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

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, presharrison said:

If only it was $5.  I wish...

If you have a pledge/KS package, there are re-sellers that will buy them at cost if not more. 

I agree that it isn't likely they'll change the design to fit a particular group as by this point they've made it fairly clear what they are going for. Much is to come and unfortunately it is still rather early, but CF is not Shadowbane 2.0. From the start they said it wouldn't be for everyone, which includes die hard fans of SB.

I'm looking forward to CU as well, but two completely different designs that will please different players.

 


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

RENAMING THIS THREAD TO: "PLEASE EDUCATE ME ON CROWFALL'S FUTURE CUSTOMIZATION SYSTEMS" The customization of looks, genders or character powers, weapons and builds has yet to arrive to the test

Not even close...   you are under-informed.   Shadowbane had the same restrictions on weapons allowed your base class with starting runes and disciplines unlocking the other weapon types.   Crowfall w

Man, most of your feedback is kind of hard to respond to because it's just not very specific. I'll respond to the ones that are clear enough and I don't disagree with all of your initial impressions.

On 4/18/2017 at 8:32 AM, mivius said:

Right now they are making it all about gear: vessels, disciplines, weapons, tools, armor... You never have to make any 'real' choices, besides your UT paths, and even that is debatable. The choice in AT trees only matter so long as 'everyone else' doesn't have it trained, which is only time-gated, so easily overcome. 

I also question, and have reservations about, the ability of disciplines to make things 'dynamic'.  As already stated, they are artificially gated, which means people will quickly run tests and determine 'best' min/max's.  So while they may have 50+ disciplines, if 30 of them have no practical use/application, or for any reason are deemed 'undesirable', what will be the point?  Plus, the discipline system, IMO, will not make up for the complete lack of choices in AT's training, we can't make 'bad' decisions, outside of choosing to train a less desirable node over a more powerful one, which can be corrected anytime..

I don't understand how you can say that there are multiple systems, which require players to critically think and put builds together, yet there are no "real" choices. What is a "real" choice? What is a "bad" choice?

The min/max situation happens in every single game that offers choice. Some choices end up being more powerful, devs make tweaks, players find counters, more options are added, the meta or game play evolves. Don't know how this could be avoided. If 3/5 Disciplines are garbage out the gate, that is simply poor dev work, but bit too early to jump to that conclusion.

If AT training is the be all for you or anyone, then CF likely won't scratch that itch, but all the systems added up don't remove a players ability to make choices, be it good, bad, or bestest ever.

On 4/18/2017 at 9:00 AM, Helix said:

character is little more than a disposable shell in crowfall.

There are few if any "unique" choices to be made on the archetype skill lines; you're pretty much on "rails". In crowfall you're a knight, and that's pretty much it (and I know you'll bring up promotions, but we know nothing about them, and I wouldn't be surprised if they were pushed till long after release or canned altogether).

You can craft disciplines, vessels and weapons which extend the knight, but if you die and lose those items, you're back to just being a knight.

I think this is one reason why a lot of people have a problem with "progression" in this game; nothing sticks. It's temporary progression and then a period of regression.

I agree about the shell description and like it. We are more than XYZ.

There is strong incentive to not die and lose everything, maintain a source of XYZ if we do die, and put more importance on non-combat roles and systems.

While I don't believe there really is much "unique" choice in any of these games, there definitely are choices to be made.

So far, seems like choices will be more on the macro instead of micro. Less about training +6 Dex at creation and more about what one does with the various build systems available over time.

Promotions, Disciplines, Adv/Disadvantages might scratch certain itches, but overall, I believe it goes beyond that and ACE isn't making a character builder, but a game about what we do with what we have. One thing that has driven me away from games is when I find myself so focused on min/max and character building, that I don't actually play or enjoy the games themselves.

On 4/18/2017 at 9:01 AM, coolwaters said:

I just don't understand why eliminating character differentiation in the skill training was ever a design goal.

If I had my way there would be no or very, very slow changing to a character. Your choices in who and what you are would be meaningful and would have weight. 

---

No, the things I want will not exist.

I want skill training that defines my character.

----

Again, I do not consider gear to be a part of character building. You do and that's fine.

The one thing I am very clear on, however, is that the current plan disclosed to us is to only allow character building via gear.

