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

Say No to Shadowbane Style Mines


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, tsp_maj said:

I'm not against trying out a ruleset CW that does

To be honest the current ruleset already does this. Some players are advocating to change it and replace it completely. I am just asking to keep a campaign in which people from different time zones can play without worrying too much of a scheduled and arbitrarily decided siege time (which means leave a campaign with the rules as it is now).

catfall-logo-typo-small.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 265
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Getting back on track, I can't stress enough that hitting rocks for hours isn't how I want to spend my game time, and that seems to be necessary for supplying crafters with what they need to keep ever

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

First, I like the idea. But, the key to PvP health is variety, in my opinion. This should be in, SB style mines should be in, 24-hour active mines that cannot be captured should be in, hot spots

11 minutes ago, Nyamo said:

Mandalore, do not get me wrong. I do think that both past and history should tach us lessons and the whole human culture and evolution is made from conserving and evolving all the experience our predecessors have accumulated in the past and it our "purpose" as human being to keep moving forward.

I understand very well your concerns but you can't really make a comparison between Shadowbane and Crowall. There reason is because Shadowbane didn't have campaigns. So the 24h vulnerability you remember were applied to the whole game population.

Crowfall thanks god have campaigns. So we can have fri/sat/sun 20-22PM vulnerability campaigns and 24h campaign and each players can chose to play were he wants.

I do not understand why you have to believe that what you think is best for you is best for everyone. Take me for example. I am italian and i live in Japan. If i want to play with some italian friends I am 100% out of any sieging in the case Crowfall implements limited time-frame sieging campaigns and by no way I can siege with them due to time zone change.
And there is plenty of people out there that live abroad, do night-shifts at work or have a family or are freelance and have an irregular schedule.

Since we can have different campaign with different ruleset I do not understand why you want to force everyone to play by your rules. Let anyone play the game the way it fits their real life schedule and not the opposite. If me and other players want to be in a 24h hours siege environment let us be. 

Lastly, from a pure economical point of view, as I already said to your guild master, we (for we, I mean people who have an unusual play-schedule) are indeed a "market" who can bring the game some money. Let us a place to be in the system, it will benefit the game in the long run as long as everyone can play the game the way he think it's best.

Sieges will take place when two sides agree on a specific time and date. One group will pick the date, and the other will pick the time. If you want to play with your friends in Italy you can schedule your banes around a time that is convenient for both you and them.

24 hour siege windows suck because they lead to zergs and offline raiding. I understand the romantic appeal of having an international guild, but the average player doesn't want to play on servers with a 500+ms because gameplay mechanics force it.  There's a difference between you volunteering to have a poorly made socksty ping so you can play with your friends, and me being forced to have a poorly made socksty ping because I have to have an international organization. 

The main issue with campaigns with different rule sets is they inherently split the player base, and one server type will emerge as the "hardcore" server.  I can guarantee the 24 hour raid servers will not be this type of server. 

 

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

To be honest the current ruleset already does this. Some players are advocating to change it and replace it completely. I am just asking to keep a campaign in which people from different time zones can play without worrying too much of a scheduled and arbitrarily decided siege time (which means leave a campaign with the rules as it is now).

The current ruleset is only the way it is because there are huge pieces to the game missing still.  They basically made it just playable enough to test things.  I think what we're trying to say is that, although you think that having a special ruleset that I wont play on wont affect me, in reality it will.  One, in the loss of development time towards other projects that are more vital to the game, and another in the form of splitting a population even more.  

I mean you made your own case against yourself in my eyes.  How many italian people, living in japan, that are interested in playing crowfall, that are interested in having no event windows on major activities in the game are there?  I get it, that is a bit ridiculous but the facts remain.  Ping is a major issue, and regional publishers is a major issue.  

Edited by tsp_maj

Maj, Keeper of Da Plank - The Shipwrecked Pirates

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Zatch said:

and the other will pick the time

As long as you do not force me to pick the time in a scheduled window I am fine with this. So you have no problem in me picking 4am of your tuesday morning ok?

