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

In YOUR opinion, what are the easiest/smallest changes...


Scarr
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Excidius said:

Make FvF the main focus which would allow everyone to play, limit each factions slots per zone and possibly total as well to encourage more balanced TOTAL numbers.   with that there is the possibility of around the clock sieges or much larger windows where people can siege.

Yep. It's a shame. They are really close to a good FvF setup. They are really far away from a good GvG setup. I don't see how they can save Dregs but FvF is right on the brink of being good.

FvF is having a snowball effect right now where unbalanced populations create "nothing to do" situations, which causes people to quit, which makes it harder to find any kind of fight, which causes more people to quit and etc.

Solving the faction balance issue alone would have likely saved FvF had they jumped on it a month ago. Creating more sensible FvF map layouts may have done a lot of solve the problem even without faction balancing.

In the end I think they're going to lose the game because they can't fix the problems with Dregs and they won't fix the problems with Shadows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Slamz said:

Bring a stealth character into either campaign. Go to any NPC camp. Loot boxes. You'll be up to your ears in 80-90 damage weapons within literally 5 minutes, especially in like Sun Elf or Urgu camps which mostly spawn crates of weapons. (I usually vendor trash anything that's <85 damage. Sometimes the 87-90 damage weapons will sell if you price them cheap enough, like 300-400 gold.)

I actually think it's a shame because there's very little market for player crafted goods under the level of a legendary crafter because War Tribe stuff is just as good and it's everywhere.

I wish that crafting was less of a pointless grind. You spend WAY too long being unable to beat Wartribe gear.

Wartribe gear shouldn't be in the game imo, it should all be crafted. Also, you're talking from the perspective someone who knows what to do (not a new player), i.e. many new people just run out of gear and go 'well, guess im quitting then'. This should never EVER happen, if your game design can ever lead a player to be unable to play the game, or even simply perceive they're unable to play, you've messed up badly.

Secondly, wartribe gear is frustrating as hell due to low durability, and taking up tons of inventory space (since they're more rng to find ones you want), combined with needing more for the same durability.

 

Edited by Cerberias
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Cerberias said:

Wartribe gear shouldn't be in the game imo, it should all be crafted. Also, you're talking from the perspective someone who knows what to do (not a new player), i.e. many new people just run out of gear and go 'well, guess im quitting then'. This should never EVER happen, if your game design can ever lead a player to be unable to play the game, you've messed up badly.

Secondly, wartribe gear is frustrating as hell due to low durability, and taking up tons of inventory space (since they're more rng to find ones you want)

 

this is compounded by what others have said, harvest times and crafting costs for newer crafters are too high. the curve of progression and resource gathering needs to be adjusted, can you imagine how bad it would be if the game was double or triple the population.  around blue you should be putting out gear that is desirable, 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Cerberias said:

Wartribe gear shouldn't be in the game imo, it should all be crafted. Also, you're talking from the perspective someone who knows what to do (not a new player), i.e. many new people just run out of gear and go 'well, guess im quitting then'. This should never EVER happen, if your game design can ever lead a player to be unable to play the game, or even simply perceive they're unable to play, you've messed up badly.

Secondly, wartribe gear is frustrating as hell due to low durability, and taking up tons of inventory space (since they're more rng to find ones you want), combined with needing more for the same durability.

 

Believe it or not this used to be the case. Wartribe gear was added in response to open beta testers complaining that it was too hard to gear up. In stead of making gear easier to craft ACE decided to add gear to drop tables and invented war tribes so it had something to drop from. When people complained about passive training making it too hard for new players to catch up to old ones ACE replaced passive training with the current system of RNG disc grinds.

These are both good examples of ACE pivoting to whatever is the "MMO standard" without considering how it impacts all the other elements of the game in stead of trying to refine the design already in place to address its flaws, and ultimately building ystems that contradict the initial design as a result.

Passive training making it hard for newbies? Don't try to fix it to give newbies useful things to do and make. Just replace it with grinding low level items and tons of xp and gold because that's the "standard MMO system"

Gear too hard to get for new players due to crafting interdependence and low harvesting yields? Don't try to adjust interdependence or harvesting yields, just put crafted-level gear on mobs because that's the "standard MMO system"

Edited by PopeUrban

LMAO my website is broken please click this to apply to Flames of Exile (maybe, if that's not busted too)

On 5/11/2015 at 1:48 PM, CAWCAWCAW said:

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, PopeUrban said:

Believe it or not this used to be the case. Wartribe gear was added in response to open beta testers complaining that it was too hard to gear up. In stead of making gear easier to craft ACE decided to add gear to drop tables and invented war tribes so it had something to drop from. When people complained about passive training making it too hard for new players to catch up to old ones ACE replaced passive training with the current system of RNG disc grinds.