As I commented above, to me it seems ACE is going for big picture when it comes to building a "character." We aren't a race/class combo forever. They've gone with a more open and could be said "modern" approach.

CF isn't about playing and building a single "character" or build exclusively for a length of time. While it looks like it will be smart to invest into fewer options, the system still allows for players to deviate without having to reroll or lose all progress.

I agree that some features wanted will not exist. Just how it is as CF is it's own design. 

Again as I mentioned above, the multiple "gear" or temporary systems that make up a build and "character" all play into the overall design of loss, dependence on others, short term campaigns and other features that aren't found in many/any other games in the same mix.

Unfortunately we don't know how most of the character building systems will work so it's just assumption, but hopefully it is enough for some. However, at the base level, I don't see CF as a deeply complex RPG about +/- with a stat point here and there being a massive deal. To me it looks to be about putting something together from various systems which may be limited or deep and then doing something with them. I'd rather the whole be greater than individual parts.

Training a ATs & Universals, Gear selection, Discipline selection, potential Promo & Adv/Disadv choices, Vessel options should all have meaning and weight if done well. It isn't Shadowbane or insert game's system, but that doesn't mean choices will be throw aways without any consequences.

 


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, APE said:

I don't understand how you can say that there are multiple systems, which require players to critically think and put builds together, yet there are no "real" choices. What is a "real" choice? What is a "bad" choice?

The min/max situation happens in every single game that offers choice. Some choices end up being more powerful, devs make tweaks, players find counters, more options are added, the meta or game play evolves. Don't know how this could be avoided. If 3/5 Disciplines are garbage out the gate, that is simply poor dev work, but bit too early to jump to that conclusion.

If AT training is the be all for you or anyone, then CF likely won't scratch that itch, but all the systems added up don't remove a players ability to make choices, be it good, bad, or bestest ever.

 

I never once said anything about requiring players to think critically, that is your own injection. My argument fairly saliently stated that the systems currently appear to be headed in a direction where you will not think critically, and your choices are gated almost exclusively by gear.

There are no 'real' choices in AT training.  Before we got numbers, I trained the AP nodes (middle) for confessor.  Had I been able to see the numerical gains of those nodes versus nodes like Fury/Vendetta\Projectiles, it's a non-choice.  The thing is, despite it being an 'at the time' bad choice, I just changed how I was training.  If everyone always has access to all the AT training nodes, it's equivalent to a non-choice, because we're all gated by only a time mechanic there.  The minor choice of what to train before what is a small condolence, again, because it is a wash in the end.

But let us address the questions:

"What is a "real" choice?"  Starting with the very boring, yet required, caveat that all things are a matter of perspective...  A real choice is a choice that provides some kind of 'consequence'.  In the case of AT's I will give a couple of (hopefully) brief examples:

   Ex1) I have two (more would be better, but I understand the constraints) branches to go down in my AT.  One leads me to +AP and Min/Max weapon damage, one leads me to Crit/Crit damage, each lead to a 'unique' ability gained upon a final node.  Providing the mechanics are balanced so that on a 'base' level each completed tree would equate to roughly the same 'power' (subjective) gain, then choosing one tree prevents you from acquiring any nodes from the other tree.  This can be mutated in any number of ways: IE make it so individual node choices allow you to choose X Y or Z node, you choose Y, and can no longer train X or Z, but still have a build path to the end.  It can be one choice, or many along the way.  More choices at varying levels will allow for more 'meaningful' choices, and would actually require you to think critically about your path/choices.

   Ex2) I have 3 to 5 (again, number relatively irrelevant outside of development time/cost/etc) branches in my AT, call them A B & C.  I choose B.  All nodes in B line train at a normal rate, if I want to train A or C line, I get a time cost multiplier (we'll use the simple double for this hypothetical) for each node in that line. So I decide that that first A node is really attractive, I spend 6 days training it instead of 3 (current times used).  Now you can gate it there and say after X branches are trained you can not train other branches, OR you can increase a multiplier on train time to allow branches to be trained.  Without the gate mechanic it still leaves you with a 'lesser evil' style choice, as you can still train everything, but using the fessor tree again, if I trained the top two branches, and wanted to train in armor, and it takes me almost two weeks to train just the first node, that's a much more of a "real" choice than we currently have.