 

19 minutes ago, Zatch said:

The main issue with campaigns with different rule sets is they inherently split the player base

But if these kind of players are not going to play the game in the first place they are not splitting anything. You are losing potential customers if you prevent them to play when they prefer, not by forcing them to play the way you want. Try to think of PoE self found league. Self found players are not taking part to the economy game anyway that's why Grinding Games decided it was more profitable for them to create a campaign for these kind of players.

19 minutes ago, Zatch said:

and one server type will emerge as the "hardcore" server.  I can guarantee the 24 hour raid servers will not be this type of server. 

Not everyone want to go hardcore and not everyone want to play in the main dominant server.

17 minutes ago, tsp_maj said:

.  One, in the lost of development time towards other projects

This is a nonsense. It is just to turn on or off one variable called "enable scheduled raid time". Do not act me like if I am un-savvy of how development work cause you are just looking like the one who isn't aware of how development works. Also if these kind of players bring money the development team will do their best to grab their money, so will surely allocate resources if they see profits in the long term. And this is true regardless of what we are discussing.

17 minutes ago, tsp_maj said:

and another in the form of splitting a population even more.

Check my reply to Zach above

 

17 minutes ago, tsp_maj said:

I mean you made your own case against yourself in my eyes.  How many italian people, living in japan, that are interested in playing crowfall, that are interested in having no event windows on major activities in the game are there? 

Probably only me.

How many people living abroad, people that prefer to spend 20-22PM with their wives rather than raiding, how many people who do night-shifts at work, how many people that have friends abroad, how many people that live in a area where there is no official server, and how many people that simply do not like scheduled raiding time. I see a player base here made of melting pot of users that have different backgrounds but have one common need.

 

If you have other arguments keep them going.

 

 

Edited by Nyamo
wording

catfall-logo-typo-small.png

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

Dude, this is a nonsense. It is just to turn on or off one variable called "enable scheduled raid time". Do not act me like if I am un-savvy of how development work cause you are just looking like the one who isn't aware of how development works. Also if these kind of players bring money the development team will do their best to grab their money, so will surely allocate resources if they see profits in the long term. And this is true regardless of what we are discussing.

Probably only me.

How many people living abroad, people that prefer to spend 20-22PM with their wives rather than raiding, how many people who do night-shifts at work, how many people that have friends abroad, how many people that live in a area where there is no official server, and how many people that simply do not like scheduled raiding time. I see a player base here made of melting pot of users that have different backgrounds but have one common need.

First, that control would have to be programmed.  It could be difficult or easy depending on several variables.  Then the server would have to be set up and monitored.  Not to mention balancing decisions would have to take this ruleset into consideration.  Of course your not wrong that if they see profit in it they would allocate resources, but once again you just made my argument for me.  Allocation of resources toward this project by its very nature means you're allocating them from something else. 

Regardless, to make my point clear, I view this server has having an extremely low population as I think you're the only person I've seen in the community that has been pushing for it.  In my world there is no chance that they will see value in this and therefor I'm less arguing against having such a server, and more trying to explain to you why you shouldn't get your hopes up. 

You argue that people with friends overseas will want to play on this server.  What server are they going to play on if this server doesnt exist?  Once again you counter your own arguments.  While some people may prefer to play on a server like that, to imply that they simply wont play the game if it doesn't exist is misguided at best. 

To answer to your highlighted rhetorical question without a question mark, still the vast minority, and even then majority of them will want to play with their friends that dont fit into those sample cases. 

Maj, Keeper of Da Plank - The Shipwrecked Pirates

 

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

As long as you do not force me to pick the time in a scheduled window I am fine with this. So you have no problem in me picking 4am of your tuesday morning ok?

 

But if these kind of players are not going to play the game in the first place they are not splitting anything. You are losing potential customers if you prevent them to play when they prefer, not by forcing them to play the way you want. Try to think of PoE self found league. Self found players are not taking part to the economy game anyway that's why Grinding Games decided it was more profitable for them to create a campaign for these kind of players.