These are both good examples of ACE pivoting to whatever is the "MMO standard" without considering how it impacts all the other elements of the game in stead of trying to refine the design already in place to address its flaws, and ultimately building ystems that contradict the initial design as a result.

Passive training making it hard for newbies? Don't try to fix it to give newbies useful things to do and make. Just replace it with grinding low level items and tons of xp and gold because that's the "standard MMO system"

Gear too hard to get for new players due to crafting interdependence and low harvesting yields? Don't try to adjust interdependence or harvesting yields, just put crafted-level gear on mobs because that's the "standard MMO system"

Personally I think passive skill training is an awful idea too, since it makes it hard for new players to catch up - something you really don't want in a game.

RNG disc grinds however are equally as dumb, particularly since they drop far more regularly for players who need them far less. All they needed was a standard 'hit things, skill up' or a predictable and communicated disc drop system (where you know in X mobs ill get a disc), so its not so bleak and demoralising in times of poor RNG.

Wartribe gear is also pretty terrible, its frustrating for new players and does little to help the game, and becomes nothing but an inventory space sink for anyone with even basic crafted gear. All they need to do is make the basic weapons from vendors not complete trash (i.e. equal to a green qual weaponsmiths work, around 75-80 damage, and higher durability), and make them free, but with 0 sale price. Nobody feels like they can't get out into the world and farm, people can do it without risking gear is they take a hit to their power, but they can also still compete to some degree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Cerberias said:

Personally I think passive skill training is an awful idea too, since it makes it hard for new players to catch up - something you really don't want in a game.

The primary advantage of the passive training from crowfall specifically was that it took progression out of active play, meaning that all active play was about what the game was theoretically supposed to be about, winning campaigns. Like EVE, you never harvested and crafted to make throwaway items, but in stead every moment spent doing those activities was only ever done to make items or farm resources people actually used.

EVE, over a decade of iteration, has landed on a pretty damn good system by making that training more about horizontal than vertical progression. Crowfall's passive training was a number of very long and purely vertical progression paths so in stead of "I can choose to be really good at making just swords quite fast but older players will be able to make a large variety of items of excellent quality" it was in stead "I need to spend 6 months passively training blacksmithing to make literally anything of value"

If you want to be a miner in EVE, or a crafter in EVE, you can start making or harvesting things of real value that even players who've been around for years will happily pay you for on day one. That's the difference between a passive training system designed to remove grind, and a passive training system that just gates progress. When you have low end trained characters that can actually produce things people want to buy, they actually have a means to buy stuff they can't make from people trained to do thing they aren't, and "catching up" isn't needed just to have access to those higher end items.

Albion does a good job at this as well, with its hybrid passive/active system. Low quality items are required to make higher quality ones so low level harvesters and crafters have a valuable product from day one, and there's a time based resource players have a limited recharge rate of that makes higher end crafters want to buy those low end items so they can use that resource to in stead product high end items.

The problem there isn't so much that passive training as a concept is bad. It actually allowed us to log in every day and go "what do we want to do today for campaign goals or gear replacement"

The problem was that the designers at ACE didn't stop to think "why did we want to do passive training in the first place" and "how can we harness its strengths and fix the weaknesses in our current system"

The problem was that they built a strictly vertical hierarchy of item qualities that makes low end products obsolete to anyone that can use higher end products, so that lower skilled players weren't just less efficient or producing less valuable stuff, but literally useless.

For all the effort put in to the complexity of the harvesting and crafting system, virtually no thought at all was put in to how that system worked or didn't work to establish a trade economy, and the effects of that are still evident in the current active system.

Edited by PopeUrban

LMAO my website is broken please click this to apply to Flames of Exile (maybe, if that's not busted too)

On 5/11/2015 at 1:48 PM, CAWCAWCAW said:

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PopeUrban said:

Don't try to fix it to give newbies useful things to do and make. Just replace it with grinding low level items and tons of xp and gold because that's the "standard MMO system"

Yeah this is another "big shame" that doesn't get enough air time.