"What is a "bad" choice?"...While I could give a 'bad' choice scenario for AT's, most of the time those "bad" choices are more about design/development failures rather than the failure on the part of the player (ie, you have Superawesomefireball as the final choice in a node, you finally get there, train it, but it on your hotbar, use it...it just crit for ...50 points of damage (in our current system)...See original Demonologist tree in Age of Conan for many examples!)

A simple gear bad choice would be...equipping a shield discipline when you can't use a shield.  That is clearly an exaggerated scenario, but it still is a poignant example.

In-so-far as min/max and disciplines, again, this is a known quantity in any gaming environment at this point.  While we do not have our hands on them to test, what little information that has been offered is concerning to me.  I see artificial gates, which in contrast to AT's is not providing meaningful choices, but limiting them.  This can be seen as either hand-holding (ie No little boy/girl, you can't do that, do this instead), or punishment (ie No little boy/girl, you WILL NOT do that).  Some of them appear to be just for the "cool" factor, which I understand to a degree.

And lastly, AT training isn't the be-all end-all for me, nor anyone AFAIK. My concern is there are no choices present, you can train the entire base AT tree, and are a carbon copy of the same AT next to you.  To branch out beyond that everything is gated by gear.  If I want a promotion class, I need to either find an intact promotion vessel (according to FAQ), or wait out the time for a necro to make one, so the choice is still dependent upon a gear gate.  Disciplines, are a gear gate as well, and the concern there becomes the acquisition, which, we are all aware, on some level, they are going to artificially gate at least some of these (and other gear) further with thralls, which is still just another piece of equipment.

Wasn't it supposed to be 1/3 training, 1/3 gear, 1/3 player skill?  Right now it is 0% AT training (small variable possible based on start time and choice, but ultimately, 0%), being generous: 10% player skill, and 90% is gear choices.  While the 10% & 90% are my guestimates, tell me how tools, armor, weapons, vessels, and disciplines do not make up the vast vast majority of 'choices' we have to make.  And of those choices, again, we revert back to min/max...are you REALLY taking 'resource' over crit, crit dmg, AP, or support power (AT dependent/preference ofc)?  Not unless you are going for color over stat and can't get the needed materials: which, in most cases of late was due to the artificial "Let's get rid of leather" era.  Disciplines can't "fix" this, because it's just more gear, promotion classes are gated by the same means...we have other choices?

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, presharrison said:

Uhhh....

what....?????

lol he's saying you put so much emphasis on cosmetic crap, does that mean I don't want cosmetics, no cosmetics are a great way for them to make extra money while at the same time maintaining a non pay to win status. But here is where it differs Where as people who actually are playing the game because they want to play the game (versus those playing for cosmetics) will be obliterated because all the time you spent worrying, "how's my costume~ or How's my hair~" will get roflstomped by the other and honestly I see his point. You don't care about the game systems or whats out there/whats coming, you just wanna look fancy in an online world.... That is how I see this, correct me if I'm wrong. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SoberSoul said:

lol he's saying you put so much emphasis on cosmetic crap, does that mean I don't want cosmetics, no cosmetics are a great way for them to make extra money while at the same time maintaining a non pay to win status. But here is where it differs Where as people who actually are playing the game because they want to play the game (versus those playing for cosmetics) will be obliterated because all the time you spent worrying, "how's my costume~ or How's my hair~" will get roflstomped by the other and honestly I see his point. You don't care about the game systems or whats out there/whats coming, you just wanna look fancy in an online world.... That is how I see this, correct me if I'm wrong. 

So I am still trying to figure out at what point what I said turned into cosmetics?

I was talking about the customization for character creation... the only comment I made that could possibly be considered cosmetics is that I said the game looked cartoonish.  

That is a small thing, my major complaint is the lack of customization.  In other words (all cookie cutter characters)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, presharrison said:

I was talking about the customization for character creation... 

That is a small thing, my major complaint is the lack of customization.  In other words (all cookie cutter characters)

 

Why do you think that game will be this way at launch? Have your read about the promotion classes, disciplines and creation runes?  

