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

Encourage Crafting in the CWs versus the EKS

Recommended Posts

(Read the bolded parts for the short version.)

This issue has been discussed a bit, and I know it's already on the dev's radar, but I think it is important it be addressed soon, what with crafting stations in EKs now being usable by other players, and 5.6 due to be pushed to the Live servers soon and how negative an impact on gameplay and testing little to no crafting in the Campaign World would have.

Obviously both some players and the devs want crafting to be done in the EKs. This is how it will be in release, between campaign cycles, when the spoils of war and taken home to better your EK infrastructure and your equipment as you ready for the next campaign. Crafting in an Eternal Kingdom can and should also be a social experience, seeing not just a vendors but crafting facilities being used by large groups of players in a single EK is something that needs to be tested and will help cement the social foundation of the game, paying dividends in it's other areas.

That said, there is a real downside to a reduction or even a total end to crafting in the Campaign Worlds. Taking Forts and Keeps, defending them and the Crafters that use the stations there, is a significant part of the gameplay loop right now, and one of the few reasons for conflict, given the lack of any real functioning win condition system. By allowing people to craft items in the EKs, even with Import/Exports limits - a mentioned method of possibly addressing this issue - you reduce the need to craft in EKs and at the same time reduce the sources of conflict, and ultimately, activity in the Campaign Worlds.

I have a suggestion for a simple solution to this problem, which would be the following:

-Cause every Fort Throne and the Keep Tree to generate a field that buffs the crafting stats of those people in it's faction, similar to what the Leadership buff does, calibrated as needed in terms of range to cover all of the nearby stations
-The strength of the buff could be equal to or greater than, as well as being stackable or not stackable with the Leadership buff, depending on what exactly you want to accomplish

If the game is able to treat players in a faction and proximity to the Throne or Tree for this buff, similarly to how it treats players in group and proximity to it's leader for the Leadership buff, then I think - based entirely on ignorance of course - that this should be do-able and fairly straight-forward. It would restore value to taking, holding and defending strongholds once again in the context of crafting, and depending on the values used, may even make it better than crafting in an EK with Leadership buffs. I am not inclined to punish or destroy the possibility for an activity, such as crafting in EKs, but rather reward the competing activity - keep player choice intact, but restore the circumstances that support the overall gameplay and activity in the Campaign Worlds.

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The risks do not equal the rewards. 

Crafting has many required items to be able to make things. If you are risking all of those items to the chance of getting ambushed and killed and the items lost the reward needs to also be worth it. 

Making it impossible to craft in the EK's would force people into the campaign worlds. The issue with that is that people will still not risk the time and mats without feeling at least safe. Having player guards is fine and dandy, but times that people are playing also needs to mesh, and guards standing around while someone makes items that can take 30+ minutes to craft from just pressing buttons is boring as hell.  Yes people will do it. And Hate doing it. Not a good way to get people to play. 

They have to make the rewards worth the risk. 

Make crafting able to be done with local storage items, when you open the crafting interface that local storage opens too. 
Better npc guards in keeps. To help prevent the teleporting solo gank. Crafters are totally vulnerable. If they get ganked they are going to stop crafting until they feel safe.

If they are and do not feel safe then there has to be a much greater reward to equal the risk. Better stats. More consistent returns. Unique badass looks. Particle effects. Something has to make up for the risk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am always happy to support a 'carrot' versus a 'stick' design solution.

The game from its inception has had the design that EKs can be used for a crafting haven, the import export from them as a built in resource sync of sorts and the sense of permanence reinforces the between campaign feel. I would be glad to see something like but my hope is that they could address a few possible risks with it:

  • If high end crafting like this happens in the CW without the resource loss seen in import/export then a corresponding cost (hippo, etc) might be needed 
  • How to address an uncle Bob situation? if a guild is dominating will this just allow them to keep dominating?  Maybe the benefit grows over time? the longer the same keep is held a slow growing impact to crafters is created?  @srathor and I talked about this with tables, etc where guilds efforts actually level up the tables but the flip of ownership could reset them?  Knowing that the longer a keep/fort is held that its power can grow could be a reason to get teams together and keep the control of POIs moving 

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

Seems like a good idea.

I could see implementing this with Relics in the forts and keeps. If the Relics were 'hippos' that needed to be fed that would drive some activity and give factions something to work together on.

In the long run I think different campaign rules will mean that crafting in EKs works fine for some, but not others. Low Imports on a campaign would make crafting in EKs less viable. And obviously, a zero Import campaign would require all crafting to be done in the campaign.

