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

Make Arrows An Item


Recommended Posts

So, I'm getting tired , and I think I'm not the only one, of tohse walls of text.
 
I will give more or less the reasons why I think Finite > infinite

  • Degrading items

We are not pledging bows should degrade, and have an aditional surplus of finite arrows. We are saying that, sword would degrade by use, and bows will not. Instead bow will have finite arrows. This way, "regenerating" a sword, could be equally costing that buying x numbers of arrows. X being a balanced number in relation sword slashing/ arrow hit

  • Game balance

There is a reality, and it is that ranged > melee. Not because archer are more beautifull. But because ranged implies being at a safe distance from melee.
 
So, like in the video I posted - surely there are a lot more -, having ranged atack + infinite ammo means there is an unbalanced feature. Arrow infinite spam isn't good. And I don't accept you telling otherwise, and more in this game.
 
But of course, you cannot make wow hunters run out of arrows. That would be autrageous.
 
what is the thing? This is crowfall, where, if I recall correctly, bow aiming was confirmed ( if not, let me know )
 
So, if there was infinite amo, the game would be totally flowed by ranger shooting arrows like an fps, since ranged > melee
 
What do we do? Finite arrows.
 
 
This way, ranged> melee, but you have to aim, and you can't spam indefinitely. You need skills to shoot, and being solvent, so people who only do pk will not have an advantage over newbies steping out of tutorial island.
 
 
With this we pretend to do Ranged = Melee, in short term combats, and long terms balance.

  • Crafting

I love when you people talk about this. You always speculate so much bad things.... 
 
The same way crafters will have to make sword, they will have to make arrows.
 
And for the people who says " I don't want to make my own arrows because it is tedious ". Oh wait, you were planing on doing your own sword too?
 
]As I said before, Runescape had a nice yet simple system of arrows crafting. And it was runescape...

  • "But I want to solely rely on my bow "

So, you are saying you want an advantage, not only my being able to be ranged all the time, but being able to shoot unlimited arrows?
 
If I want to take a melee class I will have a chronic disadvantage when I fight with you. Only because buying arrows is tedious? I have to buy a sword, and an armo to defend fomr you arrows, but gettin arrows is tedious?
 
I will link you again the video so you can enjoy someone relying only on ranged attacks here
 
 
 
 

I'm not prepared to read 10 pages right now.  I will say this, though: In an MMORPG, finite is stupid.
 
There was never a point in any game I've played that relied a finite ammunition resource that ever made it feel fun when you're using the resource a constant rate and as a primary means of combat.  

 
 
" constant rate and as a primary means of combat " is the main feature we don't want in this game. It is unbalanced and doesn't goes well with the immersion of campaings, and more with the inexistance of instances.
 
Constant rate of fire as a primary way of damage is only good for 1 person RPGs, where you are the overpowered hero, slayer of entire hordes.
 
What were the games you cited? Diablo 2, ESO, and WoW... hum, those are enjoyables games undoubtedly. 
 
But let me quote you, again, the leitmotiv of this game:
 
 

 

WELCOME TO CROWFALL.
If you’re here, it’s because you’re looking for something.
Something deeper than a virtual amusement park. More impactful than a virtual sandbox. More immersive. More real. A game where decisions matter.
We are, too. We’ve been looking for years, and we still haven’t found it…. because it doesn’t exist. Yet.





And with this, I end my contribution to this thread. Please, add more reasons I forgot for finite amo.

And, of course, pledge against it if you will. It is your right to do so. Both our final reason is to make this game fun and diferent from the rest of mmorpg in the market. Let's try to make our best in feedback.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 709
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Finite. Everything revolves around resources, and that should include ammo. Obviously casters should have some other way to attack also, like melee attacks, but giving infinite ammo removes and entire

There's many pros and cons to both Infinite and Finite ammo systems.    We have an idea on which path we are going go down, but this is a topic we've been discussing since the early days of Crowfall

It's amusing how "hardcore" PVPers get squishy when it's suggested that ammo is finite. Everything in Crowfall is resource limited. Your sword is going to dull and break. Your armor is going to rend a

And my point was that by going by the same logic of realism it would be over by one slash of most melee weapons, which would never work.

 

Only if the melee fighter gets into range, the person he's attacking is not wearing sufficient armor and he manages to connect with that single slash.

 

Also, I'd love to see an MMO with the Bushido Blade style fight system. Block, block, block, block, hit, you're dead. Of course, I don't think we have the tech yet to make that not a lagfest and impossible to pull off, but I can dream.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it's relative, getting your head bashed in with a battle-hammer is more deadly for example. It's a silly argument to make imo.

Dead is dead, whether you leave a pretty corpse or a smashed up mess.

