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

First Look: Confessor Powers - Official discussion thread

Recommended Posts

I don't understand why people are reading this and seeing undodgeable homing missiles coupled with tab targeting.

 

In fact, I don't understand how anyone other than the developers know what the developers specifically mean when they say this.

 

You can make an educated guess but so far the guesses are nothing more than mad rambling.

Yeah agree, even if there is some kind of aim assist, attacks are still subject to dodge, block, resists etc. Its not a guaranteed hit because of aim assist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even with a caveat at the beginning of every post, it's impossible to resist the temptation to play the game in your head and pick the design apart.

 

Next time, I'll make sure we provide less specifics....

 

 

This is why we can't have nice things.  :(


Nazdar

Proud member of The Hunger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...the real mistake was that I allowed Blair to list timing (any timing, even the initial default values) in his post.  That leaves you with the impression that we are further long in the development and testing cycle than we are.  

 

It makes the post read like "here is the Confessor's final powers list!" and that's not true.  Even with a caveat at the beginning of every post, it's impossible to resist the temptation to play the game in your head and pick the design apart.

 

Where we really are: Confessor powers are entered, and you can log into the game and kick off those powers.  And when you do, things happen!  Hooray!  That's is great, especially when you consider that you can't do that with Legionnaire yet.

 

I'm happy for the feedback, and I will make sure Blair jumps onto the thread to read it, I just don't want you to walk away with incorrect assumptions based on poor information.  Next time, I'll make sure we provide less specifics, especially when those specifics aren't helpful, anyway.

 

Todd

ACE

 

Less specifics isn't the issue, you know that. Us attacking this isn't even a bad thing, really.

 

Be honest with us. Are these the numbers you're testing? If they are, you just got feedback without even having to wait for alpha. Why is this seen as a bad thing? We've played a LOT of games, if you include the mass of readers who are looking at this. The in-game hours is staggering. Isn't the entire point of having us here and posting these things to get feedback? Well, there you go.

 

If you're not testing those numbers, then, yes, Blair should have used the numbers he's actually testing. Specifics isn't the problem, as long as they're accurate. You want feedback, you got feedback. Why is this bad?


I'm in this for the Experience, not the XP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To all the little $% who complained... Thanks, now we get less info

 

Ok, so shut down the forum guys. We can't have a discussion apparently.

 

I'm fairly confident that some type of aim assist function will be required to keep ranged attacks viable.

 

...........................................................

 

I don't understand why people are reading this and seeing undodgeable homing missiles coupled with tab targeting.

 

In fact, I don't understand how anyone other than the developers know what the developers specifically mean when they say this.

 

You can make an educated guess but so far the guesses are nothing more than mad rambling.

 

Oh right, like when they said "friendly fire might not make it in easier rulesets" and everyone was like "chill, it's just a possibility".

It's always better to speak about things early on instead of waiting. That's why the forum is here in the first place.

There are lots of things we aren't being told for a good reason.. so everything they say must have been seriously taken in consideration.

Edited by Fenris DDevil

y9tj8G5.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Less specifics isn't the issue, you know that. . . .

 

Be honest with us. Are these the numbers you're testing?. . . .

 

If you're not testing those numbers, then, yes, Blair should have used the numbers he's actually testing. . . .

 

You sound like you are cross-examining a hostile witness.


IhhQKY6.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're not testing those numbers, then, yes, Blair should have used the numbers he's actually testing. Specifics isn't the problem, as long as they're accurate. You want feedback, you got feedback. Why is this bad?

They certainly want feedback. But instead of the feedback on the micro level, which gamers naturally want to immediately go to, they want feedback on the macro level. At least for right now. Even if we gave them specific stuff that could be useful their still focused on the macro. This is the help they need right now. As much as we can help on the forum that is

Edited by oberon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Less specifics isn't the issue, you know that. Us attacking this isn't even a bad thing, really.

 

Be honest with us. Are these the numbers you're testing? If they are, you just got feedback without even having to wait for alpha. Why is this seen as a bad thing? We've played a LOT of games, if you include the mass of readers who are looking at this. The in-game hours is staggering. Isn't the entire point of having us here and posting these things to get feedback? Well, there you go.

 

If you're not testing those numbers, then, yes, Blair should have used the numbers he's actually testing. Specifics isn't the problem, as long as they're accurate. You want feedback, you got feedback. Why is this bad?

