Crowfall

Tearofsoul · Feb 2, 2015

So this is basiclly the overview, you have Eternal Kingdoms, and 4 campaign worlds in this case, each has different rulesets, in some you can bring you gears, in some, you can't.

kaid · Feb 2, 2015

It sounds like if you are starting fresh in the spring era of a campaign than resources are going to be very common and plentiful so gearing up your fresh mostly naked folks probably won't take to long. If you join one in a later era of the campaign join up with a guild and it will be in their interests to gear you up so you can lend might to their cause.

Draegan_sl · Feb 2, 2015

If they are going to be big on crafters, there is going to have to be a place where crafters can sell their shit. I would have to imagine there will be marketplaces of some sort. If they don't, and the game gets a decent size audience, you'll just see third party sites opening up to sell stuff.

Big Flex · Feb 2, 2015

now don't fuck up combat.

p.s. we're going dregs bros.

Byr · Feb 2, 2015

Just still thinking on it, im kind of disappointed the resets are based on time. Progression in the game should be controlled by players not some arbitrary clock. Set win conditions for when a guild/alliance reaches certain goals. 50% of cities, so and so resources. We really dont know enough about the game to know what the goals should be but they should be met by players damnit.

Big Flex · Feb 2, 2015

Byr_sl said:
Just still thinking on it, im kind of disappointed the resets are based on time. Progression in the game should be controlled by players not some arbitrary clock. Set win conditions for when a guild/alliance reaches certain goals. 50% of cities, so and so resources. We really dont know enough about the game to know what the goals should be but they should be met by players damnit.

It is. There is win conditions which differ by rule set said conditions can take different periods of time. So maybe Tuco and PRX has to capture all of the following Keeps or whatever before phase III hits, etc

Even if it was time oriented, it would make it even more frantic, euro timezone poopsocking galore, calling in sick to work, child neglect, would all occur.

i have the weirdest boner right now.

Byr · Feb 2, 2015

Big Flex_sl said:
It is. There is win conditions which differ by rule set said conditions can take different periods of time. So maybe Tuco and PRX has to capture all of the following Keeps or whatever before phase III hits, etc

not in the outline that was posted there isnt.

Caliane · Feb 2, 2015

Bruman_sl said:
"Crowfall isn?t an MMO with a ?battle ground? strapped to the end of the level treadmill. Crowfall isn?t a three-way tug of war that never resets."

Lawl, why don't they just say "Fuck you WoW, Fuck you GW2", haha.

Still though, interesting idea.

.... it doesn't sound all that dissimilar to me..

only difference is the wvw battleground apparently evolves over time. which would be cool in the other games. All that talk about how other games have to have server resets. "so we solved it by having server resets!" dude what.
And those other games have persistent PVE worlds tied to their reseting PVP worlds, which is bad. so we solved THAT be attaching a persistent pve world to our reseting PVP campaign!

Striped of resources apparently is the only real difference. but few games have been using a disposable itemization system at all lately.

Lasch · Feb 2, 2015

Byr_sl said:
id disagree because even if you gear up faster youll still lose when the other group, made for PvP, get geared and sieges your city.

I wasn't thinking the entire guild should be designed for pve. Only that some groups (4-6, whatever groups will be) pick classes/specs that will let them gear up and others asap. And conversely a group of specs that are not gear reliant just form roving pks to slow others from acquiring said gear.

But yes, taking it a ln additional step, when "the best pvp spec when geared" gets discovered, getting said group into the best geae will be cog A, with cog B being a group designed to hamstring them long enough for opposing faction's A cog team.

I am terrible at expressing my thoughts,and this was a quick jumble of thoughts I had about the constant gear wipes on certain servers. Just excited that the meta for servers will be shifting and updating is what I like the most in the concept

Tuco · Feb 2, 2015

Bruman_sl said:
This is going to be a fun 2-3 years of people bitterly arguing over a game that doesn't exist yet, then when it's released for everyone to post for 1-2 months about why it's failing and how it didn't live up to expectations, then be basically dead by month 3.