I think the K-Mart of MMO's already exists!  And it ain't us!   :)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I'm getting tired , and I think I'm not the only one, of tohse walls of text.

 

I will give more or less the reasons why I think Finite > infinite

  • Degrading items

We are not pledging bows should degrade, and have an aditional surplus of finite arrows. We are saying that, sword would degrade by use, and bows will not. Instead bow will have finite arrows. This way, "regenerating" a sword, could be equally costing that buying x numbers of arrows. X being a balanced number in relation sword slashing/ arrow hit

That would be the fair way to do it.  I was under the impression that all items would degrade(like in SWG).  So if bows/guns don't degrade then most certainly there should be finite ammo.  Or bows/guns could just simply degrade like everything else but have infinite ammo.  Really, it's six in one, half-dozen the other. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been thinking on this topic for several days without weighing in. And I think I've come to a logical conclusion.

 

99% of the games out there do not benefit from having limited ammo for the archers/hunters/etc. Having a team member run out of ammo during a raid doesn't help anyone, and causes the community to start treating the ammo-carrying class a burden or a liability for raids. For those games, infinite ammo - or, at the very least, infinite basic ammo - is a necessity. This is, after all, why Diablo 3 got rid of the concept of ammo for Demon Hunters in early Beta.

 

But Crowfall isn't like most games. If the game is supposed to include siege warfare (and we know it does), then infinite ammo is not the way to go. By having ammunition have weight and mass (filling an inventory slot with a limited amount of ammo), that means that defensive structures that mount chests full of ammunition gives the defense the advantage - which is the way it should be. For the sieging army to carry on with ranged warfare, they will have to have caravans that are heavily loaded with large quantities of arrows. Caravans that could be waylaid, destroyed, or stolen by the defenders, if the besiging army isn't paying enough attention...

 

This feels right to me. This fits the vision of the game far better than a man sitting in one defensive spot, firing 1000 arrows without ever reloading or having to go refill the quiver. A scout will have to conserve ammo, and not shoot at anything he sees - shoot at things that matter, hide from teams too big for your remaining ammo supply, and so on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I liead saying it was the last, but it is for a good cause:

 

 

link

 

 

Once in the game, you must raise your skills to qualify for a Promotion class. This allows you to differentiate yourself (pretty dramatically) from your base Archetype.

Additionally, there are also Disciplines which can be learned to gain access to addition skills, weapon styles, powers and crafting recipes. For example, the “Archery” Discipline can be used to unlock the use of Bows.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It ultimately depends on how Crowfall's combat and inventory/weight management systems play out, but given that it should be safe to say we'll be seeing combat rather consistently in campaigns of either hunger, animal, or player then they need to consider the fact that a single skirmish of even 1 archer vs 4 npcs may require as many as 30 bow shots.  We aren't going to see Chivalry or Mount & Blade combat here.  Not even Skyrim (of which finite ammo was a burden exclusive to bow users as it tends to be in many games) felt right despite varying grades of ammo value.

 

If I need to encumber myself like 40% of my max encumberance just for ammo to ensure I can remain battle ready for a life expectency of longer than a few minutes average, I'm not going to be having fun.  Finite ammo works in shooter style games because running out either means you suck or you've lived a long time and must replenish.  If I'm expected to have a life expectency of hours and consistently an hour+ away from any base or shop or craft station, I'd better not have to worry about ammunition impacting my value or contribution to my own growth and success or that of my group/guild/faction

 

There's a reason infinite ammo has become the norm.  It's because finite ammo has always been a burden in this sort of game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But Crowfall isn't like most games. If the game is supposed to include siege warfare (and we know it does), then infinite ammo is not the way to go. By having ammunition have weight and mass (filling an inventory slot with a limited amount of ammo), that means that defensive structures that mount chests full of ammunition gives the defense the advantage - which is the way it should be. For the sieging army to carry on with ranged warfare, they will have to have caravans that are heavily loaded with large quantities of arrows. Caravans that could be waylaid, destroyed, or stolen by the defenders, if the besiging army isn't paying enough attention...

Now please tell me why any guild in their right mind would ever have any arrow/ammo users for defending/attacking in a siege if they may end up being completely useless due to running out of arrows/ammo.

 

This is a PvP game that's gonna be heavily competitive when it comes to territory control, so a ton of guilds are simply just gonna say "why would I bring arrow/ammo users that may run out of arrows/ammo when I can bring any magic user instead that can keep using their spells forever?".

 

This is again where we come back the whole "arrow/ammo users needs to be 2x as strong as other ranged to make up for their liability" and it just becomes a huge mess to balance around that.

