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

Get rid of the passive skill system.

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

I'm sorry but I'm not under the impression that JTC is some sort of game design messiah. 

...

Messiah?  No.  Creative director of Crowfall, a game which is built upon the principle of and advertised as "Eternal Heroes, Dying Worlds"?  Yes.  


The Artist Formerly Known as Regulus

Share this post


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

*Shrugs* It is a catch up mechanic. You cant reward older players without punishing new players. The only way to avoid this is doing like VN said and deleting all progress between CW. That for me is worse, i dont enjoy doing the same stuff over and over just for it to become void in the end, again. Seeing months worths of progress vanishing just 'cuz newbies all salty that i am awesome? Nah, i better play minecraft.

How fun is crafting 1000000 wood swords before being able to craft a iron one? lvling skills is hardly fun at all (maybe fighting skills but that is mostly just fighting itself) and the passive nature of the current system is hardly to blame.

You arent supposed to focus on the passive skill tree, this isnt what CF is about. There is (there will be?) a whole new world out there and here you are complaining that the skill tree is boring. My point is if the only thing fun enough in the game is the passive skill tree, well, we failed and the game is done for.

This is more of a perspective issue imo.  Are you seeing months of progress vanish?  What did you really do for that progress, you clicked a few buttons.  What is the advantage of removing that progress, even playing fields and the ability to rebuild a character or copy it the exact same way if you were satisfied before.  It also lets campaigns actually have an early mid and late game, as opposed to once people are super trained there being no early game because people can quickly hop right to the more advanced tiers of stuff when a campaign starts.  

Your logic is bad though, you shouldn't just accept a boring passive system simply because you expect that the game has to have other fun elements.  Everything should be made to be interesting fun and engaging, it strengthens the entire gameplay experience.  

What's more fun for PvP, starting off on an even playing field and trying to outskill each other or holding onto a few button clicks that gave you enough training to work with a better type of wood?  More importantly, even if you do really love the persistence of the current system, is it unreasonable to ask that they at least have some even playing field campaigns?  I mean a game that was talking about concepts like guinecean only campaigns, as something they COULD experiment with if people wanted it enough, should have no problem having 0 pre-trained character campaigns if enough people want it right?

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

Are you opposed to ACE offering campaigns with fresh passive training for other players that would enjoy that?

I think that campaigns for brand new crows (only) is such a good idea it's fine for you to repeat it here.

I also think that taking away passive training between campaigns is a terrible idea. CF will not and should not be a MOBA!

 

To my mind, the problems with the passive skill system are thus:

  1. Too grindy. Even with VIP a player has to visit his account too often to adjust training, or lose training. I would be better 4 the time bank to last over a month.
  2. Skills aren't very interesting. They mostly raise attributes and stats. the skill tree should gate more new abilities and recipes.
  3. Skill trees are too linear. There should be multiple directions sprouting from many more nodes, and multiple paths to access a given advanced node.

Having said all this, it would be ridiculous for ACE to totally abandon the passive skill system.


I think the K-Mart of MMO's already exists!  And it ain't us!   :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not really noodled into it, but so far it looks like the passive systems garner, at best, a 10% increase in the base numbers and some crafting unlocks... 10% is not exactly an insurmountable advantage for the proverbial 'noob' to overcome.

Now - while I'd like the passive skill system to offer more depth and options for individualization, with more depth and options comes more cliff for new players to overcome. If the goal is to not offer any real insurmountable advantage for having been playing for years when compared to someone just starting out, there cannot really be anything "good" locked behind a gate of time. For if there is 'good stuff' to be had, anyone who does not have it is at a mechanical disadvantage and will whine incessantly.

A possible solution is to once again borrow from Eve; some sort of time multiplier subject to diminishing returns. In Eve you can get egregiously expensive implants that shorten the time-to-skill - but the detractor is that implants are destroyed when you are... So they're great for getting up to speed in a safe area, but tend to be too expensive for general use and the diminishing returns as you get into 14+ day trains makes them fairly useless beyond a certain point.

Just a thought.