Think its a "can't see the forest for the trees" type thing. ACE is talking about the forest and we start pointing out how tree #596596 isn't the right height.

 

Also no one is saying its a bad thing, so lets stop trying to martyr ourselves over this, k. No need to get so defensive. No ones saying don't give feedback, all that's been said is the details we're agonizing over are not final and shouldn't be taken as such. Broad concerns yes, exact details? Maybe not so much, yet.

Edited by pang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..................Where is the Popcorn???

 

It all looks awesome cant wait to see it in action!


- Guess my profile picture was too much for the forum Mod... I best leave it blank I already picked the least offensive one I had!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think its a "can't see the forest for the trees" type thing. ACE is talking about the forest and we start pointing out how tree #596596 isn't the right height.

 

Also no one is saying its a bad thing, so lets stop trying to martyr ourselves over this, k. No need to get so defensive. No ones saying don't give feedback, all that's been said is the details we're agonizing over are not final and shouldn't be taken as such. Broad concerns yes, details? Maybe not so much.

 

I think we're generalizing two things here.

 

1. The specific numbers that ACE is currently using

2. The concerns over those specific numbers ACE is currently using

 

People shouldn't give up on Crowfall because of math in Pre-Pre-alpha.  However, when we are given specific numbers, responding with specific concerns is exactly what everyone should expect.  It's the whole point!

 

Martyr isn't a word that can be applied to this thread.  A little skittish, sure... but people are anxious to see how things go!

Edited by valor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think they're even especially interested in feedback on specific powers, just yet, much less those powers' details. I think the feedback they're looking for is on the general concepts and aesthetics of the archetypes, and the feel of the kinds of powers they're starting testing with as they apply to the archetypes. Then, in testing, they care about making sure the combat mechanics work, again without concern over the details of the mechanics.

 

We are a long way from them looking for feedback on any specifics of any kind.


I mean, I'm assuming "fluffer" is just another pjorative term for carebears, whales, etc. Of course, I could be incorrect, but I doubt it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think they're even especially interested in feedback on specific powers, just yet, much less those powers' details. I think the feedback they're looking for is on the general concepts and aesthetics of the archetypes, and the feel of the kinds of powers they're starting testing with as they apply to the archetypes. Then, in testing, they care about making sure the combat mechanics work, again without concern over the details of the mechanics.

 

We are a long way from them looking for feedback on any specifics of any kind.

Well, in general, 5 seconds of invulnerability is too long.


I'm in this for the Experience, not the XP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, in general, 5 seconds of invulnerability is too long.

 

Poorly playing semantics games is not going to make your assertion any less pointless or useless. That feedback is only "general" in a context well beyond the context of the feedback they're looking for. In the context of this presentation, it is extraordinarily specific.

 

So stop trying to be cute. It's kind of pathetic.


I mean, I'm assuming "fluffer" is just another pjorative term for carebears, whales, etc. Of course, I could be incorrect, but I doubt it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like auto-hit stuff if the idea is to allow terrain, etc to block you from the target. If you want to keep it realistic, then you can....

 

1. Allow range to impact the speed of the cast (the closer you are, the faster you cast). Obviously keep enough range to keep it honest.

2. Make very long range stuff more AOE based, perhaps with a stack limit if some power would be op'd.

 

I don't want to see an /assist feature in the game....ever, and sticky targeting is the same, pretty much, as allowing something to auto hit.  There are trade offs to ranged attacks, and they are generally related to time to cast, accuracy, and area of effect.  If you are "keeping it real" then those are some downsides that have to come into play while staying true to a commitment for skilled gameplay that doesn't allow /assist /sticktargets /autohits. 


rSHxVEY.gif

Guildmaster, LotD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, in general, 5 seconds of invulnerability is too long.

 

Yes it seems too long but we don't have other information to contextualize it such as what the time to kill actually is and whether on not in a team fight there might be a team mate who can break you out of that stun early.

 

At this stage I think it's better to wait and see than to speculate on numbers.

Edited by youma

 Click here to join the Crowfall Discord chat community

Sekket on Mourning. Bhorov on Test Server. Youma the Pirate wherever TSP has sailed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it seems too long but we don't have other information to contextualize it such as what the time to kill actually is and whether on not in a team fight there might be a team mate who can break you out of that stun early.

 

At this stage I think it's better to wait and see than to speculate on numbers.

And I respectfully disagree.


I'm in this for the Experience, not the XP.

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...