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

ACE Devs - 1 year character progression.

Recommended Posts

You have to differ between aproachable and casual. Most people think they are the hardcore poorly made socks and filthy casuals hurt games. After all the most people are so called "casuals" but not because they are bad but more because easy game are approachable. If we can still keep the vision of Crowfall to the core but make it approchable the game will sustain and not because it is so HARDCORE. So many games became MMO molded (BDO) to be more markable aka approchable to a larger audience which ruined the game. ACE doesnt need to sell out to make the game because they have us to finanze it.

 

If you want to look up on approchable vs. easy / casual, here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWFzFsHc75U

Just don't cater to the easy mode convenience that most gamers are conditioned to seek out now and that's a good start....  If you want decisions to matter in an mmo then things must have weight and things can not be easy....


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one way you may approach making the game accessible is by making a "I have no idea what's going on" mode in character creation that suggests advantages/disadvantages for an archetype and tells you why it's suggesting them.  They wouldn't be uber min/max builds, just not totally horrible (your champion isn't taking spirit runes at creation).  Then it's all about good tutorials.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only issue I potentially see is depending on the impact of skill points on damage input it can intimidate new players. If the game has been out for a year or more and someone new wants to play, it is discouraging when they get face rolled by vet players in campaigns. Making it harder to increase player base for CF later on in the years. Of course this doesn't stop everyone, so it might not even be an issue since we don't even know the details of skill points.

 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, this is just an assumption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only issue I potentially see is depending on the impact of skill points on damage input it can intimidate new players. If the game has been out for a year or more and someone new wants to play, it is discouraging when they get face rolled by vet players in campaigns. Making it harder to increase player base for CF later on in the years. Of course this doesn't stop everyone, so it might not even be an issue since we don't even know the details of skill points.

 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, this is just an assumption.

 

They've talked about active skill increases as well as passive.  The active cap is relatively low, but could be adjusted just a bit as time goes on for that reason.    Ultimately, though, that's kind of a thing in every game.  Even in WoW, if you've just hit level cap and try to do some pvp, you're going to get steam rolled by someone in top end pvp gear.

 

EDIT: and to be clear, I get the impression that after a relatively short amount of time your skills will be high enough that you won't feel totally helpless.

Edited by yamix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You kind of have to go all in when you're designing a game for a specific group of people. I know I've already stated this but, the difference between maxing a character in 2 days vs a character in 90 days is a lot. Being able to reroll your character 45 times in the span of 1 campaign devalues the entire character creation process.

 

Balances or changes in skills will alone cause sweeping changes in the meta of the game. They want people to make decisions about their gameplay style at character creation and have to live with those choices. Let's say I roll a blacksmith character because that's the skill that I'm hype about before the game starts...so I make a Stoneborn blacksmith and I play for a couple of days and I figure out that Humans have a bonus to blacksmithing as a racial ability (This is just hypothetical). If the turn around time for maxing my character is 2 days, I'm just going to delete my character and make a new one to take advantage of the bonus. All of a sudden every blacksmith in the game is a human with the exact same stats and disciplines because it's the most efficient built.

 

When the character iteration for a game is 45 times faster, you will lose the chance for people to be creative. You lose the chance for people to make mistakes. You run out of content 45 times faster. You're making the game 45 times easier. Dumbing down the game for the sake of peoples ADHD is a horrible development decision. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've talked about active skill increases as well as passive.  The active cap is relatively low, but could be adjusted just a bit as time goes on for that reason.    Ultimately, though, that's kind of a thing in every game.  Even in WoW, if you've just hit level cap and try to do some pvp, you're going to get steam rolled by someone in top end pvp gear.

 

EDIT: and to be clear, I get the impression that after a relatively short amount of time your skills will be high enough that you won't feel totally helpless.

Ah okay that isn't too bad. Yeah, most games are like that. GW2 pvp was about player skill instead of gear and levels though, but you don't really get attached to the character then...zzzzz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think JTC summed it up pretty well when he was talking about people that constantly have problems with imbalances....

 

MMORPGs aren't supposed to be balanced, they aren't supposed to be fair fights with equal numbers equal progression on flat terrain with the same compositions for everyone....

 

They are supposed to be players adapting to all sorts of different situations.

 

The challenge in these types of discussions are the subjective meanings applied to key WORDS.  Any competitive game MUST have a great deal of attention paid to BALANCE (as I mean it).  This is different than Fair vs Unfair (as I mean it).

