Plasmafogking

Please, no advantage for $$$

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, goose said:

..presumably, if you take your assassin, DON'T die, and swap to Templar, this remains true. After all, an Assassin and a Templar are both separate physical objects that need separate runes and potentially gear loadouts. But then again, dying in a game where gear degrades and can also potentially be stolen off your corpse means that this is an expense that will exist regardless, so I posit that being bad at the game will cost your guild more than using multiple classes.

Not really going anywhere with this, just a casual observation of a turn of phrase I found odd. >.>

I play this game believing every vessel I use will die.

7 hours ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

I don't think we are there yet, because ACE hasn't even really begun optimization, but I do know from experience if the game is laggy for any reason, such as ping latency, graphics stuttering/low frame rate, etc, it's just plain worse.  I'm not sure if Unity has built in net code to make sure someone else having low frame/rate stutter doesn't impact those around them, but I do know it has been a problem in the past.

As to the 3-4 years old systems, yea graphics haven't jacked up enough since I bought my 780Ti a few years ago that it's still competitive. Moore's law seems to have stalled out a bit hardware wise lately.

 

Benchmarks say the 1080ts is 122% better. 

Actually ACE want's as many different hardware types and levels trying to test the game. They'll get a much better feel for the minimum if they know a 660m can't display the world but a 670 (desktop) can. I've been in some test where certain hardware combinations caused crashes.

Share this post


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

I play this game believing every vessel I use will die.

As of right now, bodies don't decay, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/9/2018 at 12:00 AM, Kastor said:

As long as that thing is reasonably balanced anyway. 

That's the issue. If paying vs non-paying is "balanced," why pay?

Beyond loving to throw money away or those nice folks that want to support and keep a product going, many would likely say "someone else will do it."

Without some incentive that almost always walks up to and then at least puts one foot over the "balanced" line, optional subs aren't going to be a steady income.

Even if VIP provided no real advantage but continued to be up for trade, they'd still be a way to turn cash into in-game power by trading for CW goods.

ACE doesn't have to go further down this pay model, but it seems highly unlikely they'll majorly change things up now. Too much cash involved already.

CF is not going to reward people for not spending money, but it doesn't have to make it overly easy to jump ahead because they do. Still to be seen how far it will go.

On 1/9/2018 at 12:01 AM, entityofsin said:

One would think after 3 years of horrible beta tests and ignored feedback that SBI would have got their crap together.

This can be said for pretty much any MMO. People complain prior to release, devs don't listen to each complaint, people say "see! I told you so." CF is no different so guess we just hope for the best and that they produce something worth playing. IMO, AO's betas weren't terrible, they represented the final product. Whenever CF makes it to "beta" or equivalent, hopefully it does the same and we aren't then going "wait till release or after, it will get better."

I did that. So did thousands of other people. You could make a lot off T2 and T3 mats. It was dumb playing the market cause it was too easy.

You could make a profit doing long trade runs and playing the market, but someone else could just input their card number and do it much faster. If the end goal of both is to PVP, I'd rather people have to put in work in-game rather than out. Especially when it isn't relatively equal. Time played vs Gold cost not equal. Also, one could spend their time training up gear vs running from market to market and the buy gear on top of that. So even if two players are putting in silly amounts of time in-game, one spending cash is still likely to be a head.

All SBI ever cared about was making money off their game. If they cared about other things then the general opinion from their remaining player base would have been listened to. They weren't going to do anything to damage their financial strength from the game. Oh wait, they did by falsely banning active players who disagree with them, banning inactive accounts, and people the devs and community managers didn't like from the forums. Sounds a lot like the same kind of censorship the SOTA devs do.

Despite the lip service many/most companies do, they all want to make a profitable product. They might "love" what they do and want to make us what we crave, but if it isn't paying the bills, it doesn't matter.

ACE and appointed mods banned people early on and basically ran folks off on the forums with poor moderating and rule changes. That was long ago, but seems to be very few left that question dev decisions politely or not. Then again there are fewer left bothering to post as well...

No company is perfect.

 

On 1/9/2018 at 12:16 AM, entityofsin said:

Looking up and actually experiencing it are two completely and extremely different things. Spending cash on Gold in Albion for a Legendary quality Tier 5 Warbow didn't mean you were going to win because you now have a really awesome weapon. If anything it means you're a more highly valued target for other players to kill and steal from. It means you're going to die a lot more often cause you have more expensive gear on you that people actually want.