Not everyone want to go hardcore and not everyone want to play in the main dominant server.

Dude, this is a nonsense. It is just to turn on or off one variable called "enable scheduled raid time". Do not act me like if I am un-savvy of how development work cause you are just looking like the one who isn't aware of how development works. Also if these kind of players bring money the development team will do their best to grab their money, so will surely allocate resources if they see profits in the long term. And this is true regardless of what we are discussing.

Check my reply to Zach above

 

Probably only me.

How many people living abroad, people that prefer to spend 20-22PM with their wives rather than raiding, how many people who do night-shifts at work, how many people that have friends abroad, how many people that live in a area where there is no official server, and how many people that simply do not like scheduled raiding time. I see a player base here made of melting pot of users that have different backgrounds but have one common need.

 

If you have other arguments keep them going.

 

 

Absolutely you can pick whatever bane time you want. As long as the system gives a 3-5 days notice I'm all for people picking whatever time they want to bane. As long as there is some kind of cool down between when banes can happen (3-5 days) everything else is fine.

I don't understand how I am not letting people play how they want. Keep sieges are supposed to be a big deal, and by design are not to occur every day. With this concept in mind: how is a schedule siege system restricting players? 

The 24 hour raid time inherently splits the playerbase. As stated above the vast majority of players don't want to have an international organization to guard their poorly made socks 24 hours a day. The guilds that are willing to zerg their way to victory will be at a significant advantage which is something the majority MMO pvpers frown upon. Those campaigns will become ghost towns as the playerbase leaves to join the "real campaigns" (thats just what people will call them), and you will end up in a game loop by yourself; completely defeating the economic and pvp pillars of Crowfall.

At the end of the day 24 hour raid windows just aren't fun. They've be tried in games and they just don't lead to good gameplay; ask any shadowbane or darkfall player. 

 

Edited by Zatch
i derped
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, tsp_maj said:

First, that control would have to be programmed.  It could be difficult or easy depending on several variables.  Then the server would have to be set up and monitored.  Not to mention balancing decisions would have to take this ruleset into consideration.  Of course your not wrong that if they see profit in it they would allocate resources, but once again you just made my argument for me.  Allocation of resources toward this project by its very nature means you're allocating them from something else. 

I haven't made any argument for you but if thinking of that makes you feel better feel free to think it I am happy to give you spiritual relief and feel free to message me if you need more I love helping people, even when helping them comes in such as an unexpected way like the one you just mentioned. If I am making an argument it is for the devs. I am quoting you and the others for them not to brainwash you nor to even have a conversation with you. I just pick part of what you write and use themfunctionally to explain my point of view on the matter to the devs. I have stopped playing the forum games years ago I have better ways to spend my time.

9 minutes ago, tsp_maj said:

I think you're the only person I've seen in the community that has been pushing for it.

forum population is different from server population and ever different from the population of the game after release.

10 minutes ago, tsp_maj said:

You argue that people with friends overseas will want to play on this server.  What server are they going to play on if this server doesnt exist? 

Part of a good project development is to foresee users needs before they even happens.

catfall-logo-typo-small.png

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

Absolutely you can pick whatever bane time you want. As long as the system gives a 3-5 days notice I'm all for people picking whatever time they want to bane. As long as there is some kind of cool down between when banes can happen (3-5 days) everything else is fine.

I don't understand how I am not letting people play how they want. Keep sieges are supposed to be a big deal, and by design are not to occur every day. With this concept in mind: how is a schedule siege system restricting players? 

The 24 hour raid time inherently splits the playerbase. As stated above the vast majority of players don't want to have an international organization to guard their poorly made socks 24 hours a day. The guilds that are willing to zerg their way to victory will be at a significant advantage which is something most MMO pvpers frown upon. Those campaigns will become ghost towns as the playerbase leaves to join the "real campaigns" (thats just what people will call them), and you will end up in a game loop by yourself; completely defeating the economic and pvp pillars of Crowfall.

