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

two universal trains

Recommended Posts

Also, please dont say you can "hop around" and thats why its 1-100. You even just admitted earlier the tier 1 skills take less and provide more bang for buck, Nobody "hops around" thats a joke.. You click 1 thing, and level it. If you are training blacksmithing, your working on that tree. Not hoping over to combat, then necro, then leatherworking etc, the entire premise of this game is "specialization" so thats generally what people do. Focus on achiving one thing in one tree.

 

You are wrong on this point. Many players have trained some of all the Universal skill trees. Also you can hop between nodes to get some of the benefits before completing the node.

 

Personally I've trained to reach leatherworking but also I've needed some exploration and combat skills to survive.

Edited by Dirkoff

o8WHnLc.png


THE most active European guild. Join us

now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so we got 3 main trees in universal training; combat, crafting, harvesting. i agree to some degree that as a char i shouldn't be able to be an expert in all 3 trees. however within these trees there are lots of other skills like siege in the combat tree or animal husbandry, vessel, farming in the harvesting tree. crafting haas tons from blacksmithing to building to jewelry. i hope and pray that the game will be a huge success and will keep people entertained and glued for years, but that's not realistic. say my guild is totally organizedwe assign jobs and we have 2 stonemasons who end up not playin much or quitting altogether. (that's never happened b4)it will be annoying to try to fill that gap.  personally i'd like to train a combat and a non combat skill at the same time

 

This is why I still firmly believe the best system for crowfall is to make the passive skill tree an "import/export" system as well - just like rewards.

 

What this means is there would be NO more passive training like we have now. Instead, you would have a skill tree for your Crow, tied to each CW. So you would log in, then need to log into a CW and open the tree and THERE you could passive train like we have now.

 

The difference? The rate of train would be increased ~10 fold (so 10x) HOWEVER!!! This is a temporary tree that at the end of the CW is "wiped".

 

Depending on the result of the CW (Win/Kneel/Loss) you would now EXPORT a % of the TEMP EXP you earned into an "EXP Bank" in which you could THEN spend on the Permanent Passive Tree(the one we have today).

 

So to paint an example.

 

Day 1, noone has ANY passive training done. Everyone logs in, and you join a CW. Inside the CW, you start your passive train. Normally a tier 1 node takes 3 days (72 hours) to train to 100%. Inside the CWs it now would only take 7.2 hours. OR, better, if you wanted to "move on" at 50% it takes about 1/3rd of the time to train that tier 1 to 50%, which means you could be moving onto another node just ~2.5 hours later, having half the benefit.

 

Fast forward a month, lets say within that month you focused on Blacksmithing and completed 59% (just a random guess) of the tree. CW is over, Your team won. You earned XXX amount of Temp EXP for your Universal and AT trees. You get to export X% into your Universal EXP bank and AT EXP banks. You do this.

 

You go back into your main account page (the one we have now) and lump sum spend that EXP wherever you want. Maybe you LIKED playing blacksmithing, so you spend your points to permanently unlock the crafting basics nodes + blacksmithing basics node to 100% within crafting basics AND still had some left over to go into the BS tree and get "blacksmithing Novice" up to say lvl 67

 

You now join  your NEXT CW and IMPORT your Perma Skill Tree and now rather than it being completely fresh, you can start training on day 1 with finishing Blacksmithing Novice" OR maybe just moving onto like BS Craftmanship - you get the idea. 

 

Fast forward another month, your CW has ended but this time you completed 63% (up from 59%) of the BS tree - because your perma unlocks allowed you to go further. You KNEELED this game, so you get to export slightly less EXP than if you had won, but you export some EXP. 

 

Maybe at this point, you DID have guild attrition. Your  2 Stonemasons say they want to take a break for the next 2 CWs and will be back in 2 months. No problem. You drop your Perma EXP in blacksmithing (still your focus) and now you unlock the nodes "Blacksmithing Research, BS production, Craftmanship, and maybe weapon research".

 

You log into the NEW CW and IMPORT your build. This time, however, you fill the role of the Stonemason. If you WOULD have been able to do blacksmithing this CW, you likely could have now gone through maybe ~68% of the BS tree (up from your very first CW of 59%) but since your playing the stonemason this CW, you progress through that tree and end up at the end of 1 month through about 59% of THAT tree instead - filling that role this CW.