It seems like you logged into Pre-Alpha Testing and falsely concluded that the unfinished features you experienced were representative of the finished product. 

Shadowbane - House Avari/Hy'shen
"Gimp elves get good elves killed." - Belina

Avari Discord - https://discord.gg/Bch24PV

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, soulein said:

Why do you think that game will be this way at launch? Have your read about the promotion classes, disciplines and creation runes?  

It seems like you logged into Pre-Alpha Testing and falsely concluded that the unfinished features you experienced were representative of the finished product. 

As I said in a previous post.  I believe they will change things before launch but the core of the game I believe they will / can't change.  The archetypes have always seem to be the core of there game, I do not believe they will change them.

just my .02

i hope I am wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, presharrison said:

As I said in a previous post.  I believe they will change things before launch but the core of the game I believe they will / can't change.  The archetypes have always seem to be the core of there game, I do not believe they will change them.

just my .02

i hope I am wrong.

What do you mean by "core of the game"? Do you mean they are the core of the character customization and advancement feature of the game?

Archetypes are three things:

1. An aesthetic archetype/idea which includes gear skins and animation sets. This includes the racial, cultural and professional background of the archetype, which is meant to be unique. A Druid isn't meant to wear fine silks or a suit of metal plates, just the same way a Knight isn't meant to be a Berserker in a loincloth. The aesthetic idea of the archetype isn't likely to change much from its original concept.

2. A set of skills. Skills are meant to slowly increase the player's effectiveness and power over time as an alternative to level based progression. Skills have always been about power, not about character specialization. 

3. An initial set of powers and equipment types. The archetypes' initial abilities and weapon types were meant to be "stock" configurations you'd get if you just started. 

All of the character customization in the game will come through crafting promotion class vessels (which may come loaded with new abilities compared to basic vessels) and by slotting discipline runes into a vessel. Discipline runes can add new passives, weapons types and active abilities. You don't like playing as a basic knight? Take some disciplines which grant Bow abilities and play as a tanky, weapon swapping archer/melee hybrid. The possibilities for customization implied in the discipline system are really quite extensive- even by SB standards. 

In conclusion, you're wrong. Hope that helps. :D

Shadowbane - House Avari/Hy'shen
"Gimp elves get good elves killed." - Belina

Avari Discord - https://discord.gg/Bch24PV

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, soulein said:

What do you mean by "core of the game"? Do you mean they are the core of the character customization and advancement feature of the game?

Archetypes are three things:

1. An aesthetic archetype/idea which includes gear skins and animation sets. This includes the racial, cultural and professional background of the archetype, which is meant to be unique. A Druid isn't meant to wear fine silks or a suit of metal plates, just the same way a Knight isn't meant to be a Berserker in a loincloth. The aesthetic idea of the archetype isn't likely to change much from its original concept.

2. A set of skills. Skills are meant to slowly increase the player's effectiveness and power over time as an alternative to level based progression. Skills have always been about power, not about character specialization. 

3. An initial set of powers and equipment types. The archetypes' initial abilities and weapon types were meant to be "stock" configurations you'd get if you just started. 

All of the character customization in the game will come through crafting promotion class vessels (which may come loaded with new abilities compared to basic vessels) and by slotting discipline runes into a vessel. Discipline runes can add new passives, weapons types and active abilities. You don't like playing as a basic knight? Take some disciplines which grant Bow abilities and play as a tanky, weapon swapping archer/melee hybrid. The possibilities for customization implied in the discipline system are really quite extensive- even by SB standards. 

In conclusion, you're wrong. Hope that helps. :D

You were pretty good up until the your wrong part.  Your #1 pretty much supports my argument that they are limiting the character customization.  You keep looking at things from your cookie cutter classing.  

You said "A Druid isn't meant to wear fine silks or a suit of metal plates, just the same way a Knight isn't meant to be a Berserker in a loincloth."

what I say is you are limiting your class to a cookie cutter.  So everyone that plays a knight needs to play with heavy armor and a sword.  Come on man, where the hell is your creativity?!?

why can't I make a knight with height dex in a loincloth?  

Ahhh hell kid, obviously you like the cookie cutter classes and don't like to be different.  It's fine play your knight in shiny armor.

