PDA

View Full Version : What would make you buy/resub to DFO?



bartillo
11-02-2009, 02:58
Well thats a good question, those of us in the non sub forums what do you think, what feature or change would make you buy darkfall in a instant?

for me it is this:

1) UO style hard cap

2) Full local banking, caravaning, trade routes, strict weight system, pack mules

3) player shops with npc vendors (stalls you can set up in player cities not a npc thats in your house like is going to be in the expac)

4) real animal taming, you shouldnt use grass to make a mount you should tame creatures in the wild like UO.

5) ARAC should have a strict penalty, the lore is ruined.. having the correct racially aligned clans should give bonuses so we can have race wars, if a huge guild wants to have all races their should be a penalty against it in some way.

6) Thievery skills.. lockpicking, pickpocketing, stealth, etc..

Well those are the main things id like to see to make darkfall a great game.

Strondomir
11-02-2009, 03:09
Well thats a good question, those of us in the non sub forums what do you think, what feature or change would make you buy darkfall in a instant?

for me it is this:

5) ARAC should have a strict penalty, the lore is ruined.. having the correct racially aligned clans should give bonuses so we can have race wars, if a huge guild wants to have all races their should be a penalty against it in some way.

Well those are the main things id like to see to make darkfall a great game.

I agree with #5. They should NOT have ARAC clans. That's the biggest problem. They should also have political and geographical boundaries. It's just a mess as it is right now. If they do those things, maybe there would be some actual reason for all of the fighting. Right now it's just a big Deathmatch server with an extremely large map in my opinion. With the current populations and people leaving the game because they didn't enjoy the experience, it just makes it harder and harder to enjoy the game.
I'd guess it's playstyle or something that makes Darkfall enjoyable to some and boring to others. Something has to be done to fix this one problem.

Zaffax
11-02-2009, 03:16
I agree with #5. They should NOT have ARAC clans. That's the biggest problem. They should also have political and geographical boundaries. It's just a mess as it is right now. If they do those things, maybe there would be some actual reason for all of the fighting. Right now it's just a big Deathmatch server with an extremely large map in my opinion. With the current populations and people leaving the game because they didn't enjoy the experience, it just makes it harder and harder to enjoy the game.
I'd guess it's playstyle or something that makes Darkfall enjoyable to some and boring to others. Something has to be done to fix this one problem.

It is too late too make ARAC guild penalties. Entire clans/alliances would be destroyed by this.

Ragnarok Vanir
11-02-2009, 03:17
I agree with #5. They should NOT have ARAC clans. That's the biggest problem. They should also have political and geographical boundaries. It's just a mess as it is right now. If they do those things, maybe there would be some actual reason for all of the fighting. Right now it's just a big Deathmatch server with an extremely large map in my opinion. With the current populations and people leaving the game because they didn't enjoy the experience, it just makes it harder and harder to enjoy the game.
I'd guess it's playstyle or something that makes Darkfall enjoyable to some and boring to others. Something has to be done to fix this one problem.

There has always been the option to create clans that are racially aligned. ARAC clans are already at a disadvantage as their memberships can't freely intermingle in NPC cities. I wouldn't say ARAC clans have any advantage at all.

There has also been racially aligned clans and alliances before, and there are more forming now. While I agree race war incentives would be nice, I don't think penalizing the hundreds of people currently playing in ARAC clans is the right thing to do.

Corpsepoker
11-02-2009, 03:19
It is too late too make ARAC guild penalties. Entire clans/alliances would be destroyed by this.



Everyone also said it was too late to put cool downs on spells..

Yeah.

I don't think it's too late to put penalties down on ARAC's.


No hate intended.

empa
11-02-2009, 03:19
the fact that theres no other mmo worth playing ?

splixx
11-02-2009, 03:21
It's still fun for some of us?

For me there was no suprise when the first wave of people quit after losing their cities. It's just not a game for everyone. What I can't understand is why they still stick around on the forums and bitch.

Zaffax
11-02-2009, 03:25
Everyone also said it was too late to put cool downs on spells..

Yeah.

I don't think it's too late to put penalties down on ARAC's.


No hate intended.