Some players will want to craft in safety, and there can be campaigns that suit them. Other people will want everything to involve risk, and there can be campaigns that suit that preference.


IhhQKY6.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, srathor said:

Making it impossible to craft in the EK's would force people into the campaign worlds. The issue with that is that people will still not risk the time and mats without feeling at least safe. Having player guards is fine and dandy, but times that people are playing also needs to mesh, and guards standing around while someone makes items that can take 30+ minutes to craft from just pressing buttons is boring as hell.  Yes people will do it. And Hate doing it. Not a good way to get people to play. 

They have to make the rewards worth the risk. 

Make crafting able to be done with local storage items, when you open the crafting interface that local storage opens too. 
Better npc guards in keeps. To help prevent the teleporting solo gank. Crafters are totally vulnerable. If they get ganked they are going to stop crafting until they feel safe.

If they are and do not feel safe then there has to be a much greater reward to equal the risk. Better stats. More consistent returns. Unique badass looks. Particle effects. Something has to make up for the risk. 

I am not proposing making it impossible to Craft in the EKs, and I AM proposing greater reward for the risk of crafting in the CWs - better crafting stats = better items. No particle effects needed, just better end results. This gives people a choice - they can craft in safety with less risk in their EK, or they can risk crafting in a CW and be rewarded with better items. Simple, elegant, effective.

Edited by Anthrage

Share this post


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

I am not proposing making it impossible to Craft in the EKs, and I AM proposing greater reward for the risk of crafting in the CWs - better crafting stats = better items. No particle effects needed, just better end results. This gives people a choice - they can craft in safety with less risk in their EK, or they can risk crafting in a CW and be rewarded with better items. Simple, elegant, effective.

I think this is an issue now, but won't be once there are higher populations and certain game systems are working fully as intended (permanent vessels, exports only occurring at the end of the campaign). I don't think a crafting buff would incentivize me to craft in campaign rather than EK. Given the risk of doing so, I'm going to use a vessel that will better enable me to defend myself or escape, rather than one that would be better for crafting. If I'm selling gear, that's going to happen in my EK, so it's either craft then export or export then craft. The latter is the safer option.

Even if a crafting buff were added and it did produce the desired results, it would be a temporary thing until other changes come online. That said, I wouldn't be against them adding it provided it didn't take much time/effort. I don't know if they can have different settings for the season of plenty buff between EKs and campaigns. If they can, then adding a crafting buff to season of plenty for campaigns only should be fairly simple. They will obviously need to control the seasonal buffs on a campaign by campaign basis, so maybe this functionality is already in or soon will be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Arkade said:

I think this is an issue now, but won't be once there are higher populations and certain game systems are working fully as intended (permanent vessels, exports only occurring at the end of the campaign). I don't think a crafting buff would incentivize me to craft in campaign rather than EK. Given the risk of doing so, I'm going to use a vessel that will better enable me to defend myself or escape, rather than one that would be better for crafting. If I'm selling gear, that's going to happen in my EK, so it's either craft then export or export then craft. The latter is the safer option.

Even if a crafting buff were added and it did produce the desired results, it would be a temporary thing until other changes come online. That said, I wouldn't be against them adding it provided it didn't take much time/effort. I don't know if they can have different settings for the season of plenty buff between EKs and campaigns. If they can, then adding a crafting buff to season of plenty for campaigns only should be fairly simple. They will obviously need to control the seasonal buffs on a campaign by campaign basis, so maybe this functionality is already in or soon will be.

Unfortunately what you describe is completely different from what I describe, so I can't say I am in favor of it. Adding a seasonal buff would impact everyone on the CW, what I am looking for is something tied to asset-ownership and the faction in question, which encourages the related activity. I don't see how it would inherently be a temporary thing, a crafting buff is always going to be desirable, it's why serious crafters have specific crafting vessels, level them up, make crafting gear with the related seals, spend points training leadership and grouping with others etc.

Higher populations will not address this problem, especially if an equal proportion of those people feel as you do and prefer to craft in the EK. Crafting in the EK absolutely reduces activity in the SWs, your saying it is safer simply proves my point in that regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Anthrage said:

Unfortunately what you describe is completely different from what I describe, so I can't say I am in favor of it. Adding a seasonal buff would impact everyone on the CW, what I am looking for is something tied to asset-ownership and the faction in question, which encourages the related activity. I don't see how it would inherently be a temporary thing, a crafting buff is always going to be desirable, it's why serious crafters have specific crafting vessels, level them up, make crafting gear with the related seals, spend points training leadership and grouping with others etc.

