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

how to rebuild passive tree

Recommended Posts

if game want to be balance u must delete form passive tree combat section. u can made some slots in armor for resistance, spirit etc. weapon mastery learning form killing monster, pvp etc. 

if u not deleting combat section and some new players jump to game 1year later can fully enjoy fight because will had 1 year deficit.

u can still have big passive tree with gathering, crafting, group bonuses and more thing.


aaa.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, fnukafka said:

if game want to be balance u must delete form passive tree combat section. u can made some slots in armor for resistance, spirit etc. weapon mastery learning form killing monster, pvp etc. 

if u not deleting combat section and some new players jump to game 1year later can fully enjoy fight because will had 1 year deficit.

u can still have big passive tree with gathering, crafting, group bonuses and more thing.

There is a catch-up mechanism planned ("skill tomes" were the first published idea). But since it will only matter some time after launch, of course it's no something we will see or be able to test prior to launch.

Crowfall want's people to make decisions and that those decisions will be important. Fighting, Gathering, Crafting ... choose two, your decision, and live with it. Removing the combat tree would remove this whole principle. So it's more than unlikely to happen.

The game also doesn't need to be balanced. Some people will be better, some decisions will be better. That's just how it is. Besides, the skill have some influence, but not the biggest. They are not as important as it may look like.

Anyways, it's always good to share concerns and to participate in the community, so thanks for that. And i hope you'll participate in the catch-up mechanism tests and discussions, once we get there.


2W1ZHpA.jpg

Share this post


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

There is a catch-up mechanism planned ("skill tomes" were the first published idea). But since it will only matter some time after launch, of course it's no something we will see or be able to test prior to launch.

Crowfall want's people to make decisions and that those decisions will be important. Fighting, Gathering, Crafting ... choose two, your decision, and live with it. Removing the combat tree would remove this whole principle. So it's more than unlikely to happen.

The game also doesn't need to be balanced. Some people will be better, some decisions will be better. That's just how it is. Besides, the skill have some influence, but not the biggest. They are not as important as it may look like.

Anyways, it's always good to share concerns and to participate in the community, so thanks for that. And i hope you'll participate in the catch-up mechanism tests and discussions, once we get there.

of course I understand what you say and thx u for that but I always thing good armor is more important than an unfair fate that I started playing the game a year later

aaa.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, fnukafka said:
of course I understand what you say and thx u for that but I always thing good armor is more important than an unfair fate that I started playing the game a year later

The early one catches the worm. If you are a bird, this may be good. If you are a fish, this may be bad. Both not necessarily. On the other side, those who come later don't have to live through all the bugs, build the community, gather unknown informations and put them into tables provided to others, and so on. There are more sides to it than just a skill tree. In my opinion it is a vey small price for not having to deal with a lot of other early poblems.

However, the question is not if a new player, joining a year later, won't be as strong as the older crows ... but if the game provide opportunities to catch up. If it doesn't, then i would agree to you - it just wouldn't make sense for new players to join at all. But Crowfall will.

And on another note, how big would you imagine the poorly made socksstorm from those old crows, who put all their effort into one year of achievemens, if new players would just need to join and snip with their fingers to get exactely the same immediately?

Balancing this will be a challenge. But as Todd said, when the topic first came up two years ago, this is a Future-Todd problem. Right now other things are more important. But they already wanted us to know that they are aware of these issues and will keep them in mind.

For me, for now, that is good enough. But of course we need to keep our eyes open and our feedback running. ;)

 


2W1ZHpA.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When catch-up mechanics are needed the design itself was bad to begin with. 

I personally would prefer it all be stat/gear/discipline based. Still have to live with your choices. Still have to progress. Players who have been here longer will still have the advantage but new players are not locked behind a timed gate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Kraahk said:

And on another note, how big would you imagine the poorly made socksstorm from those old crows, who put all their effort into one year of achievemens, if new players would just need to join and snip with their fingers to get exactely the same immediately?

It would depend o how they are going to monetize the game. If they are going to use a cash shop and rely on whales, then they will cater to that crowd, but if they want to focus on new players buying the game, then older players have little value. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a lot of good mechanics and ideas in crowfall, and the game is full of fun. But the time based passive tree is surely a bad design.

When i started playing crowfall, i took 1 week of holidays. I said myself, let's have some time to explore the game. After two days, i felt frustated with the passive tree. It simply breaks the effort/reward balance. This complain will come back again and again on the forum.