Also you keep putting all this hope into the runes.  I played shadowbane for many years, and I have seen the runes they have there.  They are great and help to customize your character no doubt (if they do something similar). But I was hoping we would get more then just runes and skills to customize the characters.

i guess I am just so sick of the games that have the same damn build for the characters and no matter what you do or how you build it a knight is a knight. I want a knight in a loincloth with a 2 handed sword!!! Why can't we do that? It might work like poorly made socks but I want the option to try it. Some of us like to think outside the box when creating characters.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, mivius said:

I never once said anything about requiring players to think critically, that is your own injection. My argument fairly saliently stated that the systems currently appear to be headed in a direction where you will not think critically, and your choices are gated almost exclusively by gear.

While you didn't say that players would have to critically think, you did list multiple systems that require players to make choices within and across to come up with a cohesive build. To me, this requires critical thinking. Each system alone may or may not lend itself to complex choices, but as a whole, it isn't simple.

Choices gated by gear are still choices. Wanting more UI based choices (I assume?) is just a different means.

There are no 'real' choices in AT training.  Before we got numbers, I trained the AP nodes (middle) for confessor.  Had I been able to see the numerical gains of those nodes versus nodes like Fury/Vendetta\Projectiles, it's a non-choice.  The thing is, despite it being an 'at the time' bad choice, I just changed how I was training.  If everyone always has access to all the AT training nodes, it's equivalent to a non-choice, because we're all gated by only a time mechanic there.  The minor choice of what to train before what is a small condolence, again, because it is a wash in the end.

Starting off, choosing an AT or Universal is a significant choice. At 100% trained, there isn't variation within any individual path/tree, but this assumes people will go for 100%. Anything short and there will be some choices made. With time cost, it is highly likely that branching out across Universals/ATs will be the norm, although VIP will decrease this on the AT side.

I agree that certain nodes seem like clear "get first" options, but the devs have said training is far from finalized, but regardless, they've also said that AT training specifically isn't to fill the want that some have for character building. AT training is unfortunately a carry over of time = power of traditional vertical power games. Being such, in most games, leveling from 1 to X results in similar outcomes with potentially variation here or there that is usually negated by other systems (gear/spec trees). AT training does this for the most part for better or worse.

"What is a "real" choice?"  Starting with the very boring, yet required, caveat that all things are a matter of perspective...  A real choice is a choice that provides some kind of 'consequence'.  In the case of AT's I will give a couple of (hopefully) brief examples:

   Ex1) individual node choices allow you to choose X Y or Z node, you choose Y, and can no longer train X or Z, but still have a build path to the end.  It can be one choice, or many along the way.  More choices at varying levels will allow for more 'meaningful' choices, and would actually require you to think critically about your path/choices.

Balance.

Many/most games have such a design and never ending balance issues. The more hard lined paths, the more there is to work out. Instead of having to make Duelist and Ranger have similar value, now have to make sure various paths within each has equal or similar value along with potential outcomes in relation to other systems.

There is also the issue of investing time into passive training without knowing the result. Rolling the dice isn't that exciting in such situations for me. Without respecs which remove "meaningful" choice, I'm stuck with a lackluster result. Even if there was a reset, now I have to passively train another path hoping it is better. Removing this allows ACE to focus on stats mainly and avoid many headaches.

I find nothing wrong with such a system if devs have the resources and design goals, but doesn't appear ACE wants to go down this road.

   Ex2) if I trained the top two branches, and wanted to train in armor, and it takes me almost two weeks to train just the first node, that's a much more of a "real" choice than we currently have.

Again, this approach seems to require a lot more dev time to build out numerous paths to have relatively equal power or use. If not, run into A > B typical scenario with everyone training the better option first, second, third, etc. End result likely not vastly different.

"What is a "bad" choice?"

A simple gear bad choice would be...equipping a shield discipline when you can't use a shield.  That is clearly an exaggerated scenario, but it still is a poignant example.

That is straightforward, but I see a lot of potential for "bad" or wasted choices in short or long term training. Despite having access to everything with enough time, time is a limited resource. Planning efficiently will lead to a better character overall and even with the ability to swap paths/nodes, the more one does this, the less efficient they are. Training range weapon types and melee ATs is an obvious less efficient way to go, regardless if it is just a matter of swapping to melee weapon training or range ATs. Training X armor and not having access to it will leave one at a loss. 