 

CW ends. You guys unfortunately lost. You get to EXPORT slightly less EXP to your Perma build than the previous 2 CWs. No worries, you spend THOSE points on some more Blacksmithing (as thats your focus) and by this time, your other guilds BS has decided  to be an armor smith. SO you elect to grab more "advanced weapon research" and maybe spec more into "Thralls" and Salvage nodes.

 

Good luck! Your Stonemason came back early. He is back for this CW. You start the CW, start the path of blacksmith again! THIS time around, by the end of the CW, youve completed 72% of the Blacksmith tree by the END of the CW - as each time your starting with more and more perma unlocks that are allowing you to continue to move deeper and deeper into the trees. It ends, you win, you export EXP, and on and on it goes.

 

 

 

Now, the BENEFITS of this type of system are numerous.

- In the first several CWs its currently going to be a PAIN with noone having any specialization. This solves that problem since you can train things 10x the rate.

- It allows you to temporarily "fill gaps" 

 

- It gives NEW players much less of a handicap as they can fill roles within their FIRST CW

 

- It allows for players to "test" before they "buy" (You might play 1 AT and 1 role in your first CW and HATE it, good news is, you can spend Perma EXP unlocks on ANYTHING so maybe you played a confessor and after export, decide to play a Knight, you can spend your AT EXP in the Knight tree)

 

- It allows for a nice catch up mechanic if needed - by adjusting the rate of train of Temp EXP in CWs AND Export Rates. (Say 1 year into the game, they increase the temp train speed AND % of Export - youll get much more/faster perma unlocks which makes the CURRENT perma unlocks 'less' of an advantage)

 

- It allows ACE to entice/incentive NEW CWs - by adjusting their EXP EXPORT

 

- It allows them to SLOW the rate of perma unlocks if things progress too quickly.

 

- It allows them to increase benefits of VIP - by adding a Que System and/or online portal (that NOW wouldnt be of MUCH benefit due to slow train times).

 

- Lessens impact of ALT accounts since training requires more active management and must be INSIDE CWs - which if there are account # limits on entry to CWs, guilds WONT bring in 200 alt accounts and therefore WONT get perma EXP to unlock.

 

- Lessens impact of bad choices - if you started spending points in something you later hated, you can change roles 2-3 months in, and STILL contribute in a meaningful way due to sped up temp training, etc.

 

- It allows them to LIMIT "Skill Tree IMPORTS" if they wanted to start "leveling the playing field". Which means that 3 years into the game, maybe you have "mastered" 3 different things on your account. They limit IMPORTS meaning maybe you can only bring in Perma EXP = to ~ 2 "mastery" things - again putting emphasis on specialization etc.

 

Now what are the DRAWBACKS to this system?

Well, I frankly cant thing of ANY besides just a little DEV time - but since it doesnt change anything from the current system seems it wouldnt require much work to create a "perma" unlock system and pair it with a "temp" unlock system in which the temp training speed is increased. Fundamentally, the tree stays the same in all aspects. Well, im sure that Frykka will object because of the "pro" status he/she seems to have accomplished in already mapping out his passive tree training and how "indepth" and "involving" the current tree is :P

 

Edited by th3gatekeeper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now what are the DRAWBACKS to this system?

Well, I frankly cant thing of ANY besides just a little DEV time - but since it doesnt change anything from the current system seems it wouldnt require much work to create a "perma" unlock system and pair it with a "temp" unlock system in which the temp training speed is increased. Fundamentally, the tree stays the same in all aspects. Well, im sure that Frykka will object because of the "pro" status he/she seems to have accomplished in already mapping out his passive tree training and how "indepth" and "involving" the current tree is :P

It goes around one of the objectives of the passive training system.  That you can train regardless of activity.

 

http://crowfall.com/en/faq/skills/

 

In effect, your characters keep advancing while you do things like sleep or go to work. You won’t be at a numerical disadvantage versus other players just because they have more time to invest in the game than you do.

By training based on export, you will be at an numerical disadvantage vs other players because of in game performance.

 

I personally don't mind that, simply because everyone without a day zero account is going to be permanently at a disadvantage with no way to catch up. If the export is tempered so that the export training is a bonus, then you could catch up, but it does go against the goal that training is something that just happens, playing or not.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  You miss the entire depth of the skill trees 

 

I'm missing that "depth" too. By the looks of the forums, most of us fail to see depth in a system that literally requires no choices to be made by the player at all.

