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

ACE Q&A for July - Official discussion thread


Recommended Posts

With the advent of the live Q&A, the time-delayed nature of these answers feels pretty stale.  We get answers from Todd in-forum - as long as that continues, you're fulfulling your promise to the ruby+ supporters.  You could spend the time now spent on creating these videos on something more productive, and the live Q&A gives us answers to much more relevant questions.  By the time this video happens, the answers are generally old news.

That said, we really do appreciate the interaction with the design team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, durenthal said:

With the advent of the live Q&A, the time-delayed nature of these answers feels pretty stale.

true enough for the forum-addicts / active testers, but i'd imagine/hope for far more lurkers only following the videos/newsletters at this stage....


p.s. i still think glass cannon is bugged given that is shows 0.015 in comparsion to others that display 0.15 on the stat sheet etc <shrug>


@Anhrez enjoy your x10 slower parcel crafting in the future!


also any classes that are added to the game, compared to a discipline, post launch will suffer from eternally being behind other more established classes with regards the passive training timescales...


minstrel sounds fun :)


with regards campaign worlds and 'exploits'.....are you going to fix "the issue" that currently makes walls worthless for ages now? :P

and the fact that any ground targetting power is next to unusable on structures?

Edited by Tinnis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, durenthal said:

With the advent of the live Q&A, the time-delayed nature of these answers feels pretty stale.  We get answers from Todd in-forum - as long as that continues, you're fulfulling your promise to the ruby+ supporters.  You could spend the time now spent on creating these videos on something more productive, and the live Q&A gives us answers to much more relevant questions.  By the time this video happens, the answers are generally old news.

That said, we really do appreciate the interaction with the design team.

Don't forget, it gives a pretty easy way for new or casual people to catch/keep up on what's happening, what's currently been happening, and such things.

 

For us who keep up with the forums often, the Q&A only does a bit for us. For those who have Partnership, it does even less, I imagine. But it does quite a bit for those who are just keeping Crowfall in the peripheral.

Edited by Dondagora
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Tinnis said:

true enough for the forum-addicts / active testers, but i'd imagine/hope for far more lurkers only following the videos/newsletters at this stage....

That's a good point.  I often forget that there are casual followers of the game who aren't paying much attention.  All the people I speak with are committed testers who know the game well.  Catering to the casual also explains their choice of which questions to answer in these Q&A's - they almost always choose the least detailed, least interesting (to me) questions.  The casual folks who haven't yet committed their money are certainly worth pursuing to ensure the game hits critical mass.  That said, it seems that those folks would be best served by big picture updates like the new feature announcements, and not the minutiae of answers to specific questions posed by existing testers.  I still feel this specific exercise could be merged with the live Q&A to better use ACE time, and provide us with more timely answers to immediate concerns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The live Q&As are great for people of all access levels and general fans of the game.  These monthly Q&As are good for answering important questions that ACE may have answered for dev partners but feels are worth it for the public to know as well. 

We live in a world where both can occur.

It's easy for people that follow the game a lot to find them stale if they already read the dev forums or have guildmates that share the information, but try to keep in mind that there are other types of fans and perspectives ACE is trying to satisfy as well.  Including fans that may not stay up to date on every little detail of the game. 

I know that the monthly Q&As are great for casual followers.

It's also important to note that the live Q&As often have a specific theme behind their questions, whether it is specifically race/class stuff or disciplines or whatever else, whereas the monthly q&a questions can be about anything related to the game.

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Best part of the the Q&A was hearing about "main hand" and "offhand" weapons.  This makes ambidexterity as a rune so much better, when you can actually take 2 different weapons and no longer have the paired weapons.  For some people asking about daggers/swords or sword/mace combo, this is good news.

lUvvzPy.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Teufel said:

Best part of the the Q&A was hearing about "main hand" and "offhand" weapons.  This makes ambidexterity as a rune so much better, when you can actually take 2 different weapons and no longer have the paired weapons.  For some people asking about daggers/swords or sword/mace combo, this is good news.

