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

My Training System Overhaul

Recommended Posts

When a guild leader calls their clan to war crafters and harvesters should be able to participate.

Locking them off from the combat tree is very harsh, as generally harvesters are not the best PvP'ers to begin with.

There's currently 8 different crafting professions and 5 harvesting professions with many variations of each.

A good clan would need at least 13 strictly crafters and gathers to have everything covered.

This has been talked about a TON and even a Q&A ACE did back in April-ish of 2016 called Social Systems.

 

So first, there are more than 13 "crafters and gatherers" because mining, for instance, will require 1 Harvester for each type of ore. So itll be a much much larger number than 13.

 

Second, the "Social Systems" thing you are talking about with Harvester and crafters not being able to "participate" is called soft vs hard touches.

 

- A soft touch is a type of gameplay experience where you can get on and virtually play solo with very little interaction with other players. For this, think traditional MMO "Grinding" Or if you prefer, maybe a game where you sit in town all day and "craft" stuff to sell to players. Very little, and possible next to zero human interaction.

 

- A "hard touch" system is basically raiding. It requires X people to be on at X time to do X content, otherwise you cant do it.

 

Games of Yesteryear were all Hard Touch games - like WoW. More and more people complain and they have constantly made the shift to Soft Touch systems. The BEST game needs BOTH.

 

 

So, how can we create a system in which all types of players (crafters, explorers, harvesters, PVPers) all get their soft and hard touches?

 

Well.... Honestly.... The best solution is to remove "combat" related things from the Universal Tree system and move them all to the Archtype trees. People instantly claim "What about diversity!" Well, what many have proposed and pointed out, is there is MORE than enough "diversity" in specialization when you remove combat abilities from Universal Trees. You CAN include things like "Siege Warfare" as that is a special form of combat that would require a "specialist" to do. But for generic player versus player combat. Making players choose between combat and a "profession" is what is going to propel everyone and their mothers towards alt accounts.

 

So you would level your "combat" abilities through the AT tree and your "profession" through the Universal.

 

What this does is allows all types of players to participate in both systems: Soft and Hard.

 

Currently, players who choose "Combat" as their Universal will be desired more heavily for "hard touch" systems like PVP raids on keeps, where as the guy who specializes in "Mining Iron Ore" wont really be much of an asset.

 

On the flip side, that guy who mines Iron ore, will be contributing much more to the guild, than the Combat guy if they both log in at non peak hours to play, when there are no "scheduled raids" or what not. There will be exceptions to this, but generally speaking, low pop times will be brutal for the PVP players and High pop times will be more brutal for the non PVPers - which is why everyone will have alt accounts.

 

 

Also, when you move all combat to ATs, this now makes VIP more appealing as your ONE account will have more viable PVP options, rather than having to buy an alt account to then have 1 PVP option (because your main account wont be one).

 

So it creates some larger revenue potential for ACE.

 

 

All this said, it doesnt address the REAL issue with the skill tree: It Sucks.

 

 

This is why (IMO) a perfect system would be having Universal Skills that are much more vanilla than they are now. So you would have a whole list of skills. (Example:)

- JewelCrafting

- Stonemasonry

- Tailoring

- Necromancy

- Runemaking

- Woodworking

- Weapon Smithing

- Armor Smithing

- Leather Working

- Tracking

- Vessels

- Farming

- Animal Husbandry

- Stone Harvesting

- Ore Harvesting

- Animal Harvesting

- Wood Harvesting

- Gravedigging

 

ETC. So a player just pick ONE of these as their "Universal" and then it starts training level 1-100. Thats it. No "nodes" or "builds" or "trees" just pure and simple. Each level in that given thing, makes  you better and better at it.

 

Kinda like RuneScape:

starting-levels-rs-12107.png

 

So on the above, this person has leveled up several areas, and skipped others. 

 

 

 

 

Then for the AT trees, you make them much bigger and involves the sense of "builds" Where rather than the current time to train based on tier. You have a very short time to train for the first "node" and each subsequent node takes longer and longer. So as an example, maybe the first node to train only takes like 6 hours, each subsequent node after that increases the time to train by 10% or something. Then you have a skill tree layout much like this (which BTW has ~150 nodes):

 

New%20Tree_zpsroznbiba.png

 

Many of these nodes would be duplicates. So lets say 15 of those nodes (10%) were all "Increases chance to crit by 1%". Well if you wanted to go for a crit build, you might start building towards those - though they might all be spread out among the tree. 