Share this post


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

Your logic is bad though, you shouldn't just accept a boring passive system simply because you expect that the game has to have other fun elements.  Everything should be made to be interesting fun and engaging, it strengthens the entire gameplay experience.  

Well, yeah.  The point is that is that lvling skills is hardly ever fun. The passive skill training is kinda boring but the fact that we can run it in the background while we do more interesting stuff is a positive IMO.

The passive has it own set of problems but i believe being passive isnt one of them.

1 hour ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

What's more fun for PvP, starting off on an even playing field and trying to outskill each other or holding onto a few button clicks that gave you enough training to work with a better type of wood?  More importantly, even if you do really love the persistence of the current system, is it unreasonable to ask that they at least have some even playing field campaigns?  I mean a game that was talking about concepts like guinecean only campaigns, as something they COULD experiment with if people wanted it enough, should have no problem having 0 pre-trained character campaigns if enough people want it right?

You picked the wrong title if that is what you are trying to bring to the table. There is no need to gut the passive training if that is what you are looking for. I believe nobody here would mind a ruleset like that.

Hell, for all we know all they need to do to make it happen is create a copy of the skill tree, reset everyone to zero (during the campaign only) and increase the training speed. It would be a good campaign IMO and it would be fun to reach deeper in the skill tree if only temporarily.

This would solve another issue of the skill training that is its damned slow speed. Like i said the skill training has a lot of issues but they arent its passive nature.

Share this post


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

Well, yeah.  The point is that is that lvling skills is hardly ever fun. The passive skill training is kinda boring but the fact that we can run it in the background while we do more interesting stuff is a positive IMO.

The passive has it own set of problems but i believe being passive isnt one of them.

You picked the wrong title if that is what you are trying to bring to the table. There is no need to gut the passive training if that is what you are looking for. I believe nobody here would mind a ruleset like that.

Hell, for all we know all they need to do to make it happen is create a copy of the skill tree, reset everyone to zero (during the campaign only) and increase the training speed. It would be a good campaign IMO and it would be fun to reach deeper in the skill tree if only temporarily.

This would solve another issue of the skill training that is its damned slow speed. Like i said the skill training has a lot of issues but they arent its passive nature.

1iG8KEC.gif

 

It's gotten better from a sense of progress point of view with the bank. Now you can actually save up some time and select into a few of the cheaper trees as part of your login routine, but I don't even come close to understanding what they think the draw it for tier 8 nodes that are worth 24 days of training.  Will many players think it's worth 1/3 of a sub price for a single skill? Will anyone actually want to wait for that long? Getting new skills frequently is fun, spending 1/6th of an entire six month campaign waiting to get marginally better at one skill, is not.

Since the goal of the skill curve is to be shallow, shallow enough that someone with zero training is competitive with someone with years of it, and the time curve is this steep, there is a serious disconnect on training time opportunity costs. It's like they are trying to cram time value of the steep power curve square peg, into the shallow power curve round hole.

Simply flattening the tier structure to match the actual value of the skills gained from that structure, would go along way to helping give a sense of progress far more regularly.

Again I have to ask, how long does ACE actually expect the NORMAL player to stick around for? 

Forget the lifer outliers, they should be < 5% of your target audience, so don't make the core training mechanic with primarily them in mind. Make it feel like reaching a meaningful training goal, like being fully trained in blacksmithing, is possible in less than 6 months. Even at that speed it will take years to fully explore the skill tree. I had been through a year in the last round of testing, and I STILL didn't feel like I was up to snuff in my chosen profession. If I had finished a full campaign at six months, and only had what I saw for training at six months, well campaign end is a very good exit point long before level cap.

Any other game where I only dropped play money rather than investment, and I would have taken the exit at probably 2 months in on training and never looked back. This coming from someone who put 600+ hours into Naval Action a couple of years ago waiting for it get better.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


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

 

I'm not saying passive training ruins the game, I'm saying it has the potential to cause long term issues and seems in a totally opposite direction to the rest of the games concepts.

There is absolutely no way you'll entice someone into the (fully costed) game by saying, "Oh btw, y'know how you feel under-powered? Yeah the only way to get rid of that is by spending more money".
That's some F2P bs right there.