The crafting in this game is pretty interesting and there is a lot I like about it. But the fact that low tier crafting is absolute garbage, totally worthless and represents a tremendous grind to get past is inexcusable. You can spend your whole game going "okay well after this, I'll be able to make good stuff" and I bet 90% of people ended up quitting before ever reaching a point where they felt they were making useful stuff.

And even if you have good stuff to sell good luck with that in this stupid personal vendor system, using personal EKs that aren't always up.

I doubt that "redesign the crafting system" qualifies as a small change but "adding an auction house" probably would. That, alone, could cause a huge and sudden renaissance in the crafting game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Cerberias said:

Wartribe gear shouldn't be in the game imo, it should all be crafted. Also, you're talking from the perspective someone who knows what to do (not a new player), i.e. many new people just run out of gear and go 'well, guess im quitting then'. This should never EVER happen, if your game design can ever lead a player to be unable to play the game, or even simply perceive they're unable to play, you've messed up badly.

Secondly, wartribe gear is frustrating as hell due to low durability, and taking up tons of inventory space (since they're more rng to find ones you want), combined with needing more for the same durability.

 

I think they should be incorporated into crafting. Salvage wartribe gear drops a gem that has one of the stat lines on that was on the WT gear this gem can then be crafted into crafted gear like a hunger shard which then add bonus stats there alot of stats on WT weapons that can be obtained other ways like power effiency and weapon dmg and do on this will make certain WT gear valuable to crafters creating a market for player to get gold early on aswell as armor they can use early on while keeping WT camp relevant to farm late game for more PvP locations.

Wartribe armore should get some unique stats too like anti crit, PDM and personal healing. Natural thorns and do on to be used just like above but for armor.

Veeshan Midst of UXA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PopeUrban said:

Crowfall's passive training was a number of very long and purely vertical progression paths so in stead of "I can choose to be really good at making just swords quite fast but older players will be able to make a large variety of items of excellent quality" it was in stead "I need to spend 6 months passively training blacksmithing to make literally anything of value"

If you want to be a miner in EVE, or a crafter in EVE, you can start making or harvesting things of real value that even players who've been around for years will happily pay you for on day one. That's the difference between a passive training system designed to remove grind, and a passive training system that just gates progress. When you have low end trained characters that can actually produce things people want to buy, they actually have a means to buy stuff they can't make from people trained to do thing they aren't, and "catching up" isn't needed just to have access to those higher end items.

Albion does a good job at this as well, with its hybrid passive/active system. Low quality items are required to make higher quality ones so low level harvesters and crafters have a valuable product from day one, and there's a time based resource players have a limited recharge rate of that makes higher end crafters want to buy those low end items so they can use that resource to in stead product high end items.

Some sort of crafting stamina is something I would love to see, as it would help a lot to balance small vs big guilds, and I agree passive could be decent if it was implemented more horizontally as you mention, but realistically I don't feel as though it really adds much to the game that a short grind active training system doesn't.  The grind at the moment is stupid however, and without crafting stamina it means a big guild can pool one crafter on day 1 who can then make them top tier poorly made dergs by day 2, which is incredibly bad for balance.

 

23 minutes ago, veeshan said:

I think they should be incorporated into crafting. Salvage wartribe gear drops a gem that has one of the stat lines on that was on the WT gear this gem can then be crafted into crafted gear like a hunger shard which then add bonus stats there alot of stats on WT weapons that can be obtained other ways like power effiency and weapon dmg and do on this will make certain WT gear valuable to crafters creating a market for player to get gold early on aswell as armor they can use early on while keeping WT camp relevant to farm late game for more PvP locations.

Wartribe armore should get some unique stats too like anti crit, PDM and personal healing. Natural thorns and do on to be used just like above but for armor.

I wouldnt have a problem with more crafting additives dropping from wartribes, but wartribe gear is a bad idea currently, even just having it in the game confuses many new players who don't realise it's got a fraction of the durability, and get pissy because it breaks super fast. Nobody wants boring inventory management getting in the way of pvp as often as wartribe gear does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remove AOE-5 Caps? 

I'd theory craft that this is far from easy.

f038Lkx.png

 

There is a lot of inherit latency to contend with. The casters actual ping to the server is one number, then individual members have their own pings and under that have their own threads per client to contend with. All of that has to go in and out of very small budget in terms of "time" to not only accept the fact they are being damaged but acknowledge how much damage and then re-broadcast back out. Again all within a very narrow budget of time / tolerance level to accept as being part of the AOE's actual life timer.