 

Then maybe since this is the Druid tree, many of those nodes would be "increases support power" so now if you wanted a support Druid, you might stack those. Etc. Starts creating true character builds. You could EITHER include armor types and weapon types in the AT tree OR, just create a Universal Skill for those in the above. Such as:

- Leather armor, Mail armor, Plate armor - these Universals would increase the benefits of that armor type.

Or specific weapon types: Maybe leave it with 1H vs 2H weapons or something. 

 

Many ways to do this. Point being. Universal skills are for profession advancement and AT tree is for character customization progression. Play your AT the way you want - different than other people.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the perspective of both sides here, like...Yah, there has been A TON of threads all talking about the same thing which is repetitive and kinda annoying to read through. Coolwaters has a point too though that all perspectives matter and should be taken as such.

 

But, with that out of the way...I think the way the system is set up currently, allowing players more than one universal is a mistake. An idea id be fine with would be if they seperated the trees into 6-8 universals rather than 3. That way, players can choose their combat along with their crafting/harvesting, or choose say scouting/harvesting, combos like that allowing for whatever style of play people want, while maintaining the same ratio of specialization.

 

Otherwise I'd like to see a combat tree rework that allows for combat players to feel valued and not gimped. But I mean c'mon, just because you're a harvesters doesn't at all mean you can't go siege a tower...The gains from combat atm are minimal at best. In a case of combat vs harvester it will 99/100 times come down to either AT match up or skill. That said, I'd like to see a combat tree rework allowing for "soft touch" play people want...Something like a general line that can have access to an overview map and a skill to draw up physical battle plans or give you incentive to patrol a keep for the 10-15 you have, and want to use those minutes for "soft touch" play. Stuff like that I'd consider "soft touch" combat play. Or something like thag idk, I'm writing this on the toilet so I haven't thought about it much. Just add more than flat stat increases

 

Another thing to consider is the idea that the combat line is kinda there for people who want the "hard touch" gameplay. And the harvester/crafter lines are there for those who want the "soft touch" gameplay and there is supposed to be a relation between the two but without a gameloop it's hard to tell. And some people want both "hard touch" and "soft touch" and that's where I think the combat rework needs to come into play. But idk man, it's been beaten to death and I'm kinda tired of the topic at this point

Edited by Jjohnsin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 But idk man, it's been beaten to death and I'm kinda tired of the topic at this point

 

i think people are just worried that skilling in combat will remove them from the economic part of the game. No one is asking for people to be able to harvest and craft everything on their own. You can trade stuff and crafter will sell what you need but they also want something in return which the combat tree doesn't seem to provide. Also if spending all your points combat will you only win 1 in a 100 fights then why would anyone invest in that skill tree? 

 

maybe turning the combat tree into some kind of PvE tree or some hybrid with some pvp/pve combat and special stuff like stealth and siege weapons would be the answer.

Edited by drunk

 

Crowfall Wiki

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it that hard for people to use the search funktion.

The same topic has been bought up again and again. Everytime in a new thread rather then using the existing ones.

 

Neverless i will repeat what i said in the other threads. Being able to skill 2 or 3 general skills doesnt change anything. For example with 2 general trees it would make combat players just put 1 into combat basics and the other into exploration combat related stats, while the harvester would still have 1 harvesting 1 combat. It doesnt change anything in the balancing perspectiv but it makes people less specialized and thats not in the crowfall vision of the devs.

 

The devs said that they dont want the every player can do everything. If you are good at crafting and combat then there is no need for you to look for another player.

That is the reason that you only have 1 general tree. Focus on 1 thing and look for other players that do the others. Thats why guilds are so importand in Crowfall.

 

Also the devs keep saying it. Dont get hung up on numbers.

It may take 3 days now for a tier 1 lvl100 skill, but that can change to 1 day or half a day or even 7 days.

The current numbers where mostly slaped into the game to make the game work. Balancing will most likely not be done until all major systems are ingame and working.

 

 

i think people are just worried that skilling in combat will remove them from the economic part of the game. No one is asking for people to be able to harvest and craft everything on their own. You can trade stuff and crafter will sell what you need but they also want something in return which the combat tree doesn't seem to provide.

 

The boost you gain with the skill tree is minimal. I put nothing into combat so far and can still fight combat focused people without a problem.

Gear and disciplins and player skill are a mutch bigger factor then the skill tree.

 

Some people think that you go out alone as a harvester but thats not the case.

In one of the older videos the Devs said that they take the harvesting part from eve online mining operations.

You have harvester that harvest stuff.

Then you have combat focused people to help harvesting ( you dont need the skills to be able to help them) and to defend them in case of attack.