 

Kind of the opposite of deep, really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no doubt i agree with cool, however this post was for me wanting to be more useful. i love crafting, but i'm a pvper at heart. i wouldnt mind harvesting for the crafters or farming. i wanna be useful to the guild like that, but of course it's gonna have to come 2nd after combat. i'm not gonna be like, yeah i'll paul bunyan the sh... out of'm trees. that's what i'm gonna be training for months. so if i could train both combat and 1 of these other skills at the same time, that'd b more acceptable imo


94d3694d-21cd-461f-afe1-69b22f882477.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no doubt i agree with cool, however this post was for me wanting to be more useful. i love crafting, but i'm a pvper at heart. i wouldnt mind harvesting for the crafters or farming. i wanna be useful to the guild like that, but of course it's gonna have to come 2nd after combat. i'm not gonna be like, yeah i'll paul bunyan the sh... out of'm trees. that's what i'm gonna be training for months. so if i could train both combat and 1 of these other skills at the same time, that'd b more acceptable imo

Welcome to the combat AND club.  

 

Glad to have another member. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just how long do you think the average player will put up with having that kind of content well out of reach? Please answer that question.

 

How many months do you think is reasonable for a player to wait before they reach profession end content?

What % of players do you expect to drop off before they reach that time,

and how many players do you actually want to be playing the game?

 

A hard core player in a guild that has been around since SB...   2 years

Fluffy Bunny player... 3 months

 

1 year minimum, 18 month to 2 years maximum

Hard core PvP guild players 0%, Fluffy Bunnies 80%

4-6 active CWs 6 months after full launch with 1k to 2k very active players each.

Edited by Frykka

6FUI4Mk.jpg

                                                        Sugoi - Senpai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A hard core player in a guild that has been around since SB...   2 years

Fluffy Bunny player... 3 months

 

1 year minimum, 18 month to 2 years maximum

Hard core PvP guild players 0%, Fluffy Bunnies 80%

4-6 active CWs 6 months after full launch with 1k to 2k very active players each.

Very detailed, thank you.

 

Just did some napkin business sustainability math.  

 

Assuming the full 6 active CW's, with 2k players in the very active category, all on VIP, with another 50% spend over and above VIP for cosmetics etc, that comes to 270,000 per month income.

 

Assuming an average staff cost of 10k/ month 120k/year (which is mid range value for a database guy (http://www.itcareerfinder.com/brain-food/it-salaries/database-administrator-salary-range.html)) that puts you at 27 staff, without dealing with executive costs, building costs, and server costs.

 

Also consider the need to cover advertising, product improvement, marketing, taxes, hardware for development, servers, software licences, and a metric crap ton of other costs, as well as eventually wanting to pay out dividends and raise company stock value.

 

That harsh of a model that drives away the "fluffy bunny" types as you put it, is just is not financially viable.  Something needs to be done to attract more players, and keep more from leaving, than the, "takes 2 years" would allow for.

 

I just don't see that working.  Good thing I believe that the game isn't going to be appealing to only hard core only player types that you seem to want it to.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are other options to allow for the same thing, and maybe those are in the works/plans.

 

I know there is an idea to infuse thralls into items/weapons, so perhaps that is the avenue for acquiring temporarily skills you don't have.

 

If for example you infuse a thrall that has the pistol universal tree, into a pistol, you would get all the combat skills that thrall had, and ignore overlaps, then you could deal with things you don't have by "simply" getting your hands on the correct thrall.

 

It would have to be balanced, much the same way the D&D 5th edition balances how many active spells you can hold through the concentration mechanic, say by limiting you to having one thrall infused item equipped at a time.

 

Thinking about it from that point of view, the system would be more flexible, allow for more experimentation, create a reason to "explore" for thrall souls, and allow you to temporarily use skills you didn't train for.