Ya know, like every MMO released in the past, what 5-7 years?

Sure is fun though

Don't forget the people like me, who see games on the horizon, generally ignore them, then when they come out they play them for months.

The initial design sounds great and it sounds like they're focused on combining the best parts of GW2 and Shadowbane. There's a few key problems they'll have to surmount:
1. Most 'grinding' in MMOs are boring as shit. We only find spawn camping lguk fun because we get a burst of endorphines when we get that phat fbss after sitting on our ass all day. The same is true for building castles. I was part of the group who had the first city in SB because we had many groups of people farming gold off boring ass mobs for incredible amounts of hours every day. We had the first keep in AoC for the same reason. One guy would just smoke a bowl and cycle mining nodes for literally a day straight. In ArcheAge we have arguably the strongest castle in the game and the stone was brought on the backs of many hours of boring-ass-mining. Why do we do all that? Because we want a castle damn it. It's not fun, it sucks, but we have a castle. I can tell you that few people who spent many sleepless nights farming to make that castle would sign up a second time to make another castle just so we could have that 'land rush' again.

GW2 I think was a great pioneer in that regard and it sounds like Crowfall wants to copy it. You had NPC run supply camps that would generate supply, then you had NPC mules (called dolyaks) that would slowly move the supply over to forts. Players could then use that supply to reinforce the keep, repair it etc. Players could go raise supply camps or the dolyaks.

I think this idea should be extended to an open world and extended further. Players should manage, invest and defend these supply camps but not operate them. The article clearly states that's their vision, but implementing it is hard.

2. When players care about the outcome of a campaign more than playing it (Ex: In competitive GW2 matches rather than ESO campaigns), the outcome of a campaign tends to be determined very quickly because one side will get an advantage, the 'casuals' on one side will get high morale and they'll start to get a numbers advantage because the 'casuals' on the other side will lose morale. Amusingly enough, we'd often come in hard for the first 3 days of a fight, whip our enemies then just take the next 4 days off and the non-hardcore pop on our side would still get the victory. Saying, "The losers will go back to the drawing board to figure out how to win the next campaign" sounds good, but when you lose a campaign then get rematched with the same people who just proved they have some 400 hardcore PVPers in the Oceanic and European time zone that will wreck you while you sleep and work, it's not really a fresh start.

GW2 addressed this problem with an ELO matching system and a three way fight. Both of these would be hard requirements for the campaigns. But I think it could be improved on, I won't say how until I know more about Crowfall, but it involves giving incentive to 2nd and 3rd place folks to team up with each other. In GW2 often the #1 guy and #3 guy would team up on #2 (Because #1 would strategically target #2 and #3 were pussies), or #1 and #2 team up on #3 (Because #1 and #2 were both pussies who wanted an easy fight).

Caliane · Feb 2, 2015

Byr_sl said:
Just still thinking on it, im kind of disappointed the resets are based on time. Progression in the game should be controlled by players not some arbitrary clock. Set win conditions for when a guild/alliance reaches certain goals. 50% of cities, so and so resources. We really dont know enough about the game to know what the goals should be but they should be met by players damnit.

hopefully when they say time, they don't mean a literal clock. but instead perhaps limited resources.

When we run out of vespene gas, the world starts exploding or something. Putting up a giant, Sudden death scenario.

Valderen · Feb 2, 2015

I'm not huge on PVP, but I enjoy it once in a while. I did some in GW2, ArcheAge or even WoW arena and Battleground. It's not my preferred play-style. Just a change of pace once in a while.

Now, that's out of the way, I am very intrigued by this. Even if it ends up being something I don't enjoy...hats off just for trying something different, we need more of that.

Big Flex · Feb 2, 2015

Just a few things which caught my eye

One of the key elements of strategy games is they have awin conditionfollowed by a board reset. You start the game, you play the game,someone wins. You reset the board and start a new game.