Then you have scouts that make shure no one sneak attacks you during the operation.

After that comes logistics. People with pack animals transport the harvested goods back to the castle.

Again combat focused players as guards and scouts for early warning.

 

Offcourse you can go out alone or in a small group of harvesters but that is both inefficient and asking to be ganked.

 

With ganking comes the other side of the coin for combat focused players. Ganking harvesters to take the stuff and bring it to crafters for better equipment.

 

Most pvp battles in crowfall will not be sieges but fights around ressource POIs.


o8WHnLc.png

THE most active European guild. Join us now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The devs said that they dont want the every player can do everything. If you are good at crafting and combat then there is no need for you to look for another player.

That is the reason that you only have 1 general tree. Focus on 1 thing and look for other players that do the others. Thats why guilds are so importand in Crowfall.

 

giving players an additional point to spend in either harvesting and crafting still generates enough diverstiy... noone will still be able to craft everything. it takes years to max out just armor smithing and so on...

 

 

The boost you gain with the skill tree is minimal. I put nothing into combat so far and can still fight combat focused people without a problem.

Gear and disciplins and player skill are a mutch bigger factor then the skill tree.

 

if the gain is minimal then why should anyone put points into the combat tree? why is no one addressing this? not putting your time into harvesting totally gimps you in harvesting...

.

 

 

Some people think that you go out alone as a harvester but thats not the case.

In one of the older videos the Devs said that they take the harvesting part from eve online mining operations.

You have harvester that harvest stuff.

Then you have combat focused people to help harvesting ( you dont need the skills to be able to help them) and to defend them in case of attack.

Then you have scouts that make shure no one sneak attacks you during the operation.

After that comes logistics. People with pack animals transport the harvested goods back to the castle.

Again combat focused players as guards and scouts for early warning.

 

this game is not eve online. if you have to use an expensive mining vessel which gimps you in pvp and can be looted/destoryed,  then we can talk. Solo mining and hauling is still very common in eve online ... i know this since i killed dozens in low and 0 sec.

 

Also the current alpha just does not reflect this. There are random nodes around the map you can be cleaned in like 10 min alone. If u can store my stuff nearby then why would i need any protection? Maybe i get ganked once but who cares when i only lose like 10 min of farming? i can also go "naked" to prevent any damage to my equipment and minimize my risk like that.

 

Offcourse you can go out alone or in a small group of harvesters but that is both inefficient and asking to be ganked.

 

in the current pre-alpha there are archetypes who can run from every fight and there are mechanics like stealth and so on.

i didnt got ganked once when i was playing duelist for example.

 

This probably will stay like that since it would make small scale pvp impossible otherwise

Edited by drunk

 

Crowfall Wiki

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the gain is minimal then why should anyone put points into the combat tree? why is no one addressing this? not putting your time into harvesting totally gimps you in harvesting...

This doesn't need addressing, as that is the way it's supposedly meant to function. People will be okay with the minimal statistical gains in order to get things like the offensive "CC duration extender" skills and the defensive equivalents (when they're improved after the balance passes)... or they won't and they'll level Exploration skills instead.

 

Trying to "fix" a system still in development, particularly one whose ultimate design you don't have access to or knowledge of, is an exercise in futility.

Edited by mrmoneda

Hi, I'm moneda.

s1tKI24.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Call to Arms (Issues)

 

When a guild leader calls their clan to war crafters and harvesters should be able to participate.

Locking them off from the combat tree is very harsh, as generally harvesters are not the best PvP'ers to begin with.

There's currently 8 different crafting professions and 5 harvesting professions with many variations of each.

A good clan would need at least 13 strictly crafters and gathers to have everything covered.

 

Harvesting

 

Why do harvesters need to be gimped combat wise?

Out harvesting a node and getting jumped is bad enough because getting the first licks in is half the battle.

But now you got no combat skills to fight back with.

But not everyone should be able to harvest everything.

 

Harvesting Solution -

 

Everyone should pick 1 harvesting line. (Eg (Mining, Digging, Skinning, Quarrying or Lumberjacking)

When maxed out they can train 50% of a second tree but no more.

Once they hit 50% on the second tree the crafting trainer is locked, unless they delete both crafts to 0 and start again.

 

Crafting

 

Why are crafters gimped from combat?  Every clan needs 5 accounts that you cant  PVP with?

 

Crafting Solution

 

Everyone should be able to choose 1 craft account wide.

Only VIP's should be allowed to craft.

 

TLDR

Don't group Exploration, Crafting and Combat skills to one training HUD!

