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

The First Campaign - Official discussion thread

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, Gorwald said:

damn, a lot of people still don't have understand it's gonna be a test of the system

I have read the whole 6 pages of this thread and don't remember reading anything that even remotely suggested that there was any misunderstanding in anyone's mind that this was indeed a test, a test about campain mode that naturally brings its lot of on-topic questions about campaign mode gameplay and game mechanics.

Share this post


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

I have read the whole 6 pages of this thread and don't remember reading anything that even remotely suggested that there was any misunderstanding in anyone's mind that this was indeed a test, a test about campain mode that naturally brings its lot of on-topic questions about campaign mode gameplay and game mechanics.

I think it's fair to say some people are treating crowfall tests like a game and are currently trying quite hard to win.  Heck there was even a person asking for some sort of reward for winning a test campaign. 

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AWESOME NEWS! Will be there to kick some test-bottoms!

I can now say with blunt certainty that choosing balance is showing clearly to the world what kind of unfaithful butterfly your inner self deeply is, lmao.

Share this post


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

Huge concern :

  • Rangers - Arrows - Campaign - Removal of Spirit Bank.

 

The current system of arrows is -not- going to work in Campaign. 

  • Simply put - It is a lootable ressource which will mean that on -every- single death the ranger will have to stop to craft arrows... oh wait!  Will have to get RESSOURCES to craft arrows cause you can be damn sure everyone (and their mother) will loot them.

This is a problem. Similar but much much worse than a Druid having to stop and 'craft' Essence after every death, or it cannot attack. If there is a hostile near the temple in both our cases, you be screwed. Clearly ACE hates the nature faction for some reason...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Tinnis said:

on this note:

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

It should be intended and definitely should be this way, it would make no sense otherwise. While it is thus possible to die solely to restore ones food meter, doing so would be hugely impractical and risky, and I doubt anyone would do so. I don't believe this nullifies food management in any significant way in practice, even if it does so in theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think those who are expressing concern about the mechanics which will be used in this test of the CW as regards the factions are evaluating the math correctly but forgetting to factor in human nature. We must remember that there is a political element to the game as well, and politics includes broken promises, misdirection, manipulation, lying, treachery and outright theft. CF adds murder for good measure. Human nature cannot be sufficiently calculated using math only in real life, and it will be no different here.

 

Share this post


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

This is a problem. Similar but much much worse than a Druid having to stop and 'craft' Essence after every death, or it cannot attack. If there is a hostile near the temple in both our cases, you be screwed. Clearly ACE hates the nature faction for some reason...

+1

 

Druids and the essence issue is spot on in the same boat...


Huginn ok Muninn, fljúga hverjan dag, Jörmungrund yfir; óumk ek of Hugin,, at hann aftr né komi-t, þó sjámk meir of Munin

Gathering of Ranger videos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like the whole idea with the 3 factions. One little concern, I think Balance has always the edge, they always outnumber their (current) enemies. But we have to wait and see... The other thing I am training Druid and Ranger, seems I am screwed :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Vectious said:

This is the issue.

Statistically, balance only has to manage 33% of keeps and then swap control between factions all by themselves to win.

While order/chaos has to control and manage 67% by themselves for a winning condition. 

....

I don't think this is how it works, based on how I understood the system to be. I think balance can still have keeps flagged to their name. When they take a keep, the slider goes to either order or chaos, depending on who they took the keep from, or maybe who is currently winning if the keep was unflagged at that point (not sure if all keeps will be neutral at start, or if all keeps will be from some faction by default). In which case chaos could still be winning with 40% of the keeps if balance has 30% and order the other 30%. At least that's how I understood it. 

The only tangible advantage balance has over the other factions is the FF immunity and potential for cross heal the "auto-alliance" with the underdog gives them. If that advantage will be enough to make balance "ez mode" remains to be seen. Could be, we'll have to test it. However if the slider is in the middle favoring balance, the other two factions will be red to them, and most likely will gang up on them. They just won't have the FF immunity. And even if say, balance and chaos are currently in an auto-alliance because order is ahead of everyone else, that still doesn't automatically put them in a 1v2 situation. One side or the other could still fail to show up for a siege for whatever reason (politics, lack of communication, etc.). It just prevents balance and chaos from attacking each other in that scenario. 

Personally, what I'm most curious about is how performance will be like with all these new shinies in the map. :D


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BIG QUESTION:

What happens if:

Order controls 33%, Chaos controls 33%, Balance controls 33% -------> Balance wins??  (because of no clear winner between ORDER and CHAOS )

 

Order controls 50%, Chaos controls 50%, Balance controls 0% ---------> Balance wins?? (because of no clear winner between ORDER and CHAOS )

 

 

Seems very unbalanced from my point of view....... ( if my assumptions are right^^)

 

 

 

Edited by Kreigon

One Ring to Rule them all, One Ring to Find them, One Ring to bring them all an in the darkness and bind them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what number of forts and keeps are you thinking about?
are they of equal value for victory points?
will specific forts and keeps and areas/parcels of the map have 'preset names' - or will they be nameless?

will we see any castles?


will everyone pick balance just because it is more unique, dynamic and brings more of what we want from the harsher worlds - shifting betrayals and alliances?


Ex-DAOC and others: thoughts on 3rd faction auto ally / win conditions versus a 'traditional' 3rd faction?

I reserve judgement until we find out finer details and see it in action. Just musing.

