Vitality
ＨＵＳＴＬＥ
- 5,808
- 30
All they've said is that dregs is a base type, in that, win conditions will be based on the different campaigns within the dregs. Bloodstone collection is the only win condition game type that's been talked about so far.
Crowfall
- Thread starter Kharza-kzad_sl
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Srathor
Vyemm Raider
- 1,884
- 3,045
They have mentioned the bloodstone points system, and world destruction advancing if 5 major points are controlled by one "Side".
My guess is they will have points of interest generating score. Hopefully a few score points on conquest, and ramping up score points value on length of ownership and improvements adding to score points accumulation. As in, win trading gets you little overall points, but holding a point of interest gets you score points, larger amounts the longer you hold it, and more frequent collection if you improve a point of interests value and rank through building improvements and defensive additions.
Make locations more valuable over time so combat is increased over the locations as winter gets closer and people get more desperate, and it acts as a great sink for Mats as well forcing more people to gather or take more locations.
If you have valuable points of interest all over the map like Tuco said, then the zerg can take 1-2 locations easy. But the more destructive they are they destroy the improvements and make the built up locations less valuable that they take. Then if they want to build them up it takes resources. Mats need to be gotten which splits the zerg. Kinda like Agar.io (Fun Fucking game that is)
I would love to see a campaign world have 50 small long respawn mines (Say 1000 ore then goes on respawn for a random amount of time, that time increasing as seasons go.) 3 max improvements lower the respawn or increase the yield per respawn making people have a choice on how they can harvest/transport the mats. Then 25 Medium sized medium respawn Mines (2500 ore at base Random respawn timer) 5 max improvements for medium mines. 10 Large mines (5000 ore per respawn before improvements, 7 improvement slots.) and the slaughter fest ultra mine (10K ore per respawn, 11 improvement slots)
Have some random ore spots as well, Like the wow gathering nodes, and when stuff respawns the ore can change but make the small ones have the better ores more rarely.
Same type of idea for tree nodes and lumber camps. Damn I rambled. ahh well.
My guess is they will have points of interest generating score. Hopefully a few score points on conquest, and ramping up score points value on length of ownership and improvements adding to score points accumulation. As in, win trading gets you little overall points, but holding a point of interest gets you score points, larger amounts the longer you hold it, and more frequent collection if you improve a point of interests value and rank through building improvements and defensive additions.
Make locations more valuable over time so combat is increased over the locations as winter gets closer and people get more desperate, and it acts as a great sink for Mats as well forcing more people to gather or take more locations.
If you have valuable points of interest all over the map like Tuco said, then the zerg can take 1-2 locations easy. But the more destructive they are they destroy the improvements and make the built up locations less valuable that they take. Then if they want to build them up it takes resources. Mats need to be gotten which splits the zerg. Kinda like Agar.io (Fun Fucking game that is)
I would love to see a campaign world have 50 small long respawn mines (Say 1000 ore then goes on respawn for a random amount of time, that time increasing as seasons go.) 3 max improvements lower the respawn or increase the yield per respawn making people have a choice on how they can harvest/transport the mats. Then 25 Medium sized medium respawn Mines (2500 ore at base Random respawn timer) 5 max improvements for medium mines. 10 Large mines (5000 ore per respawn before improvements, 7 improvement slots.) and the slaughter fest ultra mine (10K ore per respawn, 11 improvement slots)
Have some random ore spots as well, Like the wow gathering nodes, and when stuff respawns the ore can change but make the small ones have the better ores more rarely.
Same type of idea for tree nodes and lumber camps. Damn I rambled. ahh well.
Vitality
ＨＵＳＴＬＥ
- 5,808
- 30
Bloodstone campaign idea was for all the different world base types.
Homie they're going to have different win conditions within each world cluster. Dregs-BloodstoneUS Dregs-DeathmatchUS - Dregs-FashionshowUS etc.
They've only discussed the one win condition though.
Ukerric
Bearded Ape
- 8,381
- 10,435
Yep. What "Dregs" define is: "alliance is not determined prior to campaign" (unlike Faction/God/Guild where your current allegiance immediately gives you allies) and "winner take 100% of vault, loser take 0%" (they might possibly dissociate those two) cards of the rule deck. The rest of the campaign ruleset is completely flexible.
Jimbolini
Semi-pro Monopoly player
- 2,602
- 989
Vitality
ＨＵＳＴＬＥ
- 5,808
- 30
Big Flex
Fitness Fascist
- 4,314
- 3,166
Hey gang,
Let's talk COMBAT.
As you know, we're going to be inviting our first external testers to explore the combat system late this summer. Today's update is to talk about where we are going and how we hope to get there.