Why not trade with other guilds and all that, why do you need to be able to do everything within your guild. I bet u there will be crafting guilds so u can always trade with them.


Veeshan Midst of UXA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been talked about a TON and even a Q&A ACE did back in April-ish of 2016 called Social Systems.

 

So first, there are more than 13 "crafters and gatherers" because mining, for instance, will require 1 Harvester for each type of ore. So itll be a much much larger number than 13.

 

Second, the "Social Systems" thing you are talking about with Harvester and crafters not being able to "participate" is called soft vs hard touches.

 

- A soft touch is a type of gameplay experience where you can get on and virtually play solo with very little interaction with other players. For this, think traditional MMO "Grinding" Or if you prefer, maybe a game where you sit in town all day and "craft" stuff to sell to players. Very little, and possible next to zero human interaction.

 

- A "hard touch" system is basically raiding. It requires X people to be on at X time to do X content, otherwise you cant do it.

 

Games of Yesteryear were all Hard Touch games - like WoW. More and more people complain and they have constantly made the shift to Soft Touch systems. The BEST game needs BOTH.

 

 

So, how can we create a system in which all types of players (crafters, explorers, harvesters, PVPers) all get their soft and hard touches?

 

Well.... Honestly.... The best solution is to remove "combat" related things from the Universal Tree system and move them all to the Archtype trees. People instantly claim "What about diversity!" Well, what many have proposed and pointed out, is there is MORE than enough "diversity" in specialization when you remove combat abilities from Universal Trees. You CAN include things like "Siege Warfare" as that is a special form of combat that would require a "specialist" to do. But for generic player versus player combat. Making players choose between combat and a "profession" is what is going to propel everyone and their mothers towards alt accounts.

 

So you would level your "combat" abilities through the AT tree and your "profession" through the Universal.

 

What this does is allows all types of players to participate in both systems: Soft and Hard.

 

Currently, players who choose "Combat" as their Universal will be desired more heavily for "hard touch" systems like PVP raids on keeps, where as the guy who specializes in "Mining Iron Ore" wont really be much of an asset.

 

On the flip side, that guy who mines Iron ore, will be contributing much more to the guild, than the Combat guy if they both log in at non peak hours to play, when there are no "scheduled raids" or what not. There will be exceptions to this, but generally speaking, low pop times will be brutal for the PVP players and High pop times will be more brutal for the non PVPers - which is why everyone will have alt accounts.

 

 

Also, when you move all combat to ATs, this now makes VIP more appealing as your ONE account will have more viable PVP options, rather than having to buy an alt account to then have 1 PVP option (because your main account wont be one).

 

So it creates some larger revenue potential for ACE.

 

 

All this said, it doesnt address the REAL issue with the skill tree: It Sucks.

 

 

This is why (IMO) a perfect system would be having Universal Skills that are much more vanilla than they are now. So you would have a whole list of skills. (Example:)

- JewelCrafting

- Stonemasonry

- Tailoring

- Necromancy

- Runemaking

- Woodworking

- Weapon Smithing

- Armor Smithing

- Leather Working

- Tracking

- Vessels

- Farming

- Animal Husbandry

- Stone Harvesting

- Ore Harvesting

- Animal Harvesting

- Wood Harvesting

- Gravedigging

 

ETC. So a player just pick ONE of these as their "Universal" and then it starts training level 1-100. Thats it. No "nodes" or "builds" or "trees" just pure and simple. Each level in that given thing, makes  you better and better at it.

 

Kinda like RuneScape:

starting-levels-rs-12107.png

 

So on the above, this person has leveled up several areas, and skipped others. 

 

 

 

 

Then for the AT trees, you make them much bigger and involves the sense of "builds" Where rather than the current time to train based on tier. You have a very short time to train for the first "node" and each subsequent node takes longer and longer. So as an example, maybe the first node to train only takes like 6 hours, each subsequent node after that increases the time to train by 10% or something. Then you have a skill tree layout much like this (which BTW has ~150 nodes):

 

New%20Tree_zpsroznbiba.png

 

Many of these nodes would be duplicates. So lets say 15 of those nodes (10%) were all "Increases chance to crit by 1%". Well if you wanted to go for a crit build, you might start building towards those - though they might all be spread out among the tree. 

 

Then maybe since this is the Druid tree, many of those nodes would be "increases support power" so now if you wanted a support Druid, you might stack those. Etc. Starts creating true character builds. You could EITHER include armor types and weapon types in the AT tree OR, just create a Universal Skill for those in the above. Such as:

- Leather armor, Mail armor, Plate armor - these Universals would increase the benefits of that armor type.