Those that make the best use of time/training along with what they do in-game will be at an advantage. The system might not offer a lot of opportunity to make a permanently poor character, but at the same time, it won't guarantee a peak performer by default either.

In-so-far as min/max and disciplines, again, this is a known quantity in any gaming environment at this point.  While we do not have our hands on them to test, what little information that has been offered is concerning to me.  I see artificial gates, which in contrast to AT's is not providing meaningful choices, but limiting them.  

At this point, not much we can do but speculate. Considering the games/systems that these devs have worked on, my assumption is they are going to come up with something that will please many but still potentially let some down. For now, I'm willing to see what they actually produce.

And lastly, AT training isn't the be-all end-all for me, nor anyone AFAIK. My concern is there are no choices present, you can train the entire base AT tree, and are a carbon copy of the same AT next to you.  To branch out beyond that everything is gated by gear.  If I want a promotion class, I need to either find an intact promotion vessel (according to FAQ), or wait out the time for a necro to make one, so the choice is still dependent upon a gear gate.  Disciplines, are a gear gate as well, and the concern there becomes the acquisition, which, we are all aware, on some level, they are going to artificially gate at least some of these (and other gear) further with thralls, which is still just another piece of equipment.

I've seen several latch onto AT training and see it as an area to "make their character their own." While it seems fairly clear that no one system is supposed to do this in CF. 

What is the problem with gating build options behind "gear?" For me, the end result is the same regardless if I open an UI and click boxes, click on a NPC and do the same, or slap on gear. I end up with a build of my choosing. To me, going with gear results in greater interdependence of varied roles, makes for a better economy, and increases the need for "skill" to avoid losing what has been obtained. I likely will play differently if dying will result in losing a large chunk of my build.

Wasn't it supposed to be 1/3 training, 1/3 gear, 1/3 player skill?  Right now it is 0% AT training (small variable possible based on start time and choice, but ultimately, 0%), being generous: 10% player skill, and 90% is gear choices.  While the 10% & 90% are my guestimates, tell me how tools, armor, weapons, vessels, and disciplines do not make up the vast vast majority of 'choices' we have to make.  And of those choices, again, we revert back to min/max...are you REALLY taking 'resource' over crit, crit dmg, AP, or support power (AT dependent/preference ofc)?  Not unless you are going for color over stat and can't get the needed materials: which, in most cases of late was due to the artificial "Let's get rid of leather" era.  Disciplines can't "fix" this, because it's just more gear, promotion classes are gated by the same means...we have other choices?

Those "gear" systems do make up a lot of our choices and build. Again, I don't see a huge issue (for me). However, as time goes on, we are seeing them open up and allow more flexibility as well.

Such as being able to swap powers on the tray, multiple passives, and potentially larger pools of abilities to choose from, be it baseline, Promo, or Disciplines. Advantages/Disadvantages appear to still be coming and will be another added layer of choice. As the name implies they should come with pro/cons that result in further variation.

The 1/3 was in reference to power I believe and I hope it ends up being close. Right now, I do see more importance on gear/training instead of skill which is unfortunate as I much prefer skill based outcomes.

Individually, the systems won't replace what some want/expect or have come to know from other games. As a whole, we do have multiple systems that we have to make choices within and them with each other. 

Purely combat based:

  • AT(s) Training - Choose nodes until maxed or goals met
  • Universal Training - Weapon Basics/Styles, Armor, Vessels, Stealth, Tracking, Siege, Pets - Likely some will be like AT with full training focus and others with specialization within
  • Vessel/Armor/Weapons - Ideal stats
  • Disciplines - Potentially hundreds/thousands of choices. Unlock passives, powers, trays, weapon types, etc.
  • Promos - Maybe combo of AT+Discipline either through training and or gear granting further stats/powers/options. Or could be scrapped.
  • Advantages/Disadvantages - Further vessel/build variation

Be it short or long term, I find it unlikely that folks will end with carbon copies of one another without gravitating towards FOTM builds that would still require decent effort to obtain due to time/resource constraints.

