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

ACE Q&A for July - Official Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, killerkat said:

If that milk is through the battlefield why wouldn't I.  I used an extreme and I guess the trolls can't read between the lines.  

The point is I need to be geared well enough to be able to defend and/or escape if some rando happens to come across where I thought was a safe spot to harvest.  It has happened.  So I need to be geared and ready.  I don't play the cookie cutter fae assasin harvester to just run and hide.  I play what I plan to play at launch to be able to support the fight in hostile harvesting areas.  So I need to be geared just as everybody else who is out to farm me.  

As far as risk reward, the nodes I am harvesting are the reward, if I can't protect that in my inventory the best way possible I might as well farm it and hand it over to who ever comes by.  So yes I need to be geared just as everyone else, especially since my skills might not be all combat centric.

Calling someone a troll on the forums in against the TOS,  no need to make it personal.

Your example was "Legendary gear, that took months to get resources for".  Well you must have been farming successfully in less than legendary to have made it in the first place.  So you must have a second best set somewhere that was good enough then, but suddenly isn't good enough now because... reasons.

The point really is, that's your choice. If you think you need the best gear to harvest in, rather than "good enough", wear your best gear. If you don't think your skill is up to handling an encounter in anything but your best, odds are good you'll die no matter what your wearing anyway.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a valid point. Higher quality gear should have spmewhat higher base durability under this system because decaying it is inevitable AND it takes longer to farm AND is harder to produce.

That just makes sense to me.

Not because you should be encouraged to gather milk in the batmobile, but rather as a matter of basic economics of time versus value. More "value" should probably mean slightly higher base durability or you run the risk of legendaries being a negative value proposition.


PopeSigGIF.gif

Rub rock on face and say "Yes food is eaten now time for fight"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, PopeUrban said:

It is a valid point. Higher quality gear should have spmewhat higher base durability under this system because decaying it is inevitable AND it takes longer to farm AND is harder to produce.

That just makes sense to me.

Not because you should be encouraged to gather milk in the batmobile, but rather as a matter of basic economics of time versus value. More "value" should probably mean slightly higher base durability or you run the risk of legendaries being a negative value proposition.

Actually, I didn't comment originally on the potential for scaling durability because of this comment.

Quote

Now you all are going to argue well your legendary should have more durability so should last longer.  Well just cause I have more points in durability doesn't change the fact that I am losing the same 2pt/10sec as everyone else.  

But I think two things could happen to make high end gear more valuable.

  • Higher base durability by quality, by a much larger margin than currently happens.
  • Change the crafting so that the current experimentation rates for durability of  (1.05,2.05,5.64,6.44,8.05) get a significant bump.

I don't think it's a bad idea that the better quality gear should last much longer than the cheap stuff. It's not like durability is a factor in DPS or mitigation numbers.  Scaling up the value of pips in durability could actually bring the averages down if people though having gear last longer was more valuable than a couple of points in other things.

None of this though impacts the issue of wearing your Sunday best, just to mow your lawn in.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2018 at 7:25 AM, Anthrage said:

Personally I feel the move to unavoidable durability loss while being in combat is an absolutely terrible idea. It doesn't matter if the loss is far less than what you might suffer in X deaths - you could play for 11 hours and never die, or die and be revived, avoiding that loss completely. There is currently some in-combat tray loss but it is far less than what is being proposed. This new change is in my view entirely unnecessary and takes an issue that was affecting a minority of people and spreads it around to the entire player-base.

The changes to crafting requirements - less materials needed, fewer required components, more optional components, and the free premium materials, address the issue quite sufficiently in my opinion. These durability loss changes...it's going to create all kinds of new problems. If anything, do the first set of changes and if the slippery slope is deemed to still be too slippery, then do the durability changes...

Fully agreed. I'll echo Jah, in that I am skeptical about anything that causes people to question fighting in the first place in a PvP game.

This is all made nearly moot if we get a reasonable repair system (gold and/or mats) with max durability loss implemented. Why this is not in Crowfall, and frankly all similar games, is beyond me.

It is an excellent economic game loop too, if you tie it to the crafters themselves (plate crafter can repair damaged plate armor, and possibly save on max durability loss or resources costs).

Edited by McTan

Mic MWH, Member of Mithril Warhammers since 2003,


Hammers High! http://www.mithrilwarhammers.com

Share this post


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

Calling someone a troll on the forums in against the TOS,  no need to make it personal.

 

I didn't call anyone, I made a statement.  

Again, I used the extreme for months for legendary.  So take it as you want.


Killerkat

support expert

www.infernalgamers.com

Share this post


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

I didn't call anyone, I made a statement.  

