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

Say No to Shadowbane Style Mines

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Jah said:

It kinda did. It had separate servers that had different rulesets, imports/exports, and they would end and then people would start over on new ones. They just didn't call them campaigns.

Well I have never played Shadowbane, so I take your word for that. I guess I should rewrite that part but I will leave it that way for keeping the conversation the way it has been written.


catfall-logo-typo-small.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mandalore said:
15 minutes ago, Jah said:

The different servers even had different Windows of Opportunity to cater to people from different timezones.

Nothing is going to change that what he wants custards the rest of the pop

The rest of the pop?? I just want a campaign for people willing to play it. People that do not like it are free to play the campaign they want. I have no intention to "custard(??)" the "whole population". 

 

But yes you are not going to change my mind cause if the devs will implement "timed" sieges window and if i will feel "excluded" to sieges for real life reason I already know I will probably move to a different game, cause I do not like a game in which part of the content is put behind a wall just because I live in a different timezone of the rest of the server I want to play with.

Remember is not about playing the best mechanics, or the perfect pvp but it is all about player experience. And no one loves to be feel excluded.

Which, I mean, is completely fine to some degree. 

But since I have invested some money in the game since kickstarter and since the "solution" to fix this is already in the tools they have (campaigns) I do not see why I shouldn't try.
I think in the long run this will both pay off for me (customer) and to them (sellers).


catfall-logo-typo-small.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Nyamo said:

Shadowbane didn't had campaigns so the devs decision to make happy the majority of the populations made lot of sense at that time.

Now we have campaign and the devs can create custom tailored experiences for different fragment of game population. And, regardless of your thinking that fragmentation is bad, it is very good if you think that one part you are fragmenting would have probably left to another game, but due to the very fact that you are creating custom campaigns for them will encourage them to stay here and feed the game money.

We have campaigns now, let's use them.

Sure.  I've always said they should try different things.  I've also said I think those will be empty worlds, quickly abandoned for the worlds with a better and more accessible to most players game rules.

I'm not the one throwing around absolutes or straw man arguments about how some of us don't want other people to be able to play.  

If the siege at any time has enough interest, AND they can build that system without conflicting with the better system of controlled time sieges and make that a world setting, by all means I want you to have your shot at seeing just how poorly made socksty that sort of model is first hand.

Heck, I'll probably see if my guild wants to join in on blowing up your crap every night for a week or two while you sleep just for poorly made sockss and giggles.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

Heck, I'll probably see if my guild wants to join in on blowing up your crap while you sleep just for poorly made sockss and giggles

You are more than welcome to do this. Because if you do so we lose the castle, but you and your guild will count towards the total players who actually joined the "dead" server making it "less" dead, so we can keep using it. I know that behind your online avatar there is a kind human being and you are just demonstrating me your support. Please do it!!! We need more people joining the dead server.

 

And thank you again for your kindness.

Edited by Nyamo

catfall-logo-typo-small.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I stopped reading this thread around page 8 (and didn't read each post meticulously), so forgive me for addressing the elephant in the room if it's already been addressed...

 

Nyamo, do you mind if I ask how old you are, or what you do for a living?  I only ask because I remember thinking very much like you when I was young, with little to no obligations, and a very flexible schedule. 

This may seem condescending, but I do not wish to be.  My point is that the sort of 24/7 system you're advocating is simply unattractive to a majority of working folk that have multiple responsibilities and things to do other than play video games (work, careers that aren't hourly, families, other hobbies that don't involve sitting in front of a screen, the list goes on).  Video games are fun, and I completely understand that for some, they're an entire lifestyle.  However, the fundamental breakdown in this conversation seems that you feel just because something can be done to appeal to a very small niche of players--ones that want this game Crowfall to be their lives--that it should be done.

Many posts have already tried to address the economic implications of this with you, but it is readily apparent you do not have a fundamental understanding of economic principles.  I am not trying to belittle you; you would likely have to study these principles in school (or in your free time) to understand notions like opportunity-cost, scarcity, transaction-costs, etc.  You are taking positions that make unrealistic presumptions about the way real-life economics bears out in practice.  Your suggestions and desires work out just fine on paper, but would not work in reality (for many reasons already pointed out to you, which I will not retread them all).  This argument is analogous to Coase's theorems (represented by everyone arguing against you in this thread), and his critique of Pigou's theorems (which you are representing in this thread).  The short of it: Pigou's economic models assumed a world of no scarcity of resources, i.e., no zero-sum games, and no transaction costs or opportunity costs. 

If you don't understand what any of that means, that explains handily why you are not seeing the error in your reasoning.  Again, I am not trying to insult you.  I understand why you want this 24/7 system.  Many, including myself, do not want this system; however, if you truly understood the aforementioned concepts, you yourself would concede that while you desire and wish for a 24/7 system, you understand and realize that it is not viable in reality. 

If there were enough demand to justify implementing a 24/7 system, the devs would do it.  They're in the business of making money.  I have not looked into their incorporation structure, but I think they are a closely-held corporation (not publicly traded).  Nonetheless, they are fiduciaries to the shareholders, and have a duty to do what is in the best interests of the corporation.  Even if they themselves wanted a 24/7 system, if they realize it is, say, a 5% niche of the target audience, allocating resources to that 5% at the expense of 95% of their target audience is not only logically foolish, but going against their obligations to their shareholders.  Am I saying it is impossible for them to decide to do as you wish?  No, of course not, there are breaches of corporate duties all the time.  I am just trying to get across to you that even if ~10 of us in this thread wanted the exact same 24/7 rules as you, most of us realize that it is not viable, and thus probably not going to happen.

As Maj already said quite early on, it is not a matter of trying to convince you to want what we want.  It's about telling you "don't get your hopes up" because the writing (and hundreds of years of economic theory) is already on the wall.


"Food for the crows..."    Nobuo Xa'el

cdinUTh.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those assets like keeps that should require significant effort to build (many caravans of materials, crafted wall parts in the shadows/dregs) simply cannot be open to asset destruction 24/7.  Keeps built by guilds should use a similar siege window negotiation mechanic to SB.   This does not preclude fighting in and around keeps to hinder crafting activities the keep owners may be doing and prep battles in the hours leading up to a siege window...   wearing down enemy gear reserves, food supply, etc.    Certain spec groups can get inside and disrupt the owners logistics pre-siege.


6FUI4Mk.jpg

                                                        Sugoi - Senpai

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...