Higher populations will not address this problem, especially if an equal proportion of those people feel as you do and prefer to craft in the EK. Crafting in the EK absolutely reduces activity in the SWs, your saying it is safer simply proves my point in that regard.

The only crafting tables in a CW are in forts and keeps and you can't use them unless your faction controls the fort/keep. The fact that everyone would get the buff is moot. They only need to ensure that the buff doesn't apply to EKs.

Higher populations will make defending a fort/keep easier. Or perhaps I should say, it will make taking a fort/keep less trivial than it is now where people can just walk and solo cap them.

My point about it being safer in EKs is true, but higher populations will make crafting in campaigns less risky. Beyond that, the expected changes to exports will force people to craft in campaign. If I can't export without going to a specific location that may be camped, and I can't get those exports until the campaign ends, I'm going to be forced to craft in the campaign. If the campaign doesn't allow imports, anything I craft in my EK will be unusable in campaign, which again will force me to craft in campaign.

So this issue will be resolved naturally as game systems are added/refined. Any solution added now would be temporary and shouldn't be done if it will require significant time and effort to implement.

Share this post


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

The only crafting tables in a CW are in forts and keeps and you can't use them unless your faction controls the fort/keep. The fact that everyone would get the buff is moot. They only need to ensure that the buff doesn't apply to EKs.

Higher populations will make defending a fort/keep easier. Or perhaps I should say, it will make taking a fort/keep less trivial than it is now where people can just walk and solo cap them.

My point about it being safer in EKs is true, but higher populations will make crafting in campaigns less risky. Beyond that, the expected changes to exports will force people to craft in campaign. If I can't export without going to a specific location that may be camped, and I can't get those exports until the campaign ends, I'm going to be forced to craft in the campaign. If the campaign doesn't allow imports, anything I craft in my EK will be unusable in campaign, which again will force me to craft in campaign.

So this issue will be resolved naturally as game systems are added/refined. Any solution added now would be temporary and shouldn't be done if it will require significant time and effort to implement.

Higher populations along would not solve the problem - it would mean more people in the EKs, as well as more people attacking a stronghold, along with defending. It would not necessarily change anything.

I agree about the latter statement, which is why what I proposed does neither of the negative things you mentioned - it uses existing mechanics, which your seasonal crafting bonus suggestion does not. That the issue will be resolved in future, come release for example, has no bearing on what is going on right now, and it IS a problem right now. It is more of a problem now when it comes to getting to release as it absolutely impacts the amount of testing that is being done. A solution such as the one I describe would have a positive impact on Test, and no negative impact on either development nor the release reality should they choose to keep the buff mechanic in place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Anthrage said:

Higher populations along would not solve the problem - it would mean more people in the EKs, as well as more people attacking a stronghold, along with defending. It would not necessarily change anything.

I agree about the latter statement, which is why what I proposed does neither of the negative things you mentioned - it uses existing mechanics, which your seasonal crafting bonus suggestion does not. That the issue will be resolved in future, come release for example, has no bearing on what is going on right now, and it IS a problem right now. It is more of a problem now when it comes to getting to release as it absolutely impacts the amount of testing that is being done. A solution such as the one I describe would have a positive impact on Test, and no negative impact on either development nor the release reality should they choose to keep the buff mechanic in place.

The seasonal bonus isn't existing mechanics? We currently get the Season of Plenty bonus on the test server, so it is very much existing mechanics.

It may be that they currently can't control the benefits of the seasonal buffs on a world by world basis, but it's certainly something that will need to happen before launch. They wouldn't even need to have season of plenty give different buffs in different worlds. They could simply create a new "season" that is used exclusively in the EK.

Your suggestion may or may not use existing mechanics. Yes, we can currently get buffs within a range, centered on the leader of a group. I wouldn't assume that creating a similar buff centered on the throne would be easy.

Regardless, I was just proposing something that I thought would be easier for them to implement. We can agree to disagree on that. My point still stands that if it isn't easy, they shouldn't be wasting their time on it as the problem will be resolved via other game systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely endorse this idea! While crafting in EKs shouldn’t be prohibited, if we know that the best gear can only be made within CWs where the risks are the highest, the mix/max crowd will take steps to make this happen. Optimal gear should not be available in the complete safety afforded by EK crafting. Love this idea!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/5/2018 at 6:22 PM, Anthrage said:

Obviously both some players and the devs want crafting to be done in the EKs. This is how it will be in release, between campaign cycles, when the spoils of war and taken home to better your EK infrastructure and your equipment as you ready for the next campaign.

Not obvious to me.
The only way to use the best vessel or equipment in the dregs, due to import limit, is crafting in the dregs.

