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

Uncle Bob via Mega Alliance?

Recommended Posts

Side note for @jtoddcoleman

As the god of Trickery and deception, Its really appropriate that the gold version of Malekai's sigil is the reward for all this, all things considered. I Think Malekai would approve of how this is all turning out.


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

Browsing around, from what I can tell, a lot of you are:

1. Upset cause you're on the losing end.

2. Defending being on the winning end.

and a lot of you are just

3. Whiny toddlers.

Anytime the word guild is even mentioned in a game, they forge alliances and make enemies. It's just how it goes. Next campaign some of 'em are probably gonna stab each other in the back anyway when there's no reward to work for so the factions will most likely even back out after a few short campaigns. Several of you have legit ideas and arguments which is great, but most of you are just ticked that you're either on the losing end or a guild you figured would help your faction win left for the guild alliances. All over an imaginary golden reward or whatever. Y'all are acting like you're being cheated out of $1,000,000. It's sad.

The problem here really seems to be the guild alliances. Wanna get rid of them? Give the guilds a reason to fight each other. Player individual rewards are great, but top guild rewards would probably take care of that even faster. Granted, we are in pre alpha and there isn't a lot of big, coordinated guilds yet, but you have to look beyond that. Where are we gonna be at launch? New players come in, new guilds, new skillsets, ect.. Get a good number of guilds and competitive players and boom. Faction tier rewards, Guild tier, then player tier. Rewards for teamwork and rewards for solo. The top player isn't necessarily going to be in the top guild, and the top guild may not necessarily be in the top faction. Everyone gets a fair shot.

But seriously, if we're gonna be this insulted over a gold badge, then we need to rethink our life priorities and we're probably just not ready for rewards yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, AceX said:

Well pardon me if I am wrong, I would like to point out what mandalore mentioned

With the healers being a group based class, sure the winning faction gets stuff, and the top players doing stuff gets stuff (most of em can kill in comparison with healers).

To space the distribution of big guilds, why not have rewards to top 5 guilds or something in each faction along with the rewards mentioned above. This should cover almost all of the healers or people playing the support classes.

I mean they are classes that mainly focus on group play and most groups are guild based from what I have seen.

What do you guys think?

I tend to agree here, what about the farmers, crafters, and the other support doing the busy work for those that focus on PVP. Should be guilds or something else that determines rewards besides capture points. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, veeshan said:

Should now be a good time to tell him one of the chaos guild plan was to throw all there alts in it to try and prevent the people from getting in? there was atleast 20 alts just chilling taking up zone space. there was relativly even numbers at the seige no where near as much as there claiming there was atleast defending, however the gear difference between the 2 sides was staggering.

I honostly dont care if winter blades believes this or not but hey just by watching the videos they provide u can clearly see there wasnt 60+ that they claim

OK, if that is the case then the video shows -W- being pushed back and off their position 4 times by something close to even numbers.  Further, -W- was unable to take the breach on their first attempt and had to retreat as well.  Given you are stating that actual numbers in the fight were even, this also suggests that gearing didn't play a part since Chaos was controlling the battle ... until ....  Chaos sallied forth to knock -W- off the bane tree hill they had retreated to.  That was a tactical error and you lost the hill fight.  You were pushed back to the gate away from the breach.  -W- was then able to get in the now lightly defended breach.  All Chaos had to do is defend the breach and they would most likely have won.  No numbers disparity and gear disparity did not matter.  Chaos lost due because they lost the hill fight and did not defend the breach plain and simple.

 


cos_wb_sig1.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW

1.  I think if you set up any sort of reward system, I would suggest it be two tiered:

- Any substantive rewards should be kept at guild level, not individual.  I think that is more in the spirit of the game design plus it will reward cooperative and social play

- At the individual level, rewards should be cosmetic only

2.  On the mega-alliance Uncle Bob issue:

- scale guild rewards based on a calculation of what percentage of the server population the alliance of guilds represents.  For example, an alliance that involves 90 percent of the server population will earn less than an alliance that involves 20 percent

- provide rewards for fighting to the last, even at great odds (this has been suggested by others many times)

3.  See if you can increase the size and scale of the campaign worlds.  I know this is a technical issue as well, but it seems to me that the larger the playing field the less likely any one alliance can dominate.  I've always been in that group that thinks a massive single world a la EVE was the way to go...keep that as an option down the road if technology permits, as I think many of these issues become manageable if you let time/space do the work for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@jtoddcoleman As I had previously suggested the game needs a selfbalancing system based on scarcity of resources and Hunger. If the player chooses to go to the numerous side he needs to know that it will be more difficult to get the resources and food because he will have to share with his allies. Minor guilds / factions will have stronger players because they will have more resources available that will not be split among many players. This is basic self-balancing based on the system that creates hunger/poverty in the real world.

