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

ACE Q&A for April - Official discussion thread

Recommended Posts

At 3:45 on the video it was mentioned that "1 Support Power = 1% heal bonus".  Is this correct?  This would mean all the skill training and weapon bonuses create a very large healing percentage difference when compared to a non trained healer.

Edited by Weebles

Official Moderator of the Community Crowfall Discord!  Come join the discussion @ https://discord.me/crowfall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pann:

There are numerous systems/features which I'm looking forward to which haven't been introduced yet. I am generally pleased with progress, but I'd really like more transparency to be completely frank with you. I've posted laundry lists of questions regarding resource pools and statisticsbanking, vaults and inventory, amongst others. I know your time is understandably occupied with coding, asset creation, engineering, marketing, etc. However, it is clear to me based upon the questions asked in these Q&As and the questions asked on the boards that there is still a fundamental disconnect between the testers/players and the developers in terms of understanding game mechanics. It is difficult for us as testers to know if things are working as intended if we don't know how things are intended to work. Some skills are obviously not meant to work (slash/crush arrows for rangers for example) while others we figure out are broken (200% healing from Covered with Flies instead of 2%). When we ask "is armor mitigation working"? Its clear that we can't tell for sure. Thats a problem. We are the fanboys...we are your most loyal and ardent supporters (and customers)...and we are getting frustrated. That's not a good sign. 

Edited by Gradishar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Weebles said:

At 3:45 on the video it was mentioned that "1 Support Power = 1% heal bonus".  Is this correct?  This would mean all the skill training and weapon bonuses create a very large healing percentage difference when compared to a non trained healer.

1hps is not the same as 1% heal bonus.


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pann said:

Has the system/feature that you're most looking forward been introduced yet? If so, how do you like the progress so far? If not, what is it that you're anticipating?

I'm mostly waiting on Thralls, Combat/Exploration Disciplines, Assassin and Stalker Archetypes, and for Siege World (Siege Perilous + Big World) to be introduced :P

 

This Q&A also reminded me of the Milestone Sprints you guys used to do, I'd be interested in seeing those make a comeback. It's always interesting to see being the scenes. :D

 


giphy.gif

You Can't Be A Genius, If You Aren't The Slightest Bit Insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good Q&A but you missed the point on the AC / Support power questions... is parent stat inheritance working? We know that 100AC gives 1% mitigation to everything. But we have no way of telling if the AC parent stat now applies to those mitigation child stats on individual armor pieces, or if my legio's 500 support power is inherited by the healing power stat and actually results in additional healing.  It can't be 1% because we'd sure as hell notice a 500% healing increase.  500hp extra per heal is less noticeable, because it might be 100 per tick for 5 ticks or something that falls inside the RNG margin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Gradishar said:

Pann:

There are numerous systems/features which I'm looking forward to which haven't been introduced yet. I am generally pleased with progress, but I'd really like more transparency to be completely frank with you. I've posted laundry lists of questions regarding resource pools and statisticsbanking, vaults and inventory, amongst others. I know your time is understandably occupied with coding, asset creation, engineering, marketing, etc. However, it is clear to me based upon the questions asked in these Q&As and the questions asked on the boards that there is still a fundamental disconnect between the testers/players and the developers in terms of understanding game mechanics. It is difficult for us as testers to know if things are working as intended if we don't know how things are intended to work. Some skills are obviously not meant to work (slash/crush arrows for rangers for example) while others we figure out are broken (200% healing from Covered with Flies instead of 2%). When we ask "is armor mitigation working"? Its clear that we can't tell for sure. Thats a problem. We are the fanboys...we are your most loyal and ardent supporters (and customers)...and we are getting frustrated. That's not a good sign. 

This stage of testing is about figuring out whether systems work mechanically.  Worrying about the specific numbers isn't as important. 

I do not believe there is a fundamental disconnect, and I also believe ACE is very transparent with what they are working on, while not taking too much time to talk about things that aren't quite a priority yet. 

I believe the biggest disconnect and source of frustration so far is that people still can not shake the fact that they are testing, not playing a game with some personal goal or objective that needs winning. 

I think the mitigation part of the Q&A illustrates this issue perfectly.  They have the crafting of various qualities of armor in there to test crafting using different qualities of materials, but as far as testing mitigations and such they are not gating that, and putting most of it on the easy-to-attain basic gear. 

Some testers will go in and they are immediately looking at the balance aspect, where they believe epic gear should be better than basic gear, but this is a test, not a game, it does not operate on the same philosophies as a game itself.  In a game you would believe epic gear is better than basic gear, but in a test depending what they want to test it simply does not need to be. 