And once again, how is it fun? You click a button once every few days....woohoo

The thing about saying new players will be under-powered completely misses the fact that the game is 100% group/guild centric.  You're not supposed to just be going it alone soloing everything.  This isn't most MMOs where it's basically a single player game with other people around.  If you're not with a group/guild then you're going to have a bad time even if you had every skill trained.  New players won't feel as under powered or disadvantaged because they will be grouping up with people either in their guild or their faction and everything will be a group effort helped by people who aren't under powered.

I mean no matter what game you play though, you come in at any point after launch and you're at a disadvantage against people who have been playing for years.  Obviously it's incredibly common in MMOs but any game with any progression sees it.  I feel like the current resets we already see are enough to help with that issue.  

Also I mean "you click a button, wooo", yeah I mean no one's on the edge of their seat ranting and raving about how amazingly enjoyable a passive system is to interact with.  It's a simple UI object.  The enjoyment or fun comes from the feeling of character progression.  This one was designed to not be solely based on time actively spent in the game so people with less time to play can stay somewhat relevant.  As someone with a full time job who likes to play more than one game that appeals to me.  If I decide I want to take a break from Crowfall for a week when a new title comes out then I can do that and not feel like I'm just falling way behind by just logging in and allocating my time.

This isn't to say they couldn't add additional systems for persistent long term progression that are active.  I mean a lot of games do things like weapon proficiencies that level up as you use those weapons.  Reputation with your faction is a system that could technically work in this game since the crows and the factions exist outside of the campaigns.  There's a number of things they could add but none of them require completely removing the passive skill system.

Share this post


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

The thing about saying new players will be under-powered completely misses the fact that the game is 100% group/guild centric.  You're not supposed to just be going it alone soloing everything.  This isn't most MMOs where it's basically a single player game with other people around.  If you're not with a group/guild then you're going to have a bad time even if you had every skill trained.  New players won't feel as under powered or disadvantaged because they will be grouping up with people either in their guild or their faction and everything will be a group effort helped by people who aren't under powered.

I mean no matter what game you play though, you come in at any point after launch and you're at a disadvantage against people who have been playing for years.  Obviously it's incredibly common in MMOs but any game with any progression sees it.  I feel like the current resets we already see are enough to help with that issue.  

Also I mean "you click a button, wooo", yeah I mean no one's on the edge of their seat ranting and raving about how amazingly enjoyable a passive system is to interact with.  It's a simple UI object.  The enjoyment or fun comes from the feeling of character progression.  This one was designed to not be solely based on time actively spent in the game so people with less time to play can stay somewhat relevant.  As someone with a full time job who likes to play more than one game that appeals to me.  If I decide I want to take a break from Crowfall for a week when a new title comes out then I can do that and not feel like I'm just falling way behind by just logging in and allocating my time.

This isn't to say they couldn't add additional systems for persistent long term progression that are active.  I mean a lot of games do things like weapon proficiencies that level up as you use those weapons.  Reputation with your faction is a system that could technically work in this game since the crows and the factions exist outside of the campaigns.  There's a number of things they could add but none of them require completely removing the passive skill system.

I'm not sure you are predicting behavior for a pvp-centric game correctly.  It's very rarely "oh let's take on the complete newb cause power in numbers" unless you are part of some zerg-friendly game.  It's usually "you aren't spec'd right, you aren't high enough level, your class doesn't fit well with what we need".  

Saying the game is group-centric is a terrible excuse for justifying uneven playing fields.  It's like on one end trying to downplay the significance of a training advantage while on the other end saying it's so important that the system shouldn't be cut.  You can't have it both ways.  

And whether late-game is group-centric or not, if the game does not have a good way of easing new players in at the beginning and also well after launch, it's going to suffer greatly retaining players.  


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely agree with VN here! And I see most of those who are even for the passive training even say they dislike leveling. And since the obvious argument here is, well there is only a 10% increase then it hardly matters at all. A more fun system would be as VN proposed, where everything starts fresh every campaign, they can even take more daring choices with the passive system and add in things that might feel a bit more rewarding than the current stat increase as well. It would still work the same you would just reset every campaign.

