Navigation

    Fractured Forum

    • Login
    • Search
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Users
    • Groups
    1. Home
    2. Alexian
    3. Best
    • Profile
    • Following
    • Followers
    • Topics
    • Posts
    • Best
    • Groups

    Best posts made by Alexian

    • RE: What challenges should guild alliances face?

      @Farlander said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      The reason I'm posting in this thread is because I don't want to see friendly fire and collision. There are too many ways to exploit those game mechanics to grief. I haven't seen much in the way of resolving those problems other than "deal with it this is a hardcore game not meant for carebears". I will push back as well until I see the final product has ruled it out in the release as long as others argue for it.

      The argument that I need to go play some single player game is the same argument used by players for decades in mmos when they want the ability to kill other players willy nilly I will throw this at you, if you want to go grief and kill players at your heart's content go play a free server where like minded players have set up those rulesets for you. I'd suggest UO Outlands. They actually promote reds/greys or at the very least don't impost harsh penalties. I've paid for this game just like everyone. I have as much a right to try to mold it to my liking as anyone else.

      I also don't want to see some 13 yr old decide to go on a town killing spree because he's bored and jeopardize an alliance. Some of you are arguing against alliances and I do agree they can be no fun on the receiving end. I'd rather see caps than rules that make alliances near impossible to maintain.

      I want to clarify: no one here has said you “need” to play single player games. No one here even advised that you do so.

      What was said is that the only way to eliminate griefing or the possibility of griefing is to play games that don’t involve interaction with other players or allow PvP, which is indeed a fact.

      We both agree that griefing should be highly deterred by game mechanics. Where we differ is that I think the game should attempt to do this in a way that doesn’t needlessly betray its sandbox premise.

      You absolutely have the right to advocate for whatever changes you think would make Fractured a better game. No one is trying to suggest otherwise.

      But in fact, it was you who tried to prevent me from suggesting changes to the game:

      “Everyone is so worried about these large alliances taking over everything. If this is a problem for you just join one. Most large guilds don't have very strict rules. They can't because it is too hard to control and enforce them. Most just say "have fun". It's a source for grouping and finding others to do things with. If you don't like one group move to another. If you want to be in one with your friends only then make an alliance with a neighboring large guild.”

      That’s what you told me on the previous page in your first post in this thread.

      I respect your right to suggest changes or additions to the game even if I don’t agree with them. Please do the same for me. 🙂

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: Meridian - PvX/Syndesia - International - Diplomacy/Politics/Trade/Warfare

      Greetings to all; Meridian is eagerly anticipating the Winter/March test.
      Hope all of you are well! 🙂

      posted in Guild Recruitment
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: ETA on developer forum?

      Gonna echo what some of the others have said; part of the reason I upgraded from Governor to Creator was the opportunity to interact more exclusively with the dev team: receiving updates and progress reports as well as the chance to provide feedback. 🙂

      posted in Questions & Answers
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: What challenges should guild alliances face?

      @Roccandil said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      As I see it, you're arguing that because griefing can't be eliminated, there's no reason to not have friendly fire (or collisions). That's an all-or-nothing argument.

      Between statements like these and your refusal to acknowledge SBI's explicit admission that Albion's alliance system is widely criticized and the biggest topic of feedback, you "see" a lot of strange things. You may need your prescription adjusted! 😜

      My point here is that since griefing is inevitable regardless of whether or not friendly fire and collision mechanics are enabled, their inclusion should absolutely be considered if we can find workarounds for the most egregious griefing abuses.

      But simply dismissing these features out of hand "because griefing" is inappropriate. 🙂

      Simply saying, however, that griefing can't be eliminated is irrelevant to my argument. Perfect is the enemy of good enough, and you'll spend the first 30% of your time solving 70% of the problem, and the remaining 70% of your time solving the remaining 30% of the problem.

      Friendly fire and collisions are low-hanging fruit. They're in the first 70% of the problem, and not using them eliminates a great deal of potential griefing (as well as development time and cost).