 

If that's where it is going, I could live with one universal, and leave Combat where it is, but it would still be a bait profession until you had at least one other profession fully trained.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sb community is a paradox. sometimes really reliable, but other times the mosr unreliable dudes u'll ever see. God forbid u lost 2 banes in a row, cuz then u had most people running for the hills or not loggin in. u had veterans coming to banes with no pots or rods and  u'd lose cuz of that. i love sb and to some extent the community, but i've never seen as many moochers in my life. Cf is a very teamwork based game and when it came to farmin and contributing overall SB is not the best example by far


94d3694d-21cd-461f-afe1-69b22f882477.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sb community is a paradox. sometimes really reliable, but other times the mosr unreliable dudes u'll ever see. God forbid u lost 2 banes in a row, cuz then u had most people running for the hills or not loggin in. u had veterans coming to banes with no pots or rods and  u'd lose cuz of that. i love sb and to some extent the community, but i've never seen as many moochers in my life. Cf is a very teamwork based game and when it came to farmin and contributing overall SB is not the best example by far

 

The logisticians were the unsung heroes of Shadowbane. Outfitting enough moochers to field an effective fighting force took effort.


IhhQKY6.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 u're telling me crafting an amazing successful weapon forged with top tier ore with full experimentation points by a trained blacksmith will be just a tiny bit better than some generic crap a novice conjured with some crafting pots?

 

Actually, as it stands, that is exactly the case.  Yes, we only have access to half the experimentation points, but you can easily extrapolate what more points in successive materials and experimentation will yield.  I think the underlying systems need a good "looking at"...especially considering...

 

While I've seen many posts along these lines, I haven't seen the arguments which I feel are most poignant.  

 

While being a crafter or gatherer doesn't eliminate you from being a combatant, as it stands you will be at a disadvantage.

 

As a hypothetical, we're a week into release, you are a gatherer on Dregs, you have the same time in as the combat tree guy you are going to fight, and for this example, the same class, same roughly equivalent 'skill' at playing said class, same equipment.  Embargo PoI are known set-ups to be conflict points.  You head there to offload your goods (and this is likely several hours worth of work, right?), you meet said same class/skill person, they kill you, because they have the combat advantage.  This disparity of combat advantage will continue to grow with time (and gear, but that's a different argument, for another time).  How many times will this need to occur before the gatherer decides to A) quit B) train combat instead?  

 

Even if they switch to combat, they will still be at a disadvantage versus the person who wholly goes combat, and this will be a 'known thing', so why would you continue to farm resources, knowing you will likely lose them?  I realize there are many variables and other worlds, but realistically, this will always be a concern.  Being on a guild vs guild realm is not 'better' unless your group always wins.  Making 'friends' has its limitations too(really, how many of your friends are ALWAYS available when you want them to be?), not to mention how insanely boring it will be to have people just standing around while one (or a couple) people harvest?  Because if you don't bring enough, and get steamrolled...well there goes all your stuff...especially if you have someone adept at tactics (kill the harvesters, get people who move fast to loot & leave while the rest of your combatants distract/cc their protection?  just an example)

 

How long will being at a combat disadvantage be 'fun'?  How about replacing these people 6 months, a year, two years in when their skills are maxxed, and now you need to find someone to replace them?  Skill building takes time, and what are you going to offer someone to sway them away from where they are already comfortable?  How long will hopping from cw to cw to try and gather stuff that you can't even  extract from that cw for an as of yet undetermined (but presumably at least weeks, if not months, varying by cw) amount of time, or better yet, just fattening the bank of whatever combat specialist happens to be the one to beat you down as you go to embargo, or catches you at a bad moment in the field?

 

Yes, people will enjoy gathering,  and crafting, but that is going to be dependent upon some sense of accomplishment.  If your stuff is stolen, or you cannot contribute meaningfully, you will lose interest, this is human nature.

 

I would actually suggest eliminating the combat general tree, or converting it to some sort of specialization (like siege warfare only).   We already all have a class tree that could easily serve to be the stand-alone combat tree, with plenty of variety to be 'different'.  But both that, and combat vs crafter/gatherer tend to overlook (IMO) the nature of gamers to Min/Max, thus the popularity of FOTM's and the importance of 'balance'.  There are enough differing crafting specializations that between that, and having allowances for gathering specializations would provide a wide array of variety for people.