First, we should answer this question: What is the purpose of the "core combat" milestone?
"Find the Fun." This is a phrase that game developers use when they talk about building new game systems. When designing a game system, you have to decide how much 'innovation' you can afford.
The simple fact is that a lot of ideas sound fun on paper (or a whiteboard) and turn out NOT to be fun in practice. Even worse than that, sometimes ideas that COULD be fun aren't because implementation issues crop up (bugs, gross imbalance, UI issues, bad framerate, whatever) that effectively 'hide' the fun that you should be having.
Why was Tetris fun? It's hard to put a finger on exactly why this combination of elements was more fun than all of the other 'falling pieces' games that came before (or, frankly, since).
Therefore, the chances of your development team finding the fun in any game is, quite often, a function of how many chances you have to iterate on it. You start with a strong suspicion that there is gold right here, and you keep digging until you find it.
As we've said before, we think combat is our most important subsystem. Once we make combat fun, we will have a solid foundation on which we can build a great game. And the key to making combat fun is iteration:
- Build it
- Play it
- Change it
- Repeat
It's amazing how often teams have to move forward on building the game before they 'find the fun'. I know! Sounds crazy, right? It's actually quite common. Honestly, we've all done it.
No one can predict how long it will take to find the fun, and time is ALWAYS in short supply. Business realities inevitably dictate that you can't afford to wait some indeterminate length amount of time for your team to find the fun before you can start making content.
How are we going to avoid that? We're going to be as smart as we possibly can about ordering the content - move low risk items forward, push the unknowns out as far as possible - and get to work IMMEDIATELY on finding the fun. Start at the beginning of the project, and then squeeze as many iterations as you possible can into your production schedule.
OK, so how does the iterative process look?
It might be a lot different than what you are used to seeing because even companies that use the iterative approach typically hide it. It's kind of messy. The first version we are going to put in front of you is going to look a LOT different from the final product.
If your goal is to minimize the number of iterations, you don't spend time on stuff that is likely to change. The key tenets are:
1. Do less, but do it better. Include only the features, art and content that you need to test a concept - nothing more. Anything else is a distraction (or worse, it could hide the fun).
2. Try out ideas, then kill them quickly if they don't work. This is a concept known as "fail quickly". If an idea just isn't going to work, better to find that out as quickly as possible and move on.
3. Don't be afraid to make mistakes. 'Finding the fun' is an exploration game, and every iteration reveals a bit more of the unmapped space. You can't explore a problem space without going down a few rabbit holes.
4. Learn and adapt. Every iteration gives you more data to work with. Use that data to make measured changes to the system, and try again. and again. and again. and again.
Let's say that we need to test the ramparts around a castle wall and, due to movement speed and jump height being still in flux, we aren't sure yet if that wall should be 15 feet high or 20. Rather than guess, and then spending a few months of art time adding detail to that wall - only to get it into the game and find out that it was too high - instead spend an hour building one version, then get it into the game as quickly as possible and try it out. Don't build the detailed wall until you know everything you need to know.
What does this mean for me?
It means that you will likely be testing combat on a castle wall that looks like a grey box.
It also means that a day later, that wall might be taller. or shorter. or gone completely.
The key is quick iteration. As a tester, you're going to be using your imagination to fill in a LOT of gaps in the gameplay experience:
Interfaces will stress function over form. Environments will be untextured and blocky as we focus on flow and movement rather than appearance. Archetype selection will be extremely limited, because we're only building the ones we need to test powers, skills and features -- as they come online.
Remember the process that we outlined, above: Build, Play, Change, Repeat.
Is this going to change how you communicate with us?
Yes and no. The process will be oddly familiar.
Between now and late summer, it means that we'll be releasing the combat information in small, digestible chunks. Some of that information will make sense, some of it will be puzzling and some of it will inevitably change as we iterate.
Hopefully, by the end, we'll have a fun experience and you will all see how it all fits together.
Wait - that sounds like the game of rampant speculation! You sneaky bastards, you've been training us on this approach all along, haven't you?
No, I wish we were that smart. J
The approaches are similar because both of them focus on the timely release of information on a structured cadence.
.but the difference is that with the "game of speculation" we had a firm view of the destination. This time, the process is iterative; this is an exploration expedition. We know the direction that we are heading, but we won't know the exact destination until we get there.
That sounds ominous. How do you know you'll find it?
We don't. That's the thing about game development, it is equal parts and amazing and terrifying.
But here is the secret: There is no shortcut to building something great. It doesn't come from hoping. It doesn't come from wishing. And it certainly doesn't come from just copying something else.