+1 for very good news!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is attack speed a thing?

Since we will be seeing changes to dual wielding i would like to see some increased attack speed when using daggers.

Also in the same topic will that changes requires more animations? Or will attacks require dual wielding to be used?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, BarriaKarl said:

Is attack speed a thing?

Since we will be seeing changes to dual wielding i would like to see some increased attack speed when using daggers.

Also in the same topic will that changes requires more animations? Or will attacks require dual wielding to be used?

blair has referenced it before....

Quote

PCM is vector 2 of 4 on weapons. 1 being damage, 3 being speed, and 4 being durability. Once all those are stood up there will be a variety of choices based on the class. Some favor PCM (like knights), some will favor Damage(like duelist, templars, assassins), some might even favor speed when we get it online. The goal being there isn't a one size fits all weapon for all class/race/disc combos.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Tinnis said:

blair has referenced it before....

Quote

PCM is vector 2 of 4 on weapons. 1 being damage, 3 being speed, and 4 being durability. Once all those are stood up there will be a variety of choices based on the class. Some favor PCM (like knights), some will favor Damage(like duelist, templars, assassins), some might even favor speed when we get it online. The goal being there isn't a one size fits all weapon for all class/race/disc combos.

Good. Now they should just adjust PCM so that we can actually make a choice instead of being PCM slaves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A suggestion regarding the issue of certain numbers seeming or being too high and others being too low. Health and damage values were reduced by an order of magnitude (then health was bumped by 75%), and of course damage amounts on weapons had to be reduced to match these new values, resulting in the admittedly underwhelming numbers when you craft weapons. Time To Kill went down somewhat which in my opinion is a good thing, but for those crafting, the results are legitimately undesirable and I do not feel the proposed solution - bigger numbers through decimal places - is going to do the trick.

My proposal would be some combination of the following:

  • Increase weapon damage amounts by 50%, leave health pools as they are
  • Increase the number of damage type debuffs as well as their degrees of effect, either in Skill Trees, Class Powers or through Disciplines
  • Increase the degree of effect of damage type mitigation in Skill Trees, Class Powers and through Disciplines
  • Modify damage type platforms - Class Powers and Disciplines - to slightly increase diversity of availability
  • Explore customizable damage type procs available to craftings either through the existing material type combinations (many combos avail) or Alchemy etc

 

The idea behind this suggestion is essentially to buff potential and possible damage, which is somewhat different from just reversing in whole or in part the order of magnitude reduction. This would make it possible to put up bigger damage numbers, requiring investment, effort, expense, making of choices or customization, but also make it possible to counter, be it through deeper skill training 'choices' we have now or with loadout (powers and passives) or in the item itself through the crafting process.

A few practical examples. Right now many classes have skill nodes which can buff a damage type in relatively small amounts - say between 2.5 and 10%. I would prefer to see larger damage type and mitigation rewards for training, 10%-50%, in the skill trees, and have lower amounts of a higher number available on the platforms mentioned above. Make damage buffing and mitigation a bigger part game, resulting in bigger numbers potential below or above the baseline and have this extend into the crafting as well.

There are a small number of examples of this currently available - Firewalker being the primary one - but as damage types are so specific to a single or very small number of classes, reward is not as significant and the pay-off on and effect such a system-wide change would be thusly, ironically, mitigated. Giving a higher number of classes a great choice of damage types - and I am working on a breakdown of what exists right now - would feed customization, favor crafters and fuel combat complexity. Armor types, and perhaps the proposed armor sets, could be part of this a well.

In SB - yes I went there - buffs and debuffs, damage type mitigations, were much more important than they are in CF at present. Giving support classes more to do and more tools to do it with, and offensive-minded players a somewhat more friendly-fire friendly option for contributing to a large-scale fight - something we are going to bump into eventually - would be a good thing overall I believe. Right now, things are not terribly well integrated or smoothed out at the numbers level, and I think doing something like the above could serve as a high-return approach for doing that while solving some of the specific issues we are facing right now since the magnitude change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...