Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
ACE_JackalBark

ACE Q&A for December - Official Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

I still need more understanding on the armor change ... I get the shift in what leather gets you versus plate but my questions are:

  • how does this benefit the gatherers or make the crafters more vital to the game? 
  • why do plate users get the less effort path to move from leather to plate but default leather wearers take a hit on the need for passives
  • does this feel like a needed fix to combat that somehow limits crafting complexity and value?

 

Edited by Anhrez

Don't forget, the one EK that no one will judge you for looting your guilds treasury is Anhrez's Doober Shack. Where you can take those long con gains and 'simplify' them to more easily fit in your inventory. While you are unloading your hard earned winnings, swing by the Bazaar and pick up something to celebrate your genius.

LR0tCJt.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Live stream : Tuesday 19 December :

On the subject of : Ranged hitbox are you going to change it?

Answer : We like it where it is (something to that effect) - Not everyone is a first person shooter god (reworded)

 

Present situation :

This imo gives a large sense of consern, presently any ranged player (bow user) is able to hit their target : Regardless of them having their reticule lit up -nor- even have a target highlighted.  Be that at 5 m, let alone 60 m.

 

Thoughts :

I can understand that the large hitbox will make it “easier” to make those long shots from 60 m.  I can sympatice that playing a ranged character should be attractive to most players.  The issue is that the amount of power placed on one set of characters whom have access to the bow outweights the other classes.  Yes the Ranger in the current setup is far too strong.  So if you wont change the hitbox, the only other solution becomes nerfing the class, abilities or disciplines - which imo is definately not the way to go.  

It’s not to make the challenge of hitting targets impossible, but at least move away from it being a completely wasted effort cause it takes no effort.

Note : 
Hitting would also be made easier IF the damage numbers didn’t cover your reticule from ranged players making it impossible to aim.  I strongly -urge- you to relook at this decition.

 

Course of action : 

  1. Move the damage numbers so you get feedback but so the feedback (numbers) doesn’t cover the target you are aiming at/trying to hit.
  2. Make the hitbox smaller.  Do it in steps if you like.  
    1. Make it so you -have- to have a target at the very least.
    2. Make it so you actually need that target in your reticule to hit it.

Start with these two steps and then lets revisit the subject, but please do not leave it “as is!”


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

50% of players are playing Ranger wood elf. Reason for it? Mobility and ray cast. Anyone, I mean ANYONE can hit at range currently. You just have to aim in the general vicinity to hit your target. It takes no effort and it leaves melees no chance to face off with any range.

I don't want rangers nerfed to the ground they are currently at a good place minus those 2 issues. Fix that and you fix all range.

A good player facing off against a ranger should be able to time a rangers attacks and roll, dash or dodge out of "some" of their attacks. A good ranger should be able to anticipate these moves and keep up with their movement. It's an exciting part of fighting melee vs range. Currently, there is no chance of this micro combat to occur. Rangers just had to shoot in front of him and as long as the enemy didn't blink behind them, they are hit.

Please don't say it "may be easy for you" when 50% or more of the testers are playing ranger because... well why not! It's more fun to win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<Slams head on desk a few more times>

I can't wait to see what was "fixed" in all of the new changes. 

The disconnect to me is blinding. Don't use dev tools to make mats. Don't use the one ring to give you god mode.
Don't gloss over the details because it is going to be really cool once we add in the 15 things that people will not see for a year. 

Start from scratch. Play the damn game. If you don't have time to do that then why do you think we will. 

If that would just be wasting your time why do you think it is okay to waste ours?

Is that really a hard concept to get?

The game has to be fun for the player from jump. It has to be accessible from the first minute. Easy to learn hard to master. Each complication/hoop jump has to be spotted, and seem attainable and fun from the previous one. They also have to be fairly transparent so that we don't notice the treadmill below us. 

Loading our bags up even more is infuriating when the bags sizes keep shrinking. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ranged hitbox / reticle system is very frustrating to use.  I can even understand wanting some aim assist to help players who are not great shooter players, but in action right now it just makes for terrible team fight mechanics, you almost always hit the closest enemy to you because the aim assist is so huge you cant trust the reticle.  If you really must keep this much aim assist in game, it would be great if you could at least program in some kind of "reticle priority" where target in reticle is always given priority vs other targets in the vicinity that might be closer to you. 

Edited by Sekcbaba

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A fun but probably difficult feature to add is to reduce dmg based on how “on target” the shot is. Hit full on reticle/target, full damage. Hit at the very end of the ray cast, 25% dmg. And everything in between. Again, a skilled player would do well here while someone with less skill would suffer yet not be useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Range targeting should be Reticle for full damage Outer reticle for glancing damage Bullseye pinpoint for weak point extra special skill based omg damage.(HEAD SHOT!)

Stats should be able to increase/decrease the hit beams. Spec into the "Aim assist stat" to help the old farts like me so we don't feel useless. But the FPS Killer gods could spec/slot into moar DPS and use their godlike ability to snipe.

Make the shots generate three hitscans. The 1 hit weak at the widest one like now, The pill sized one that the reticle represents added to the first = the normal damage, then the Arrow width hitscan that represents the bullseye as the weak point godlike shot. 

My obviously unpvp player take on this gripping issue.

Now can we get back to our regularly scheduled program of me bitching about the new things that are going to screw over crafters in the name of fun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By all means but the more and more we go about all the fancy things to come, the less I'm convinced this whole thing will not blow up like a powder keg. 

I get that there are too many things to implement and adjust for the little time remaining but please focus on the basics of combat. I don't really care about anything at this point but combat and performance. Get these into the right direction and then continue. Otherwise as said... it will be a huge boom at the end. 