It comes from having a clear vision, and then working your ass off to make it a reality.
When I say it like that, it isn't really that surprising, is it? You know the drill.
We're all going to take a leap of faith, together. If you're reading this, then you feel it too: There is gold right here. We just need to dig for it.
We'll find it, or we'll die trying.
Todd
Let's talk COMBAT.
As you know, we're going to be inviting our first external testers to explore the combat system late this summer. Today's update is to talk about where we are going and how we hope to get there.
First, we should answer this question: What is the purpose of the "core combat" milestone?
"Find the Fun." This is a phrase that game developers use when they talk about building new game systems. When designing a game system, you have to decide how much 'innovation' you can afford.
The simple fact is that a lot of ideas sound fun on paper (or a whiteboard) and turn out NOT to be fun in practice. Even worse than that, sometimes ideas that COULD be fun aren't because implementation issues crop up (bugs, gross imbalance, UI issues, bad framerate, whatever) that effectively 'hide' the fun that you should be having.
Why was Tetris fun? It's hard to put a finger on exactly why this combination of elements was more fun than all of the other 'falling pieces' games that came before (or, frankly, since).
Therefore, the chances of your development team finding the fun in any game is, quite often, a function of how many chances you have to iterate on it. You start with a strong suspicion that there is gold right here, and you keep digging until you find it.
As we've said before, we think combat is our most important subsystem. Once we make combat fun, we will have a solid foundation on which we can build a great game. And the key to making combat fun is iteration:
- Build it
- Play it
- Change it
- Repeat
It's amazing how often teams have to move forward on building the game before they 'find the fun'. I know! Sounds crazy, right? It's actually quite common. Honestly, we've all done it.
No one can predict how long it will take to find the fun, and time is ALWAYS in short supply. Business realities inevitably dictate that you can't afford to wait some indeterminate length amount of time for your team to find the fun before you can start making content.
How are we going to avoid that? We're going to be as smart as we possibly can about ordering the content - move low risk items forward, push the unknowns out as far as possible - and get to work IMMEDIATELY on finding the fun. Start at the beginning of the project, and then squeeze as many iterations as you possible can into your production schedule.
OK, so how does the iterative process look?
It might be a lot different than what you are used to seeing because even companies that use the iterative approach typically hide it. It's kind of messy. The first version we are going to put in front of you is going to look a LOT different from the final product.
If your goal is to minimize the number of iterations, you don't spend time on stuff that is likely to change. The key tenets are:
1. Do less, but do it better. Include only the features, art and content that you need to test a concept - nothing more. Anything else is a distraction (or worse, it could hide the fun).
2. Try out ideas, then kill them quickly if they don't work. This is a concept known as "fail quickly". If an idea just isn't going to work, better to find that out as quickly as possible and move on.
3. Don't be afraid to make mistakes. 'Finding the fun' is an exploration game, and every iteration reveals a bit more of the unmapped space. You can't explore a problem space without going down a few rabbit holes.
4. Learn and adapt. Every iteration gives you more data to work with. Use that data to make measured changes to the system, and try again. and again. and again. and again.
Let's say that we need to test the ramparts around a castle wall and, due to movement speed and jump height being still in flux, we aren't sure yet if that wall should be 15 feet high or 20. Rather than guess, and then spending a few months of art time adding detail to that wall - only to get it into the game and find out that it was too high - instead spend an hour building one version, then get it into the game as quickly as possible and try it out. Don't build the detailed wall until you know everything you need to know.
What does this mean for me?
It means that you will likely be testing combat on a castle wall that looks like a grey box.
It also means that a day later, that wall might be taller. or shorter. or gone completely.
The key is quick iteration. As a tester, you're going to be using your imagination to fill in a LOT of gaps in the gameplay experience:
Interfaces will stress function over form. Environments will be untextured and blocky as we focus on flow and movement rather than appearance. Archetype selection will be extremely limited, because we're only building the ones we need to test powers, skills and features -- as they come online.
Remember the process that we outlined, above: Build, Play, Change, Repeat.
Is this going to change how you communicate with us?
Yes and no. The process will be oddly familiar.
Between now and late summer, it means that we'll be releasing the combat information in small, digestible chunks. Some of that information will make sense, some of it will be puzzling and some of it will inevitably change as we iterate.
Hopefully, by the end, we'll have a fun experience and you will all see how it all fits together.
Wait - that sounds like the game of rampant speculation! You sneaky bastards, you've been training us on this approach all along, haven't you?
No, I wish we were that smart. J
The approaches are similar because both of them focus on the timely release of information on a structured cadence.