Or specific weapon types: Maybe leave it with 1H vs 2H weapons or something. 

 

Many ways to do this. Point being. Universal skills are for profession advancement and AT tree is for character customization progression. Play your AT the way you want - different than other people.

 

 

I realy like the tree in this for the druid and what not, i use to play a free game that had something similiar (You started in the middle of the tree and it was a grid of boxes and u could only train skill that was ajacent to a block you already learnt. The more powerful skills where in the corners so couldnt get them all and so on.


Veeshan Midst of UXA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think people are just worried that skilling in combat will remove them from the economic part of the game. No one is asking for people to be able to harvest and craft everything on their own. You can trade stuff and crafter will sell what you need but they also want something in return which the combat tree doesn't seem to provide. Also if spending all your points combat will you only win 1 in a 100 fights then why would anyone invest in that skill tree? 

 

maybe turning the combat tree into some kind of PvE tree or some hybrid with some pvp/pve combat and special stuff like stealth and siege weapons would be the answer.

Yah I get that, but I think the idea behind the skill tree is that people who want that economic side of things are available to take a crafting/harvesting profession and still not be barely at all gimped in combat. And those that don't want to involve in the economic side of things have the choice to go for combat. It's just choosing your playstyle. The only issue I've agreed with is that combat specialized people don't have the stuff to do for short play sessions of 10-15 minutes like crafters and harvesters, whereas harvesters/crafters can always be relevant in combat. Which is why I'm going to keep advocating for a combat tree rework rather than a passive skill tree rework...Overall its way less work and keeps the system intact as it is now.

 

But yah I see why people dislike the system as is, and I agree. I don't necessarily dislike and don't love it...But I don't think it's as broken as people make it out to be and definitely doesn't need 2 universals to fix it, just the combat universal needs to be redone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah I get that, but I think the idea behind the skill tree is that people who want that economic side of things are available to take a crafting/harvesting profession and still not be barely at all gimped in combat. And those that don't want to involve in the economic side of things have the choice to go for combat. It's just choosing your playstyle. The only issue I've agreed with is that combat specialized people don't have the stuff to do for short play sessions of 10-15 minutes like crafters and harvesters, whereas harvesters/crafters can always be relevant in combat. Which is why I'm going to keep advocating for a combat tree rework rather than a passive skill tree rework...Overall its way less work and keeps the system intact as it is now.

 

But yah I see why people dislike the system as is, and I agree. I don't necessarily dislike and don't love it...But I don't think it's as broken as people make it out to be and definitely doesn't need 2 universals to fix it, just the combat universal needs to be redone

Well I think the way ACE wants to design the typical CW with objectives and POIs and hotspots I don't agree a combat focused player will have nothing to do in short play sessions or off peak hours. Things you can do will obviously be effected but if the game is designed well there should always be something to do. Besides if we are claiming Crafters/harvestors will have stuff to do some of which will involve going out to gather which they might want combat focused players to group with them to do so. Crowfall by design just seems more equipped to handle that issue more so than others I think. So in this case its the content that needs to be focused on to fix it not how the skill trees are made.

 

Do agree with the tweaks and such to the trees. Combat lines getting more things then just stat boosts is a simple fix that'll go a long way. Overhauls, revamps and redesigns at this point are not really feasible anyway. Besides the fact that you can't please everyone as evidence by how many threads we've seen on this and pretty much just as many different ideas on how to "fix" them. Meaning you change it to idea x and then everyone who wanted idea y and z are still not happy. So yeah keep the current design but make tweaks and improve what we have is the best way to go, IMO.

Edited by pang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to "fix" a system still in development, particularly one whose ultimate design you don't have access to or knowledge of, is an exercise in futility.

 

yeah, but people are arguing with "the combat skill tree does not make a difference" and "harvesters need combat focused people to defend them" in the same post which is just nonsense...


 

Crowfall Wiki

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to "fix" a system still in development, particularly one whose ultimate design you don't have access to or knowledge of, is an exercise in futility.

 

Combat was in development when they "fixed" it.

 

It's nonsense to imply that feedback on a system while it's in development is somehow less important than looking at the mess on the floor afterwards and goin': yep, that sucks all right.

Edited by coolwaters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes when people tell you the same thing over and over again, it's you.

 

Time to listen. It's a new poster with solid feedback. Shouting him down only comes off looking trite.

 

 

Lesson 19 from the developer of Magic the Gathering from 20 years talk.