Ultimately it is up to us to find meaning behind our choices. For me, I need to see the full context in a more finalized version to know how much I'll enjoy it or not. Any system could be improved to fit my preferences along with adding new ones, but the devs don't have unlimited resources, nor are they customizing the game for each of us. 

Overall, I'm more concerned about actual game play and what I do with any build, be it simple or complex. Active in-game choices day to day are more important than how much of a particular stat I have or if my build is vastly different than everyone else.

I do believe that some should be willing to step outside their comfort zone as CF is not like XYZ game. It appears to be less about "The Character" and more about the player. Short term matches, risk vs reward, loss, and an overall more fluid game design can play nice but don't need complex permanent character development.

 

 


 

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

You were pretty good up until the your wrong part.  Your #1 pretty much supports my argument that they are limiting the character customization.  You keep looking at things from your cookie cutter classing.  

You said "A Druid isn't meant to wear fine silks or a suit of metal plates, just the same way a Knight isn't meant to be a Berserker in a loincloth."

what I say is you are limiting your class to a cookie cutter.  So everyone that plays a knight needs to play with heavy armor and a sword.  Come on man, where the hell is your creativity?!?

why can't I make a knight with height dex in a loincloth?  

Ahhh hell kid, obviously you like the cookie cutter classes and don't like to be different.  It's fine play your knight in shiny armor.

Also you keep putting all this hope into the runes.  I played shadowbane for many years, and I have seen the runes they have there.  They are great and help to customize your character no doubt (if they do something similar). But I was hoping we would get more then just runes and skills to customize the characters.

i guess I am just so sick of the games that have the same damn build for the characters and no matter what you do or how you build it a knight is a knight. I want a knight in a loincloth with a 2 handed sword!!! Why can't we do that? It might work like poorly made socks but I want the option to try it. Some of us like to think outside the box when creating characters.

 

Why can't you be anything you can imagine? Simple answer is that isn't the game they are making nor ever implied they were.

A Knight is a Knight. Not Conan the Loincloth Barbarian. Although Champion would be a closer fit for that role.

Every Archetype can wear all armor types which have various looks, but overall, they have a theme. Disciplines will open up more Weapon options as well. They've added both genders for humanoids and look to be going with more cosmetic options to appease those that zoom in and stare at their character's faces all day, but overall, this takes dev time and impacts performance

As I stated above (bottom of post), there is plenty of customization in regards to build, at least on paper. Visually this might be a different story, but I fall into the game play > looks crowd.

Maybe you could give examples of what you'd rather see as this is the Suggestion forum, not THIS SUCKS! forum. Reference other games/systems?

I'm a fan of thinking outside the box as well, but sometimes options just to have them is a waste for everyone.

Honestly don't know what you want beyond not what they've done so far.

 

 


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, presharrison said:

You were pretty good up until the your wrong part.  Your #1 pretty much supports my argument that they are limiting the character customization.  You keep looking at things from your cookie cutter classing.  

So your critique WAS only about cosmetics after all. Got it!

Quote

You said "A Druid isn't meant to wear fine silks or a suit of metal plates, just the same way a Knight isn't meant to be a Berserker in a loincloth."

what I say is you are limiting your class to a cookie cutter.  So everyone that plays a knight needs to play with heavy armor and a sword.  Come on man, where the hell is your creativity?!?

why can't I make a knight with height dex in a loincloth? 

Ahhh hell kid, obviously you like the cookie cutter classes and don't like to be different.  It's fine play your knight in shiny armor.

All archetypes can wear all armor types. I was just describing the differences in cosmetic themes between the different archetype concepts. Looks like you're just a special snowflake who's too caught up in the way your character looks.

10 hours ago, presharrison said:

Also you keep putting all this hope into the runes.  I played shadowbane for many years, and I have seen the runes they have there.  They are great and help to customize your character no doubt (if they do something similar). But I was hoping we would get more then just runes and skills to customize the characters.

What makes you think runes will work the same way they did in Shadowbane? You need to do a little bit more research about the game than none at all. This whole thread is you whining to the community for attention, hoping the rest of us bear the cost of educating you. Go read an FAQ.

10 hours ago, presharrison said:

i guess I am just so sick of the games that have the same damn build for the characters and no matter what you do or how you build it a knight is a knight. I want a knight in a loincloth with a 2 handed sword!!! Why can't we do that? It might work like poorly made socks but I want the option to try it. Some of us like to think outside the box when creating characters.