Some people play the game with 10 accounts. All these accounts train overtime. So where's the fun here ? If we train by playing, it would be more fair for everyone. Decisions mean nothing when you can have everything at the end with several accounts. 

The solution : make a real effort / reward balance. Make the game so multi-accounts gives no unfair advantage. Unless the game will played only by a small amount of hardcore nolife players. It seems to be a real issue that can completely break the game.

I love the idea that decisions should have sense and let's hope that the catch up mechanics will bring more balance. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Franck83 said:

Some people play the game with 10 accounts. All these accounts train overtime. So where's the fun here ? If we train by playing, it would be more fair for everyone. Decisions mean nothing when you can have everything at the end with several accounts. 

The solution : make a real effort / reward balance. Make the game so multi-accounts gives no unfair advantage. Unless the game will played only by a small amount of hardcore nolife players. It seems to be a real issue that can completely break the game.

sir u find big problem multi accounts. Why CF not asking 100 USD and give u 3 acc because if player will had only 1 acc trading selling will work. with multi acc they ar teaching 6 passive tree insted 2 INBALANCE IMBALANCE NO FAIR PLAY .... thats good question for developer who can ask ask them  


aaa.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

multi accounts = cheating and Exploit

i want see game rules if there something about multi acc. if so, it must be written right away when the player buys the game.


aaa.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, fnukafka said:

multi accounts = cheating and Exploit

i want see game rules if there something about multi acc. if so, it must be written right away when the player buys the game.

Why is it cheating?  People have been multiboxing in different games for years.  Its just another form of emergent and creative gameplay, you know, the type of thing that sandbox MMO's actively encourage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, fnukafka said:

multi accounts = cheating and Exploit

i want see game rules if there something about multi acc. if so, it must be written right away when the player buys the game.

This is not feasible. If you feel this is a problem then you are better served in pushing for game mechanics changes to mitigate. Trying to limit the number of accounts people own will never work. 

Share this post


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

Why is it cheating?  People have been multiboxing in different games for years.  Its just another form of emergent and creative gameplay, you know, the type of thing that sandbox MMO's actively encourage.

problem is passive tree if u had 4 acc u dont need buy vip points and u will learn 4-5 time fast (one aac crafting, 2 crafting, 3 explo., 4 explo., 5 combat) 

1 acc 50 USD (4 acc 200 USD)

1 month vip - 15 usd ---- 1 year 150 usd


aaa.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

create someone's poll / multi acc. yes / multi acc. no

if win yes we can start thinking more why not pay 200 USD for 500% training speed or more 400 usd for 1000% !!!


aaa.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, fnukafka said:

i want see game rules if there something about multi acc. if so, it must be written right away when the player buys the game.

This has been dicussed several time throughout the years.

One of the official answers have been this one:

On 6/29/2016 at 11:22 PM, Pann said:

Jess. Gordon and I discussed this policy. As Jess stated, we are in agreement that we will allow people to run multiple accounts in tandem. Regarding the legitimate concerns some of you voiced about people running bots and somesuch, those activities are against the TOS and will be dealt with regardless of how many game clients someone is running. We'll have measures in place for people to report suspicious activity and we will be sniffing around for it ourselves. 

You can use the forum search function to find discussions about this topic, like these two:

 

It's a different topic than the original topic though, so it could make sense to make a seperate thread. (though i don't think that it would change anything).

Edited by Kraahk

2W1ZHpA.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/29/2019 at 3:32 PM, mystafyi said:

This is not feasible. If you feel this is a problem then you are better served in pushing for game mechanics changes to mitigate. Trying to limit the number of accounts people own will never work. 

I agree. Limiting the number of accounts is not a good solution.

But a time based passive skill system is not fair enough. It brings multi-account automatic training.

 

The character progression must be challenging. The character progression must be a big part of the game mechanics. Not a consumer feel mechanic. It should take challenge to build a character.  Multi accounts people would need much more work and time to bring all their characters to high level. Some flexibility and refine system (just like in sb) could avoid some side effects of a challenging progression.

 

Close to real experience mechanics. For cohesive and intuitive purposes, it must be linked to the real game experience. I can't understand why you should be able to reach the highest level in crafting for all your characters and accounts without making any crafted item. You should craft to improve your skills. You should block to improve your blocking skills. You should be using your sword to improve your sword skills. And so on...

