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

The First Campaign - Official discussion thread

Recommended Posts

Just now, Hyriol said:

 

Well, I still think logging out should be the same as dying, without the durability hit.  You log back in as a crow at a temple, with all your stuff still sitting wherever you logged out.

That's an old discussion, though, in a much different thread. ;P

on this note:

is it intended that death and switching bodies restores food meters? generally nullifies food resource management entirely....


caldera_forum_banner_wings.png

Share this post


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

That's not how I read the update.  We should have the same personal inventory carrying capacity that we do now in the campaigns, and we should have the same size bank space.  The difference is that we will only be able to transfer 10 items from our "Spirit Bank" to our inventory. 

I think he is talking about being able to push items into the spirit bank to avoid losing items in the field.

If they are locking the import, my guess is that putting things in is a one way door after the ten items.

Share this post


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

The system and the implementation of it -is- not ready for campaign.

There are a bunch of systems not ready for Campaign.  That's why I keep asking you guys to think of it as a "test" and not a "playtest".  This first Campaign will be broken in a dozen major ways and a thousand minor ones.  but we need to go through this phase, first.  It's a necessary step to get us where we want to be.

I'm telling you right now: not everything is going to be fixed in a way that ensures every class will be fun.  Some of the obvious exploits will still be there, in various forms, and it's not that "we just didn't think of it" in most cases.   I want this milestone out.  We shouldn't let "perfect" be the enemy of "good enough to move forward."  We'll find stuff, and fix it, and add more stuff, and break it, and test it, and move forward.  Same as always.

Todd

ACE


J Todd Coleman

ArtCraft Entertainment, Inc.

Follow us on Twitter @CrowfallGame | Like us on Facebook

[Rules of Conduct]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Nazdar said:

The 3-faction scheme is innovative for keeping the match from running away in one direction, but I foresee a huge imbalance towards... balance.  Balance has all sorts of interesting social dynamics.  In comparison, Order/Chaos is bland.  Of course players are going to want to play Balance! Speaking in terms of self-selecting population, I bet we have 10% - 80% - 10% (O - B - C)

...

This can also be fixed by making sure there's a population lock on each faction. Let's say the server can handle 300 players max, then each faction would be capped at 100 players at any given time. Also I think it's a bit of an assumption that everyone will want to play balance. Some players may already be invested in other factions for various reasons (lore or whatever). In the Scorn and Bloodbath maps for example the most active guilds and alliances of guilds are pretty evenly distributed between the 3 factions (on NA at least). However I will agree that if the whole "balance auto-allies with whoever is losing" turns out to be a significant advantage for how these CWs play out, then it might be fair to make the Balance side of the slider thinner than the other two factions to compensate for that. Still too early to tell though, we need to test those things. 


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Nazdar said:

The 3-faction scheme is innovative for keeping the match from running away in one direction, but I foresee a huge imbalance towards... balance.  Balance has all sorts of interesting social dynamics.  In comparison, Order/Chaos is bland.  Of course players are going to want to play Balance! Speaking in terms of self-selecting population, I bet we have 10% - 80% - 10% (O - B - C)

Also, mathematically speaking, if the score slider stays in even thirds, Balance is much more likely to win than either extreme.  Winning as Order or Chaos involves one faction successfully conquering two factions.  This can be solved!  The middle third on the score slider will need to be made a LOT more narrow for Balance to ever not win.

Broken:  [ OOOOOO  BBBBBB  CCCCCC ]

Fixed:  [ OOOOOOOO  BB  CCCCCCCC ]

 

 

We've discussed both of those points, and you absolutely could be right.  We've made it relatively easy to adjust the slider to accommodate a tighter "victory window" for Balance. We can also easily fall back to "King of the Hill" rules if the "Tug of War" becomes too predictable or turns out not to be fun.  Let's try it and see what happens.

Todd

ACE

 


J Todd Coleman

ArtCraft Entertainment, Inc.