Unfortunately many players want to play on the more comfortable side, but that ends the fun of everyone in the end. Stop thinking this is a utopian world where players go to the weaker side just to give a fight to the winners. No one wants to be on the losing side.

Edited by hamon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mentioning number is a terrible metric. HoA isn't running around with a ton of people. Neither is Sugoi.

If 25 people swing the game that much, thats an issue with amount of people playing and knowledge gap problems.

Additionally to pretend like the other factions haven't given up is dishonest. I am not sure what can be done about that to be honest. Psychologically, may make sense to lower capture points. The difference between 50,000-10,000 feels a lot worse than 50 - 10. Not sure the need for huge numbers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So much of the game requires man hours to get ready.

You need to harvest to get tools so that you can harvest to make gear so that you can harvest to get more tools so you can get the gear to protect the harvests to get more gear to kill the enemy harvesters to get tools and gear and better weapons to get more items to get the harvesters more gear to get the gear to get ready for a pvp fight that you need more mats to get the gear to get the siege engines to get the buildings so that you can make tools to get the other guys areas. 

HoA moving to hide in W's skirts means less ability for the 3 factions to be able to do such things. 

It also does not help that UDL is taking time off. 

I am totally burnt out on the lack of quality of life for crafters and gatherers. The new discs  help a lot for the gathering part. But it is not enough, due to the sheer amount of homework the crafters have to do to feed the war machine. Without the crafter arm of UDL the bulk of the killers have zero interest, so we are all off playing more fun games till poorly made socks gets changed/fixed/fights stop crashing and ruining the experience. 

And we stopped holding interest with the bulk of 5.8 being a poorly made socksshow performance wise. Most of UDL actually lost interest when Pest was trying the game almost a year ago and we couldn't have 5v5 fights due to MSG ping. 

Also points systems where the only things being marked are kills and damage done, or circle standing skills do not encourage the support arms to keep trying. 

So much of this game is driven by the need to get stuff, to be able to make stuff. But the getting of stuff is handed the short end of the stick so much. And the base part of getting the stuff is not that much fun. It is a dangerous undertaking, that is a chore.  And half the time the people who are invested in the training are supplanted by the spring summer mechanic gatherers who are taking the best nodes for themselves, and the other half the time in fall and winter it is so unfun to be the target of all the now geared out killers who are better than you at fighting that it is just not worth it. 

My opinion on the whole thing is that The numbers of HoA added to W is not that big of a deal, but the logistics and sheer bloody mindedness of HoA added to W's numbers and quality players means that why bother to play an unfun game in a pre alpha vrs a stacked deck of motivated try hards. 

It is already unfun, why add to that. 

Share this post


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

@jtoddcoleman As I had previously suggested the game needs a selfbalancing system based on scarcity of resources and Hunger. If the player chooses to go to the numerous side he needs to know that it will be more difficult to get the resources and food because he will have to share with his allies.

Very well put! Sounds like a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the devs call you a zerg and an unhealthy part of the game what does that mean? 

 

The plus side is it is easy finding people to kill each evening.

Edited by nerion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, nerion said:

When the devs call you a zerg and an unhealthy part of the game what does that mean? 

"Zerg is a slang term for a group of low-level gamers who depend on overwhelming numbers to achieve victory, rather than relying on technique or strategy. The term is most often used in the context of online role-playing and strategy games, but it also applies to multiplayer first-person shooters."

https://www.techopedia.com/definition/27053/zerg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the issues in the current campaign are a good example of differentiating between an unorganized zerg and an organized one. Clearly, Jah is being disingenuous about which his faction is. The constant screenshots of player counts are cute, but clearly show an organization concerned about appearances. Not knowing the difference between two organized, experienced, skill-trained guilds competing against mostly wet-behind-the-ear unorganized factions is a bit "he doth protest too much" in nature.