At the end of the day 24 hour raid windows just aren't fun. They've be tried in games and they just don't lead to good gameplay; ask any shadowbane or darkfall player. 

I think we are then saying the same thing but we use different wording. If you want to siege me and then I am free to pick the time on 3-5 day notice anytime I want then I am ok with this. If you force me to pick it between 20-22PM Pacific because the server is located on Pacific and it should represent the time zone of everyone playing I am against.

In this meaning I use the word 24h. Which means that I am still free to pick the time that suits best my guild even if this time is 3:35 am of your week-day working morning. 

Maybe it is just me misunderstanding most of the people here, but they seems they want to be able to attack and to defend based on the time  "server area" in which the server is located. If that is the case you are cutting off from the game cross-time-zone compatibility and making the game a bunch of national servers. There are many players that due to real life reasons prefer a flexible environment and not one regulated by the "geographical zone" time.

 

catfall-logo-typo-small.png

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

I haven't made any argument for you but if thinking of that makes you feel better feel free to think it I am happy to give you spiritual relief and feel free to message me if you need more I love helping people, even when helping them comes in such as an unexpected way like the one you just mentioned. If I am making an argument it is for the devs. I am quoting you and the others for them not to brainwash you nor to even have a conversation with you. I just pick part of what you write and use themfunctionally to explain my point of view on the matter to the devs. I have stopped playing the forum games years ago I have better ways to spend my time.

Usually when people have a failing argument the resort to personal attacks.  It seems you've run out of counter points with any substance.  I respect that you want to get your point across to the Devs, as do we all, for your sake I hope you get what you want out of Crowfall. 

Maj, Keeper of Da Plank - The Shipwrecked Pirates

 

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

I think we are then saying the same thing but we use different wording. If you want to siege me and then I am free to pick the time on 3-5 day notice anytime I want then I am ok with this. If you force me to pick it between 20-22PM Pacific because the server is located on Pacific and it should represent the time zone of everyone playing I am against.

In this meaning I use the word 24h. Which means that I am still free to pick the time that suits best my guild even if this time is 3:35 am of your week-day working morning. 

Maybe it is just me misunderstanding most of the people here, but they seems they want to be able to attack and to defend based on the time  "server area" in which the server is located. If that is the case you are cutting off from the game cross-time-zone compatibility and making the game a bunch of national servers. There are many players that due to real life reasons prefer a flexible environment and not one regulated by the "geographical zone" time.

 

My impression of how the siege system will work:

Guild A Banes guild B. Guild A gets to select the date. Guild B gets to select the window between x number of hours. Guild A selects the time when the bane goes live from guild b's window.  I believe that system will give you plenty of options to pick whatever time you want to bane, and will be convenient for all players.  

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

Usually when people have a failing argument the resort to personal attacks.  It seems you've run out of counter points with any substance.  I respect that you want to get your point across to the Devs, as do we all, for your sake I hope you get what you want out of Crowfall. 

It wasn't a personal attack. And no I am not out of arguments neither. Point is I do not agree I am making a point for you. what I do not care is trying to explain you why because I think my message is already clear for the devs. If you felt this as a personal attack, well then... sorry? I guess. I am really polite and I do not like quarrels nor I attack people I do not know. Just saying that I do not care to keep discussing with you any further doesn't make my arguments less valid nor does this makes what I said a personal attack. It is exactly what I said nothing more nothing less. I have better ways to spend my time. I simply went back replying you again because you are trying to depict me like someone who does personal attacks when it is out of arguments while I do not think this is the case. 

But I guess cultural differences makes a huge impact on how written words are perceived. It took me years to get used to a culture different than mine and probably it will take years for us to reach a common point in which you can understand i wasn't even remotely to attack you nor to run away because I am out of arguments.