 

I don't think having us train in two universal skills is the answer, I think elimination of the combat tree, or at least a re-purposing of it is.  Otherwise I feel crafting/gathering will come down to just the people with alt accounts, and maybe a few die-hards, but not enough to fill the roles we will need.  I feel that as the system stands people have a gross underestimation of the time and effort things in the gathering/crafting arenas will take, and the amount of frustration that will ensue when it is only the combat tree people who will "come out on top", and thus scare away the crafters and gatherers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a hypothetical, we're a week into release, you are a gatherer on Dregs, you have the same time in as the combat tree guy you are going to fight, and for this example, the same class, same roughly equivalent 'skill' at playing said class, same equipment.  Embargo PoI are known set-ups to be conflict points.  You head there to offload your goods (and this is likely several hours worth of work, right?), you meet said same class/skill person, they kill you, because they have the combat advantage.  This disparity of combat advantage will continue to grow with time (and gear, but that's a different argument, for another time).  How many times will this need to occur before the gatherer decides to A) quit B) train combat instead? 

 

That gatherer should join a guild so someone can help him safely reach the embargo point.


IhhQKY6.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It goes around one of the objectives of the passive training system.  That you can train regardless of activity.

 

http://crowfall.com/en/faq/skills/

 

By training based on export, you will be at an numerical disadvantage vs other players because of in game performance.

 

I personally don't mind that, simply because everyone without a day zero account is going to be permanently at a disadvantage with no way to catch up. If the export is tempered so that the export training is a bonus, then you could catch up, but it does go against the goal that training is something that just happens, playing or not.

Personally, I dont see the issue. This is still accomplished... 

 

You can still passively train, regardless of activity. It merely requires 1 more step in the process, to log into a CW. Thats it.

 

you COULD be at a disadvantage, if you lose the CW. They never promised you will have equal passive training with everyone, merely that you CAN train passively they only promised: "You won’t be at a numerical disadvantage versus other players just because they have more time to invest in the game than you do."

Which is true. Just because someone has more time wont mean you have a disadvantage. 

 

I dont think using EXPORT goes against the goal, because you are still training, whether you are playing or not... You could log into a CW and just be a "mooch" by passively training the entire CW, not contributing anything, never playing even ONCE, and still get Perma EXP - BUT! If you get too many moochers... its likely that they will lose that CW and you wont get AS MUCH Perma EXP to export. However, again, my "vision" on this (that they can adjust) is that the difference between win/loss/kneel wont be much.... Maybe 100%/95%/90% or 100%/90%/80% so even after a YEAR of CWs, if someone lost the entire time versus someone won the entire time the real difference in their total EXP earned wont be that much AND because you can train things so fast in the CWs @ 10x the rate, the real impact is even smaller.

 

However the NICE thing about this system is, it gives less incentive to alt. Even if you do alt, it requires much more "management" to stay training 24/7 than currently - because of the increased train rate in CWs. If you DO bring in alts, they take up space from the total # of accounts that can be in any CW - so there is both a "pro and con" to using alts. Not just that, but if you start parking alts in other CWs to mooch off them, even after several months of playing, its very likely an alt wont help THAT much over just playing the game - due to increase rate of train inside CWs. 

 

This also makes room for attractive VIP options in which you can add things like a "Que" system as well as an external online "portal" in which you can manage skills, to make it MUCH more convenient to make sure that account constantly trains.

 

While this wont eliminate alting completely, itll eliminate alt armies and itll give a HUGE reason to VIP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That gatherer should join a guild so someone can help him safely reach the embargo point.

 

I see similar answers a lot...it's why I used dregs (I assume all FF will be on, regardless of guild affiliation, which I wish would be more prevalent, because sometimes it's guildies who you end up wanting to kill the most...)..and guildies (or friends) are not always available...  so now I have two specialization routes which require me to accept the fact I'm (essentially) cannon fodder alone, or are am dependent upon others to perform the most basic tasks with any measure of safety?

 

Extrapolate it out as much as you like (you have two friends guarding you, but now there are five people waiting at the embargo point...), but the point(s) behind the hypothetical remain...crafting and gathering will put you at a disadvantage, and increase your risk, with little extra in the way of reward.

 

You can also fairly safely assume more people will go combat than the other trees if the system stays as is...this seems like a huge oversight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very detailed, thank you.

 

Just did some napkin business sustainability math.  

 

Assuming the full 6 active CW's, with 2k players in the very active category, all on VIP, with another 50% spend over and above VIP for cosmetics etc, that comes to 270,000 per month income.