7ug90hM.png


 


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  • Degrading items

We are not pledging bows should degrade, and have an aditional surplus of finite arrows. We are saying that, sword would degrade by use, and bows will not. Instead bow will have finite arrows. This way, "regenerating" a sword, could be equally costing that buying x numbers of arrows. X being a balanced number in relation sword slashing/ arrow hit

 

Doesn't this over-penalize in the other direction? A melee user that "ran out of ammo" ends up buying a whole new sword. A bow user retains a much larger portion of the cost of his weaponry, as the bow is not lost, and if he never dies, he will never need to replace it. A successful archer can use one weapon for an infinite time span while a successful swordsman will still have to constantly replace swords.

 

This has dire conseqiences for bow crafting. It drastically reduces demand for bows and replaces that demand with arrows. Unless these arrows are sufficiently diverse to mimic the crafted complexity of a sword weapon, ranged crafting suffers from a wholesale lack of utility.

 

For there to be a direct correlary, bows would have to be crafted with a built in supply of arrows, and linked to them intrinsically so that the bow vanishes when they are depleted. That is exactly the system that an infinite ammo implemenation mimics, only it does so without requiring the bow user to juggle an extra inventory slot.

PopeSigGIF.gif

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
... when you choose to play a ammo-based ranged class, that ammunition is a pre-requisite of being able to do said damage.  This is the most basic premise of the class(es).  What I'm saying is there are a number of people advocating to circumvent this most basic premise of a ammo-based ranged class by asking for and/or advocating for FREE UNLIMITED AMMUNITION. Caveats, conditions, concepts, alternate conditions, and so on are irrelevant in-so-far as you are attempting to violate the most basic premise of the class you choose to play. (This includes the ideas/notions of balance, fairness, fun, alternative features that might be implemented instead, and so on & so forth.)

 

So, WHY?  I didn't realize I had to ask the question explicitly, but there.  The only answer I have seen is because it's what people have grown accustomed to, it's their opinion it should be that way (not that an opinion should be invalid either, but then we get into the further issues of fairness, balance, and so on).  I have yet to read so much as a single reason that justifies violating the most basic premise of the class(es).

 

Yup, quoting myself, since people can't be 'bothered' to read what has alreay been written, discussed, and dissected.

 

Not so much as a single reason why, other than "I want it to be that way".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not so much as a single reason why, other than "I want it to be that way".

Really? There's 11 pages and there have been like a dozen good points as to why there shouldn't be finite arrows/ammo.

 

Just because you don't like those points doesn't mean that they aren't valid. You're just doing the thing that kids do where they plug their ears and go "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU, MY OPINION IS THE ONLY RIGHT ONE".

7ug90hM.png


 


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now please tell me why any guild in their right mind would ever have any arrow/ammo users for defending/attacking in a siege if they may end up being completely useless due to running out of arrows/ammo.

 

This is a PvP game that's gonna be heavily competitive when it comes to territory control, so a ton of guilds are simply just gonna say "why would I bring arrow/ammo users that may run out of arrows/ammo when I can bring any magic user instead that can keep using their spells forever?".

 

This is again where we come back the whole "arrow/ammo users needs to be 2x as strong as other ranged to make up for their liability" and it just becomes a huge mess to balance around that.

 

Emphasis added. If that happens, then you deserved to lose for failing to supply your troops according to their strengths and skills.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are making me lie about not posting here

 

Really? There's 11 pages and there have been like a dozen good points as to why there shouldn't be finite arrows/ammo.

 

Just because you don't like those points doesn't mean that they aren't valid. You're just doing the thing that kids do where they plug their ears and go "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU, MY OPINION IS THE ONLY RIGHT ONE".

 

 

I tried to post good point to prove why finite is better.

 

 

Explain the point on having infinite amo without saying it is for comodity, lazyness, or any " there are people too noob for x "

Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely limited ammo.
And resources for casters, big armor-repair prices to tanks.
This game is all about crafting being essential and in need for finite durations on items.
The economy is based on the above.
Would be a silly move to let-go of this opportunity to boost crafters even more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Emphasis added. If that happens, then you deserved to lose for failing to supply your troops according to their strengths and skills.

That example was just hypothetical, because I know for a fact that if arrow/ammo users end up requiring your guild to constantly feed them a supply of arrows/ammo, then hardly anyone is gonna bother with that.

 

Why would you bring 50 archers to your siege that all require hundreds(maybe even thousands) of arrows EACH and are subject to running around and becoming useless, when you could bring 50 ranged magic users that don't require reagents instead?

 

They would have to buff arrow/ammo users to be really strong for it to pay off for people to bring them, which in turn probably makes them sort of OP and makes everyone want to bring tons of them and then magic users become UP.