 

If we simply look at words alone, one could say a given player having an Advantage versus another is a case of "imbalance".  But this isn't true (within context)..  How do you tell the one from the other, fair versus unfair, problems in Balance or not, advantage versus disadvantage? 

 

Context. 

 

A Dev House does have to be highly involved in "Balance" in what they are making.  Without Balance . . . nothing works well, or at all.  It's in how you define that word, and where it applies that's important however. 

 

"Unfair" fights should happen in an MMO.  This is in no way an automatic definition of an imbalance.

 

For whatever it's worth, I'll lay out examples from my gaming over the years and present how I interpret this topic, and the criteria I use to do so.  Agree or disagree, it's all good.

 

A level 60 enters a lowbie zone and is able to kill everyone around him taking no damage himself (scenario -  victims have no chance).

Judgment:  Not Balanced & Unfair

Why?:  No risk for the attacker, targets are taken out of the fight with no counters available. 

Verdict:  Not desirable. It foists an arbitrary redirect to "the grind" on the victims while disallowing their participation in PvP.

 

A player is jumped by several others near his level and ganked.(scenario - victim had no chance, outnumbered)

Judgment:  Balanced and Unfair

Why?:  The target was outnumbered, but still IN the fightAttackers could be harmed.  The target lost to a numbers advantaged group only. 

Verdict:  Desirable, manifesting as a numbers Disadvantage while still being in the fight.  The target is capable of affecting his attackers, is capable of returning for payback and counter ambushing.  This capability is the gateway to player driven PvP Content.

 

Two same level players face off.  One player is near invulnerable and one to three shots the other. (assumes a gear/stat dominant combat system) 

Judgement:  Not Balanced & Unfair (as opinion) 

Why?: One player is taken out of the pvp fight by automatic character stats not player action(s).

Verdict:  Not Desirable, manifesting as character statting/gear being Out of Balance - criteria = victims taken out of fight - opponent invulnerablePersonal opinion - my major complaint with gear/stat/level driven MMOs: It's the principal cause of lousy PvP being mechanics that, to too high a degree, take the P)layer out of the mix.  Foists a mandated redirect to "the grind" on the victim while disallowing their participation in the fight at all.

 

Two players are on a PvP map, one with predominately "elite" skills, the other with mostly vanilla.  The "lowbie" attacks the "elite".  The elite character takes damage, but turns to the attacker and successfully executes a series of elite attacks dispatching his assailant with little effort. 

JudgementBalanced and Fair.

Why?:  Both players were in the fight.  Each had to take action against one another as human players.  The weaker foe was able to affect his target, and, if conditions were different, or opponent (human player) reactions/skill different, may have been able to kill the elite-skilled character. 

Verdict:  Desireable, manifested as a Fair case of Advantage versus Disadvantage, not an arbitrary redirect to a stat grind.  The victim is motivated to continue in PvP, as they were still part of the fight, as well as being positively motivated to "skill up" his collection of elite skills. 

Note:  This scenario comes from my time in Guild Wars 1, and the best experience I've had in MMOs where players were allowed reward for progression of better skills without being so OP it took less developed players out of fights.  "Elites" still had to pay attention and play smart to leverage the Advantages they had.

 

Sorry for the long post, but I'm motivated.  Fair versus Unfair always stirs up a lot of smoke.  Working out what's Fair versus Unfair is at time cloudy, particularly when multiple players are involved.

 

I guess my shorter version is (IMO):

 

It's Unfair to face opponents in PvP who are simply invulnerable with no effort on their part..

 

It's perfectly FAIR to be ganked by multiple players in an Unfair Fight - provided the first statement above isn't in effect.

Edited by Bramble

“Letting your customers set your standards is a dangerous game, because the race to the bottom is pretty easy to win. Setting your own standards--and living up to them--is a better way to profit. Not to mention a better way to make your day worth all the effort you put into it." - Seth Godin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The challenge in these types of discussions are the subjective meanings applied to key WORDS.  Any competitive game MUST have a great deal of attention paid to BALANCE (as I mean it).  This is different than Fair vs Unfair (as I mean it).

 

If we simply look at words alone, one could say a given player having an Advantage versus another is a case of "imbalance".  But this isn't true (within context)..  How do you tell the one from the other, fair versus unfair, problems in Balance or not, advantage versus disadvantage? 

 

Context. 