.but the difference is that with the "game of speculation" we had a firm view of the destination. This time, the process is iterative; this is an exploration expedition. We know the direction that we are heading, but we won't know the exact destination until we get there.
That sounds ominous. How do you know you'll find it?
We don't. That's the thing about game development, it is equal parts and amazing and terrifying.
But here is the secret: There is no shortcut to building something great. It doesn't come from hoping. It doesn't come from wishing. And it certainly doesn't come from just copying something else.
It comes from having a clear vision, and then working your ass off to make it a reality.
When I say it like that, it isn't really that surprising, is it? You know the drill.
We're all going to take a leap of faith, together. If you're reading this, then you feel it too: There is gold right here. We just need to dig for it.
We'll find it, or we'll die trying.
Todd
I wonder what they're going to do about the potential fragmenting of the player base.
One thing that matters to me the most in any MMORPG is that it feels like I'm always connected to a world that is full of people, teeming with life. This is why heavily instanced games, ghost town servers, etc never appeal to me. I believe this is also why many of the most popular servers in MMORPGs gain more popularity once people realize they are highly popular. Even when they have massive queues, you still see people rerolling to be part of the action. I realize that I am not like everyone else, so take my opinion as just one side of the whole.
Here's where my concern comes in. It seems like they want to give players the option to choose where they want to play. Be it one of the many campaigns, messing around in the EK, or both. I wouldn't be as concerned with this if campaigns weren't so integral to the core game play and weren't taking place over such an extended period of time. I've heard them use a month, or several, as an example, I believe. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, and I do like what they seem to be doing here, at least in theory. So you might have a handful of players who want to play in, and build up, their own Eternal Kingdom, or mess around in Kingdoms that they are involved with. This already fragments the community to a certain degree as there are no NPC owned central hubs. At least none that have been mentioned as far as I know. So these players will largely be relying on communities of people that have established their own EK economy for their daily activities. This might not be much of an issue as the players will most likely flock to the most populated and active EKs with the best rule sets. That's assuming there is enough of a player base who are more interested in the EK system than the campaigns, which is my next concern.
I am making a wild assumption here, but I think the majority of the player base will actually spend most of their time in campaigns. They will likely be so invested in those campaigns, that they will be unlikely to spend more than 10 minutes a day in an EK before logging out, if that will even be possible. Each campaign will have a different subset of players involved in it. I'm not entirely sure how campaign lockouts and campaign division by population goes, but I'm sure you get the general idea of what I'm trying to say. I just have to wonder how bad the fragmenting will be. I guess it largely depends how many people end up playing the game, and how they evolve their systems to handle large or small amounts of players.
Maybe I'm just overthinking this, but it seems like a concern in my eyes.
One thing that matters to me the most in any MMORPG is that it feels like I'm always connected to a world that is full of people, teeming with life. This is why heavily instanced games, ghost town servers, etc never appeal to me. I believe this is also why many of the most popular servers in MMORPGs gain more popularity once people realize they are highly popular. Even when they have massive queues, you still see people rerolling to be part of the action. I realize that I am not like everyone else, so take my opinion as just one side of the whole.
Here's where my concern comes in. It seems like they want to give players the option to choose where they want to play. Be it one of the many campaigns, messing around in the EK, or both. I wouldn't be as concerned with this if campaigns weren't so integral to the core game play and weren't taking place over such an extended period of time. I've heard them use a month, or several, as an example, I believe. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, and I do like what they seem to be doing here, at least in theory. So you might have a handful of players who want to play in, and build up, their own Eternal Kingdom, or mess around in Kingdoms that they are involved with. This already fragments the community to a certain degree as there are no NPC owned central hubs. At least none that have been mentioned as far as I know. So these players will largely be relying on communities of people that have established their own EK economy for their daily activities. This might not be much of an issue as the players will most likely flock to the most populated and active EKs with the best rule sets. That's assuming there is enough of a player base who are more interested in the EK system than the campaigns, which is my next concern.
I am making a wild assumption here, but I think the majority of the player base will actually spend most of their time in campaigns. They will likely be so invested in those campaigns, that they will be unlikely to spend more than 10 minutes a day in an EK before logging out, if that will even be possible. Each campaign will have a different subset of players involved in it. I'm not entirely sure how campaign lockouts and campaign division by population goes, but I'm sure you get the general idea of what I'm trying to say. I just have to wonder how bad the fragmenting will be. I guess it largely depends how many people end up playing the game, and how they evolve their systems to handle large or small amounts of players.
Maybe I'm just overthinking this, but it seems like a concern in my eyes.