Win condition?

hey join the Campaigns to scavenge the Dying Worlds forrelics, resources and glory.

Possible phat lewt?

Phase 1 is Spring. The Campaign map is hidden by fog of war. You are dropped (typically naked) into an unknown, deadly environment. This world is filled with the ruins of ancient castles, abandoned mines and haunted villages - which you have to explore to scavenge for weapons, tools and the resources to start building fortifications.
Phase 2 is Summer. The Hunger starts to infect the creatures.Resources become scarce.Your team claims an abandoned quarry and must fight to keep it. You use the stone to build an ancient keep, to use it as staging areas to attack their neighbors.
Phase 3 is Fall. Thecreatures become more deadlyas the Hunger takes hold. Resources are heavily contested andtransporting them is fraught with peril.Your guild frantically builds a wall around your city, as the nature of conflict shifts from smaller skirmishes to siege warfare.
Phase 4 is Winter. The environment is brutal.Warmth is hard to come by. Your kingdoms grows in strength;your neighbors falter and you demand that they swear fealty or face complete loss of the Campaign. Instead, a handful of smaller kingdoms choose to band together against you.
Phase 5 is Victory and Defeat. The World is destroyed in a cataclysmic event as the Campaign comes to an end. Your Kingdom emerges victorious, and you return to the Eternal Kingdoms toenjoy the spoils of war. Your adversaries head home, too -- to lick their wounds.

Finite resource nodes? Again, win/loss conditions not based upon time elapsed?

Bruman · Feb 2, 2015

I wonder how (if at all) a catchup system like Mario Kart would work in a game like this.

"What, some guy is crazy powerful and noone can stop him now? Game has entered the no-fun zone? Time to make the losers find a lot more blue shells dropping next to those bear asses!"

Vitality · Feb 2, 2015

I wonder what type of permanence they're offering aside from character progression after a campaign ends.

Something as simple as a leaderboard would go a long way for me there.

Big Flex · Feb 2, 2015

Vitality_sl said:
I wonder what type of permanence they're offering aside from character progression after a campaign ends.

Something as simple as a leaderboard would go a long way for me there.

Apparently there is trophies and shit, so i don't think something like a leader-board is too far off

Vitality · Feb 2, 2015

If they add a guild leaderboard you can sign Tuco up for this one.

Tuco · Feb 2, 2015

The more tracking of accomplishments for players and guilds the better, and often it's just a matter of presenting information already stored in the game's database.

Mr Creed · Feb 2, 2015

Depending on the length of the campaign it doesnt sound THAT different from GW2 at least for the RvR/GvG stages. You collect points and highest points win. If the win condition is time, all available points being collected or something else is not that different, because it all hinges in the same situation, like Tuco described. You dominate the early game, at least some part of the opposition will lose hope, and you snowball from there. Someone is always going to be behind, and the mere fact that the situation will solve itself if they wait probably lures them into just giving up in many cases. Doesnt apply to everyone and all campaigns obviously - I had some good reads in threads here about PRX and their opposition. But just as many about Player vs Wall match-ups that were were over after the first weekend. Based on that I think the longer the campaign the better.

Vitality · Feb 2, 2015

Idk, if they're promising dynamic map layouts with player construction and world interaction GW2 doesn't really compare at all. Especially if they add meaningful PVE into the mix with mobs getting harder and harder.

Crowfall

Ancient MMO noob

Blackwing Lair Raider

2 Minutes Hate

Fitness Fascist

Ahn'Qiraj Raider

Fitness Fascist

Ahn'Qiraj Raider

Avatar of War Slayer

Trakanon Raider

I got Tuco'd!

Avatar of War Slayer

Space Pirate

Fitness Fascist

Golden Squire

ＨＵＳＴＬＥ

Fitness Fascist

ＨＵＳＴＬＥ

I got Tuco'd!

Too old for this shit

ＨＵＳＴＬＥ