Again, I used the extreme for months for legendary.  So take it as you want.

I was literally the only person that commented on the post, before you used the word troll.

Let's see what the mods think.  I usually don't flag, but your trying to defend breaking the rules, and using personal attacks, sooo....

Share this post


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

Fully agreed. I'll echo Jah, in that I am skeptical about anything that causes people to question fighting in the first place in a PvP game.

This is all made nearly moot if we get a reasonable repair system (gold and/or mats) with max durability loss implemented. Why this is not in Crowfall, and frankly all similar games, is beyond me.

It is an excellent economic game loop too, if you tie it to the crafters themselves (plate crafter can repair damaged plate armor, and possibly save on max durability loss or resources costs).

The entire concept of durability in any form causes people to question fighting in the first place. However, we need an economic sink of some sort if we're going to have anything meaningful to fight over. This means people must be encouraged to weigh the cost of fighting against the potential for gain from said fighting. If you want most of the players to err on the side of fighting, most of the players have to see this as a positive value proposition.

The question to answer is "what causes the fewest people to question fighting in the first place"

According to this thread there are various opinions on the matter depending on who you ask. In my personal opinion, this solution seems to encourage disruption of the status quo moreso than resigning oneself to simply running away from (or kneeling to) the local top of the pile. However, like everything in this thread, that's an opinion based on nothing more than intuition and assumption.

I think there is a lot of confirmation bias in this discussion. We all have slightly different lenses on it, and as humans without a formal data collection apparatus (metrics that ACE may track that we can't for instance) it is natural we assume different things about the "majority" of players.


PopeSigGIF.gif

Rub rock on face and say "Yes food is eaten now time for fight"

Share this post


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

The entire concept of durability in any form causes people to question fighting in the first place. However, we need an economic sink of some sort if we're going to have anything meaningful to fight over. This means people must be encouraged to weigh the cost of fighting against the potential for gain from said fighting. If you want most of the players to err on the side of fighting, most of the players have to see this as a positive value proposition.

The question to answer is "what causes the fewest people to question fighting in the first place"

According to this thread there are various opinions on the matter depending on who you ask. In my personal opinion, this solution seems to encourage disruption of the status quo moreso than resigning oneself to simply running away from (or kneeling to) the local top of the pile. However, like everything in this thread, that's an opinion based on nothing more than intuition and assumption.

I think there is a lot of confirmation bias in this discussion. We all have slightly different lenses on it, and as humans without a formal data collection apparatus (metrics that ACE may track that we can't for instance) it is natural we assume different things about the "majority" of players.

I'd add that a repair system would greatly diminish the value of needing new gear made. If you allow people to effectively stay in one piece of gear for a whole campaign, why bother going out to farm resources (the primary flashpoint of unscheduled PvP)? Repairing is a crutch for people who can't organize gathering and harvesting teams. No thanks.


Obsidian-ForumSignature.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a repair system would destroy the economyloop and harvesting/crafting would lose their importance.


One Ring to Rule them all, One Ring to Find them, One Ring to bring them all an in the darkness and bind them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/13/2018 at 9:06 PM, PopeUrban said:

The entire concept of durability in any form causes people to question fighting in the first place. However, we need an economic sink of some sort if we're going to have anything meaningful to fight over. This means people must be encouraged to weigh the cost of fighting against the potential for gain from said fighting. If you want most of the players to err on the side of fighting, most of the players have to see this as a positive value proposition.

The question to answer is "what causes the fewest people to question fighting in the first place"

Indeed.

What about my discussion of repair systems? Something that would really affect this question.


Mic MWH, Member of Mithril Warhammers since 2003,


Hammers High! http://www.mithrilwarhammers.com

Share this post


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

Indeed.

What about my discussion of repair systems? Something that would really affect this question.

It totally would, but I think Scree raises a good point about repairs.

Repairs are a method to extend the lifespan of items, but depending on implementation they do necessarily shift some of the focus of the gear cycle away from crafting. NPC repairs are convenient, but rob crafters of income. Player repairs return that income, but shift the focus of crafting from primarily new gear to a large portion of their time being pumping out maintainence items. As a SWG crafter I can say that I enjoyed making gear, and HATED making kits, simply because there were no fun stats to play with on the kits, but I had to make a poorly made socksload of kits to make customers happy.

I think if we want crafters to remain engaged and play a focal role, we should think about what's fun for them as well as whats fun for the people buying or being furnished with their wares. Repair systems are, essentially, a chore that must be done by the holder of items which isn't necessarily a fun thing, just a thing you gotta do now and then for balance reasons because the econ is built around it. Those systems also de-emphasize unique gear and the intricacies of crafting new gear.