The guilds should have better vessels to compete for winning the CW and exporting resource, before crafting anything rare in their EK (losers get zero import from dregs CW).

However I doubt lack of crafting in CW is a problem. I figure developers have their useful feedback from our tests wherever the item is crafted.

Moreover imho ACE is looking how fast (we) testers are crafting object, starting this way to figure how many resource are needed in a map. A buffer given in test environment surely will alter this kind of consideration.

In the end, not an idea I'm going to support.


Catelyn: War will make them old, as it did us. I pity them.
Mathis: Why? Look at them. They're young and strong, full of life and laughter. And lust, aye, more lust than they know what to do with. There will be many a bastard bred this night, I promise you. Why pity?
Catelyn: Because it will not last. Because they are the knights of summer, and winter is coming.

A Clash of Kings, Chapter 22, Catelyn II.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Crowfall Discord Channels: international (english) - italiano

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/5/2018 at 11:31 AM, Anthrage said:

I am not proposing making it impossible to Craft in the EKs, and I AM proposing greater reward for the risk of crafting in the CWs - better crafting stats = better items. No particle effects needed, just better end results. This gives people a choice - they can craft in safety with less risk in their EK, or they can risk crafting in a CW and be rewarded with better items. Simple, elegant, effective.

That would kill and totally defeat the purpose of the EK's being connected to campaign economy in my opinion.  Why would you ever export the "best" resources from the dregs, a very early selling point on the motivation to take the risk of going there, if you can't make the best gear with it? 

It also seems to fly in the face of dying worlds, where worlds get harsher and harder to live in as time progresses.  Crafting takes time, and harvested resources, both of which should become less and less available as worlds progress, so gear will become worse and worse as the worlds age. 

Besides, the real solutions to this problem has already been laid out and partly built.  They are called called import restrictions, and different campaign configurations.  You may be able to get some things from the EK, but there is no reason to assume that every campaign will 

  •  allow for "free flow" of goods enough to trigger Uncle Bob scenarios.
  • have imports available in all seasons. It's entirely possible some worlds will get completely cut off of imports in the last half of the campaign.
  • have open gates on quality. Some worlds may restrict transfers in to lower standards than those that can be crafted in that world.

If you gimp crafting in the EK universally, then the EK will have a diminished value to the overall plan for the game, making Crowfall less than it could be.

If however ACE gives you the kind of world settings you think more people would be interested in playing, ones where the only good gear is made inside them, then people will play it because it's a better game. I personally think it would be a worse game, too much stick and not enough carrot, and not many people will play it, but I would love to see you get a shot at giving it a try.

That's why I like some of your ideas about the types of buffs, but the application does not need to be a universal thing, nor does it need to gimp EK's to be implemented in certain worlds.

I personally think there is is a common mistake being made that the whole game has to have a specific format, when what we really should be talking about is campaign world options. 

Campaign rulesets are not an ideological battle that has to be won in the overarching game design, it's survival of the fittest campaign models, and may the most popular campaign styles that get played and are successful,  win.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the unknown here could be relics .... We have already seen the placement of one in a Fort its just not doing anything at the moment. 

@jtoddcoleman 's uber creation

eaH03eB.jpg

if relics are place-able within forts and Ek's the ability to tune the powers of them, the strength , etc could maybe allow us some of what the OP is describing.

Are relics destroy-able?  without a large change to existing mechanics maybe relics could give a lift to the crafters in the fort but can be targeted by the attackers ? 

 


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

I think whether or not someone crafts in the CW or the EK should not really matter.  All of this can be controlled via import rule set's per campaign.  If you want limited or zero imports then play that rule set.  If materials needed to craft come from CW's,  It will already force everyone into CW's.  This almost seems like a solution to a problem that does not exist.....

Share this post


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

That would kill and totally defeat the purpose of the EK's being connected to campaign economy in my opinion.  Why would you ever export the "best" resources from the dregs, a very early selling point on the motivation to take the risk of going there, if you can't make the best gear with it? 

I think you are getting a bit carried away with black-and-white thinking here. People aren't going to trash the best resources at the end of a campaign simply because there was a crafting buff available when crafting in the campaign. The connected economy would remain. EK crafters are still going to want the best resources they can get, and those would still come from the Dregs. Crafting in campaigns has more risk than crafting in EKs, so rewarding that risk-taking may be a good thing.

3 hours ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

If you gimp crafting in the EK universally, then the EK will have a diminished value to the overall plan for the game, making Crowfall less than it could be.