In my eyes it will add more fun and more mixing and fiddling around with potential "skill trees", will also prevent anyone from being everything after how many years in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So...

Passive system shouldn't be paid much attention.

The stats gained don't really matter.

It is significant enough that some would walk away from the game if removed because persistence regardless of significance matters.

A per-CW ruleset that allowed fresh characters wouldn't be the end of the game and likely some would enjoy it.

CF was sold on the idea of being able to try whatever ruleset if there was interest.

MMOs have had multiple servers with multiple characters being managed, stored, deleted, created for 20 years or so.

If only there was an "easy" solution...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2018 at 9:19 AM, thomasblair said:

Where you can go get your grind on is with leveling vessels and finding Disciplines. +90 attributes from a basic white quality vessel at max is pretty significant, even more so if we up the amount of attributes gained per level on the higher quality vessels.

Could you elaborate on what you mean by "pretty significant" in comparison to the overall "super shallow power curve?"

Share this post


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

I completely agree with VN here! And I see most of those who are even for the passive training even say they dislike leveling. And since the obvious argument here is, well there is only a 10% increase then it hardly matters at all. A more fun system would be as VN proposed, where everything starts fresh every campaign, they can even take more daring choices with the passive system and add in things that might feel a bit more rewarding than the current stat increase as well. It would still work the same you would just reset every campaign.

In my eyes it will add more fun and more mixing and fiddling around with potential "skill trees", will also prevent anyone from being everything after how many years in. 

The really big advantage I see to a passive level system over an active one is it equalizes things between people like me, who tend to log 50+ hours a week at work, have families and responsibilities - and the folks with pretty much unlimited free time. I can progress just as fast and not be left behind because of needing to adult. :D

One option I was thinking of was making trained skills part of the vessel, and therefore part of the import/export rules. This allows people who stick with a plan skill-wise over time to get some return on that, but with the cost of limitations on the sorts of campaigns they can join... For example, a campaign could allow only vessels under 100 hours of skill time to enter,  or 100-200 hours, or whatever - which ensures all of the vessels in that campaign are in the same relative skill bracket.

This could also allow the skill trees to get considerably wilder with talents and abilities, because nothing would be an insurmountable advantage for the people in that campaign given the gating.

Potential problems with this are the additional database requirements to hold skill data for however many vessels are in the game at the same time.


Share this post


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

The really big advantage I see to a passive level system over an active one is it equalizes things between people like me, who tend to log 50+ hours a week at work, have families and responsibilities - and the folks with pretty much unlimited free time. I can progress just as fast and not be left behind because of needing to adult. :D

One option I was thinking of was making trained skills part of the vessel, and therefore part of the import/export rules. This allows people who stick with a plan skill-wise over time to get some return on that, but with the cost of limitations on the sorts of campaigns they can join... For example, a campaign could allow only vessels under 100 hours of skill time to enter,  or 100-200 hours, or whatever - which ensures all of the vessels in that campaign are in the same relative skill bracket.

This could also allow the skill trees to get considerably wilder with talents and abilities, because nothing would be an insurmountable advantage for the people in that campaign given the gating.

Potential problems with this are the additional database requirements to hold skill data for however many vessels are in the game at the same time.

That was actually one of the earlier suggestions I made on the issue as well.

I think it would be neat if you had to gain your vessels training passively but rapidly while in a campaign, and then export (retire) that vessel to your EK when done. In your EK the vessel could still skill up, at the current very slow passive training rate, and would forever be locked out of new campaigns.  

If you had a vessel in your EK with certain training, in campaign training could happen for those nodes at 2X or faster, as you "remember" the past lives the crow has lived, so every campaign you can get further, faster on those things you have already trained in.

It would change the life cycle of vessels from decay and loose, to lives for one world then "retires".

Constant passive progress, limited ability to uncle Bob, and no absolute skill ceiling to hit.

Kinda pointless to talk about though, ACE has a direction they are not going to change a third time before release.  We have what we have mechanics wise, all that is left to argue about that has a chance of changing is pace and things placed in the skill tree.

 

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I have another idea that could work to satisfy the desire for active progression a bit more, tie into the passive system, and still leave room for completion targets.