 

A Dev House does have to be highly involved in "Balance" in what they are making.  Without Balance . . . nothing works well, or at all.  It's in how you define that word, and where it applies that's important however. 

 

"Unfair" fights should happen in an MMO.  This is in no way an automatic definition of an imbalance.

 

For whatever it's worth, I'll lay out examples from my gaming over the years and present how I interpret this topic, and the criteria I use to do so.  Agree or disagree, it's all good.

 

A level 60 enters a lowbie zone and is able to kill everyone around him taking no damage himself (scenario -  victims have no chance).

Judgment:  Not Balanced & Unfair

Why?:  No risk for the attacker, targets are taken out of the fight with no counters available. 

Verdict:  Not desirable. It foists an arbitrary redirect to "the grind" on the victims while disallowing their participation in the fight at all.

 

A player is jumped by several others near his level and ganked.(scenario - victim had no chance, outnumbered)

Judgment:  Balanced and Unfair

Why?:  The target was outnumbered, but still IN the fightAttackers could be harmed.  The target lost to a numbers advantaged group only. 

Verdict:  Desirable, manifesting as a numbers Disadvantage while still being in the fight.  The target is capable of affecting his attackers, is capable of returning for payback and counter ambushing.  This capability is the gateway to player driven PvP Content.

 

Two same level players face off.  One player is near invulnerable and one to three shots the other. (scenario assumes a gear/stat dominant combat system) 

Judgement:  Not Balanced & Unfair (as opinion) 

Why?: One player is taken out of the pvp fight by automatic character stats not player action(s).

Verdict:  Not Desirable, manifesting as character statting/gear being Out of Balance - criteria = victims taken out of fight - opponent invulnerablePersonal opinion - my major complaint with gear/stat/level driven MMOs: It's the principal cause of lousy PvP being mechanics that, to too high a degree, take the P)layer out of the mix.  Foists a mandated redirect to "the grind" on the victim while disallowing their participation in the fight at all.

 

Two players are on a PvP map, one with predominately "elite" skills, the other with mostly vanilla.  The "lowbie" attacks the "elite".  The elite character takes damage, but turns to the attacker and successfully executes a series of elite attacks dispatching his assailant with little effort. 

JudgementBalanced and Fair.

Why?:  Both players were in the fight.  Each had to take action against one another as human players.  The weaker foe was able to affect his target, and, if conditions were different, or opponent (human player) reactions/skill different, may have been able to kill the elite-skilled character. 

Verdict:  Desireable, manifested as a Fair case of Advantage versus Disadvantage, not an arbitrary redirect to a stat grind.  The victim is motivated to continue in PvP, as they were still part of the fight, as well as being positively motivated to "skill up" his collection of elite skills. 

Note:  This scenario comes from my time in Guild Wars 1, and the best experience I've had in MMOs where players were allowed reward for progression of better skills without being so OP it took less developed players out of fights.  "Elites" still had to pay attention and play smart to leverage the Advantages they had.

 

Sorry for the long post, but I'm motivated.  Fair versus Unfair always stirs up a lot of smoke.  Working out what's Fair versus Unfair is at time cloudy, particularly when multiple players are involved.

 

I guess my shorter version is (IMO):

 

It's Unfair for a game to allow a player to be invulnerable with no effort on their part.

 

It's perfectly FAIR to be ganked by multiple players in an Unfair Fight - provided the first statement above isn't in effect.

I dunno man, my philosophy has always been to not worry about balance or fair and unfair, just go in and do what it takes to win and let the devs worry about such things if they need to.  I've generally found that the most successful players usually just focus on what they can do to win instead of just focusing on things being balanced or fair....

 

I also believe being balanced imbalanced fair or unfair is something that can take a long time to determine.  The best competitive games were left alone for a long time where the players were allowed to deal with imbalances and unfairness and figure out ways to combat it and evolve their own meta.... let people figure out ways to overcome challenges, don't worry so much about the guy that dies to some ability once and complains that it was unfair or imbalanced. 


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno man, my philosophy has always been to not worry about balance or fair and unfair, just go in and do what it takes to win and let the devs worry about such things if they need to.  I've generally found that the most successful players usually just focus on what they can do to win instead of just focusing on things being balanced or fair....

 

I also believe being balanced imbalanced fair or unfair is something that can take a long time to determine.  The best competitive games were left alone for a long time where the players were allowed to deal with imbalances and unfairness and figure out ways to combat it and evolve their own meta.... let people figure out ways to overcome challenges, don't worry so much about the guy that dies to some ability once and complains that it was unfair or imbalanced. 