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Weebles said:

He cleared said "1 HPS or heal percentage" in the video.

No, he said heal per second or damage per second, you may have misheard "per second" as "percentage".

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pann said:

Has the system/feature that you're most looking forward been introduced yet? If so, how do you like the progress so far? If not, what is it that you're anticipating?

FULL STORY

LOL.
Honestly?!
Are you kidding?!

You are over a year behind any schedule and ask if the feature we are most looking forward has been introcuced yet?!
Is this a prank or something, is this trolling? You cant be serious.

Ok, I shall answer to this, your game development is very slow and showing very low progression. There isnt really any substential game existing even yet, as good as everything is missing or not working, after much more than 2 years. You got a ton of stuff to do before you can even think of soft launching your game, and your performance so far wasnt very promising really. So good luck for soft launching Crowfall in late 2018 with many missing features still.

You would better realize this and increase your efforts.
Asking this question really is beyond any good reasons...


After EverQuest Next is gone, its Star Citizen for me.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

This stage of testing is about figuring out whether systems work mechanically.  Worrying about the specific numbers isn't as important. 

I do not believe there is a fundamental disconnect, and I also believe ACE is very transparent with what they are working on, while not taking too much time to talk about things that aren't quite a priority yet. 

I believe the biggest disconnect and source of frustration so far is that people still can not shake the fact that they are testing, not playing a game with some personal goal or objective that needs winning. 

You are incorrect sir. I don't care whether Armor Class is properly balanced with Attack Power in terms of "specific numbers." I do care if Armor Class is effecting damage and actually causing mitigation and whether the three different armors are having different resulting effects. When we don't know how stamina works. When we don't know if a skill increases our stamina or our resource pool. When we don't know if Constitution effects HPs, Stamina, both or neither...I don't think ACE is doing a good job in communicating to their testers. This has nothing to do with trying to "win" the game. This has everything to do with effective use of time and assisting the developers in identifying bugs, poor design decisions, etc. The responses I receive from question posts are entirely supposition and presumption. Understanding the design goals behind these features and systems is important and more resources should be dedicated to helping us understand how the game is intended to work. You may like the "age of discovery" and fumbling around in the dark hoping to discern wether a Mace with +.4 Resource is preferred to a Mace with +.04 to Stamina for the new Stamina Knight (I literally spent 3 hours trying to answer that question on Saturday). I think some better communication would go a long way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, durenthal said:

A good Q&A but you missed the point on the AC / Support power questions... is parent stat inheritance working? We know that 100AC gives 1% mitigation to everything. But we have no way of telling if the AC parent stat now applies to those mitigation child stats on individual armor pieces, or if my legio's 500 support power is inherited by the healing power stat and actually results in additional healing.  It can't be 1% because we'd sure as hell notice a 500% healing increase.  500hp extra per heal is less noticeable, because it might be 100 per tick for 5 ticks or something that falls inside the RNG margin.

Word.


Hi, I'm moneda.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Gradishar said:

You are incorrect sir. I don't care whether Armor Class is properly balanced with Attack Power in terms of "specific numbers." I do care if Armor Class is effecting damage and actually causing mitigation and whether the three different armors are having different resulting effects. When we don't know how stamina works. When we don't know if a skill increases our stamina or our resource pool. When we don't know if Constitution effects HPs, Stamina, both or neither...I don't think ACE is doing a good job in communicating to their testers. This has nothing to do with trying to "win" the game. This has everything to do with effective use of time and assisting the developers in identifying bugs, poor design decisions, etc. The responses I receive from question posts are entirely supposition and presumption. Understanding the design goals behind these features and systems is important and more resources should be dedicated to helping us understand how the game is intended to work. You may like the "age of discovery" and fumbling around in the dark hoping to discern wether a Mace with +.4 Resource is preferred to a Mace with +.04 to Stamina for the new Stamina Knight (I literally spent 3 hours trying to answer that question on Saturday). I think some better communication would go a long way. 

Your post reveals the very disconnect I am talking about though.  You thirst for knowledge about the game, this isn't bad, we are all anticipating a fun game to sink our teeth into, but I believe that desire to know the inner workings of everything is distracting from the nature of testing.  At the end of your post you talk about spending 3 hours to figure out which stat is more optimal for a knight right now.  This is the mentality of achieving a personal goal of understanding and min/maxing for a knight so that you can gain an advantage with it while playing and participating in things such as pvp for example.  In this regard you are approaching the test as a player/gamer instead of just a tester. 