 

Assuming an average staff cost of 10k/ month 120k/year (which is mid range value for a database guy (http://www.itcareerfinder.com/brain-food/it-salaries/database-administrator-salary-range.html)) that puts you at 27 staff, without dealing with executive costs, building costs, and server costs.

 

Also consider the need to cover advertising, product improvement, marketing, taxes, hardware for development, servers, software licences, and a metric crap ton of other costs, as well as eventually wanting to pay out dividends and raise company stock value.

 

That harsh of a model that drives away the "fluffy bunny" types as you put it, is just is not financially viable.  Something needs to be done to attract more players, and keep more from leaving, than the, "takes 2 years" would allow for.

 

I just don't see that working.  Good thing I believe that the game isn't going to be appealing to only hard core only player types that you seem to want it to.

You made a flaw in your estimates. Its HIGHLY probably the 2k "active" players will already have years of VIP saved up from KS accounts and what not. I mean... sure there might be a few HUNDRED that are "active/hardcore" that join post-launch, but even then, how many KS or alpha backer accounts are out there for purchase? A LOT.

 

Its very likely that a large % of the "25% of players on VIP" will be players who have already BOUGHT VIP. I personally have years of VIP sitting around.

 

SO what your math needs to be based on is NEW players coming into the game.

 

If crowfall attracts 2,000 NEW players. Thats $50 * 2000 = 100k upfront. Then if 25% of those players VIP, thats 500 VIP at $15/mo = $7,500/mo. Which is WAY too small to support anything.

 

Which is why crowfall needs to attract a MUCH larger crowd. 

 

This is the issue I keep harping on. People get so hung up on VIP, Alts, Etc. They are losing the bigger picture. 

 

There are a large % of players who get turned off by Subscriptions AND Pay to Play games. Why? Because, in just talking to my friends about games, we talk about "whats out there" and we ALL agree - NOTHING. The problem is, I bring up a game, and they go "Oooo... I have to pay? I dunno... If Im gonna pay, I might as well play WoW, or FF, or list off 5 other games that are F2P".

 

The funny part is, you and I both know Crowfall offers a better experience than those games, but thats just human nature. THEY dont know and I have to sell them on the game and sell them on the box price. Lets say I get them interested.

 

They go watch a video about the basics of Crowfall and get excited about it. Then they hear 100% passive training and say "so... are there going to be like alt armies in this game" To which, I HAVE to respond... Yeah... unfortunately you could buy 20 accounts and become a specialist in many areas BUT!...... (I get cut off with) "Man... that sounds kinda lame... so if I buck up and pay $50 ill have to pay another $100+ dollars just to be competitive?" 

 

"Well not rea....." 

 

"Eh, I might as well go back to BDO then"

 

/end conversation.

 

 

The same conversation is had with VIP.

 

"Wait so I need to pay $50, then pay a sub fee of $15/mo to be competitive?"

 

"Eh, Ill just go back to playing XXXX title for free".

 

This is why its VERY important to look at systems that CURB Alts, and Incentive VIP - without making them mandatory.

 

The only system I have seen thus far that REALLY does this, is the system I proposed - Expedited INSIDE CW training, to Export EXP with # of accounts per CW being "fixed".

 

This system discourages alt armies and makes them a MUCH bigger pain to manage for a much smaller benefit. Sure you can still run 2 or 3 or 4 accounts but likely not 20.

This system encourages VIP without making it mandatory.

 

NOW, I could say "eh those things dont really help you tho BECAUSE..... " and list the reasons why. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

or are am dependent upon others to perform the most basic tasks with any measure of safety?

 

Absolutely. You should not expect safety unless you are in an EK.


IhhQKY6.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I dont see the issue. This is still accomplished... 

 

You can still passively train, regardless of activity. It merely requires 1 more step in the process, to log into a CW. Thats it.

 

you COULD be at a disadvantage, if you lose the CW. They never promised you will have equal passive training with everyone, merely that you CAN train passively they only promised: "You won’t be at a numerical disadvantage versus other players just because they have more time to invest in the game than you do."

Which is true. Just because someone has more time wont mean you have a disadvantage. 