 

I hear you.

 

However, an MMO is an artificial construct, and as such, just like a car, an electrical circuit, or even work flow through an organization, you have to lay out and assess how that (those) mechanisms are working.  Balance verus Imbalance, working as intended or not.

 

Gaming has been around for thousands of years.  The idea of what constitutes "unfair advantage" isn't new to gaming or sports.

 

And I'm in agreement with you that someone simply COMPLAINING something was Unfair doesn't make it so.  See my point regarding being ganked by more than one player.   That was an Unfair fight . . . but in OUR context here, relative to a gaming construct, given the conditions I stated (the victim at least being in the fight) . . . it would be an entirely Fair and Balanced . . . Unfair Fight.

 

/shrug

 

Anyway, thanks for the smooth reply. /salute

Edited by Bramble

“Letting your customers set your standards is a dangerous game, because the race to the bottom is pretty easy to win. Setting your own standards--and living up to them--is a better way to profit. Not to mention a better way to make your day worth all the effort you put into it." - Seth Godin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A level 60 enters a lowbie zone and is able to kill everyone around him taking no damage himself (scenario -  victims have no chance).

Judgment:  Not Balanced & Unfair

Why?:  No risk for the attacker, targets are taken out of the fight with no counters available. 

Verdict:  Not desirable. It foists an arbitrary redirect to "the grind" on the victims while disallowing their participation in PvP.

 

A player is jumped by several others near his level and ganked.(scenario - victim had no chance, outnumbered)

Judgment:  Balanced and Unfair

Why?:  The target was outnumbered, but still IN the fightAttackers could be harmed.  The target lost to a numbers advantaged group only. 

Verdict:  Desirable, manifesting as a numbers Disadvantage while still being in the fight.  The target is capable of affecting his attackers, is capable of returning for payback and counter ambushing.  This capability is the gateway to player driven PvP Content.

 

Two same level players face off.  One player is near invulnerable and one to three shots the other. (assumes a gear/stat dominant combat system) 

Judgement:  Not Balanced & Unfair (as opinion) 

Why?: One player is taken out of the pvp fight by automatic character stats not player action(s).

Verdict:  Not Desirable, manifesting as character statting/gear being Out of Balance - criteria = victims taken out of fight - opponent invulnerablePersonal opinion - my major complaint with gear/stat/level driven MMOs: It's the principal cause of lousy PvP being mechanics that, to too high a degree, take the P)layer out of the mix.  Foists a mandated redirect to "the grind" on the victim while disallowing their participation in the fight at all.

 

Two players are on a PvP map, one with predominately "elite" skills, the other with mostly vanilla.  The "lowbie" attacks the "elite".  The elite character takes damage, but turns to the attacker and successfully executes a series of elite attacks dispatching his assailant with little effort. 

JudgementBalanced and Fair.

Why?:  Both players were in the fight.  Each had to take action against one another as human players.  The weaker foe was able to affect his target, and, if conditions were different, or opponent (human player) reactions/skill different, may have been able to kill the elite-skilled character. 

Verdict:  Desireable, manifested as a Fair case of Advantage versus Disadvantage, not an arbitrary redirect to a stat grind.  The victim is motivated to continue in PvP, as they were still part of the fight, as well as being positively motivated to "skill up" his collection of elite skills. 

Note:  This scenario comes from my time in Guild Wars 1, and the best experience I've had in MMOs where players were allowed reward for progression of better skills without being so OP it took less developed players out of fights.  "Elites" still had to pay attention and play smart to leverage the Advantages they had.

 

My version:

 

A level 60 enters a lowbie zone and is able to kill everyone around him taking no damage himself (scenario -  victims have no chance).

Judgment:  Irrelevant to Crowfall

Why?:  Devs have posted they are building a shallow power curve so that all players are impactful on combat regardless of level. A few lowbies banding together will be able to take out a maxed character.

Verdict:  Why are we talking about this?

 

A player is jumped by several others near his level and ganked.(scenario - victim had no chance, outnumbered)

Judgment:  Balanced and Fair

Why?:  The target chose to travel without backup and did not have sufficient situational awareness.

Verdict:  You're a bad player, and you need to get better. Don't travel alone unless you're good enough to handle it.