Follow us on Twitter @CrowfallGame | Like us on Facebook

[Rules of Conduct]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Rikutatis said:

This can also be fixed by making sure there's a population lock on each faction. Let's say the server can handle 300 players max, then each faction would be capped at 100 players at any given time.

What if certain people flooded the enemy faction with their 49 multi boxed accounts?


11 minutes ago, jtoddcoleman said:

This first Campaign will be broken in a dozen major ways and a thousand minor ones.

will the first one be a single server?

Edited by Tinnis

caldera_forum_banner_wings.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the main idea of this system is to ensure that dominant factions are guaranteed to be 2v1'd and finding ways to limit balance within that framework would be ideal, imo.

My biggest problem is that even if Balance's victory window is sufficiently tight, an ascendant balance creates a situation where the further-behind team can't attack the group that actually has all the holdings.  Effectively, balance is the only team that's exempted from being 2v1'd.  IMO giving the further-behind team a way of bloodlessly claiming balance holdings if they get too strong so they're focused on bloodthirst against the winner instead of being the winners themselves would be ideal.

Share this post


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

What if certain people flooded the enemy faction with their 49 multi boxed accounts?

Then there will be evidence that multi boxed accounts are a problem that needs to be addressed.

Welcome to the world of testing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I'm the least interested in this rule set because of the massive limitations it should be interesting to see a lot more people in the wild.  I hope the auto-ally system doesn't totally ruin the pvp aspect of the game.  I fear it will just turn into one massive back and forth WoW battleground feel with the ebb and flow of auto-ally.

Edited by facerip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple things we need to know

-does balance get allied if one side has a slight advantage or only if the marker has gone into the red or blue.

-can balance capture their own points or does it go to the side that they are allied to/has less.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OR.  Make balance holdings count against victory.  So order holdings move the track right, chaos moves it left, and unclaimed & balance holdings shrink the size of the balance area.  Balance has to remain lean for victory, handing over excess holdings to the loser.  This puts balance in the lead, but also puts the loser in a position to catch up, and also gives the winner an opportunity.  In the last stage of winter, the size of the balance track is locked and it's an all out fight for the finish.

Edited by canvox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, facerip said:

Although I'm the least interested in this rule set because of the massive limitations it should be interesting to see a lot more people in the wild.  I hope the auto-ally system doesn't totally ruin the pvp aspect of the game.  I fear that it will just turn in to one massive back and forth  WoW battleground feel with the ebb and flow of auto-ally.

They could have the auto flip only happen after some threshold other than 50% is reached.

Flip point ^

 [ OOOOOO  BBBBBBB  CCCCCC ]

 [ OOOOOO  BBB^BBB  CCCCCC ]

OR

 [ OOOOOO  ^BBBBBB^  CCCCCC ]

By messing with the threshold point one team could gain so much ground on one side, that even double teamed the winning team could have a strong land/area/asset advantage that the two working together can't overcome.

What probably needs to happen, is for balance to have a (N)eutral time, when BOTH Order and Chaos can attack them and take their holdings, so that balance is only on order or chaos side when one of them will win, but while balance is in the winning position, all teams are enemies, and balance tries to erode both order and chaos positions equally.

 [ OOOOOO  ^BNNNNB^  CCCCCC ]

If the world assets are controlled 90% balance, and 5% order, and 5% chaos, it's still "balanced".

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked what sypo said about making it 3-way when balance is achieved & then putting balance on the losing side is winning (giving chaos & order the option to team up against a balance who's gotten too large).  Maybe it already works that way!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the needle is in the middle third balance is winning but has no allies.

As soon as either chaos or order begins winning the other becomes allies with balance.

So balance is winning or gains an ally as soon as they start losing. 

Balance EZ mode.

At least on paper. We will test it and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mythx said:

It should be easy to find ongoing fights with this faction system we are testing, and it will be fun! :)

 

unless your balance or the losing faction and 2/3rds of the server are unkillable lol...


@jtoddcoleman what real times will you go for in-game day/night cycle?

Edited by Tinnis

caldera_forum_banner_wings.png

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...