Quote

CHAOS wins by ending the game with as many strongholds as possible.
ORDER wins by ending the game with as many strongholds as possible.
BALANCE wins by ensuring there is no clear winner between ORDER and CHAOS.

To facilitate this idea (that Balance constantly shifts alliances), we set it up such that when one side takes the lead, BALANCE is automatically considered an “ally” to the losing faction in terms of both targeting and friendly fire.

Do you think this will help or hinder faction population/power imbalances compared to a more traditional standalone 3rd faction?
[where you may not be able to recover from being the underdog]

Does it hinder developing your sense of 'faction pride' and 'us vs them'?

If you are balance or the losing faction - you could log into a server where 2/3rds of the players will be unkillable by you...(or you could be harrassed by 2/3rds of the server without being able to fight them e.g. spying and harvester or POI stealing etc)

Would you prefer alliances negotated (and broken!) by word of mouth instead of automatic game systems?

Will this lead to constant 2/3 vs 1/3 zerging? Would you prefer more dynamic and unpredictable *3 way fighting* instead?

Do you want a system like this in the guild versus guild worlds - where you can officially /alliance your guild to another guild at will to avoid friendly fire and temporarily be on the same 'faction'? [and break it at will too]

How do you want Global or Faction or 'Local' Chat (if this will even be a thing) to be handled in a 3 faction CW?

Edited by Tinnis

caldera_forum_banner_wings.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

chaos/order still click F on a balance statue even if they are allied momentarily?

If one team is about to finally overwhelm a large well defended keep they could pay off a small order/chaos guild to run around and take smaller keeps in order to stop the siege by rendering the attacking force allied mid siege. LoL

Edited by dolmar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, End said:

There is one surefire way to make that highly impractical: allocate factions at random. This has many advantages:

- the game can make sure camps are well balanced including accross timezones to ensure a minimum presence in each faction at all hours of the day.

- you have only 1 chance out of 3 that your alt spy account will be allocated to a specific ennemy faction and 2 chances out of 3 that it will be allocated to an ennemy faction at all. If you want to have exactly one spy account in each ennemy faction, your chance is 2/3 * 1/3 = 2/9 or 22% chances. Which means that to have a good expectation of having a spy in each camp you will need 5 alt accounts, and variance will still make it fail once in a while.

Another thing that would help would be to force all accounts heiling from the same IP to be in the same (randomly assigned) faction. This makes cheating even more complicated as the cheater will have to use a different VPN for each session. As for people genuinely heiling from the same IP (LAN users), they shouldn't really mind being in the same faction.

One more way to make this painful and costly to cheat would be to restrict access to the faction chat and community chest to these players that have been actively playing for the last 10 minutes, making it necessary to actively operate the alt accounts or use a bot.

Random would be worse because that would guarantee that guilds and people on discord/vent/teamspeak be in different factions.

what we need is guild/ alliance based play where people can only invite who they trust.


www.lotd.org       pking and siege pvp since 1995

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

re: world maps and scouting

what will be the radius of fog of war revealed? (for a non scout and a scout and for day and for night)

what is the radius size that is captured into a scrawled map? [how many crafted maps would you need to cover the whole world map?]

will you remove visible map co-ords for all players? will there be a visible grid or anything like EK map view for people to reference locations - or absoutely nothing of that sort?

Edited by Tinnis

caldera_forum_banner_wings.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to see we're starting with the core module and friendly fire, wouldn't want to forget the basics. 

Edited by bahamutkaiser

a52d4a0d-044f-44ff-8a10-ccc31bfa2d87.jpg          Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes... Than if they're upset, they'll be a mile away, and barefoot :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, End said:

There is one surefire way to make that highly impractical: allocate factions at random. This has many advantages:

- the game can make sure camps are well balanced including accross timezones to ensure a minimum presence in each faction at all hours of the day.

- you have only 1 chance out of 3 that your alt spy account will be allocated to a specific ennemy faction and 2 chances out of 3 that it will be allocated to an ennemy faction at all. If you want to have exactly one spy account in each ennemy faction, your chance is 2/3 * 1/3 = 2/9 or 22% chances. Which means that to have a good expectation of having a spy in each camp you will need 5 alt accounts, and variance will still make it fail once in a while.

Another thing that would help would be to force all accounts heiling from the same IP to be in the same (randomly assigned) faction. This makes cheating even more complicated as the cheater will have to use a different VPN for each session. As for people genuinely heiling from the same IP (LAN users), they shouldn't really mind being in the same faction.

One more way to make this painful and costly to cheat would be to restrict access to the faction chat and community chest to these players that have been actively playing for the last 10 minutes, making it necessary to actively operate the alt accounts or use a bot.

You want guilds to quit the game, because this is how you get guilds to quit the game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Gorwald said:

After reading the 6 pages of this thread i come to a conclusion : Todd should put sentence about TESTING in more greater letters, capitalize, with eye poping stuff to catch attention (test some pictures of naked Doggett) because damn, a lot of people still don't have understand it's gonna be a test of the system first more than our-first-fully-functional-campaign-that-we-can-all-play-and-it-will-be-like-a-released-game!

I can't imagine anyone is surprised.

"Here testers, a brand new shiny win condition! Go have fun!"

"Oh, p.s., it's not about winning."

Right. That aircraft will have the flight characteristics of an empty gin bottle. Have you met the sociopaths around here? :P

Share this post


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

Random would be worse because that would guarantee that guilds and people on discord/vent/teamspeak be in different factions.

what we need is guild/ alliance based play where people can only invite who they trust.

The entire guild can be assigned at random to a faction.

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...