Use the sacrifice system to supplement the training system directly.  What this would mean, is that a vessel can sacrifice to train a skill node actively, with the following rules.

  1. Must have the qualifiers in the passive training tree, or sacrifice training tree to advance that node.
  2. Must have maxed out the current sacrifice limits. Training happens after the leveling.
  3. Has no impact on passive training.  You can get ahead of passive training this way, but you can't push passive training further ahead.
  4. Tied to the vessel, so if you lose the vessel, you also lose the sacrifice training.

So what happens is you can actively pursue a different training line for vessels as a one off, but still need to finish the passive training if you want all your vessels to benefit from a particular skill.

That would give you active progress, the ability to see if certain skills are in fact worth the time to train, but have an end of campaign reset (or mid campaign if your vessel decays), that active achievers could work towards.

 

Share this post


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

So...

Passive system shouldn't be paid much attention.

The stats gained don't really matter.

It is significant enough that some would walk away from the game if removed because persistence regardless of significance matters.

A per-CW ruleset that allowed fresh characters wouldn't be the end of the game and likely some would enjoy it.

CF was sold on the idea of being able to try whatever ruleset if there was interest.

MMOs have had multiple servers with multiple characters being managed, stored, deleted, created for 20 years or so.

If only there was an "easy" solution...

 

 

I think they've already solved your quandary--It's called a MOBA.  Hero shooters offer a similar solution (perhaps a further step away).  Both incorporate :wub:esports:wub:!! 

Let's break this down (and we'll leave hero shooters out of this for now):

MOBA=temporary worlds (arena matches) and temporary characters (temporary progression)

MMORPG=permanent worlds, and  permanent characters (progression)

CROWFALL (MMORPGRTS we'll say)="Eternal Heroes, Dying Worlds"=temporary worlds, permanent characters (progression)

Only one of these is truly innovative.  

 


The Artist Formerly Known as Regulus

Share this post


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

I think they've already solved your quandary--It's called a MOBA.  Hero shooters offer a similar solution (perhaps a further step away).  Both incorporate :wub:esports:wub:!! 

Let's break this down (and we'll leave hero shooters out of this for now):

MOBA=temporary worlds (arena matches) and temporary characters (temporary progression)

MMORPG=permanent worlds, and  permanent characters (progression)

CROWFALL (MMORPGRTS we'll say)="Eternal Heroes, Dying Worlds"=temporary worlds, permanent characters (progression)

Only one of these is truly innovative.  

In their latest video (and from the start) ACE has labeled CF as a Throne War Simulator that takes elements from multiple genres including MMOs.

For me, one of CF's strongest selling points was the "short" campaign experiences with win/lose conditions and potential for various rulesets. All of which is far from being what I assume the common definition of "MMORPG" would be for many.

Even in your attempt to make a new label, it's clear that CF =/= MMORPG at least not the traditional version nor does it have or need to include XYZ.

I don't believe the passive system should be scrapped or tweaked heavily as at this point they are too invested, however, offering a ruleset that used it differently seems entirely plausible and for me, enjoyable.

Be it everyone has only X training points to spend at the start and that's it, sped up training, no VIP, one class/race combo only, and so on. There are countless possibilities that would require little effort on the devs part as it's just turning the "dials" as they call them. That seemed to be their intention all along.

No need to redesign the game or any specific system.

No clue how difficult it would be to have a CW with an independent training system, even if temporary, but as I mentioned, games have been doing similar or more complex since at least the mid 90s.

If I wanted to play a MOBA, I would. If you want permanent characters, could always play WoW or insert any previous MMO...

Guessing we are both here because we like what ACE is attempting to do.

IMO, passive training in CF is far from innovative. Other games have it and it's basically leveling done without the work. Not very deep or hard to create. Most of CF is inspired or borrowing from previous work, slapping it all together is what is new.

Overall I like the concepts, but particular systems could be played with more to increase potential fan base and entertainment for all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, APE said:

In their latest video (and from the start) ACE has labeled CF as a Throne War Simulator that takes elements from multiple genres including MMOs.