 

You can make a Two-handed Knight who doesn't wear armor. The levels of build customization in Crowfall will likely meet or exceed that of Shadowbane. Once again, you're wrong.

Shadowbane - House Avari/Hy'shen
"Gimp elves get good elves killed." - Belina

Avari Discord - https://discord.gg/Bch24PV

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

So your critique WAS only about cosmetics after all. Got it!

Are you really this intellectually challenged?!?!? It appears so. 

 

2 hours ago, soulein said:

So your critique WAS only about cosmetics after all. Got it All archetypes can wear all armor types. I was just describing the differences in cosmetic themes between the different archetype concepts. Looks like you're just a special snowflake who's too caught up in the way your character looks.

Look man, I explained it too many times already, you keep believing I am caught up in the cosmetics, with those people who what half a brain have already figured out where my issues are and they posted intelligent replies back.  Unfortunately, there is always that one person dare I say the T word.  That just wants to keep post crap to piss off the poster.  You my special friend fall into that catagory. So do me and everyone else on here a favor let it go man... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, presharrison said:

Are you really this intellectually challenged?!?!? It appears so. 

 

Look man, I explained it too many times already, you keep believing I am caught up in the cosmetics, with those people who what half a brain have already figured out where my issues are and they posted intelligent replies back.  Unfortunately, there is always that one person dare I say the T word.  That just wants to keep post crap to piss off the poster.  You my special friend fall into that catagory. So do me and everyone else on here a favor let it go man... 

Look man, I tried helping you to see how wrong you were. We (multiple people in this thread) tried showing you all the information which should have answered your questions. You chose to ignore or disregard that information, which is ultimately superior to what you had when you made this thread (a few minutes of very rough gameplay). I wish you luck in whatever game you end up in though! 

Shadowbane - House Avari/Hy'shen
"Gimp elves get good elves killed." - Belina

Avari Discord - https://discord.gg/Bch24PV

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's rather simple.... again....

There were 22 classes in Shadowbane. If you want to count classes that could double by profession (Eg. Warlock could be base Fighter or Mage, Doomsayer could be Healer or Mage) there were 30 choices. There were again...47 Discipline runes.

Crowfall will have 13 archetypes (to start at least) with each having three promotion classes, which basically means 39 choices. There are (reportedly) 150 Discipline runes coming.

Add to this the complexity/specialization of the Vessel/Armor/weapon crafting systems.

If the OP cannot see the degree for customization is much greater in Crowfall than Shadowbane, well then It's because he doesn't want to see it. 

BTW, I don't prefer the chosen art style either, But I can live with it and I understand why they chose it.

Oh...and generally just because I hate it so much......  Guinecians with flintlocks was an abomination of a choice for an AT. Why not the cat from Shrek, makes about as much damned sense!

.

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

Not all archetypes are intended to have 3 promotion choices. 

It doesn't change much but I just want to make sure misinformation isn't spread. 

Also imo ACE seems to be slowly shifting away from promotions and more into disciplines.

They aren't moving away from promotions, per se; they said that they'll see what's left for promotions after Disciplines 

giphy.gif

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is still the possibility for great character building. The passive training is all we have had so far so. if we only make assumptions on that, then yeah, there is no character building. No choices.

We only barely know what disciplines will do. We can equip 3 more or less out of ~150? That's choice. Some grant abilities. This is the opportunity cost type choices a lot of us want.

Advantage/disadvantage runes are still a thing right? I'm thinking these will be like disc runes but less so. Think starter runes in shadowbane. Instead of being tied to your crow, they are inserted into your vessel. Basically the same thing but you can swap then out instead of making a new character. I also like the idea of always needing new runes if you swap vessels, runes, etc. It will keep the economy going.

 

And we still have no idea what promotion class will do or how gear will work out.

 

13 ATs by roughly 3 promotion classes you can be 1 of by roughly 150 disc runes you can use 3 of by who knows how many advantage/disadvantage runes by anything crazy that gear may or may not do.

The possibility is there. Still a lot to be revealed. Maybe passive training adds no real choice. That's fine if these other things do.

aeei5jG.png

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...