- 3,813
- 4,360
their reset mechanic was designed specifically to solve all the problems you mentioned regarding fragmentation (heavily instanced, ghost town servers, etc) and you are worried it will create it?
You are worried people will spend all their time playing the game and not sitting in the lobby?
I don't understand where you are coming from, at all, or why you are worried about that? if most of the players are playing the game then great!
I am actually worried about the opposite occuring. If most of the players decide to stay in the lobby, if it ends up similiar to the eve demographic where like 70% of the players never leave the EK, then what? I worry they will start to make concessions to these players. it's already started, with extremely limited PVE in the EKs.
it doesn't matter what it is. your "wilds" plots have 3 wolves that spawn once an hour, or whatever. Ok thats something you can kill and skin. that's resources you can harvest. it's crap at first. but if enough players are focused there (and their cash shop is all EK shit) that's where a lot of their income comes from. so ppl just start whining that they can't earn enough in EK vs the campaigns. and then maybe they start to make concessions. Ok you can start harvesting better quality stuff. more pve gets added to EKs. If you build enough EK shit (or spend enough in the cash shop) then the rare material starts to spawn in your EK. etc.
You are worried people will spend all their time playing the game and not sitting in the lobby?
I don't understand where you are coming from, at all, or why you are worried about that? if most of the players are playing the game then great!
I am actually worried about the opposite occuring. If most of the players decide to stay in the lobby, if it ends up similiar to the eve demographic where like 70% of the players never leave the EK, then what? I worry they will start to make concessions to these players. it's already started, with extremely limited PVE in the EKs.
it doesn't matter what it is. your "wilds" plots have 3 wolves that spawn once an hour, or whatever. Ok thats something you can kill and skin. that's resources you can harvest. it's crap at first. but if enough players are focused there (and their cash shop is all EK shit) that's where a lot of their income comes from. so ppl just start whining that they can't earn enough in EK vs the campaigns. and then maybe they start to make concessions. Ok you can start harvesting better quality stuff. more pve gets added to EKs. If you build enough EK shit (or spend enough in the cash shop) then the rare material starts to spawn in your EK. etc.
B_Mizzle
Avatar of War Slayer
- 7,944
- 15,933
I think what he's saying is maybe there will be too many servers/types + EK and player base will be fragmented.
- 3,813
- 4,360
yeah ok that's a stupid concern. This game is more like Eve's single server than any other game with hard defined "servers" which fragment playerbases. That fragmentation is permanent until they fail and the dev's start forcing server merges, players have no control over what servers get merged with what.
This game is "single" server. That server hosts EK + campaigns. When you are not playing the game (in the campaigns) you can move around to whatever EK you want. It's just housing instances. Everyone gets one, and most will be shit. Someone who throws a lot of cash in building up the most convenient EK will become Jita and everyone will go there for trading. super RP fags will all end up congregating in another one to do their brony cyber sexing. pvp guilds will throw all their resources into their best housing guy's EK and all of them will use their guild EK.
The number of campaign servers that exist at any point in time will only be the amount needed to support the player base. because they reset they always have players. If someone "wins" one to the point that it starts to be a ghost town then the campaign ends and a new campaign is created. You never meet someone irl who plays the game and then be like "what server are you on? oh that sucks i'm on a different one. no i'm way too invested in this server to reroll, oh well"
This game is "single" server. That server hosts EK + campaigns. When you are not playing the game (in the campaigns) you can move around to whatever EK you want. It's just housing instances. Everyone gets one, and most will be shit. Someone who throws a lot of cash in building up the most convenient EK will become Jita and everyone will go there for trading. super RP fags will all end up congregating in another one to do their brony cyber sexing. pvp guilds will throw all their resources into their best housing guy's EK and all of them will use their guild EK.
The number of campaign servers that exist at any point in time will only be the amount needed to support the player base. because they reset they always have players. If someone "wins" one to the point that it starts to be a ghost town then the campaign ends and a new campaign is created. You never meet someone irl who plays the game and then be like "what server are you on? oh that sucks i'm on a different one. no i'm way too invested in this server to reroll, oh well"
Jimbolini
Semi-pro Monopoly player
- 2,602
- 989
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 47,915
- 82,546
Did they decide/announce whether you can enter the EK once you enter a campaign? My perception/assumption is that you can't. You sit in the EK between campaigns, and once you enter the campaign that's it. That's how I'd prefer it anyway.
Ukerric
Bearded Ape
- 8,381
- 10,435
But your inventory won't. Basically, what you wear and hold remains in limbo while you're back in the EK, and what you move around the EK (restocking the vendors) will (presumably) fall back into your bank when you go back.