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

Ace Q&a For August – Official Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Database guy here. Appreciated the schema discussion, sounds like a fun problem.   puts down his sandwich and turns off the Cosby Show

I love a lot of the answers in this Q&A but there are two specific areas where I have thoughts/concerns.   1) Alliances > I would definitely say I don't see any real reason for an "Alliance"

If you enjoy PVP, why do you keep trying to make combats as short as possible? When I enjoy something I like it to last.   ladies....

Erk, i don't like this at all :(

But we'll see... :')

From individual players points of views I would agree that having more freedom is the best since as an individual players, there are only so many cases of betrayals you will encounter and one campaign to play for your character at a time. I agree that we can only see for ourselves whether it's true or not that this system works best for the game as a whole.

 

If it didn't work out I'm sure ACE would notice it too in time.

Forum_Signature.png


Chalcitis - A Treasure Hunting Guild, visit Forum Post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Erk, i don't like this at all :(

But we'll see... :')

I like it from an accountability standpoint... it's not like you need to be tagged up with a guild to be in it anyway... i mean with the prevalence of voice comms these days you could do a lot of damage just committing to spying in a guild and relaying information real time back to your real guild. 

 

I'm also curious if they will allow you to go anonymous mode as far as being logged in.  Say me and my buddies all join different guilds to spy on them, but we all have a set of characters that want to hang out without others knowing... can joe blow in my guild simply look at a guild roster and see that i'm online on a certain character in a certain location? 

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to post
Share on other sites

VN, I believe the way they explained it to us is that if you join with 1 character, they whole account gets joined.  It is not a closed roster just for the guild to see. 

 

They have specifically said the best way is to have a second account.

 

I actually like the one account/one guild rule.  Also, 1 account logged into 1 computer restriction will make espionage/spying really complicated. I say bring it on though...Hopefully there are some real consequences to a successful spy campaign, other then just seeing troop movement (boring).

Edited by Nakawe
Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to building in CW, premade walls kinda sucks. One of the best parts about player cities in Shadowbane was how customizable it was. If you wanted uber fortress you could have 3 layers of walls but your crafting vendor selection would be limited. On the other hand, you could have one layer of walls and many crafting buildings if you wanted more of a mercantile city. Will this be possible at all in campaign worlds or will it always be cookie cutter in regard to walls?

Link to post
Share on other sites

VN, I believe the way they explained it to us is that if you join with 1 character, they whole account gets joined.  It is not a closed roster just for the guild to see. 

 

They have specifically said the best way is to have a second account.

This isn't what i'm talking about at all though... obviously if it's 1 guild 1 account the whole account is joined... what I want to know is what will guild members be able to see of each other.  Will they be able to tell which guildies are online?  Probably?  Will they be able to see your location in some way shape or form? (hopefully not)...

 

I don't mind the 1 guild 1 account the more i think about it... basically they are trying to make you commit to your loyalties and adding ways for you to be accountable. 

 

The only problem I see with it, which is really just a casual problem, is that some people enjoy having alts not associated with their guild to just relax and do their own thing on. 

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love a lot of the answers in this Q&A but there are two specific areas where I have thoughts/concerns.

 

1) Alliances > I would definitely say I don't see any real reason for an "Alliance" concept with the implementation of sub-guilds being designed.  An alliance can very easily be created by creating a figurehead guild that the allying guilds "sub" into, which will allow them to win campaigns as an alliance.  This restriction may create some overhead, such as who becomes a member of that parent guild, and how much power does that parent guild have, but I think those mechanics will actually cause some great politics.  Stand your ground on this one ACE, let alliances come from guild hierarchies.

 

2) "Incentives" > I have some concerns with JTC's answer on this question.  This topic has been discussed at length on the slack many times and seems to be a very popular topic, and I've heard your exact answer before.  But I think that comparing campaign victory to other games like soccer, football, TF2, dota, or anything really, ends up missing two key issues:

 

a ) Player investment.  A lot of people play football and don't care about their long-term rewards, but those people also don't need to put in 6 months of effort and manage their relationship with hundreds of other players in order to succeed.  Ignoring that difference is huge, because there's generally a pretty strong relationship between how much investment we put into games, and what the possible rewards are (though of course, defining the value of those rewards is largely intangible and subjective).

 

Yes, you're right, some people will absolutely just play for the bragging rights.  That's true in pretty much every game.  But that reward is enticing for fewer and fewer people as that player investment increases.  The harder you make it for them to win, the more they are going to stop caring.  I know Crowfall is a niche game, and I know you don't need a mass market for success here, but I think there's an underestimation of how large that niche market is going to be if this concern isn't seriously considered.