I agree that having higher Tier increases target value, but having higher Tier definitely makes a player more powerful that at a point stats overwhelm skill. Haven't played for a while, but was that way for the first couple months and last 2 betas I was in. Just my view, but I believe earning items in-game through time/effort/skill should result in the same if not more return than opening a wallet. The amount of effort required to obtain high Tier gear in-game vs out wasn't equal when I played, not even close. Regardless if someone else was out grinding away on trees and crafting. The lower the skill ceiling, the more stats matter. AO is very simple overall, stats matter. CF requires more, but still not very much and might decrease if they keep "balancing" and overloading combat with too much.

VIP isn't a, "I am gonna reach into my wallet and pull out a large handful of cash so I can win more" type of thing. You're spending money to diversify your account faster. This doesn't lead to more winning.

VIP might very well be that if we can trade it easily in-game for anything (weapons, ore, siege equipment, vessels) relatively easily. VIP specific advantages for consuming it are only part of the concern.

 

16 hours ago, jetah said:

having access to multiple races and classes will cost you or your guild more than someone who's focusing on 1 of each.  If you take your assassin and die then swap to templar someone has to gear that class change. More resources have to be gathered to make sure there's enough to craft variety of gear.

Unless players work together and request or use what is available vs what they want. 

In the 5.4 test I cannot train 2 skills for Race or Class until I'm 50% complete their respective Basic Training. This is a ~45 day wait time before that VIP perk is available. Only the extended Bank will be used for 2 of 3 training groups. Everyone at the start will be equal in the first 45 days! If someone joins after those 45 days then they'll be behind.

This seems rather irrelevant for any game that plans to be around for a while. If VIP is less valuable for X period, people will buy it or not, but eventually it will have value though and will continue until people get what they want out of it.

People are also forgetting the Tomes, these allow players without VIP to catch up! (after they're introduced)

Assuming they can be obtained relatively easy to actually "catch up."

 

14 hours ago, ClockworkOrange said:

Now that the laughter is over, the sadness is kicking in. I wish this was a multiplayer twitch like environment :( 

Would be nice but was never the plan. However would enjoy more "tactical" gameplay and use of physics, positioning, aiming, terrain, etc so combat isn't so messy or bland. Combat can be as simple or complicated as devs can get, with "twitch" or mechanical aspects being one layer. So far, seems rather shallow in entertainment and complexity not just power...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, goose said:

As of right now, bodies don't decay, though.

I’m speaking at release. I assume every vessel will be killed, I lose a fight, or decays. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, jetah said:

I’m speaking at release. I assume every vessel will be killed, I lose a fight, or decays. 

Even if they implement vessel decay, being bad at the game will cost your guild more than playing multiple classes.

Playing two classes requires two vessels and two gear sets.

Dying 21 times requires three vessels and three gear sets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With how gear alone is going to be looted, a single vessel is going to have multiple gear sets for it. In any pvp looting game that is what happens. Whether the loot is coming in the form of crafting mats or actual crafted items, it translates into sets of gear lost and time lost because of it.

2 minutes ago, goose said:

Dying 21 times requires three vessels and three gear sets.

So this could mean more than 3 sets of gear. It could possibly mean 10 or 12 or even more depending on how much stuff is being lost in general. This is how it was in Albion Online except everything was lootable and if you died, you basically just had to accept you lost probably 3 or 4+ hours of gathering and crafting time for your armor, bag, cape, mount, consumables, and anything else you had on you, such as tools or crafting mats. Luckily gathering crafting mats accelerated a lot when you hit T4 to equip gathering gear.

The point I am making is people in that game often had 3+ sets of extra gear to burn through if they decided to go out and pvp. I see the exact same behavior in Crowfall if not a largest emphasis of stockpiling full sets of gear, additional consumables, food items, possibly mounts, bags if they get put into the game, etc. If gathering mats remains as slow as it is in the current live testing, then those extra items being stockpiled is going to make a huge difference when it comes to winning campaigns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, entityofsin said:

With how gear alone is going to be looted, a single vessel is going to have multiple gear sets for it. In any pvp looting game that is what happens. Whether the loot is coming in the form of crafting mats or actual crafted items, it translates into sets of gear lost and time lost because of it.

So this could mean more than 3 sets of gear. It could possibly mean 10 or 12 or even more depending on how much stuff is being lost in general. This is how it was in Albion Online except everything was lootable and if you died, you basically just had to accept you lost probably 3 or 4+ hours of gathering and crafting time for your armor, bag, cape, mount, consumables, and anything else you had on you, such as tools or crafting mats. Luckily gathering crafting mats accelerated a lot when you hit T4 to equip gathering gear.