      Again, this is risk management basics. 🙂

      The fly in your proverbial soup is that you've both arbitrarily and unilaterally constrained the goal. We agree that "perfect" is impossible and "good enough" is both desirable and attainable...

      ...And it may be possible to achieve "good enough" by enabling friendly fire and collision mechanics to preserve a hardcore sandbox element while also encoding mechanics into the game that heavily deter untrammeled griefing.

      In other words, you're potentially throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The only way citing "griefing" as a reason to not enable friendly fire and collision mechanics is justified is if the developers and community establish that these goals are mutually exclusive, which has not yet been proven. 😉

      Now, as regards your spat with @Gothix, I’m sorry to say he’s right: no one on OUR side of the debate has insisted that their “rules” apply to all three planets. I share his respect for various play styles and also don’t want to impose my views of PvP onto Arboreus.

      I reject your premise; at best, it's an assumption and a strawman. I'm planning to PvP on Syndesia and Tartaros (and Arboreus if need be), and I'm arguing for what I want to see in PvP.

      Farlander and I have just as much right as you to do that.

      Trying to manipulate us into the perception of being "PvE-only players wanting to impose PvE everywhere", well, let's just say, that's not true. I hope that wasn't deliberate.

      Well, actually, no:

      @Roccandil said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      @Gothix said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      @Roccandil said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      Wow, way to twist what Farlander said! You've definitely lost rep with me. 😞

      What else to say to a person that's demanding an entire game to be made how he likes? All 3 planets. Completely disregarding (may as well say disrespecting) all other players that want to play this game.

      Dude, that's -you-. If his posts are a demand to make the entire game his way, so are yours.

      Rather, I just see another player with an opinion, to which he is entitled. In no way do I see his posts as you see them.

      Right here, you insist that @Gothix - not you or @Farlander - is the one demanding "an entire game to be made his way."

      That's either a poor attempt at revisionist history or you're deeply confused about the flow of conversation. 😉

      Gothix, @Bardikens, and myself recognize that Fractured will feature three different planets designed for three different styles of play. We have all three repeatedly stated we don't care what happens to Arboreus and that our proposals don't apply to it, because we recognize some players wouldn't enjoy the mechanics we're endorsing. What we're recommending is for arguably Syndesia and certainly Tartaros. We're trying to accomodate as many different people as possible.

      You are insisting that your personal preferences be applied to all three planets because you want to PvP on both, despite the fact that all three planets were designed conceptually with three different play styles in mind.

      Your argument in this thread and your argument alone offers no regard for the play style of others and accommodates only those players who think like you. 😕

      And I'll happily refer you to back to your own quotes to remind you. 😄

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: Meridian - PvX/Syndesia - International - Diplomacy/Politics/Trade/Warfare

      @OlivePit Howdy. @Razvan, per usual, nailed it.

      We have a Guilded server with channels mostly reserved for members.

      I prefer to talk to potential recruits and interested players one on one. It's more personal, more direct, and I can make sure all your questions/concerns are answered/addressed.

      Check your DMs for a response from me. 🙂

      posted in Guild Recruitment
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: Alpha 2

      @Farlander Oh yeah; SC is still definitely a thing! Some pretty cool updates according to @Bardikens!

      posted in Questions & Answers
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: What challenges should guild alliances face?

      Been away from my desktop for almost the entire weekend, so I didn't wanna get into any responses that required formatting.

      First and foremost, kudos to @Roccandil for finding time in between alternatively chastising @Gothix for his rudeness/then flaming him outright to make a series of insightful suggestions on one of the previous pages. Logistics and War of the Gods in particular would be excellent factors in challenging zerg guilds and alliances from projecting power casually.

      Well done, Scarecrow! 😄

      @Xzoviac said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      Just wanna put this out there, I like griefing, I think it's part of pvp games, i have solo griefed big guilds before that like to harass people and picked off there shitty low level members, to stop em growing, griefing can be useful physiologic warfare and gorilla tactics forcing people to pk you then use the town guards as your allies, this is all fine.