For me, one of CF's strongest selling points was the "short" campaign experiences with win/lose conditions and potential for various rulesets. All of which is far from being what I assume the common definition of "MMORPG" would be for many.

Even in your attempt to make a new label, it's clear that CF =/= MMORPG at least not the traditional version nor does it have or need to include XYZ.

I don't believe the passive system should be scrapped or tweaked heavily as at this point they are too invested, however, offering a ruleset that used it differently seems entirely plausible and for me, enjoyable.

Be it everyone has only X training points to spend at the start and that's it, sped up training, no VIP, one class/race combo only, and so on. There are countless possibilities that would require little effort on the devs part as it's just turning the "dials" as they call them. That seemed to be their intention all along.

No need to redesign the game or any specific system.

No clue how difficult it would be to have a CW with an independent training system, even if temporary, but as I mentioned, games have been doing similar or more complex since at least the mid 90s.

If I wanted to play a MOBA, I would. If you want permanent characters, could always play WoW or insert any previous MMO...

Guessing we are both here because we like what ACE is attempting to do.

IMO, passive training in CF is far from innovative. Other games have it and it's basically leveling done without the work. Not very deep or hard to create. Most of CF is inspired or borrowing from previous work, slapping it all together is what is new.

Overall I like the concepts, but particular systems could be played with more to increase potential fan base and entertainment for all.

The labels get thrown around far too much these days, the reality of it is you are going to find hybrid games in all genres, they generally all borrow elements that can be familiar to other genres.  MOBAs have SMITE and League of Legends, 2 games that have similar objectives, but completely different combat mechanics.  SMITE happens to be closer to common third person MMO combat with WASD movement, yet it is found in the MOBA genre.  Meanwhile in MMORPGs you might have battlegrounds that play like a MOBA, or garrisons that bring back SOME rts elements, etc etc.  

These days saying a game falls under a certain genre and trying to pigeonhole it like that is just inefficient, way too many hybrids and variances even within specific genres now.  


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ArcJurado said:

I mean no matter what game you play though, you come in at any point after launch and you're at a disadvantage against people who have been playing for years.

And why should this be the case? For people's proverbial e-peens? I agree that in many MMOs that is the goal, but a large part of the draw for CF is the re-sets.

 

16 hours ago, ArcJurado said:

 New players won't feel as under powered or disadvantaged because they will be grouping up with people either in their guild or their faction and everything will be a group effort helped by people who aren't under powered.

I don't think this is true, the only way this would be possible would be with no server pop limits where zergs > all. I think we can all agree that we don't want CF to be a zerg fest. As a result, with limited spots, guilds are going to actively look for what fits. Not just random players. Therefore, any new player will not be able to join and as they can never catch up, will never be able to join. I see a lot of people talking about "Well it's only 10%" - it is clear that these people have never played with hardcore MMO players, that 10% is everything. I am not ignoring the fact this game is guild centric, I'm explaining how a passive system hurts the idea of a guild centric game by adding pointless barriers to entry for new players.

16 hours ago, ArcJurado said:

 The enjoyment or fun comes from the feeling of character progression.  This one was designed to not be solely based on time actively spent in the game so people with less time to play can stay somewhat relevant.  As someone with a full time job who likes to play more than one game that appeals to me.  If I decide I want to take a break from Crowfall for a week when a new title comes out then I can do that and not feel like I'm just falling way behind by just logging in and allocating my time.

This I simply cannot understand. Why do you want a game to play itself? How is that enjoyable? I also work full time and can appreciate the lack of time to dedicate for games these days but damn, I don't want the game to progress for me. Otherwise I'd be buying Clicker Heroes 2.

IMO the fact that there are re-sets enables exactly what you want. You can take breaks from the game knowing that when you come back you'll be on the same playing field as everyone else. Except currently that requires you to constantly log in and remember to train skills, which may not be possible for some people.

 

 

I also don't like all these comments of "well it's too late to change it now". Literally this is the easiest system in the game to change at this point, it's passive stat increases... no animations, no additional variables, nothing. VNs idea of skill trees being campaign focused, each campaign you can build totally different and actually reach max build for a specific skill, is a much much better system. And no, that doesn't turn it into a moba - not even a little bit.