The point I am making is people in that game often had 3+ sets of extra gear to burn through if they decided to go out and pvp. I see the exact same behavior in Crowfall if not a largest emphasis of stockpiling full sets of gear, additional consumables, food items, possibly mounts, bags if they get put into the game, etc. If gathering mats remains as slow as it is in the current live testing, then those extra items being stockpiled is going to make a huge difference when it comes to winning campaigns.

Unless they backtrack severely, allowing the gear equipped on your vessel to be looted on death, which last I checked was a feature that was dropped and not planned to be re-implemented except in the more severe bands like The Dregs, losing extra gear for any other reason than that you decided to carry it around with you when you didn't need to is a non-factor.

If you're going to extrapolate using hypothetical worst case scenarios, though, why not go all-out? Every time someone dies, they COULD be carrying a full inventory of top-tier crafted loot that then gets stolen, causing each death to cost "their guild" the equivalent of 5 full gear sets in addition to the decay on their vessel and equipped gear.

OR you could make the more reasonable argument that the guild shouldn't be expected to foot every cost for every player, and that dying enough times to lose your body and every piece of equipped gear makes you a liability that having multiple roles you are effective at does not.

Edit: though as a side note, if gathering remains as slow as it was last time I was on, this may be valid. However, if gathering remains as slow as it was, I personally would consider that a design flaw, 'cause gathering was pretty freaking tedious.

Edited by goose

Share this post


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

Even if they implement vessel decay, being bad at the game will cost your guild more than playing multiple classes.

Playing two classes requires two vessels and two gear sets.

Dying 21 times requires three vessels and three gear sets.

I'll never assume a 100% kill rate in crowfall. I doubt you'll always win in combat. Everyone will die who's in a campaign, to think otherwise will be costly. I believe most groups will use tier 1 gear (just above basic) because of the ease of acquisition. I say that because all crows can harvest T1. having a few scouts looking for ganks will be more effective with everyone harvesting. If the scout sees something then the combat players can stop and swap trays to be on standby.

Share this post


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

having access to multiple races and classes will cost you or your guild more than someone who's focusing on 1 of each.  If you take your assassin and die then swap to templar someone has to gear that class change. More resources have to be gathered to make sure there's enough to craft variety of gear.

Unless players work together and request or use what is available vs what they want. 

In the 5.4 test I cannot train 2 skills for Race or Class until I'm 50% complete their respective Basic Training. This is a ~45 day wait time before that VIP perk is available. Only the extended Bank will be used for 2 of 3 training groups. Everyone at the start will be equal in the first 45 days! If someone joins after those 45 days then they'll be behind.

This seems rather irrelevant for any game that plans to be around for a while. If VIP is less valuable for X period, people will buy it or not, but eventually it will have value though and will continue until people get what they want out of it.

People are also forgetting the Tomes, these allow players without VIP to catch up! (after they're introduced)

Assuming they can be obtained relatively easy to actually "catch up."

Even if a guild works together more sets of gear have to be built. I'm hoping that blueprints allow for multiple parts built per resource than what we have right now. IE to craft 1 leather tunic it takes 15 leather with a blueprint we might get 15 tunics for 15 leather.

VIP wont have as much value until you're 50% complete of the Basic Race and Class. You'll only have access to the Bank but not the extra skill slot. I think the Bank is worth the VIP for Race and Class even though you can't use the extra skill slot for 45 days.

I just mentioned they exist and people seem to be overlooking them. I'm sure there will be people trading Tomes for VIP as there will be plenty of alt accounts specific for this use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jetah said:

I'll never assume a 100% kill rate in crowfall. I doubt you'll always win in combat. Everyone will die who's in a campaign, to think otherwise will be costly. I believe most groups will use tier 1 gear (just above basic) because of the ease of acquisition. I say that because all crows can harvest T1. having a few scouts looking for ganks will be more effective with everyone harvesting. If the scout sees something then the combat players can stop and swap trays to be on standby.

Yup, this was a thing in Albion Online. People didn't go above T4 gear cause it was safer to get and cheap to buy from the Auction House to fully gear your character.

I can see guilds reserving their expensive gear for major pvp events, like castle sieges or defending forts. I doubt anyone is going to seriously run around in high end gear if it's not easily replaceable.

I know I'll be stockpiling extra items so I can continue to have fun after dying and losing stuff. I think at some point everyone that plays the game regularly after launch will do the same.

Share this post


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

Yup, this was a thing in Albion Online. People didn't go above T4 gear cause it was safer to get and cheap to buy from the Auction House to fully gear your character.

I can see guilds reserving their expensive gear for major pvp events, like castle sieges or defending forts. I doubt anyone is going to seriously run around in high end gear if it's not easily replaceable.

I know I'll be stockpiling extra items so I can continue to have fun after dying and losing stuff. I think at some point everyone that plays the game regularly after launch will do the same.