So really, despite how unobtrusive it is in most impllementations, I think the question 'are repairs fun?" merits investigation. Shopping for gear is fun in a system with variant stats (even when "shopping" is trying to get better rolls from free guild smiths). Using gear is fun. Creating it is fun. Repairs might be unobtrusive, but I can't think of any repair system I'd call "fun"

Using this logic I'm thinking the better route is to just build whatever durability balance repairs would have given you in to the gear, which is essentially what epxerimentation and decay skills do. They let you use the gear without a chore, and keep the economy focused upon the gear rather than the upkeep mechanism.


PopeSigGIF.gif

Rub rock on face and say "Yes food is eaten now time for fight"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the big reasons why many games failed, was because the distributor or developer only bother to generate profit. One of the biggest examples is the Archeage one of the best games of the Sandbox genre ruined by pay2win stimulated by Trion (NA distributor) with Apex sales and items to improve equipment, etc ...

Another big problem is the Gold Sellers and the importance that gold has in the game economy. Today, in Archeage for example, you only have to legally buy Apex with Trion and resell in by gold or buy gold directly from sellers to be able to buy the best items and in 1 day already be one of the strongest of the server ...

My question to you @jtoddcoleman and other developers: how do you think and are thinking of barring the existence of pay2win mechanics as much as possible?

A lot of people ask me about this and do not buy the game because they are still not sure how Crowfall will be in the pay2win question.
Do you intend to do some system to block the transfer of gold between accounts? 
Do not allow for example that you can sell an apple to a Gold Seller for 50k and so buy the best items ...

To finish: I would like to know how you are thinking the Pay2Win issue in Crowfall ...

Thank you!

7pAkg2C.png
 Facebook  Facebook Group ★ Lives & Vídeos   Crowfall BR ★
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the big reasons why many games failed, was because the distributor or developer only bother to generate profit. One of the biggest examples is the Archeage one of the best games of the Sandbox genre ruined by pay2win stimulated by Trion (NA distributor) with Apex sales and items to improve equipment, etc ...

Another big problem is the Gold Sellers and the importance that gold has in the game economy. Today, in Archeage for example, you only have to legally buy Apex with Trion and resell in by gold or buy gold directly from sellers to be able to buy the best items and in 1 day already be one of the strongest of the server ...

My question to you @jtoddcoleman and other developers: how do you think and are thinking of barring the existence of pay2win mechanics as much as possible?

A lot of people ask me about this and do not buy the game because they are still not sure how Crowfall will be in the pay2win question.

Do you intend to do some system to block the transfer of gold between accounts?

Do not allow for example that you can sell an apple to a Gold Seller for 50k and so buy the best items ...

To finish: I would like to know how you are thinking the Pay2Win issue in Crowfall ...

Thank you!


7pAkg2C.png
 Facebook  Facebook Group ★ Lives & Vídeos   Crowfall BR ★
 

Share this post


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

One of the big reasons why many games failed, was because the distributor or developer only bother to generate profit. One of the biggest examples is the Archeage one of the best games of the Sandbox genre ruined by pay2win stimulated by Trion (NA distributor) with Apex sales and items to improve equipment, etc ...

I believe you have this backwards most games fail because they fail to generate a profit. Maybe this is because of the self entitled P2W cry babies that think any little convenience item that is sold is somehow P2W. Do you think the investors for this game invested their money purely so you can enjoy a game? Sorry but no they expect a return on their investment and a profit. This game is not developed far enough to address how they will make a profit. I hope they make a lot of money. This is how they can afford to continue to add content and improve the game after release. 

Share this post


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

One of the biggest examples is the Archeage one of the best games of the Sandbox genre ruined by pay2win stimulated by Trion (NA distributor) with Apex sales and items to improve equipment,

Archeage was greatly hurt by Pay-to-Win in NA release (from the player's perspective, it is a profitable business model).  Selling Apex is NOT the problem. The real problem is a steep power curve in gear combined with labor point caps, so the only way to acquire the highest level of gear is to pay money.  This is not the same design as Crowfall. Crowfall is intended to have a "flattened power curve" and everything is obtainable through in-game play.


tiPrpwh.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stuff wears out, but people want value for what they already value. A repair system would be fine if it was a lossy system. As in one that after each repair did not repair it equal to full durability of a new item. 

If you had a chestguard that started at 2k durability. then after the first repair went down to 1500 durability. Then second repair dropped to 1000 durability, then 500, then kaput. 

People would feel like their gear was worth more due to the time it lasted but could also accept that after the 2nd repair it is time to start looking for a new set.