This close to real and challenging game experience is why blizzard is currently making wow classic. Bringing back some of the old school game experience. Today, playing game is like a consumer experience. Full accounts training, specs templates, full gear from guild... Where is the natural feel ?

 

More control from the player to the character progression. If i have 1 week of holidays, i would like to push my character progression especially the passive system. Imagine i killed 1k mobs, made some intensive pvp. But a guy that started to play 1 week before me, even if he did nothing in the game, would be higher skilled than me. He just have to pick the right stuff the guild. Where the fun ?

This seems to be a real issue especially on a competitive pvp game.

 

All these suggestions are linked to  the effort/reward system. This should be improved. Hope this help.

Edited by Franck83

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/29/2019 at 11:30 PM, Wilbur said:

Why is it cheating?  People have been multiboxing in different games for years.  Its just another form of emergent and creative gameplay, you know, the type of thing that sandbox MMO's actively encourage.

Creates an unfair environment where one person has an advantage over another. So yeah it could be consider cheating to an extreme. In spirit of the game though it is being a bit of a bad sport one might say. 


Veeshan Midst of UXA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/29/2019 at 11:32 PM, mystafyi said:

This is not feasible. If you feel this is a problem then you are better served in pushing for game mechanics changes to mitigate. Trying to limit the number of accounts people own will never work. 

It has worked though in the past. Project 1999 a classic everquest emulator ip blocks you to one account. You can request more account through the ip which they allow under the condition it for another player to use and no multiboxing. If your the caught multiboxing you get the ban hammer. 

Was to prevent the game being player how is was not intended to be played. And it maintained a healthy population for years now considering it a emulator of a game from 1999 that hasn't had and any added content 


Veeshan Midst of UXA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue is time locked progression allow for casual to stay up with everyone but allow for muiltiboxes to get ahead. 

Where active progression make it harder for muiltipul account to keep up but also harder for casual too. 


Veeshan Midst of UXA

Share this post


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

It has worked though in the past. Project 1999 a classic everquest emulator ip blocks you to one account. You can request more account through the ip which they allow under the condition it for another player to use and no multiboxing. If your the caught multiboxing you get the ban hammer. 

Was to prevent the game being player how is was not intended to be played. And it maintained a healthy population for years now considering it a emulator of a game from 1999 that hasn't had and any added content 

Alas, sadly a simple Virtual machine with separate VPN or tether through your phone will fix that. Add to that P99 had to add a virus to users computers in order to stop the use of showEQ, a move that companies cannot legally do, hence why it still worked on EQ live. Strangely enough, the lead devs for P99 were huge botters/RMT/hackers in EQ and developed the ShowEQ hack and a few others. 

Share this post


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

It has worked though in the past. Project 1999 a classic everquest emulator ip blocks you to one account. You can request more account through the ip which they allow under the condition it for another player to use and no multiboxing. If your the caught multiboxing you get the ban hammer. 

Was to prevent the game being player how is was not intended to be played. And it maintained a healthy population for years now considering it a emulator of a game from 1999 that hasn't had and any added content 

It is impossible for a remote system to determine if I'm one dude using 50 accounts from 50 proxy IPs or 50 dudes using 50 accounts from 50 different native IPs.

it is also impossible for you to determine remotely whether I am one person playing two accounts on one PC by using a virtual machine at my house or whether I'm two different people playing two different PCs because your server can only see as far as a router's subnet mask.

In order to do that you'd have to report all of my network traffic in stead of just the traffic intended for you, and you'd have to have root level access to my machine to know if I was running a VM. This would require you to install kernel level spyware on my machine more invasive than most governments are allowed to (officially) use against private citizens.

Keycloning is easy to detect remotely, as all you need to do is watch the results of traffic on your server. Multiboxing (where a person may run multiple accounts but control them individually by alt-tabbing or using two sets of inputs) is virtually impossible to prove with any level of certainty unless the user is a massive idiot. Its an unenforceable policy that only accomplishes to reserve whatever advantages multiboxing confers as the sole domain of your more tech savvy players.

You can outlaw multiboxing, you can't really enforce that ban or prove that most violators are violating your policy.

A system that want to limit multiboxing can't rely on prohibiting it. The only sane move is to approach the design itself to limit the utility of multiboxing. For example limiting peer to peer trading or requiring some kind of linear scale time investment. These sorts of approaches are antithetical to core freedoms of the open pvp niche crowfall is attempting to fill, and they've already sold far too many accounts under the current policy to change it now.

Edited by PopeUrban

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

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...