 

I dont think using EXPORT goes against the goal, because you are still training, whether you are playing or not... You could log into a CW and just be a "mooch" by passively training the entire CW, not contributing anything, never playing even ONCE, and still get Perma EXP - BUT! If you get too many moochers... its likely that they will lose that CW and you wont get AS MUCH Perma EXP to export. However, again, my "vision" on this (that they can adjust) is that the difference between win/loss/kneel wont be much.... Maybe 100%/95%/90% or 100%/90%/80% so even after a YEAR of CWs, if someone lost the entire time versus someone won the entire time the real difference in their total EXP earned wont be that much AND because you can train things so fast in the CWs @ 10x the rate, the real impact is even smaller.

 

However the NICE thing about this system is, it gives less incentive to alt. Even if you do alt, it requires much more "management" to stay training 24/7 than currently - because of the increased train rate in CWs. If you DO bring in alts, they take up space from the total # of accounts that can be in any CW - so there is both a "pro and con" to using alts. Not just that, but if you start parking alts in other CWs to mooch off them, even after several months of playing, its very likely an alt wont help THAT much over just playing the game - due to increase rate of train inside CWs. 

 

This also makes room for attractive VIP options in which you can add things like a "Que" system as well as an external online "portal" in which you can manage skills, to make it MUCH more convenient to make sure that account constantly trains.

 

While this wont eliminate alting completely, itll eliminate alt armies and itll give a HUGE reason to VIP.

 

Note I am not trying to shoot down your idea, only pointing out potential flaws.  I happen to like the idea personally, but it needs to be fully explored if it has any hope of passing the inertia gauntlet of what is already built.

 

Double dipping could be a problem, and magnify the alt issue.

 

Say I join with my alt 5 different campaigns, and make the first part of my day a login to switch training.  Say that the embargo rate matches what is currently advertised as the item rate for a loss, 20% I believe.

 

Now I really don't care who wins in my alts non-primary games, as I will embargo a percentage of that training regardless.  If my team wins without me,  great, if not, well I get something anyway.

 

This makes the system all about volume of campaigns I can enter, to get to what is currently "free".

 

That issue would have to be addressed, without penalizing players who are actually active in multiple campaigns on their mains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note I am not trying to shoot down your idea, only pointing out potential flaws.  I happen to like the idea personally, but it needs to be fully explored if it has any hope of passing the inertia gauntlet of what is already built.

 

Double dipping could be a problem, and magnify the alt issue.

 

Say I join with my alt 5 different campaigns, and make the first part of my day a login to switch training.  Say that the embargo rate matches what is currently advertised as the item rate for a loss, 20% I believe.

 

Now I really don't care who wins in my alts non-primary games, as I will embargo a percentage of that training regardless.  If my team wins without me,  great, if not, well I get something anyway.

 

This makes the system all about volume of campaigns I can enter, to get to what is currently "free".

 

That issue would have to be addressed, without penalizing players who are actually active in multiple campaigns on their mains.

 

I think I deal with SOME of this concern here: http://community.crowfall.com/index.php?/topic/14759-discussion-re-designing-the-passive-skill-tree/?p=314771

 

But you are right. You could put in quite a bit of extra work and have a small number of alt accounts that get some benefit eventually. The issue I see, is think about how this will work for guild vs guild when you expound this issue. Those 5 alt spots you took up, took the spots of 5 active players.

 

So either:

Expand your idea and look at it from a guild vs guild perspective or "what if everyone did this" type of perspective.

OR

Fast forward you example. Then what.

 

You have put it ALOT of extra work to do what? Import those alts into a CW with you? This is a "benefit" AND a "negative".

- A benefit because you can now fill more roles

- A negative because you took the place of an active player.

 

Multiply this by 100 "guild members" all having 5 alt accounts, youll hit a CW account limit and not everyone can bring in their alts. Also, if the limit was 500 and was filled with 100 active + 400 alts, youll lose very quickly and get little rewards.... So you would have to strategically use alt accounts to "fill gaps", not rely on them heavily.

 

But yes, this wont deter a SMALL number of alts for each player, but it will deter 

1) the sheer benefit - right now there is no "negative" to alt accounts

2) Alt armies.