Sure some folks will only want new gear and wouldn't want to repair. Others would want to keep repairing till the damn thing fell off of them.

Options are key. Give us as many options that can fit under the big tent idea of dying worlds, Eternal heros. 

Share this post


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

Stuff wears out, but people want value for what they already value. A repair system would be fine if it was a lossy system. As in one that after each repair did not repair it equal to full durability of a new item. 

If you had a chestguard that started at 2k durability. then after the first repair went down to 1500 durability. Then second repair dropped to 1000 durability, then 500, then kaput. 

People would feel like their gear was worth more due to the time it lasted but could also accept that after the 2nd repair it is time to start looking for a new set.

Sure some folks will only want new gear and wouldn't want to repair. Others would want to keep repairing till the damn thing fell off of them.

Options are key. Give us as many options that can fit under the big tent idea of dying worlds, Eternal heros. 

I'm definitely partial to a durability loss repair approach as well... Though personally I'd just give it a 25% max durability hit each time it was repaired until it fell below some minimum threshold... I want a collection of irreparable armor to scatter around my kingdom!

That being said, I also see the problem of repairs diminishing the role of crafters and harvesters as mentioned by others... But if we have a learned repair recipe and repairs require various materials to be performed I don't think it would hurt...

Something like a "repair kit" would be bad in my opinion. Each repair would have to be a custom job done by a crafter and depending on the materials you added it would adjust the stats accordingly... I can picture scenarios where armor had cold protection before being repaired, but because of a lack of proper materials the cold protection was reduced... Perhaps even the ability to add on new stats (at the cost of old ones)... There are a lot of ways to make repair crafting just as interesting as new item crafting.

Edited by ledeir
Expanding on thoughts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Careful what you wish for. They can make us do repair chores just to achieve the already planned lifespan of our gear.

Adding a repair system essentially just means adding a new hassle since they can dial in the planned lifetime to be the same either way.


IhhQKY6.gif

Share this post


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

Stuff wears out, but people want value for what they already value. A repair system would be fine if it was a lossy system. As in one that after each repair did not repair it equal to full durability of a new item. 

If you had a chestguard that started at 2k durability. then after the first repair went down to 1500 durability. Then second repair dropped to 1000 durability, then 500, then kaput. 

People would feel like their gear was worth more due to the time it lasted but could also accept that after the 2nd repair it is time to start looking for a new set.

Sure some folks will only want new gear and wouldn't want to repair. Others would want to keep repairing till the damn thing fell off of them.

Options are key. Give us as many options that can fit under the big tent idea of dying worlds, Eternal heros. 

There really isn't a reason to have a repair system. You could adjust the time to decay system based on the amount of time on average you want a player to have that piece of gear. People feeling like their gear is "worth" more in this type of system are just living in ignorance.

I don't see the need to complicate things further.

Edited by Tark20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tark20 said:

There really isn't a reason to have a repair system. You could adjust the time to decay system based on the amount of time on average you want a player to have that piece of gear. People feeling like their gear is "worth" more in this type of system are just living in ignorance.

I don't see the need to complicate things further.

I disagree and I expect I'm not the only one. 

If it were up to me, I'd get the gear I wanted once, and then do everything I could to make it last forever. The value is in preserving stats I like as long as possible. Ideally I would be able to continually repair the same item until it was looted off my dead body. 

If there was a repair mechanic that supported this, it would allow for the resource sink to be spread out over time instead of stockpiling and blowing through them all at once. 

This adds an extra level of strategy, do  you use your resources to maintain your gear, or do you save it for new things come winter.

This allows crafters to be more actively involved. Currently there is little reason to look for a crafter before your gear breaks (unless you are hoping to use them as a bank). 

This increases the value of lower quality resources. We can burn through them to repair our gear. Numerous times on the forums there have been threads about upgrading resources from one color to another, this effectively lets you do that if the amount of durability repaired is relative to the quality. It also has the benefit of still requiring the better resources to begin with.

Also, there's nothing that says it has to be as efficient as crafting new. If it takes 10 stones to make something new, and 5 stones to repair a third of it, there will be people who choose to repair it despite being wasteful. Extra resource sinks increase the value of the resources themselves.(and by association of harvesting)

This is debatable, but it can potentially make harvesting feel safer while encouraging harvesters to take more risks. A harvester can feel useful delivering smaller loads, making it feel less grindy if they play it safe. Also a repair system can be used to encourage hunting for specific materials... This can force the harvester away from safe areas.

Those are just some reasons to have a repair system.

Edit: My above comments only apply if its a repair before it breaks system.

 

Edited by ledeir
Clarity

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...