 

Your audience is good at recognizing problems, but bad at solving them.

 

Your players have a better understanding of how they feel about your game than you do. They can tell easier when something is wrong and they're excellent at identifying problems, but they're not as equipped to solve the problems. They don't know the restrictions you're under or what needs you have to fulfill. They see the game from their perspective, but your job is to understand the perspective of all the players. So use your audience as a resource to help figure out what is wrong with your game, but take it with a grain of salt when they offer you solutions.

 

https://youtu.be/QHHg99hwQGY?t=3355

 

If people keep complainging about something, or pointing out dislike for something, there may just be a problem with it.

 

We, myself included, may not come up with the best solutions, nor should we be expected to, but if there is a continous stream of complaints about a single issue, it deserves to be examined and looked into.

 

Lesson 11

 

If everyone likes your game but no one loves it, it will fail

 

 

Your players don't need to love everything, but they need to love something. Something has to draw them into your game, something they feel strongly about. Don't worry that the players will hate something. Instead, worry that no one will love anything. Things that evoke strong responses will most often evoke strong responses in many directions, meaning it's almost impossible to make some players love something without making other players hate it. In fact, some players enjoy hating what other players love. So stop worrying about evoking a negative response and start worrying about evoking a strong response.

 

 

https://youtu.be/QHHg99hwQGY?t=2007

 

So what do you love about it? Specifically the restriction of gimping harvesters and crafters in relation to combat?  Is that a strong positive response and why? Why does it make you feel the way you do about it?  How does that make the game better?

 

Personally I don't think it does, I think it makes it worse.

 

I've heard many arguments, and they all seem to revolve around not wanting people to be entirely self sufficient.  I don't personally buy that argument, as even without combat in the general, it will take almost 2 real years to master a single economic expertise, and because there will be so many different types of combat types, DPS,Tanks, Support, Specialists, and all the sub archetypes within those broad categories, and of all the things in the passive trained skills, combat also requires personal skill to execute correctly,  I don't see the need or advantage of locking out another less defined subdivisions of combat that arches over all of the above.

 

So the more it is brought up, the more ACE should evaluate WHY it keeps being brought up, and if the desired positive outweighs the negatives, because they are both "valid" positions, from different points of view.

 

Actually, everyone should listen to that full talk a few times, it might save some arguments and open a few eyes.

 

EDIT: ok just re-watched, and yea there is a HUGE one as it relates to this topic.

 

https://youtu.be/QHHg99hwQGY?t=791

 

"Don't confuse "interesting" with "fun"

 

This is a concept we talk about a lot in R&D. It turns out that there are two different kinds of stimulation—intellectual stimulation and emotional stimulation. The first is about stimulating the ways in which you think. ("Hmm, that's very interesting.") The second is about generating an emotional response. ("Ooh, that's fun!") In Magic, looking at a card file is intellectual stimulation. Playing with the cards is more of an emotional stimulation.

So in the case of CF, the economic skills are supposed to be intellectual stimulation. How can I make the most from my resources, what do I train next to improve my productivity, what is the most important thing to train next to help my guild, who do I have to work with to get the best gear, etc?

 

Combat is the emotion, which comes down to "How do I beat my opponents".  You need to use the economic skills to do this, but really the heat of the moment, the thrill of victory, will be much more intense when you are engaging in PvP.

 

Gimping the emotion, or making seeking that emotional thrill the wrong intellectual choice if you want to get ahead, is just plain counter productive. It's breaking the first rule of the talk, "Fighting against human nature is a losing battle".

 

https://youtu.be/QHHg99hwQGY?t=134

 

It's not just game play diversity, it's also forcing players to pit two types of enjoyment against each other. Do I want to enjoy this game Intellectually or emotionally, because I can't do both optimally with the given systems. That is simply fighting human nature.  I want to enjoy both the emotional, and the intellectual side of CF, and I'm pretty sure the vast majority who want anything to do with the intellectual side of the game want both.  

 

Forcing players to chose between one or the other is simply bad design. In the extreme it would be like saying to a magic player,  "You can build decks, or play matches with other peoples decks, but not both."

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The combat AND folks just want to have their cake and to eat it too.   That is all I see, players who don't value choices or don't want to have to make a hard choice between the additional combat skills above what is already in the Archetype tree OR a useful scouting, vessel, leadership, harvesting, crafting, farming, breeding skill.  Players that don't value crafting or exploration main accounts, who think in terms of alts for any and all non combat needs...  