 

Two same level players face off.  One player is near invulnerable and one to three shots the other. (assumes a gear/stat dominant combat system) 

Judgement:  Balanced & Fair

Why?: Bother players had the same opportunity to gear up before entering the field of battle. The winning player played the economic battle far better than his opponent did, and he deserves to win. The losing player should not have "faced off" against an obviously superior foe.

Verdict:  You're a bad player, and you need to get better. Tactical skills should not trump nonexistent strategic and logistical gameplay.


Official "Bad Person" of Crowfall

"I think 1/3rd of my postcount is telling people that we aren't turning into a PvE / casual / broad audience game." -

Tully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My version:

 

A level 60 enters a lowbie zone and is able to kill everyone around him taking no damage himself (scenario -  victims have no chance).

Judgment:  Irrelevant to Crowfall

Why?:  Devs have posted they are building a shallow power curve so that all players are impactful on combat regardless of level. A few lowbies banding together will be able to take out a maxed character.

Verdict:  Why are we talking about this?

 

A player is jumped by several others near his level and ganked.(scenario - victim had no chance, outnumbered)

Judgment:  Balanced and Fair

Why?:  The target chose to travel without backup and did not have sufficient situational awareness.

Verdict:  You're a bad player, and you need to get better. Don't travel alone unless you're good enough to handle it.

 

Two same level players face off.  One player is near invulnerable and one to three shots the other. (assumes a gear/stat dominant combat system) 

Judgement:  Balanced & Fair

Why?: Bother players had the same opportunity to gear up before entering the field of battle. The winning player played the economic battle far better than his opponent did, and he deserves to win. The losing player should not have "faced off" against an obviously superior foe.

Verdict:  You're a bad player, and you need to get better. Tactical skills should not trump nonexistent strategic and logistical gameplay.

 

Jihan, you spend too much time being a self involved snark. :P

 

What's your take on how I attempt to filter "Fair" versus "Unfair", Balance or not.  You missed the forest for the trees by fabricating conclusions on events where you weren't involved.  Thus your ability to draw constructive conclusions comes into question.

 

You don't kiss yourself in the mirror every morning do you?  :wub:

 

More participation, less posturing.

Edited by Bramble

“Letting your customers set your standards is a dangerous game, because the race to the bottom is pretty easy to win. Setting your own standards--and living up to them--is a better way to profit. Not to mention a better way to make your day worth all the effort you put into it." - Seth Godin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are some wow players who understand why their combat system is imbalanced, because they are using the old D&D system with character levels, which was mainly used to tell a player a story in a single player game. And the level system was never intended for PvP combat in the fist place.
 
 
It was interesting read and content far above here, @Bramble
 
 
- VN, less reddit & CSGO skills, and don`t be so selfish all the time, and think about all the young girls and boys who just play CF, because it`s fun. It`s not about competition play at all for many players in this game.
 

D&D trailer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=1&v=BwhcROHN-3o

Edited by mythx

MQfHl7c.png

Crowfall Game Client: https://www.crowfall.com/en/client/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jihan, you spend too much time being a self involved snark. :P

 

You don't kiss yourself in the mirror every morning do you?  :wub:

 

I think I spend exactly the right amount of time being a self-involved snark! =) No mirror-kissing, though, too busy fighting off the supermodels to waste time on narcissism.

 

What's your take on how I attempt to filter "Fair" versus "Unfair", Balance or not.

 

My take is that that there's no such thing as an unfair fight as long as nobody is cheating/hacking. Sure, there will be encounters where one side has no chance of winning; that just means that they got outplayed and deserve to lose because they should have avoided being in that situation.

 

And the only abilities or characters that are meaningfully unbalanced are those which are either always or never the best choice. Anything which has situational strengths and weaknesses will find a balance point.


Official "Bad Person" of Crowfall

"I think 1/3rd of my postcount is telling people that we aren't turning into a PvE / casual / broad audience game." -

Tully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There are some wow players who understand why their combat system is imbalanced, because they are using the old D&D system with character levels, which was mainly used to tell a player a story in a single player game. And the level system was never intended for PvP combat in the fist place.
 
 
It was interesting read and content far above here, @Bramble
 
 
- VN, less reddit & CSGO skills, and don`t be so selfish all the time, and think about all the young girls and boys who just play CF, because it`s fun. It`s not about competition play at all for many players in this game.
 

D&D trailer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=1&v=BwhcROHN-3o

 

This game isn't supposed to be the shallow investment for fun casual game... it's supposed to be the niche throne war simulator... also it's supposed to be for the hardcore gamer type... including the types that are very passionate about what kinda hardware they are using to get the most out of their gaming experience... a far cry from the casual mentality....