Edited by Nyamo

catfall-logo-typo-small.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Zatch said:

Guild A Banes guild B. Guild A gets to select the date. Guild B gets to select the window between x number of hours. Guild A selects the time when the bane goes live from guild b's window.  I believe that system will give you plenty of options to pick whatever time you want to bane, and will be convenient for all players.  

I understand clearly this. And I am happy with this and I agree to some degree. This is where I have concerns:

1. "between x number of hours": if this x covers 24h time span I am perfectly OK with this.

2. "will be convenient to all players": Yes but attackers and defender have not to be considered equally. It has to be 100% guaranteed that is convenient for who defends in the first place. It has to be the attacking guild who has to make space in their schedule to meet the defending one. I mean everyone here is against sieges when everyone is not online defending right? So let's make defending a priority. But just remember that not all guilds operate on "prime time" (where prime time is the prime time of the area geographically location of the server). As long as a guild decided by his own will to play with 400 ping on a server they can't be forced to defend "20-22PM prime time" because that's the prime time. They are already taking a risk in joining with high ping, let them pick the time that is best for that guild.

Edited by Nyamo

catfall-logo-typo-small.png

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

Mandalore, do not get me wrong. I do think that both past and history should tach us lessons and the whole human culture and evolution is made from conserving and evolving all the experience our predecessors have accumulated in the past and it our "purpose" as human being to keep moving forward.

I understand very well your concerns but you can't really make a comparison between Shadowbane and Crowall. There reason is because Shadowbane didn't have campaigns. So the 24h vulnerability you remember were applied to the whole game population.

Crowfall thanks god have campaigns. So we can have fri/sat/sun 20-22PM vulnerability campaigns and 24h campaign and each players can chose to play were he wants.

I do not understand why you have to believe that what you think is best for you is best for everyone. Take me for example. I am italian and i live in Japan. If i want to play with some italian friends I am 100% out of any sieging in the case Crowfall implements limited time-frame sieging campaigns and by no way I can siege with them due to time zone change.
And there is plenty of people out there that live abroad, do night-shifts at work or have a family or are freelance and have an irregular schedule.

Since we can have different campaign with different ruleset I do not understand why you want to force everyone to play by your rules. Let anyone play the game the way it fits their real life schedule and not the opposite. If me and other players want to be in a 24h hours siege environment let us be. 

Lastly, from a pure economical point of view, as I already said to your guild master, we (for we, I mean people who have an unusual play-schedule) are indeed a "market" who can bring the game some money. Let us a place to be in the system, it will benefit the game in the long run as long as everyone can play the game the way he think it's best.

At some point you have to decide who you’re marketing the game for and if you do it 24/7 past experiences show that it impacts the population so negatively that they leave in droves.  At what point is your experience worth the enjoyment of others?    You’re more than welcome to play on a EU server from Japan.  You’re more than welcome to play on the NA servers.  At some point they have to make a game for the majority of the players availability in each CW and then you as the minority have to pick where you want to play to maximize your time.  

Is the 5% of people (I prob gave you some %) worth more than the satisfaction of the other 95% of that CW’s population? 

40 minutes ago, Andius said:

W/HoA were held up as like these mystical forces of highly skilled players with legendary theorycrafters chained to a desk in some deep dungeon holding all the arcane secrets we could use to win if only we knew them.

wiDfyPp.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting back on track, I can't stress enough that hitting rocks for hours isn't how I want to spend my game time, and that seems to be necessary for supplying crafters with what they need to keep everyone equipped. Solo harvesting can be tolerable if you put on some music or a podcast and just zone out. This option disappears, however, when you need to coordinate for group harvesting. Either way, we're talking about a boring, monotonous activity which comes at the opportunity cost of the things we'd rather be doing. I'd rather fight my way into an adventure zone, cleaving through groups of zombies, to arrive at the abandoned mining outpost. There, we could capture the outpost for our guild and transport the Ore it produces in a pack animal back to our base- fighting off player raiders along the way. 