With that said, I am not in agreement with JTodd about his solution to this problem. It feels a bit haphazard and unlikely to influence any behaviors in this game. Rewarding individuals for team enhancing behaviors is a novel idea, but the problem is we have evidence it doesn't work. Any individual reward track incentivizes individual behaviors. If I know up front that I can win rewards simply by crafting more than any other person, I'll do it. That doesn't mean that crafter is giving those goods to anyone, helping his team, or any measurable assistance is being provided towards winning. This is the problem with his reward vectors. Ultimately none of them might actually influence a team's outcome. Let's assume an obvious vector;

  • Kills: I can farm kills against alts and manipulate the rankings so that I win.
  • Crafting: I can craft all day long, and not provide these goods to my team.
  • Harvesting: I can harvest all day long too, but if the goods don't make their way to my team...
  • Captures: probably the only vector he hinted at that would help my team win; ultimately also farmable with the right cross-faction alliance.

It's hard to think of any vector that can't be manipulated, simply to win these "gold medals". I also don't believe any of these vectors necessarily mean that an individual was contributing to the success of a team. They merely indicate that a person is having individual success. Reward vectors of a personal nature like this, are almost assuredly going to incentivize the wrong behaviors because teams don't necessarily do well just because one player is doing well.

I do believe there are solutions to incentivizing or penalizing team stacking behaviors. I think it's possible to solve this to a degree. Ultimately people are going to join a stacked team if they can get something for doing it. Stop giving people rewards for joining a stacked team. 

Also please note that their different ways to measure a "stacked" team; both by inspecting player count, and the current faction score.

Edited by Scree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Scree said:

I think the issues in the current campaign are a good example of differentiating between an unorganized zerg and an organized one. Clearly, Jah is being disingenuous about which his faction is. The constant screenshots of player counts are cute, but clearly show an organization concerned about appearances. Not knowing the difference between two organized, experienced, skill-trained guilds competing against mostly wet-behind-the-ear unorganized factions is a bit "he doth protest too much" in nature.

With that said, I am not in agreement with JTodd about his solution to this problem. It feels a bit haphazard and unlikely to influence any behaviors in this game. Rewarding individuals for team enhancing behaviors is a novel idea, but the problem is we have evidence it doesn't work. Any individual reward track incentivizes individual behaviors. If I know up front that I can win rewards simply by crafting more than any other person, I'll do it. That doesn't mean that crafter is giving those goods to anyone, helping his team, or any measurable assistance is being provided towards winning. This is the problem with his reward vectors. Ultimately none of them might actually influence a team's outcome. Let's assume an obvious vector;

  • Kills: I can farm kills against alts and manipulate the rankings so that I win.
  • Crafting: I can craft all day long, and not provide these goods to my team.
  • Harvesting: I can harvest all day long too, but if the goods don't make their way to my team...
  • Captures: probably the only vector he hinted at that would help my team win; ultimately also farmable with the right cross-faction alliance.

It's hard to think of any vector that can't be manipulated, simply to win these "gold medals". I also don't believe any of these vectors necessarily mean that an individual was contributing to the success of a team. They merely indicate that a person is having individual success. Reward vectors of a personal nature like this, are almost assuredly going to incentivize the wrong behaviors because teams don't necessarily do well just because one player is doing well.

I do believe there are solutions to incentivizing or penalizing team stacking behaviors. I think it's possible to solve this to a degree. Ultimately people are going to join a stacked team if they can get something for doing it. Stop giving people rewards for joining a stacked team. 

Also please note that their different ways to measure a "stacked" team; both by inspecting player count, and the current faction score.

Agreed 100 percent Scree.

We are not asking for intervention. I would like to see this play out over multiple campaigns so we can get some good data and feedback to the developers. I'm getting whining PM's from people now saying, "you tricked JTodd into believing something that is not true". Nobody is trying to pull the wool over JTC eyes. There is a political element at play here shaming two dominant guilds for stacking the odds in their favor at a time when they probably shouldn't have done it. The collective strength of every one else cannot win a war (not be be confused with battle) against the Sugoi/HoA/W alliance at this point. We are working to get some momentum built but you can't just speak results into existence, this will take time.

I also agree with Scree on the rewards system. Individual success is not the way to go with rewards. From my personal point of view I like to play multiple characters (pvp/crafter/farmer) and it would punish someone like me more. For the dregs that is a non starter for me. I want to help my team win, and if we win I want rewards.