We know guilds will need leadership mains and scouting mains.  We know every player will need to level vessels on their main account.  We know guilds will need harvesting main accounts and main caravan drivers and main siege equipment operators.  We know every player will feel the pull of the other trees.  We know all players will see thus need other players, need each other.

What I think is actually missing is reasons for having crafters and farmers and animal husbandry specialists also be main accounts, give a reason for them to be better than an alt account bot, played only when that skill is needed.  Make these non combat skill trees essential to have online and live in your CW working side by side with all the other necessary builds.  We think a lot about group comp in small skirmish fights but never (not yet) about the necessary overall guild comp to be an effective and efficient organization with less alt accounts rather than more, because we assume our alt accounts will do much of that non-combat work, that these roles are superfluous to winning. What if, instead, these crafters and specialists DID give in game buffs and advantages to players that made a difference in the meta but only while online and active, farming specialists not only provided food but could also reduce hunger rates while using combat powers, breeding specialists gave a buff to mounts or sped up mounting and dismounting cooldowns (picket ability), crafters had the ability to reduce decay rates in items equipped (like a temporary auto repair buff), these are non combat but substantially beneficial in game abilities that are group/guild/global faction oriented.

 

I would hope that there is just simply too much harvesting to get done, to much protection of those harvesters, to many POIs to fight over and capture, to much gear to make, to many mounts to supply, to much food needed by all to have ANY of these necessary functions be efficiently done by alt accounts because things are happening in the CW concurrently and continuously; that demand needs each and every one of these things done all the time and not just in "off hours".  That you need "dedicated" players in every skill tree rather than cookie cutter combat mains and alts for everything else.

 

Your question before was why then would anyone skill up combat skills and gimp their economic output.  My answer is a loud and clear DAMN STRAIGHT, why would you do that unless, oh snap, you hate doing that job (except on alts) and all you want to do is combat and strut around with your epeen hanging out.  Why can you not choose your role and be happy with it?   Why do you have a need to take someone else's role AND get to do your own preferred role.

Edited by Frykka

6FUI4Mk.jpg

                                                        Sugoi - Senpai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forcing players to chose between one or the other is simply bad design. In the extreme it would be like saying to a magic player,  "You can build decks, or play matches with other peoples decks, but not both."

It's not bad design it's a design goal. You have got to get out of the current MMO mindset that a player has to be able to do everything.


o8WHnLc.png


THE most active European guild. Join us

now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Combat was in development when they "fixed" it.

Combat wasn't an incomplete assortment of animations that did nothing when they changed it, it was a complete system in need of refinement. They simply chose to change it based on complaints and resource restraints; and especially for those of us who consider the changes made a step backward, changing another incomplete system in need of refinement based upon ignorant complaints would be troubling at best.


Hi, I'm moneda.

s1tKI24.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forcing players to chose between one or the other is simply bad design. In the extreme it would be like saying to a magic player,  "You can build decks, or play matches with other peoples decks, but not both."

 

 

It's not bad design it's a design goal. You have got to get out of the current MMO mindset that a player has to be able to do everything.

 

Did you read my whole post, watch the relevant parts of the video, or just jump strait to the end and smother your answer with confirmation bias?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHHg99hwQGY

 

Doesn't really matter, because that response gives me an opportunity to detail exactly why I think it's bad design based on the above presentation and Thomas Blair's own statements regarding the intent of the systems. I'll steer clear as much as possible of other arguments simply because I've said them before in other threads.

  • Ironically, it actually goes against the stated goals of the developers.

What??? How did I get that?  

 

 

Here's some thought's.

 

The Archetype skills are not there as a means to customize a character, they are there to provide stats one would typically see via leveling up a character by delivering bear butts to some guy who really wants 6 bear butts for some reason. We are using a model where you gain those stats passively over time and will eventually get them all.

 

The Archetype skills by design try to avoid doing things with powers. If we put in (cause we forget), we tend to want to pull it out.

 

Let's talk Universal skills!

These skill trees are far different. They have many nodes which grant unique pieces of gameplay or functionality. Yes over time the player could get them all, but we are looking at at least 10+ years time frame, so it is highly improbable especially as we add more content the amount of time will continue to rise.

Universal skills are supposed to be different, and open unique pieces of gameplay functionality, but the entire combat line does not. With the exception of siege, which has not been designed yet, every single node, every single improvement, is simply a duplication of something similar to what you get in the archetype skill trees. Every skill is literally the same type of skill as you would see from "via leveling up a character" As to serving it's intended purpose of being "far different", it simply doesn't.  The developers are literally going against their own stated design intent by keeping it as is.