 

I would love to see the game be successful just with people taking it serious "just because."  But I don't think that's incredibly likely.

 

b ) Player Behaviors (aka, "The Skilled Player").  My previous point makes it sound like somehow playing for the "fun" and the "competition" will leave the game dead and lacking players.  That's not really the only bad scenario that could result.  You may end up with tens of thousands of people playing Crowfall without figuring this question out, but there's still an open question left: will they be playing well?

 

Now maybe that doesn't sound important to people, because they think I mean "playing well" as in "are they skilled at using their character."  But that's not what I mean.  Will they actually contest all the objectives?  Will they care about anything other than K/D?  Will they value all of the PoIs in the same way?

 

These are big important questions, and if your value proposition to players just playing for "competition" is too drastically different than those hoping to get resources out to the EKs, then you create a major rift in the playstyles of these players.

 

For example: EK players need to get resources to their embargoes, but the "competitive" folks don't.  All they want to do is make sure 100% of their resources go into winning the campaign.  So now you make a situation where the EK folks need to put resources in the embargo to get what they want, but then they are competing to win against people who have inherently more resources available to actually try to win.  Without winning, they don't get resources, so they ultimately are stuck in a catch-22.

 

This is only one possible danger of having too many disconnected incentive structures.  I'm sure people thinking about it could come up with other examples of negative situations.

 

Now, this isn't to say that you need to make EK's super important, or that competitive players need to want the same high end goal.  But all of your long-term goals need to enforce similar large-scale tactics.  Competitive players need to care about resources as much as EK junkies do, even if those resources are used for completely different purposes.

 

Ultimately, here's my TL;DR for this one: If you rely on "Players play to win because winning is cool," as a key reward mechanic, then you have no way to control or predict how people play.  And if you don't know how people play, then there's a huge possibility that the overall system falls apart.

 

Know why your players play (and be realistic about it!), then determine how they play, then determine how the game works to support it.

 

That's my thoughts.  Good luck, as always!

Edited by theDoctor
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it from an accountability standpoint... it's not like you need to be tagged up with a guild to be in it anyway... i mean with the prevalence of voice comms these days you could do a lot of damage just committing to spying in a guild and relaying information real time back to your real guild. 

 

I'm also curious if they will allow you to go anonymous mode as far as being logged in.  Say me and my buddies all join different guilds to spy on them, but we all have a set of characters that want to hang out without others knowing... can joe blow in my guild simply look at a guild roster and see that i'm online on a certain character in a certain location? 

That would be annoying. Quite annoying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The only problem I see with it, which is really just a casual problem, is that some people enjoy having alts not associated with their guild to just relax and do their own thing on. 

Ah, ya not wanting to help someone and be stealth afk worrying only about  yourself......... I hate when that happens.   Doing that gets people black-listed in KoS, we support each other best we can...

 

Best way to do that on a separate guild-less account...

Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be annoying. Quite annoying.

Thinking about it even more... I think they should give limited information about players in general even if they are in the same guild... it would make it really easy to spy if you could just stare at your guild roster and see exactly how many people are on, or where they were at, etc....

 

I'd actually like a really hardcore approach where it doesn't tell you who is online and you only learn about that through chatting and meeting up for head counts. 

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there might be some confusion about the one account  = one guild answer.

 

The question which Todd was responding to was: 

 

What is the structure of characters as they relate to guilds?

 

So in Todd's answer, is: A "account = account" or B "account = character"?

 

If A then it has the consequence that all your characters are in one guild and if B, then you can have different characters in possible different guilds.

 

ACE might want to clarify this a bit more, although I think he really meant A.

Edited by Canth

ZCcquVD.png

THE most active European Crowfall community. Join us now!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, ya not wanting to help someone and be stealth afk worrying only about  yourself......... I hate when that happens.   Doing that gets people black-listed in KoS, we support each other best we can...

 

Best way to do that on a separate guild-less account...

It's a video game... some people don't always want to do everything with the guild every waking moment... maybe they want to experience the game from a different point of view.

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there might be some confusion about the one account  = one guild answer.

 

The question which Todd was responding to was: 

 

 

So in Todd's answer, is: A "account = account" or B "account = character"?

 

If A then it has the consequence that all your characters are in one guild and if B, then you can have different characters in possible different guilds.

 

ACE might want to clarify this a bit more, although I think he really meant A.

I thought the question he was responding to was about espionage?

 

Rewatching it and listening to his explanation it really does seem like he meant 1 account 1 guild.

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

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...