So in a nutshell increasing or removing it is less about increasing your ability to do wider spread damage but more to do with solving a lot of network code across multiple regions and holding down a timely response. 

For example: 240ms between Australia -> North America servers are the basic open latency before you even do anything. As that's just pure infrastructure problems.

It's not say you can't overcome this with different approaches to micro networks and various ingestions points staged globally but that also comes at much higher cost than i think ACE could afford.

I think to be honest one of the contributing reasons for the dreg crashes as of late in large siege battles is the AOE queues are backing up resulting in an accidental flooding effect (ie similar to how DDOS works) on the as-is infrastructure.

 

Edited by Dorizzdt

You can linger in a forum of a game you dislike and be toxic, or you can just move on play something different. If you can't move on then its probably time for you to seek some mental respite. 

I choose to play Crowfall - problems and all - because its a fun game. Why do you hate fun?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remove aoe caps but reduce healing to group only. 

Remove alliances (this was something I was against from the start)

Reduce guild caps to 50, screw the large guilds, sorry but if there were more guilds there would be more action. I don't care if guilds have non aggressive pacs, they would still take friendly fire. I banged on for a very long time that the 500 cap was ridiculously to high.

That would be a good easy fix then work on a territorial system and a pvp progression system like what Daoc had.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dorizzdt said:

Remove AOE-5 Caps? 

I'd theory craft that this is far from easy.

f038Lkx.png

 

There is a lot of inherit latency to contend with. The casters actual ping to the server is one number, then individual members have their own pings and under that have their own threads per client to contend with. All of that has to go in and out of very small budget in terms of "time" to not only accept the fact they are being damaged but acknowledge how much damage and then re-broadcast back out. Again all within a very narrow budget of time / tolerance level to accept as being part of the AOE's actual life timer.

So in a nutshell increasing or removing it is less about increasing your ability to do wider spread damage but more to do with solving a lot of network code across multiple regions and holding down a timely response. 

For example: 240ms between Australia -> North America servers are the basic open latency before you even do anything. As that's just pure infrastructure problems.

It's not say you can't overcome this with different approaches to micro networks and various ingestions points staged globally but that also comes at much higher cost than i think ACE could afford.

I think to be honest one of the contributing reasons for the dreg crashes as of late in large siege battles is the AOE queues are backing up resulting in an accidental flooding effect (ie similar to how DDOS works) on the as-is infrastructure.

 

This is just more proof the game cant handle 200 player battles. We should still remove aoe caps for all fights between 2-100 players to be more realistic, immersive, and fair. If it still causes lag or unregistered hits, then there is little hope for cf longterm success. 🏌️ It really shouldnt be that difficult to implement. Also before they consolidated the regional servers into 1 global dregs/shadow because of low populations, it was less likely for na ping to fight against aus pings.

I still think no aoe cap should be attempted, it will drastically improve variety in strategies and lets face it; balls of nameplates are the least immersive concept in medieval fantasy reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, arkh said:

Harvesting tray. custard tired of having a toon attack (or try to attack if it's 20m away) any NPC going near the screen.

Personally I find this way way less annoying than having to constantly switch in to and out of the harvesting tray. It happens pretty rarely and when it does I just kill the mob. Using the harvesting tray was a huge pain in the ass that you had to fiddle with constantly and I hated it when we had it.

Better idea would be an option (in options) to turn on "sticky harvesting" which just made sure you stayed in harvesting mode as long as you are holding down leftclick. No annoying harvesting tray, no randomly swapping to combat because something stumbled under your reticle, but can still react to combat at a moment's notice just by releasing and then holding leftclick again.

LMAO my website is broken please click this to apply to Flames of Exile (maybe, if that's not busted too)

On 5/11/2015 at 1:48 PM, CAWCAWCAW said:

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dorizzdt said:

not only accept the fact they are being damaged but acknowledge how much damage and then re-broadcast back out.