The vast majority of players drawn to this game want open world pvp and player driven politics. They like the idea of a Throne War Simulator, not a medieval peasant simulator. 

@jtoddcoleman @thomasblair 

Edit: Kind of sounds like this from the FAQ:

ARE THERE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN RESOURCE FACTORIES OF THE SAME TYPE?

Yes. First, the proximity and location to other POIs makes a huge difference. Second, we’ve also put balance settings in place to increase (or decrease) the quality, quantity and type of material that each factory produces. One mine could produce high quality iron, while another produces low quality copper -- but at a much higher rate.

Quarries located in a remote area will typically produce a higher volume of materials (and at a greater frequency). This was designed so that as the risk of transporting those materials goes up, so does the potential reward.

Edited by soulein

Shadowbane - House Avari/Hy'shen
"Gimp elves get good elves killed." - Belina

Avari Discord - https://discord.gg/Bch24PV

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

At some point you have to decide who you’re marketing the game for and if you do it 24/7 past experiences show that it impacts the population so negatively that they leave in droves.  At what point is your experience worth the enjoyment of others?    You’re more than welcome to play on a EU server from Japan.  You’re more than welcome to play on the NA servers.  At some point they have to make a game for the majority of the players availability in each CW and then you as the minority have to pick where you want to play to maximize your time.  

Is the 5% of people (I prob gave you some %) worth more than the satisfaction of the other 95% of that CW’s population? 

You talk like if the 2 things are mutually exclusive. Why can't this 5% of people play on a campaign suited for their needs? We have campaigns, let's use them. 95% of the population is happy playing their campaign and this 5% of the population is happy too. Problem solved. 

You may say that this 5% of the population not playing together with the 95% is dividing the player base, but then I would probably reply that if this 5% of the population would probably end up migrating to a game that suit more their in-real life needs. So you will most likely lose them anyway. Instead by making a campaign for them non only you are assuring that thee people are in the "total" player population, but there is also a good chance that some of these will feed the game real time money by purchasing VIP or in cash shops houses or mounts.

Honestly I do not think how adding one more campaign may hurt the game, if the people play on that campaign spend enough money to sustain the expenses of the server rent for that particular campaign and some of the staff salaries. Also, with player caps on campaigns they can be tweaked so they are balanced even with low population. It is just a matter to set up properly some variables when creating a campaign. 

Lastly they made "custom campaign" one of the sales points of their kickstarter. Everyone in this thread seems against it. Everyone thinks that different rule sets for different player base  is bad. I wonder if we both have the same understanding on what the developers meant when they were promoting this feature. Well as a kickstarter backer I still think that the devs will deliver what they promised and as a backer and as a customer I would love to see campaigns suited for the needs of all different kinds of players. i am not so selfish that I expect as you said to make 95% of the population unhappy to be happy. I expect that the devs to make a clever use of a mechanics already in game (the campaigns) to create many of them so they can meet the needs of of everyone.

catfall-logo-typo-small.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

The current harvesting system sucks. As Soulein said, it is tolerable if you put on music and such but the majority of the harvesting is done by people who have multiple accounts who would rather be doing something else. I think that the current system should stay in place for harvesting but POIs should be added as well. That way, people who want to go off on their own or who don't have a big enough guild are able to get the required resources for gear. Also, you could have it so motherloads are the only way to get gems and minerals to incorporate this group aspect of farming as well as the POI type gameplay.

I think this would satisfy both sides of the argument.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the OP's sentiment. 

Nightly fights and skirmishes over resources is a great way to make hot spots for combat while the campaign develops. The problem is that (generally speaking) people aren't going to want to fight over the same resources in the same window every night. Resource POI's should provide a substantial amount upon capture and have diminishing returns over a 3-4(?) hour window (as the resources near the node would naturally be depleted) Once the POI runs dry it should despawn or deactivate. This encourages the initial conflict and encourages groups to mobilize quickly, it also adds value to holding small forts and outposts. I hope that this type of gameplay will favor small highly organized groups over a large, unorganized, and slow group.  