      Using game mechanics against people tricking people in to ganks Is all fine

      stealing mobs jumping on drops, scummy (if they are not already your enemy ) but again all fine.

      I dont think gms should monitor player behaviour even swearing and abusing, add a chat block function, and add a optional swear filter switch on and off.

      The only things that should be moderated are illigal behaviours.
      Scamming, cheating, hacking, duping

      I personally loathe untrammeled griefing because I'd rather not see it drive away prospective players and kill the game, as has often happened in other MMOs. But I also believe assuming the role of a brigand, highwayman, murderer, etc. is part of the sandbox experience and can be a source of content creation.

      But I think Fractured has an obligation to implement mechanics that deter mass griefing. You should be able to do it... but there should be consequences that make you think twice. 🤔

      (This is similar to how I feel about zerg guilds and alliances. Fractured should allow for powerful empires and confederations to operate... but there should be consequences and challenges that make you think twice before attempting to rule ze world!)

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: Meridian - PvX/Syndesia - International - Diplomacy/Politics/Trade/Warfare

      Meridian's official participation in the 2021 Spring Alpha test is now concluded; thanks to all those who made it a fun and successful enterprise.

      Please see our official feedback thread for our take on this test; open debate and discussion are encouraged!

      Additionally, I've reworked this thread to better convey @Bardikens' vision for Meridian. 🙂

      Solo players, small groups, and individual guilds who wish to join Meridian and our capital, Zenith, should read this thread and take a look at Zenith's own.

      posted in Guild Recruitment
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: Enchanting crafting materials?

      @Dariusacmar To be fair, the dev team has been at an extremely important and high profile games conference. Give 'em a few more days. 😄

      posted in Questions & Answers
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: What challenges should guild alliances face?

      @Gothix said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      If alliance members aren't immune to friendly fire, then you should simply watch where you are shooting your AoEs at, specially if alliance member is low on HP. That's part of the tactics and awareness skills. If some alliance member is trying to deliberately go into your shooting zone (for whatever reason), then use diplomatic channels to request allied guild kick him for punishment, or break alliance with that guild if that other guild doesn't care about it's members behavior.

      It's called social mechanics.

      Game should not hand hold people and give them safety net against "bad things" happening to them (death, karma loss, whatever). People should be aware of their surroundings and act accordingly.

      If some player deliberately tries to stand where you are shooting at then use other social means at your disposal to deal with him. For example, warn other people around about him and have ruling guilds order all guards to attack him on sight, and forbid NPCs to trade him etc.

      That said, there should be personal options for ruling guilds to make list specific people that guards should consider targets (regardless of those players alignment or guild affiliation). Same for NPC interactions.

      Outright disabling all friendly fire is definitely not a solution. That would be like completely disabling all in game chat for everyone because some players are going around insulting people...

      I agree with all of this.

      Enabled friendly fire and collision mechanics will force all guilds, armies, battalions, zergs, etc. of varying size that they need to be tactical about how, when, and where they deploy their assets. It will require them to carefully consider the terrain in ways that disabled friendly fire doesn't; they'd need to be careful not to let themselves be drawn into situations where their numbers are a hindrance. It's realistic, it demands greater tactics, and it might minimize the extent to which zergs can just blindly steamroll the opposition! 🙂

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: Meridian - PvX/Syndesia - International - Diplomacy/Politics/Trade/Warfare

      Hope everyone is well; Meridian looks forward to the Fall 2021 test. 🙂

      posted in Guild Recruitment
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: What challenges should guild alliances face?

      @Gothix said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      @Alexian said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      Enabled friendly fire and collision mechanics will force all guilds, armies, battalions, zergs, etc. of varying size that they need to be tactical about how, when, and where they deploy their assets. It will require them to carefully consider the terrain in ways that disabled friendly fire doesn't; they'd need to be careful not to let themselves be drawn into situations where their numbers are a hindrance. It's realistic, it demands greater tactics, and it might minimize the extent to which zergs can just blindly steamroll the opposition! 🙂

      Exactly. And if there is some alliance player deliberately going into your line of fire constantly, then use social mechanics to punish his behavior. Get him kicked out of alliance, have your town guards place him on "attack on sight list", have NPCs in your towns refuse to trade him. Have other people around you remember him and punish him by full extend of social methods.