This assumes a "client side" model, which I would hope they aren't using (it's very hackable -- oh I took damage? No I didn't). I also feel like I've seen enough rubber banding to suspect it's a server side model. In that case, the server is simply telling the client what is happening to it and does not need the client to okay it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Jubileet said:

This is just more proof the game cant handle 200 player battles. We should still remove aoe caps for all fights between 2-100 players to be more realistic, immersive, and fair. If it still causes lag or unregistered hits, then there is little hope for cf longterm success. 🏌️ It really shouldnt be that difficult to implement. Also before they consolidated the regional servers into 1 global dregs/shadow because of low populations, it was less likely for na ping to fight against aus pings.

Every game suffers this fate right now its not a "game" problem only its a global internet infrastructure problem as well. Meaning the cabling for example between countries is a barrier in itself (ie 200ms from Australia <-> US etc).

To put it in perspective last time I checked (could have moved up since then) Ashes Of Creation hasn't gone over a 200 simultaneous player limit either.  New World seems to hedge its bets around 50v50 battles (yes they have 200k simultaneous users in the game itself but not in battle) and so on. Grand Theft Auto 5 wont' go above 32 players unless the servers are modded and that case its 64+ before bad things happen like ghosting of foreign objects etc. Battlefield hasn't even gotten close to these numbers at all. World of Warcraft "pvp" instances don't escalate beyond 200.

What exactly are you baselining these metrics against? for a ~$27m budget in gaming at the initial creation of CrowFall - I think we need to reign in some perspective here maybe?

To reduce the fight max capabilities is not realistic either without enforcing "instance" based barriers here, which breaks the open world sandbox. At the most all you can really do is reduce the Zone caps themselves which means how do you handle those farming already in the instance vs those who want to fight to the max? 

Not difficult to implement? Well as i hopefully demonstrated you have a lot of serious budgets right now trying to answer that question - one of which by the way owns one of the biggest cloud infrastructures on the planet - and they're still not at that point of success.

47 minutes ago, Slamz said:

This assumes a "client side" model, which I would hope they aren't using (it's very hackable -- oh I took damage? No I didn't). I also feel like I've seen enough rubber banding to suspect it's a server side model. In that case, the server is simply telling the client what is happening to it and does not need the client to okay it.

Kind of. The client has to react to the inbound packets - and if they are using something like Unity3D ECS (not thunderome) that changes the architectural issue in a different way if they aren't using it. I can only speculate how they are doing it suffice to say that one inbound packet also has to be deserialized, update two-way bindings (i.e. break into the UI thread) update health bars at the very least and tell the particles engine to flare VFX - the list goes on. You also have issues such as informing the client to update its AVATARS (skeletons) to sync with intended behaviors (ergo players jumping, mounting horse or running around). The client does a lot of reactionary work but at the same time is also sending back data to inform server of what that client or player is also doing - all in 16ms intervals ( Unity3d game loop ticks client side).

I mean its not easy and what they have done as i've said before isn't worth just throwing out because of peoples assumptions that 100k players in one sandbox is ideal.

The only game of this type (open sandbox) that has been successful is Eve Online (world record holder - 6,142 players) and to be clear, they have solved it by forcing every player to a slow motion based combat (Time Dilation - TiDi)  which being in these massive 1000+ battles lasts for hours and its no where near the word "fun". CCP has looked into another engine to test scale further and find a way to bring this back into that dream - https://www.eveonline.com/news/view/introducing-a-new-tech-demo-eve-aether-wars - but it didn't go down as planned.

 

 

You can linger in a forum of a game you dislike and be toxic, or you can just move on play something different. If you can't move on then its probably time for you to seek some mental respite. 

I choose to play Crowfall - problems and all - because its a fun game. Why do you hate fun?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Create Hunger dome as open world instantiated content. The player would enter a decaying map while walking through the open world. This would improve the PVP experience as you would enter a portal and be able to face players of similar level within a random map with resources and loot with group or solo play.
2. Make factions have a balancing system where a faction would only be activated if there was another player of the opposite faction on the same map, ie, there would only be a faction if there was another equivalent opposite faction. This would make players migrate to other factions as mercenaries, as it assumes that there is no faction if there is no opposing side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

100% easiest quick change. Make a Path of Exile style market search. It operates in the browser and pulls the data from the vendor system database. Provides the item name/ stats/ EK name/ and square location and if the EK is online or not. Allow it to be searchable and filterable by campaign. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allow an additional gathering and crafting belt, or let each discipline add a belt so we can dual gathering or crafting.

Like : mining + quarrying or leather working + armor smiting

Edited by OldVamp
Link to comment
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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...