Players, guilds, or factions that do not have enough power to capture these poi's still have the opportunity to manually harvest resources and stockpile materials to get the ball rolling. Personally I hate hitting rocks and chopping trees but I'll do it to support my guild and get to the mid game. I see Manually harvesting nodes as something that you need early game and as a fall back once you get crushed.

There will always be several power players contesting the large areas of the map. Smaller guilds always get squeezed out and are forced to ally or retreat to the less populated/less desirable areas of the map. Eventually they return (usually at a pivotal moment in the war of thrones) and make a huge contribution to the outcome. This type of gameplay is what made SB great in my opinion.

 

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

Elivish Drivel 

This is how I've always thought the POI system would work. The question I have is will mine POIs provide raw resources to make gear, or will they provide resources to rebuild forts and keeps. I think a dynamic POI spawn system could be an interesting mechanic layered ontop of the POI system, and with the recent addition of random hunger shards falling on the world at night, I could see ACE having the building blocks to make such a system. 

The worst thing about Crowfall right now is how close it is to being an actual game. Once systems like this, the guild system, and caravans are added to the game Crowfall will have a really fun game loop. 

Edited by Zatch
Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think that having mines or POI's would be a more enjoyable way to collect resources.  For players like myself that only have a few hours a day to play, mines or POI's, potentially allows me to kill two birds with one stone by affording me the opportunity to pvp while contributing to resource gather.  I think Chroma's idea of a 3-4 hour possession window is excellent because it will force more activity and effort from those that want to control the POI/mine(s). 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Other things aside, someone convince me that throwing down strongholds outside of a PoI inorder to capture it and or reap its rewards isn't the ideal way to handle these nightly events.  Here's why I think it's the best solution.

**#1 you create a very high likelyhood that fighting will last for the duration of prime-time in that area. (This means that players that only have 30 minutes to play, can participate.)
**We build stuff in the world that has meaning.
**We just created a localized respawn point.
**We've now put two+ teams in a localized area.
**If we're pushed back we can regroup, in reletive safety, within the walls. (More fighting, over longer periods)
**Your team works on building siege equipment within the walls.
**The closer you fight from your stronghold the greater advantage you have. (Creates a yoyo effect that prolongs conflict)
**Scouting for strongholds going up becomes important.
**Final stage is you're sieging an asset that someone built, something pride alone will make worth defending.
**Crafters come to the front line to build upgrades and siege at the forward asset.

We can talk about supply lines and building blocks all you want.  Lets not forget the point of the PoI.  Its a carrot to bring large groups together, for the purpose of combat.  The value is the fight, not the pixels you get out of it.    Everything I tried to focus on goes towards that goal but sometimes I get caught up in the details and just throw out ideas. 

Problems I see with this idea: (My suggestions)

**Respawn Rush (Respawning should take a recovery period, instead of respawning with full health, food and armor)
**Long fights, doesn't address people like Salamar that may log in an hour after fighting began.  (Players in a guild with a stronghold should be able to fast travel to the fight within reason)
**May require extra programming. (Worth it)
**Building on the cheap.  The cost of building a stronghold would have to be reasonable enough to make this viable. (Doesn't bother me to be honest, but it will some)

To conclude:
Taking a pre-fab Keep has no meaning.  PoI's, where you have to run who knows how far to get to, in the current concept will only provide one decent fight in a night.  We have all been on, and know what happens, when you get all dressed up for a fight, run 30 minutes to a region, and get rolled.  It's a lot harder to restart that engine once it has stalled.  There's always that awkward silence that peters off into an empty discord.  If you allow the same team to run to an area, put down roots, develop their frontline as people log on, if and when they die thoughts will be of protecting their walls and regrouping because the enemy is likely going to press.  Suddenly you've turned a single fight into a drawn out event.  

Edited by tsp_maj

Maj, Keeper of Da Plank - The Shipwrecked Pirates

 

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...