why more machines weren’t being used. The bureaucrat replied, “You don’t understand. This is a jobs program.” To which Milton responded, “Oh, I thought you were trying to build a canal. If it’s jobs you want, you should give these workers spoons, not shovels!” Shovels : Vendors Machines : Auction-house
  7. This is true, but I can only speak for myself as a player when I say good combat makes up for a LOT of other failings. I played GW2 WvW heavily for something like 7 years based solely on the strength of its combat system. This was a game mode that: had no meaningful progression (all characters got to max level/gear very quickly), had no compelling things to do outside of fight other players (the pve side was like its own separate game), had no lasting conquest objectives (anything you captured would be recaptured as soon as you logged off), was mostly ignored by the game devs (played
  8. So the thing with loot drop is that the pain of losing the gear that you need almost always exceeds the pleasure of taking opponents' gear that you don't need. It's an unbalanced fun/antifun equation, and it will continue to be unless the game supports more fungible gear or a better market for trade. It would be different if you could cash in looted stuff for its worth in mats, or sell it on an auction house for its worth in gold, but you can't, so when you pick up <some-random-piece-of-gear> that doesn't fit your build, you've gained something that's worth much less to you than whe
  9. Remind me, what is the evasion button in Crowfall again? It's not dodge. I don't understand how this game can ever have good back-and-forth fights when it's not possible to see an opponent using big skills like this and actually *do* something about it. Once the opponent has pointed at you and clicked, you are going to take a lot of damage and there's almost nothing you can do about it. If the game is going to play like that, then I think combat needs to be more of a sustain / mitigation / combo interrupt chessmatch because otherwise it's just two players pointing at each other
  10. Rrrrr rrrrrr rr rrrrrrr. Rrrrrrrrr: rrr rrr'r rrrrr rr (+ rrrr) rrr rrr rrrr rrrrrrr rrr rrr rrrrrrrr rrrr. Rrr'r rr r rrrrr rrrr-rr-rrrr. Rrrrrrrr rrrrrr rr rrrrrrr rrr rrrrrrr r rrrrr rrrrrr. Rrrr rrrrrr rrrrrr rrrr rrr rr rrr'r rrrrr rrrr rr rr rrrrrrr rrr rrrrrrr rr rrr rrrrrr rrrrrr. .. Rr'r rrr rrrr rrrrrrrrr. rr rrrr rrrrrr rrr rrrrrr rrrrrrr rrrrr rr rrrrr rrrrrr rrr rrrrrr rrrrrrrrr rrrrrrr rrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrr. rrrrrr rrrrr rrrrrr... Rrrr, rr rrrrrrr rr rr rrr rrrrrrrr rrrrrr, R RRRRRRR RRRR R RRRR RRRRR RR RRRRRRRR!!!! Rrr rrrrrr rrrrrrrr rrrrr rrrrrrrrrr rrrrrr. rrrrrr
  11. I'm going put aside whether TTK is too long or too short and focus on this. The ability to decide the outcome of a fight through skill and reaction has long been a pain point for me in Crowfall's combat system. No matter how you set a proposed TTK knob, this lack of control remains the real problem. I may have used this video as an example before, but let's look at a different MMO's combat. Here's GW2: Skip to 3:50 in the video if the timestamp link doesn't work. I'll just go through the streamer's description of a small fight in the context of defending some territory
  12. Not going to comment on any specifics, but overall, it'd be nice if there was some kind of standard for what balancing should achieve. A class shouldn't have more than this much sustain unless it trades off against damage / defense / mobility proportionally A class shouldn't be able to do this much DPS or burst unless it trades off against sustain / defense / mobility proportionally etc. Also, counterplay: If a player attempts X skill at an opponent, that opponent can do Y to counteract or avoid it, and the player can do Z to counter that, and on and on.
  13. But in Crowfall, you can't spread out a lot of the time (eg. indoor wards, canyons). Regardless, it's more the power of 3 people to potentially wipe out an entire army in one stroke that indicates a problem to me. Why are 3 AoE classes able to wipe out an entire army, but 3 single-target classes not? That doesn't seem right.
  14. I think that's an acknowledged bug. See here:
  15. Surprised no one mentioned mercenary work yet. Even without an official alliance, a small guild is free to sell their services to larger group. We already had one guild that did that in a campaign, and I thought it went really well. They turned the tide of at least one siege as well as PvP-ed on commission for larger alliances. A smaller but effective guild could get quite rich doing this, assuming their services are worth it. They might not 'win' the campaign, but they can certainly 'win' quite a bit of wealth compared to their small numbers - either in gold or gear/vessels provided
×
×
  • Create New...