 

This is of course assuming that magic users don't require reagents. Who knows, they might and this entire discussion is a moot point.

 

 

Explain the point on having infinite amo without saying it is for comodity, lazyness, or any " there are people too noob for x "

Read through the thread. There have been several good points that are both for and against finite arrows/ammo. I'm not gonna spoon-feed you.

Edited by macavity

7ug90hM.png


 


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now please tell me why any guild in their right mind would ever have any arrow/ammo users for defending/attacking in a siege if they may end up being completely useless due to running out of arrows/ammo.

 

This is a PvP game that's gonna be heavily competitive when it comes to territory control, so a ton of guilds are simply just gonna say "why would I bring arrow/ammo users that may run out of arrows/ammo when I can bring any magic user instead that can keep using their spells forever?".

 

This is again where we come back the whole "arrow/ammo users needs to be 2x as strong as other ranged to make up for their liability" and it just becomes a huge mess to balance around that.

And so who would they use? 

Ranged provides huge boosts, so having the setback of being in need of a steady flow of supplies to be most effective makes big strategic sense.

I'll say it the other way.. Why shouldn't the one doing the siege be able to choke out the supply lines and starve/defang the defenders?

And wouldn't it be much better for pvp if rangers and mages weren't auto-casting? If their spells actually mattered?

Lets stop viewing pvp as a skill spamfest where the biggest whale wins.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And wouldn't it be much better for pvp if rangers and mages weren't auto-casting? If their spells actually mattered?

Are you implying that if you don't have reagents required to use spells then spells don't matter?

 

How about melee? They don't require any reagents to use their spells, but they still matter, right?

 

 

Lets stop viewing pvp as a skill spamfest where the biggest whale wins.

That reminds me of another thing that hasn't been talked about. If ammo/arrow users are really good due to requiring a constant feed of arrows, then big zerg guilds are gonna have a huge advantage. They will tons of resources, they will have tons of people to craft the arrows/ammo and they will have tons of people to defend the supplies.

Edited by macavity

7ug90hM.png


 


Link to post
Share on other sites

That example was just hypothetical, because I know for a fact that if arrow/ammo users end up requiring your guild to constantly feed them a supply of arrows/ammo, then hardly anyone is gonna bother with that.

 

Why would you bring 50 archers to your siege that all require hundreds(maybe even thousands) of arrows EACH and are subject to running around and becoming useless, when you could bring 50 ranged magic users that don't require reagents instead?

 

That's assuming facts not in evidence. And if you think, as a Stronghold/Guild Manager, that it's a good idea to refuse to accept Archers from joining you just because you don't want the hassle of maintaining an adequate arrow supply, you're going to soon find yourself being killed by the very people you ostracized.

 

They would have to buff arrow/ammo users to be really strong for it to pay off for people to bring them, which in turn probably makes them sort of OP and makes everyone want to bring tons of them and then magic users become UP.

 

This is of course assuming that magic users don't require reagents. Who knows, they might and this entire discussion is a moot point.

 

As I said, assuming facts not in evidence. And, for a siege, you have time to plan and prepare. As the defender, you can keep chests with extra ammo handy. As the attacker, you can take a Caravan with extra ammo. In both cases, you can also provide ways of carrying those reagents for mages - "Mana Potions," if nothing else. You think a Mage is going to stay at full mana constantly through a multi-hour siege? How?

 

Neglecting resources just because the logistics might be more complicated than you want to deal with is the mark of a poor captain. And usually the cause for a failed defense.

Edited by Katzemensch
Link to post
Share on other sites

You think a Mage is going to stay at full mana constantly through a multi-hour siege? How?

Mana will most likely regenerate slowly by itself. In addition to that, you usually have food and different buffs that help with regeneration. Also, there will probably be abilities/spells that you can use out of combat to boost mana regen. Arrow/ammo users won't have these kinds of luxuries with finite arrows/ammo.

 

 

 Neglecting resources just because the logistics might be more complicated than you want to deal with is the mark of a poor captain. And usually the cause for a failed defense.

The problem is that if a class/archetype is a burden, in any sort of way, compared to other alternatives, then guilds that are competitive will just opt out of using those classes/archetypes. We've seen that in nearly every single MMO in both PvE and PvP. It's gonna be even more of an issue with the whole supply system(s).

 

If caravans have like 500 item slots and each class/archetype requires 2 item slots to get their supplies but you're forced to spend 3 or 4 item slots for arrow/ammo users because they need their arrows/ammo in addition to the normal supplies, then why even bring them in the first place?

 

At that point the only reason you would bring them, would be if they did twice the damage of a "normal" ranged class/archetype and then we get into the whole overpowered/underpowered balance argument thing.

7ug90hM.png


 


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...