Share this post


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

"Zerg is a slang term for a group of low-level gamers who depend on overwhelming numbers to achieve victory, rather than relying on technique or strategy. The term is most often used in the context of online role-playing and strategy games, but it also applies to multiplayer first-person shooters."

https://www.techopedia.com/definition/27053/zerg

 

 

I have another word for  you to look  up, "Denial".

 

You might want to share the results with Jah and Mandalore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why they don't just limit the populations?

In what other competition would you allow an imbalance of competitors?  This is like showing up to a 15 on 5 basketball game.  "Well they wanted to play together!". Huh?

I get that people might have friends that want to come in late but Crowfall campaigns end.  It's not separating people for very long.  In addition there will be multiple campaigns.  Add to that a system where spots open as people leave the campaign and I don't see the problem.

What's worse?  Separating latecomers to the game temporarily/making them play together on another campaign or inventing some convoluted system to combat (poorly made socksty) human nature and likely tanking the game anyway?

Right now the problem is just a handful of guilds.  People forget that once this game is ready thousands are going to flood in.  Just wait until the unwashed masses all go Chaos because "hurr, durrr chaos!" (No offense to Chaos guilds).  The plebs are not going to weigh the consequences of a scarcity system.  

What they are going to do is go Chaos regardless, realize that they might not be rewarded and gripe, so you may as well have limited the faction choice to begin with.  😀

The customer is not always right as evidenced by the current sorry state of the campaigns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a Mechanic that allow the 2 loosing fractions to Ally against the winning one to Close the Point Gap? Did Not think this any Further. Maybe the Community can Help there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People all jumped ship for the sake of the colour of the badge. How about you give everyone who competed a blue, the top 20 on each faction a purple and if you are on the winning team it gets upgraded to gold. This should get people going back to their factions to be in the top 20 and having a chance to get the best looking one. Will also promote continued fighting to stay in the top 20 instead of letting it slip away to us night cappers. Will also need to work on the scoring system to accommodate for people who don’t fight at all but build gear for everyone else to fight. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, valgrim1333 said:

I don't understand why they don't just limit the populations?

Because its not actually about population numbers. The faction with the highest population is the one that is crying about losing.

People are whining because the winning faction is playing the game as intended.

Quote

Crowfall is a designed to push the boundaries of online social dynamics. “In some ways, it sounds revolutionary – but our goal is to rediscover what we lost.” explained J. Todd Coleman, co-founder and Creative Director. “Politics, Trade, Empires, Alliances, Betrayal – the ability for players to have a real impact on the game world. In the rush to make these games appeal to the mass market, we lost the elements that made them great.

 

Quote

Crowfall offers three core areas of conflict: military strength (building castles and conquering territory), political power (forging alliances and attracting a hierarchy of vassals) and economic might (crafting goods and building a merchant empire).

 

Quote

 

As the winds shift with the changing of the seasons, it carries the familiar sights and smells of the fall and impending winter. But there’s something else, too. A sense of foreboding, a ripple of electricity that prickles the back of your neck and traces down your spine.

It’s coming.

War.

The time has come to call the banners and prepare for what lies ahead in Crowfall®. Knowledge is power; choose your Skills wisely. Protect those who toil at the harvest and work bench, crafting the tools that will shift the balance between victory and defeat. Guide your guildmates in the tactical arts.

Get ready to “git gud”.

 


 


IhhQKY6.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me the biggest difference between this MMO and others is how heavily guilds effect the gameplay. Because there is such an emphasis on joining a guild and team-play, the situation arises where you have vastly different experiences of the game between players who join a communicative guild who captures points and siege; and players who are basically soloing minus campaign wide sieges. These are two massively different game play styles and any system that caters to just one of these play styles or treats them the same will be flawed because it incentivizes one over the others. This isn't such a big deal in other MMOs because in those games you are grinding monster in dungeons to get loot whereas in this game your grinding low level confused players. In CF, the large crafting and harvesting component makes it immensely difficult to keep up with mega guilds who can farm from multiple accounts and having competitive gear is essential to doing well in PvP. People will naturally start moving to bigger and bigger guilds because that is the play style that's being incentivized. There should be some kind of balancing system or loyalty system or reward system in place to get layers to choose under dog factions or guilds. This wouldn't get rid of mega guilds, but it would create a choice for players. Safety in numbers and equipment or better rewards or something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...