 

This isn't the game where everyone is supposed to get a lil debbie and a trophy for participation....

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something that is not being mentioned is the "if a high skilled player attacks you and kills you, go get your friends, come back and kill them" scenario that the devs have mentioned several times now.

I think that if you're only thinking of 1v1 PvP then these concerns seem realistic.  The moment you move into more of a free form sandbox approach then suddenly things are not about making sure there's balance between players 1v1, but about finding ways to fight your enemies with whatever advantages you can summon/invent/use/find.

CF is not arena PvP where you're slotted into a fight with one other player and that's it.  You're not even slotted into a fight with your team against another team. You fight when and where and with whatever/whoever. There's no need to make sure that a 3 month veteran won't over power a 3 week player because the 3 week player should have the sense to travel with a group of friends that can overpower/outthink the 3 month vet.

Not even gonna mention stealth and pit traps.


pixS8Wt.jpg


The Chronicles of Crowfall           The Free Lands of Azure            RIP Doc Gonzo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
- Why create a skill system with character progression that just imbalance the game further when PvP is the main focus of the game?

 

And there`re some good post here talking about imbalance in PvP, and with large scale combat which is seldom a fair battle.

The main reason I continue to mention it, because the guild/player gap just increase with that old system, because there are many other aspect of gameplay which is also important - not just combat skill progression.

 

- And @Freeze mentioned earlier don`t use skill requirements on items please, which I also agree, because it only increase the overall player skill gap just like skill progression.

Edited by mythx

MQfHl7c.png

Crowfall Game Client: https://www.crowfall.com/en/client/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I spend exactly the right amount of time being a self-involved snark! =) No mirror-kissing, though, too busy fighting off the supermodels to waste time on narcissism.

 

 

My take is that that there's no such thing as an unfair fight as long as nobody is cheating/hacking. Sure, there will be encounters where one side has no chance of winning; that just means that they got outplayed and deserve to lose because they should have avoided being in that situation.

 

And the only abilities or characters that are meaningfully unbalanced are those which are either always or never the best choice. Anything which has situational strengths and weaknesses will find a balance point.

 

Ok, I agree (in spirit) with the "no such thing as an unfair fight", both sentences, in the sense that they match with two scenarios I mention above.  The one being out numbered, the other being matched up against a better skill-equipped character.

 

What I'm trying to dig at though is:  WHY are those (or perhaps when) perfectly fine?  I do have an example where I've deemed one scenario "unfair and imbalanced", but that shouldn't be a case in Crowfall as you've pointed out.

 

Still, it's important to understand the why.  Why?  Because it's not a moral or ethical debate.  Crowfall is simply code driven based on artificial rule sets.  Unless someone is going to tell me Art+Craft is made up of superhuman pychics, they WILL be tweaking "balance" issues.

 

IMO no one "deserves" to lose, they either will or won't.  Once we say Bob "deserved" to lose (insert supposed reason here) you enter the realm of taking the player out of the situation.  And, you can't always keep yourself "out of a bad situation", sometimes it happens.

 

If players are always IN the fight, even if disadvantaged . . . lots of possibilities exist.  In that I think we are in  agreement?

Edited by Bramble

“Letting your customers set your standards is a dangerous game, because the race to the bottom is pretty easy to win. Setting your own standards--and living up to them--is a better way to profit. Not to mention a better way to make your day worth all the effort you put into it." - Seth Godin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

- Why create a skill system with character progression that just imbalance the game further when PvP is the main focus of the game?
 
And there`re some good post here talking about imbalance in PvP, and with large scale combat which is seldom a fair battle.
The main reason I continue to mention it, because the guild/player gap just increase with that old system, because there are many other aspect of gameplay which is also important - not just combat skill progression.
 
- And @Freeze mentioned earlier don`t use skill requirements on items please, which I also agree, because it only increase the overall player skill gap just like skill progression.

 

 

So what you are looking at are the dynamics of "progression", as they will be implemented, versus how that comes into play when players face off in PvP.

 

How do you believe, specifically, the current picture of character progression is going to negatively affect PvP?


“Letting your customers set your standards is a dangerous game, because the race to the bottom is pretty easy to win. Setting your own standards--and living up to them--is a better way to profit. Not to mention a better way to make your day worth all the effort you put into it." - Seth Godin

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...