Sure if you knew as much about all of the systems as ACE did, you might be able to go in and find very specific bugs or mismatches with those systems, but right now they aren't focused on the intricacies of stats and whether they are all perfectly working as intended, eventually, maybe even soon they will be. 

Perhaps ACE should put out another list of the things they really want people to focus in on while testing.  It's been a while since they did that.

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I want right now in crowfall, is some sort way to actually find pvp, its too hard to find even numbers for combat, need some sort of battlegrounds or something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

Your post reveals the very disconnect I am talking about though.  You thirst for knowledge about the game, this isn't bad, we are all anticipating a fun game to sink our teeth into, but I believe that desire to know the inner workings of everything is distracting from the nature of testing.  At the end of your post you talk about spending 3 hours to figure out which stat is more optimal for a knight right now.  This is the mentality of achieving a personal goal of understanding and min/maxing for a knight so that you can gain an advantage with it while playing and participating in things such as pvp for example. 

Sure if you knew as much about all of the systems as ACE did, you might be able to go in and find very specific bugs or mismatches with those systems, but right now they aren't focused on the intricacies of stats and whether they are all perfectly working as intended, eventually, maybe even soon they will be. 

I provided an example of the "fog of testing" we are presently living in. Again, you may enjoy the fact that no one knows what Constitution does or what Strength does and wether a Confessor's crit chance is working as intended or if armor is working or if slashing damage is working or frankly anything for that matter. You may be content being the mice in the maze searching for the cheese, blissfully ignorant of the intent of the experiment, the design goals, the parameters of the test. And maybe you're right. Maybe we should just shut up and keep looking for the cheese...wether its there or not. Unfortunately, I think we have already lost of a lot of testers who are frustrated with fumbling around in the dark. I sincerely want this game to be successful...and believe more transparency would assist in that goal. Obviously, you disagree...and believe we should just be thankful for what crumbs we are being fed. If you think that model can ultimately be sustained...I wish you luck. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gradishar said:

I provided an example of the "fog of testing" we are presently living in. Again, you may enjoy the fact that no one knows what Constitution does or what Strength does and wether a Confessor's crit chance is working as intended or if armor is working or if slashing damage is working or frankly anything for that matter. You may be content being the mice in the maze searching for the cheese, blissfully ignorant of the intent of the experiment, the design goals, the parameters of the test. And maybe you're right. Maybe we should just shut up and keep looking for the cheese...wether its there or not. Unfortunately, I think we have already lost of a lot of testers who are frustrated with fumbling around in the dark. I sincerely want this game to be successful...and believe more transparency would assist in that goal. Obviously, you disagree...and believe we should just be thankful for what crumbs we are being fed. If you think that model can ultimately be sustained...I wish you luck. 

It doesn't really matter if I enjoy it or not, because the point of testing isn't enjoyment.  It honestly doesn't matter if I am content or not either.

I don't think you should shut up, people should always voice their feedback and concerns, but I do think that the disconnect you perceive is because of people approaching the test with a certain mentality. 

Do you think we would have lost some of those testers if they had approached the test for what it is, instead of searching for something more progressed and more game-like?

The very notion of getting frustrated at a pre-alpha test is a bit silly, because as long as you know what you are getting into, it should never really end up frustrating you.


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, VIKINGNAIL said:

It doesn't really matter if I enjoy it or not, because the point of testing isn't enjoyment.  It honestly doesn't matter if I am content or not either.

I don't think you should shut up, people should always voice their feedback and concerns, but I do think that the disconnect you perceive is because of people approaching the test with a certain mentality. 

Do you think we would have lost some of those testers if they had approached the test for what it is, instead of searching for something more progressed and more game-like?

The very notion of getting frustrated at a pre-alpha test is a bit silly, because as long as you know what you are getting into, it should never really end up frustrating you.

Ah yes...and we would have world peace if we just took a moment to stare into each other's eyes and contemplate our similarities instead of our differences. 

Anyway...

Yes, "testers" often approach "games" as "gamers." This is a truism. Should we be "frustrated" with a lack of communication as to how attributes are intended to work? Should we be "frustrated" with not know if Armor Class actually provides any actual mitigation? (armor certainly does...training AC is another matter all together). You're right...we're just being silly. We should just take a deep breath...sing kumbaya and know its all going to be ok...so long as we have better attitudes about the entire endeavor. 

Thank you VN...for pointing out what a bad attitude I have and I will henceforth strive to replicate your blissfully ignorant persona. 

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...