Edited by Thyr

You get the wolves...lots of wolves...and sheep that wear armor and have developed an appetite for blood soaked grass - dubanka

Even insects smell good when roasted - a random confessor

Share this post


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

Live stream : Tuesday 19 December :

On the subject of : Ranged hitbox are you going to change it?

And you have failed at making a competitive PVP game. If we start with a max skill ceiling of booger eating 5 year old low, what do we build towards?

The competitive PVP games on the market require skill. Most are shooters (Overwatch, PUBG, Fortnite, Rainbow Six: Siege......) I am having a hard time defending Crowfall at this point. Its a game for senior citizens who wants to feel like they are playing a competitive PVP game.

Share this post


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

The ranged hitbox / reticle system is very frustrating to use.  I can even understand wanting some aim assist to help players who are not great shooter players, but in action right now it just makes for terrible team fight mechanics, you almost always hit the closest enemy to you because the aim assist is so huge you cant trust the reticle.  If you really must keep this much aim assist in game, it would be great if you could at least program in some kind of "reticle priority" where target in reticle is always given priority vs other targets in the vicinity that might be closer to you. 

That "reticle priority" is supposed to be in game already.


IhhQKY6.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, ClockworkOrange said:

And you have failed at making a competitive PVP game. If we start with a max skill ceiling of booger eating 5 year old low, what do we build towards?

The competitive PVP games on the market require skill. Most are shooters (Overwatch, PUBG, Fortnite, Rainbow Six: Siege......) I am having a hard time defending Crowfall at this point. Its a game for senior citizens who wants to feel like they are playing a competitive PVP game.

This is a problem with the testing in this game and has been for a long time.  The skill-ceiling is so low that good players don't want to test, and then they listen to the not-so-good players anytime they scream that something has become too "unfun" aka "challenging".

I told them for years that there needs to be a skill-ceiling that players work towards over time, not something they start out already at.  Most players aren't good, they don't know what is best for them, they need that carrot on a stick of trying to get better, they just don't know it.


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


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

This is a problem with the testing in this game and has been for a long time.  The skill-ceiling is so low that good players don't want to test, and then they listen to the not-so-good players anytime they scream that something has become too "unfun" aka "challenging".

I told them for years that there needs to be a skill-ceiling that players work towards over time, not something they start out already at.  Most players aren't good, they don't know what is best for them, they need that carrot on a stick of trying to get better, they just don't know it.

There is so much truth in the comment above. People who wanted a high skill-ceiling stopped testing a long time ago because the games a bore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Unfolded said:

This:

 

So, as of now 4 people think the  aiming is okay. It migth be useful to call them out on that. Ask them why they think so, just to you know have people with different opinions to make the thread more diverse instead of we just kinda repeating ourselves about how bad the aiming is.

I personaly think they are trolling or something (really stupid childish if that is the case) but we never know. Just dont go about it by threatening them or being hostile since there should be some forum rules related to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, ClockworkOrange said:

There is so much truth in the comment above. People who wanted a high skill-ceiling stopped testing a long time ago because the games a bore.

You know when blizzard balances games they start too hard and tailor it back because by starting too hard they can see exactly how short people are coming up.  If they make it too easy and people just blast through the content they don't know how much harder they are supposed to make it.

In the case of crowfall testing it is also a setting of expectations.  If you start off with easy anytime you up the skill requirement the people that had become acclimated to easy will complain.

I'm sure ACE had technical reasons to start off doing things the way they did them but an unfortunate side effect to being a crowdfunded game is that you had people stumbling into the game without a true tester mentality and they are going to fight ACE every step of the way if ACE tries to make the game more challenging.  


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Anhrez said:

I still need more understanding on the armor change ... I get the shift in what leather gets you versus plate but my questions are:

  • how does this benefit the gatherers or make the crafters more vital to the game? 
  • why do plate users get the less effort path to move from leather to plate but default leather wearers take a hit on the need for passives
  • does this feel like a needed fix to combat that somehow limits crafting complexity and value?

 

It certainly forces the standard DPS classes to make a meaningful choice as to whether they want more survivability or not.

On average though it should probably make DPS classes more vulnerable which may lead to more group composition diversity and more varied and interesting combat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, ClockworkOrange said:

There is so much truth in the comment above. People who wanted a high skill-ceiling stopped testing a long time ago because the games a bore.

I don't think ACE really listens to the testing-player-base nearly as much as you two keep saying.

They've implemented so many things out of the blue that nobody asked for.

But, when you are a pariah on the forum, I can see how it feels good to suggest that everyone else on the forum is collectively at fault for the perceived destruction of the game's viability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, DocHollidaze said:

I don't think ACE really listens to the testing-player-base nearly as much as you two keep saying.

They've implemented so many things out of the blue that nobody asked for.

But, when you are a pariah on the forum, I can see how it feels good to suggest that everyone else on the forum is collectively at fault for the perceived destruction of the game's viability.

There are definitely people that made less-than-stellar suggestions and were quite loud about them, acknowledging that that has occurred is not suggesting everyone else is collectively at fault, but there are definitely some people that had bad ideas and were quite passionate about them, and some of those bad ideas have also coincidentally made it into the game.  

I don't care if people make bad suggestions though, everyone should have a right to voice their thoughts, what I care about is whether ACE can identify good vs bad suggestions and make a good game through it all.  I personally feel they've floundered a lot more than they should have, but I also feel that the game can still be turned into something great, they just need to show the initiative and start heading in that direction.

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...