The point of CF is to push new concepts, not accept old, outdated and frankly boring systems that we have seen for over 30 years.

CF is supposedly not about leveling, yet they have put a time based leveling system into the game and multiple people are defending it over the idea of "progression". Random time sinks are not good progression, look at Warlord's of Draenor and why that failed.

I see CF much more like D&D than most MMOs. In D&D you don't get to carry over random passive stats to a new campaign, but you do get to try playing with a totally new character resulting in a totally different experience even though it is within the same setting and it's very enjoyable. With this passive system you will feel compelled to play what you have spent the past 6 months speccing into, despite the fact you have played two separate campaigns. That does not seem like good game design to me.

And ultimately I will always bring it back to, "How is this fun?" - If it isn't fun, it shouldn't be in a game that we play for.. y'know, fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, ArcJurado said:

 

I mean no matter what game you play though, you come in at any point after launch and you're at a disadvantage against people who have been playing for years.  Obviously it's incredibly common in MMOs but any game with any progression sees it.  I feel like the current resets we already see are enough to help with that issue.  

 

One of the big pluses for CF that gets around this sort of imbalance, is the ability to twink new players, and the total lack of "Must be level X to use this item" limitations.

Day one, I can put on the best weapon,armor,disciplines, etc, if only I have access to them. Old MMO's were like a football team where the new players couldn't wear the best footwear, padds, and other gear, and had to earn the right to wear them one piece and step at a time.

In CF, if your on a team, that team can be the source of your gear, so your starting limitations, and power curve to achieve can me much more shallow. Couple that with "multiple ways to the same end stat" approach, and maybe you don't get to high end final abilities via training, maybe you have to equip the relevant discipline to do it.

All in all it's pretty robust.  I still think training is too slow, and would be more interesting if there was a second and active channel for achieving the same thing, as long as the active channel was not the permanent progress. Disciplines are ... close, and sacrifice .... helps, but it just seems to me that active progress is still gated too heavily by time and grind work.

Share this post


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

In their latest video (and from the start) ACE has labeled CF as a Throne War Simulator that takes elements from multiple genres including MMOs.

For me, one of CF's strongest selling points was the "short" campaign experiences with win/lose conditions and potential for various rulesets. All of which is far from being what I assume the common definition of "MMORPG" would be for many.

Even in your attempt to make a new label, it's clear that CF =/= MMORPG at least not the traditional version nor does it have or need to include XYZ.

I don't believe the passive system should be scrapped or tweaked heavily as at this point they are too invested, however, offering a ruleset that used it differently seems entirely plausible and for me, enjoyable.

Be it everyone has only X training points to spend at the start and that's it, sped up training, no VIP, one class/race combo only, and so on. There are countless possibilities that would require little effort on the devs part as it's just turning the "dials" as they call them. That seemed to be their intention all along.

No need to redesign the game or any specific system.

No clue how difficult it would be to have a CW with an independent training system, even if temporary, but as I mentioned, games have been doing similar or more complex since at least the mid 90s.

If I wanted to play a MOBA, I would. If you want permanent characters, could always play WoW or insert any previous MMO...

Guessing we are both here because we like what ACE is attempting to do.

IMO, passive training in CF is far from innovative. Other games have it and it's basically leveling done without the work. Not very deep or hard to create. Most of CF is inspired or borrowing from previous work, slapping it all together is what is new.

Overall I like the concepts, but particular systems could be played with more to increase potential fan base and entertainment for all.

You know, they called Shadowbane a "Game of Thrones" (i.e., Throne War Simulator), too (perhaps posthumously).  Putting labels aside for a moment (though I do believe they are important), what it comes down to is making good on the designed promised and summed up in the expression "Eternal heroes, Dying worlds".  You dislike passive progression.  However, I think you'd have to admit that it does (at least in part) address one part of that genuinely innovative promise. I happen to like passive training, though I have my opinions on how it might be improved (of course).  In addition, I would say that permanent progression in CF, such as it is, is barely enough to make good on the "eternal heroes" part.  Consequently, I'd like to see more permanence--not less--at least when it comes to our characters.    


The Artist Formerly Known as Regulus

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...