      Which, in turn, would add more dimension to inter-guild diplomacy and alliances.

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: Haven't pledged? Want to upgrade, but not sure yet? Tell us why!

      @pushcart said in Haven't pledged? Want to upgrade, but not sure yet? Tell us why!:

      Lack of communication. We didn't get any contact pills or update what's going on since alpha test 2. I personally think it's a big nono since everyone is afraid of Kickstarter game to fail or disappear. Please even update saying u guys are going to vacation or anything to keep ppl knowing what's going on. When ppl don't know wat's going on, ppl just not going to put more money in it.

      I just sank $1500 into Fractured, purchasing first the Governor's pack and then the Creator's.

      This is the first time I've ever "pledged' or "backed" a game prior to its full release, so I'm in uncharted territory personally.

      And as someone who suffers from chronic buyer's remorse, I can't help but feel I've taken an enormous risk.

      So my hope to @Prometheus, @Specter, and @Znirf is that they'll vindicate the community's faith with regular updates. Specter assured me that a content pill is coming this week. 🙂

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: Opinion on Monsters after the alpha

      Good thread and good question.

      Even speaking as someone who plays MMORPG for guilds/PvP/politics, I fully recognize that PvE is almost always the lifeblood of an MMO: plenty of PvE folks never PvP, but almost all PvP folks also PvE.

      I personally see PvE as largely a means to an end: it provides a more regular kind of flagpole for guilds to rally around since PvP generally requires far more effort and organization.

      But that said, you’re right that Fractured will need a dynamic and engaging PvE system lest it hemorrhage players.

      Maybe some sort of raid/World Boss system needs to be implemented to spice things up?

      I’m not sure. Paging @Bardikens!

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: Haven't pledged? Want to upgrade, but not sure yet? Tell us why!

      @kellewic said in Haven't pledged? Want to upgrade, but not sure yet? Tell us why!:

      @pushcart said in Haven't pledged? Want to upgrade, but not sure yet? Tell us why!:

      Lack of communication. We didn't get any contact pills or update what's going on since alpha test 2. I personally think it's a big nono since everyone is afraid of Kickstarter game to fail or disappear. Please even update saying u guys are going to vacation or anything to keep ppl knowing what's going on. When ppl don't know wat's going on, ppl just not going to put more money in it.

      Since @Znirf joined, I've been seeing these about every 2 weeks except when Alpha1 T2 was running, but one did come out right about 2 weeks after the test ended. We'll see if it continues but it's been more often.

      And we as pledge backers will continue to push and encourage updates/outreach from the community managers and developers. 😄

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: What challenges should guild alliances face?

      I’m open to a few hard mechanical caps, but I share @Gothix’s view that what would be better is strong mechanical and social deterrents.

      In Albion, large guilds sidestep the member cap by creating overflow guilds. Oftentimes the overflow guild shares the same name as the first guild but it has a 2 on it. 🤣

      We don’t wanna make it impossible for larger guilds to exist and function, we just wanna make sure that they’re sufficiently challenged so that they can’t just sweep the board as they did in Albion and other games.

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: What challenges should guild alliances face?

      @Xzoviac said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      I think a simple way to stop zergs, the more people bunched together the more likely a horror will spawn that attacks everyone in its path, killiable but unpredictable jumpy smashy hard to lure, and will fight big clumps of people, will add a bit of chaos to guild vs guild pvp

      Almost like the Thresher Maw from Mass Effect or some such.

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: What challenges should guild alliances face?

      @Gothix said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      @Jetah said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      i also think the whole isometric view will be a problem for zergs too. Only so many people can fit on a screen, thus only so many can attack an object. then add in friendly fire with no-clip with line of sight projectiles hitting the nearest object, it'll be pretty hard to blob things.