He suggested a modest buff, along the lines of the Leadership buff. He even left open the possibility that it would not stack with the Leadership buff, which is a very modest version of the proposal. Casting the whole suggestion as "gimping crafting in the EK universally" is a bit of a straw man.

On 5/5/2018 at 12:22 PM, Anthrage said:

-The strength of the buff could be equal to or greater than, as well as being stackable or not stackable with the Leadership buff, depending on what exactly you want to accomplish

 


IhhQKY6.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jah said:

I think you are getting a bit carried away with black-and-white thinking here. People aren't going to trash the best resources at the end of a campaign simply because there was a crafting buff available when crafting in the campaign. The connected economy would remain. EK crafters are still going to want the best resources they can get, and those would still come from the Dregs. Crafting in campaigns has more risk than crafting in EKs, so rewarding that risk-taking may be a good thing.

He suggested a modest buff, along the lines of the Leadership buff. He even left open the possibility that it would not stack with the Leadership buff, which is a very modest version of the proposal. Casting the whole suggestion as "gimping crafting in the EK universally" is a bit of a straw man.

 

I've already stated my position on the leadership and crafting buffs, but I'll do it again.  

In the EK's , the leadership buff is at best already going to be largely relegated to ATL accounts and multiboxing. 

It is not going to be remotely engaging gameplay to stand around and watch someone else craft, and if the results are going to be substandard without it, crafters will be required to either work in pairs/groups all the time, or buy an ALT account to stand close while they work.  In essence, there is already a barrier in place to making the best stuff in EK's. Either a second account, or social dependency. There does not need to be more.

Leadership buffs on crafting seems very much a square peg/round hole sort of design. I could see an apprentice/master relationship, one that in no way precludes a master craftsman from doing his best work alone.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You would think after so many years of dealing with human beings, I would have lost the capacity to be surprised at how poorly people are able to understand something that is stated clearly. Sadly, that is not the case.

As I have said, what I proposed is primarily to address the REAL issue that exists in the Test - all of these comments about the release CW cycle are entirely superfluous. NONE of them have acknowledged this real issue. Most of them bring up things I myself have brought up in my own posts or have already addressed. You guys need seriously need to learn to custard read, because this is bloody tedious. How in the hell can you have a discussion with someone who isn't even understanding what you've written?

So many comments that counter a position that doesn't even custard exist. Good lord, what a waste of time.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, KrakkenSmacken said:

I've already stated my position on the leadership and crafting buffs, but I'll do it again.  

In the EK's , the leadership buff is at best already going to be largely relegated to ATL accounts and multiboxing. 

It is not going to be remotely engaging gameplay to stand around and watch someone else craft, and if the results are going to be substandard without it, crafters will be required to either work in pairs/groups all the time, or buy an ALT account to stand close while they work.  In essence, there is already a barrier in place to making the best stuff in EK's. Either a second account, or social dependency. There does not need to be more.

Leadership buffs on crafting seems very much a square peg/round hole sort of design. I could see an apprentice/master relationship, one that in no way precludes a master craftsman from doing his best work alone.

I suppose that's one way to ignore what I said.


IhhQKY6.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jah said:

I suppose that's one way to ignore what I said.

I don't see how.  He clearly said very specifically

Quote

This gives people a choice - they can craft in safety with less risk in their EK, or they can risk crafting in a CW and be rewarded with better items.

Rewarded with better items is the same as saying EK's produce worse items.  EK crafting being gimped with worse results.

I also don't think that the Risk/Reward mantra is something that should be followed so tightly as to choke off other game design goals, which is exactly what I think gimping EK crafting would do.

6 minutes ago, Anthrage said:

You would think after so many years of dealing with human beings, I would have lost the capacity to be surprised at how poorly people are able to understand something that is stated clearly. Sadly, that is not the case.

As I have said, what I proposed is primarily to address the REAL issue that exists in the Test - all of these comments about the release CW cycle are entirely superfluous. NONE of them have acknowledged this real issue. Most of them bring up things I myself have brought up in my own posts or have already addressed. You guys need seriously need to learn to custard read, because this is bloody tedious. How in the hell can you have a discussion with someone who isn't even understanding what you've written?

So many comments that counter a position that doesn't even custard exist. Good lord, what a waste of time.

 

 

I don't care a bit about test being broken in any way other than how it reflects on how it will be when it's no longer test.  Test is not the game. Since when it is no longer test, campaign configuration and import limits will allow for options that provide for these kinds of incentives, it's a waste of time to dwell on the issue now until we see how those systems deal with it. 

You don't waste time and money painting a car your taking to the wreckers.

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...