  • It makes players choose between playing primarily for intellectual enjoyment, or playing primarily for emotional enjoyment.

Crafting and harvesting are intellectual pursuits, in that you take them because you want the intellectual enjoyment of playing the economy game. One of the main parts of CF that distinguishes it from a MOBA, long term strategy and guild skill interrelationships. On the other hand, combat is more emotionally focused, in that you get that instant thrill of winning, or sense of loss.

  • It's Fighting against human nature and is probably a losing battle

I base this on both my own personal plans to work around this mechanic if it is kept as is, and what others have stated they will do.  The solution is simple, buy two accounts or more, scrap VIP or possibly only VIP the "combat" account, and train into as many as economic skill lines as needed to have a combat focused account, and an economy focused account, in as much as I need to play both sides of the game.  

  • Understand what emotion your game is trying to evoke

 I am pretty sure the emotion this game is trying to evoke, with the CW resets, the EK, the Lore, and the entire purpose for the hunger, is a game of conquest and domination.  Conquering your enemies both physically through combat, and economically through attrition.  Since the goal of the game is to try to evoke two types of emotion, two types of stimulation, and two types of conquest, driving players to experience only one of those to it's full potential, is designing like you want to marginalize one type of play over another.

 

  • Make the fun part also the correct strategy to win

Combat is fun, and is seems to be the primary way which players will win each campaign world. Hamstringing the players ability to fully enjoy that fun because they absolutely need to have at least on guild level the economic professions to survive the attrition that is hunger, makes the correct strategy to win, something other than the funnest part of the game.

 

That's why its bad design, and ironically not the stated intent for design goal for the different skill trees.

 

 

 

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Combat is fun, and is seems to be the primary way which players will win each campaign world. Hamstringing the players ability to fully enjoy that fun because they absolutely need to have at least on guild level the economic professions to survive the attrition that is hunger, makes the correct strategy to win, something other than the funnest part of the game.

 

 

I must be honest I haven't read the whole of your post because you just repeat the same assumptions and state the same things over and over again just using different words. TLDR

 

So I'm just going to pick up on your assumption that campaigns are won by combat. Yes, this is partially true but without the logistics chain behind the combat players producing the weapons and armour, the harvesters gathering the resources for the crafters and the castles walls etc there will be no campaign win even for the best PvP players. 

 

You will also assume that players will automatically multi-account, some will yes but I believe many will not.

 

You also assume that people will not enjoy the game if they are a dedicated crafter ('combat is fun but crafting is interesting') That to me is very trite and unsubstantiated. You seem to think in very 'black and white' terms; crafters will take part in combat, they may not be the elite PvP players but they will make a significant contribution. The PvP player will gather and craft, they will not be the best crafters but they will make a significant contribution. 

 

No one is stopping you having multiple accounts, that is up to you. 

 

I would prefer a more EVE Online approach to passive skill training but that is probably not what ACE have in mind. We have Universal and AT skill tress, with the Universal trees having all the non-specific AT skills. I am content that is the correct approach, especially with one Universal Skill queue. 

 

The skills themselves, the training duration and some skill dependencies need modifying but this is what these test sessions are all about.

 

They are not about re-designing the skill system to suit the current MMO  desire of players to be able to do everything as soon as possible.


o8WHnLc.png


THE most active European guild. Join us

now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The combat AND folks just want to have their cake and to eat it too. That is all I see, players who don't value choices or don't want to have to make a hard choice between the additional combat skills above what is already in the Archetype tree OR a useful scouting, vessel, leadership, harvesting, crafting, farming, breeding skill.

Frankly this argument would carry more weight if the skill training allowed any choice at all past which line to train. It doesn't, by design. If you're offended by the absence of choice in the other side's position regarding which line to train, shouldn't you be even more annoyed with the utter absence of choice or decision in the actual skill training?

 

Seems a forrest for the trees situation to me.

Edited by coolwaters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must be honest I haven't read the whole of your post because you just repeat the same assumptions and state the same things over and over again just using different words. TLDR

 

So I'm just going to pick up on your assumption ...

 

You will also assume that players will ... 

 

You also assume that people will not enjoy ...

 

They are not about re-designing the skill system to suit the current MMO  desire of players to be able to do everything as soon as possible.

 

 

If you won't do me the courtesy of reading my post, at least do me the courtesy of not making assumptions about what I assume in said post. 

 

That summary is a straw man argument because I never said or implied anything remotely like that.

 

Maybe if this topic of discussion bores you, and you can't be bothered to read the opposing points of view to understand them, you should simply avoid it in the future.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...