      Player collision and friendly fire are indeed the most efficient ways to deter zerging.

      Yep. Imagine a scenario where a battle is being waged between two guilds, one smaller than the other, but the smaller guild is trying to hold a bridge or choke point and the larger guild has to find a way to breach it. Player collisions and friendly fire would make such tactical scenarios much more dynamic and exciting since both parties would have to be very, very judicious in their troop configuration, deployment, and management of the terrain.

      As opposed to just being able to literally run right through the enemy and haul ass towards the target. 😂

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: What challenges should guild alliances face?

      @Jairone said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      Logistic, enemy alliances, events, politics, and all that.

      There's always the potential for big battles so long as the technology can support it... but the best way to have challenges affect such a group is through the all too neglected parts of games. Droughts, floods, goods transport, and so on can all be things that make challenges for people in game, and the large a group the more they would have to deal with such issues.

      Thanks for your contributions to the thread! 😄

      Those of us who support a politically dynamic Fractured agree with you: logistics should play a significant role in undermining casual power projection by guilds and alliances. It should be possible but extremely challenging for any entity to project and maintain power, especially across large distances.

      Since Fractured is incorporating energy and hunger mechanics into the game, they will hopefully play crucial factors in a would-be conqueror's calculus.

      @Jairone said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      @Roccandil I disagree with the dominant group thing. Most games not only have them with numerical advantages (which is easy to see, and historically accurate, but makes for a terrible balance in games like this) but offer increased rewards for the results often further skewing the next results.

      Put on a level field, things often change. Where some of the players might indeed be very good, the same is likely true of those who they were dominating with those advantages. In fact, those who were being dominated are likely as good or better on average, because they have faced hardships forcing them to attempt to improve.

      That all is an aside to the entire debate on zergs otherwise, though. Creating good systems that don't punish players within games due to such advantages is a tough thing. At least for games with less vertical power curve we have more limited imbalances to address. 🙂

      You have the right of it! 😉

      As many of us have said in this thread, numbers (and greater numbers) should absolutely be an advantage in most situations. Though again, as was the case in the real world, there are military scenarios in which an army's greater numbers can prove to be a hindrance to them based on terrain and logistics.

      @Gothix said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      @Roccandil said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

      Hmm. I don't think friendly fire would reduce zerging (see below), nor is that my goal.

      Your goal is not to reduce zerging? Well... i guess that explains a lot... lol

      Personally i prefer where skills determine the outcome of the battles and not who brings 1000 players vs 150.

      Skill and numbers should both be factors in an army's success or failure. Guilds and alliances should have the opportunity to bring greater numbers to bear against their enemy if they have that advantage, but there should be realistic costs and challenges to such an effort.

      And adding player collision mechanics and enabling friendly fire could add additional factors into the field of battle, requiring more tactical deployment of forces, enabling scenarios in which smaller armies could use their enemies' greater numbers against them, and creating an altogether more interesting, dynamic, and unpredictable war framework.

      (Though, granted - all that we suggested does require much greater skill, patience, and tactical acumen than what is needed to simply drown your enemy in a chaotic zerg and spamming AOEs with abandon. 😉 )

      All in all, it seems that most people who've posted in this thread support examination and possible implementation of the proposals discussed, which is good. I'm pleased to see that so many players support ideas that will make the game more challenging and exciting for guilds and alliances and who wish to avoid the many pitfalls of Albion Online's controversial and highly criticized set-up that SBI is still struggling to correct after 2 years. 😄

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • RE: [Poll] City Reputation System

      Interesting suggestion, @Gothix! It would definitely serve as a social mechanic that incentivizes skill and a positive reputation. (Which should help deter ganking, if karma is involved.)

      @Jetah said in [Poll] City Reputation System:

      i thought they said there were limited NPCs and no grinding. wouldn't rep require NPCs and grinding?

      How so?

      posted in Discussions & Feedback
      Alexian
      Alexian
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
    • 5 / 7