I'm sure someone will figure out the best time gear stat rewards and people will use that. If I do get Legendary gear, it'll be for my EK to show off.  I don't use a tuxedo to cut grass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "people will complain no matter what" argument fails here, because we all know p2w is the worst label a western mmo can have, and that's the one they should be avoiding most, no matter what other complaints people might come up with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope they just go with the old school Subscription based model.  It worked for the most successful (financially speaking) MMO in the genre.  Please do NOT go for quick cash shop grabs for any advantage.  If you can't afford 15 a month then find another game.

 

D,

 

Share this post


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

I hope they just go with the old school Subscription based model.  It worked for the most successful (financially speaking) MMO in the genre.  Please do NOT go for quick cash shop grabs for any advantage.  If you can't afford 15 a month then find another game.

 

D,

 

They aren't changing models. Nor should they.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2018-01-11 at 10:10 AM, Dannyboy said:

I hope they just go with the old school Subscription based model.  It worked for the most successful (financially speaking) MMO in the genre.  Please do NOT go for quick cash shop grabs for any advantage.  If you can't afford 15 a month then find another game.

 

D,

 

Name any game which survived at least several years in this model and didn't change up till now, because i can name tons of games who started as P2P games and only survived by dropping this model to where it belongs - to the garbage bin.

Share this post


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

I'm so glad I have SIX YEARS of VIP!

Yeah... I'm so glad I had TWO MONTHS of VIP! when I bought my Amber package. Because I'm a terrible person who didn't discover this game early enough. It's what I deserve.

 

 

 

I'm not bitter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly don't get why ACE has to make VIP a focal point of its revenue, all models have risks, but why can't they just go with the models that are working for other big western games.  Cosmetics cosmetics cosmetics.  I don't mind if they have VIP option, but it should be less significant and not the focus of their future revenue.  Just churn out cool skins, spell fx, etc, your game leaves a much better taste in everyone's mouth when you don't have tiered money statuses for players.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um, actually BDO is far from dead look at its players on steam, but yeah no p2w would be nice, but thats already gone with the VIP and stuff, and those will stay in the game for sure so yeah

Share this post


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

Name any game which survived at least several years in this model and didn't change up till now, because i can name tons of games who started as P2P games and only survived by dropping this model to where it belongs - to the garbage bin.

Several early MMOs until 10 years ago or longer "survived" on required subs with some moving to optional with "perks." WoW and FFXIV being two that I believe are still sub based with shops but not really much "P2W" elements. EVE went F2P/Sub optional last year. DAoC is still sub based and one of my favorites. Eastern, especially newer, MMOs are definitely set up with cash shop and "convenience/advantage" in mind, however, most are still in business with more folks playing at any given time than CF might ever see...

Can you name any some what newer MMO that survived on cosmetics only?

POE is not a "MMO" and GW2 offers (or did) the majority of what you said CF shouldn't have.

I personally have no clue if CF could survive on cosmetics only and prefer if they at least attempted to keep cash less involved at least to find out, but it's not my company, income, risk, etc.

6 hours ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

I honestly don't get why ACE has to make VIP a focal point of its revenue, all models have risks, but why can't they just go with the models that are working for other big western games.  Cosmetics cosmetics cosmetics.  I don't mind if they have VIP option, but it should be less significant and not the focus of their future revenue.  Just churn out cool skins, spell fx, etc, your game leaves a much better taste in everyone's mouth when you don't have tiered money statuses for players.  

Yes it is unfortunate that they couldn't at least attempt to think up and try something else before going straight into cash influencing options.

While many/most MMOs  have had to change their pay model, at least they tried something else. If fans won't/can't support the original model, change it up and find what will work.

If ACE's plan doesn't work, what then? $50 -> F2P, VIP -> more "value" with more "advantage," Store -> start wading into more "pay for advantage" options. Their first choices are 2nd/3rd/last choices for other companies.

Maybe it will work and there will be enough die hard CF fans, but game will need to be pretty spectacular and or the competition with "better" pay models will have to do pretty poorly.

CU: game + sub + no cosmetics, AoC: sub + cosmetics being the 2 I'm interested in. Wouldn't be surprised if there are a few sleepers that come out of nowhere... AMZ's New World?

5 hours ago, Almalexia said:

Um, actually BDO is far from dead look at its players on steam, but yeah no p2w would be nice, but thats already gone with the VIP and stuff, and those will stay in the game for sure so yeah

"Dead, failure, garbage, lost all customers, etc" translation "I stopped playing or don't like the game so it automatically is no longer good nor people play it"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.