 

The entire suggestion kinda works together. If you mainly just adopted the "number of accounts per CW" rule, Sure it deters alts without changing the passive training however it still allows those alts to train at the same pace. Currently all an Alt army would do is train 1 of everything with no risk or time, then whever its needed use that alt for the next CW. So everyone would still have alt armies. Which is why requiring you to be INSIDE the CW to train and it tied to the CW results, and having an account cap - ALL work towards the same goal of making alt armies less appealing and PROMOTING VIP! :)

 

The other aspect I havnt pitched yet - basically because this gets into CW design is.

 

Lets say (Inc A LOT of assumptions)

They do "sieges" at certain times per week or whatever. We know there will likely only be "set times" in which you can actually siege a keep right?

 

Well, if they allow these campaigns to end based on 

"defeat" and not some arbitrary time constraint. 

 

Then think about what will happen to a CW full of alts.

 

They lose very QUICK = less temp EXP they have trained, even with X% Export rate. Your reward was VERY small for quite a bit of work.... Versus a more active CW = longer train times = higher chance of success = more Perma EXP.

 

Basically it ruins the time vs reward aspect of alts and makes it require A LOT more work for an unknown benefit - because you wont know when and where youll actually get to USE the alts. I bet this would deter a majority of alt players and most people who do alts might just do 2 or 3. Just a hunch though.

Edited by th3gatekeeper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I deal with SOME of this concern here: http://community.crowfall.com/index.php?/topic/14759-discussion-re-designing-the-passive-skill-tree/?p=314771

 

But you are right. You could put in quite a bit of extra work and have a small number of alt accounts that get some benefit eventually. The issue I see, is think about how this will work for guild vs guild when you expound this issue. Those 5 alt spots you took up, took the spots of 5 active players.

 

So either:

Expand your idea and look at it from a guild vs guild perspective or "what if everyone did this" type of perspective.

OR

Fast forward you example. Then what.

 

You have put it ALOT of extra work to do what? Import those alts into a CW with you? This is a "benefit" AND a "negative".

- A benefit because you can now fill more roles

- A negative because you took the place of an active player.

 

Multiply this by 100 "guild members" all having 5 alt accounts, youll hit a CW account limit and not everyone can bring in their alts. Also, if the limit was 500 and was filled with 100 active + 400 alts, youll lose very quickly and get little rewards.... So you would have to strategically use alt accounts to "fill gaps", not rely on them heavily.

 

But yes, this wont deter a SMALL number of alts for each player, but it will deter 

1) the sheer benefit - right now there is no "negative" to alt accounts

2) Alt armies.

 

The entire suggestion kinda works together. If you mainly just adopted the "number of accounts per CW" rule, Sure it deters alts without changing the passive training however it still allows those alts to train at the same pace. Currently all an Alt army would do is train 1 of everything with no risk or time, then whever its needed use that alt for the next CW. So everyone would still have alt armies. Which is why requiring you to be INSIDE the CW to train and it tied to the CW results, and having an account cap - ALL work towards the same goal of making alt armies less appealing and PROMOTING VIP! :)

 

The other aspect I havnt pitched yet - basically because this gets into CW design is.

 

Lets say (Inc A LOT of assumptions)

They do "sieges" at certain times per week or whatever. We know there will likely only be "set times" in which you can actually siege a keep right?

 

Well, if they allow these campaigns to end based on 

"defeat" and not some arbitrary time constraint. 

 

Then think about what will happen to a CW full of alts.

 

They lose very QUICK = less temp EXP they have trained, even with X% Export rate. Your reward was VERY small for quite a bit of work.... Versus a more active CW = longer train times = higher chance of success = more Perma EXP.

 

Basically it ruins the time vs reward aspect of alts and makes it require A LOT more work for an unknown benefit - because you wont know when and where youll actually get to USE the alts. I bet this would deter a majority of alt players and most people who do alts might just do 2 or 3. Just a hunch though.

 

Your making an assumption, that there is some sort of limit on the number of players that can enter the world.

 

That does not seem to be supported by the developers intent.

 

http://crowfall.com/en/faq/campaign/#7

 

 

The only limit that will be placed on the user population for each Campaign World will be the technical limitations of the hardware, i.e. how many players can a server handle?

Since volume of records in a DB is basically a non-issue as a technical limitation, the only real limitation is simultaneous active players.

 

An alt training in the background in an offline state is not going to tax technical resources enough to justify restrictions, given the above statement.

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...