None taken. However, combat isnt something that clans are dependent upon. A clan wont dissolve because of an extra tick of dmg on a spell. ARAC penalties are related to clans however as the clan itself becomes a source of issue. I'm not saying it can't be done but understand that a large segment of the CURRENT darkfall community WILL quit the game.

wormw00d
11-02-2009, 03:59
3 and maybe 4, the rest of that shit can go in the toilet w/ the other turds.

xpiher
11-02-2009, 04:03
Well thats a good question, those of us in the non sub forums what do you think, what feature or change would make you buy darkfall in a instant?

for me it is this:

1) UO style hard cap

2) Full local banking, caravaning, trade routes, strict weight system, pack mules

3) player shops with npc vendors (stalls you can set up in player cities not a npc thats in your house like is going to be in the expac)

4) real animal taming, you shouldnt use grass to make a mount you should tame creatures in the wild like UO.

5) ARAC should have a strict penalty, the lore is ruined.. having the correct racially aligned clans should give bonuses so we can have race wars, if a huge guild wants to have all races their should be a penalty against it in some way.

6) Thievery skills.. lockpicking, pickpocketing, stealth, etc..

Well those are the main things id like to see to make darkfall a great game.

Your game already exist its called MO. See you over there while i play this game for better PvP.

The lore isn't ruined by ARAC clans, the lore supports ARAC clans and so does the game structure (chaos cities). Whats missing from the game is RvR elements to go along with it.

Dave_sp!
11-02-2009, 04:03
1 2 and 5, without them the game lacks any depth

oh, and something similar to 3

xpiher
11-02-2009, 04:05
If you agree with the OP go then go play MO. K?

EZGanKer
11-02-2009, 04:08
:) i am subbed

Keno
11-02-2009, 04:10
I just hope that the ship combat and sea life will really click after the expansion. Give us shit to do with ships :P

Strondomir
11-02-2009, 04:13
If you agree with the OP go then go play MO. K?

/RANT ON
Why do you do that xpiher? Why suggest another game when someone is just wanting Darkfall to be improved? Maybe not on all points, but hey, maybe some of them may lead to a better experience for everyone.
I don't want to suggest a different game to someone who wants Darkfall to have some changes.
I don't like that. Remember, it's everyone that plays Darkfall, not just you.
These suggestions encompass everyone. There are a lot of games out there to play, and yes, some offer different things. Darkfall IS different, but really does need improvement, you and I both know this.
My point of view isn't the same as a lot of people, but it still is mine. I would think we actually want people to play, not throw them to the competition.
/RANT OFF

xpiher
11-02-2009, 04:20
/RANT ON
Why do you do that xpiher? Why suggest another game when someone is just wanting Darkfall to be improved? Maybe not on all points, but hey, maybe some of them may lead to a better experience for everyone.
I don't want to suggest a different game to someone who wants Darkfall to have some changes.
I don't like that. Remember, it's everyone that plays Darkfall, not just you.
These suggestions encompass everyone. There are a lot of games out there to play, and yes, some offer different things. Darkfall IS different, but really does need improvement, you and I both know this.
My point of view isn't the same as a lot of people, but it still is mine. I would think we actually want people to play, not throw them to the competition.
/RANT OFF

I say that because the above suggestions aren't in darkfall's philosphy. Real taming? The devs don't want the game to be PvEvP. Pick pocketing? The devs don't want loot to be determined by a dice roll. Hard cap? Devs already said they want additional options not restrictions. Same could be said about ARAC clans.

The ideas I do agree with are full local banking and vendors. Vendors are being added.

Thats why I said go play MO. It already has what you want minus the ARAC penalities since everyone in that game is either red or blue.

Dragoon
11-02-2009, 04:28
Pick pocketing is retarded, taming would be cool for catching mounts and other things but no animals that help you fight, and a hardcap isn't ideal but the ONLY reason I would support it is because the devs don't appear to know how to balance PvP.

Strondomir
11-02-2009, 04:31
I say that because the above suggestions aren't in darkfall's philosphy. Real taming? The devs don't want the game to be PvEvP. Pick pocketing? The devs don't want loot to be determined by a dice roll. Hard cap? Devs already said they want additional options not restrictions. Same could be said about ARAC clans.

The ideas I do agree with are full local banking and vendors. Vendors are being added.

Thats why I said go play MO. It already has what you want minus the ARAC penalities since everyone in that game is either red or blue.

I guess all your knowledge belong to me! Why don't you just say what you mean to say? You AGREED with the Vendor/Banking idea. You may not agree with some of the others, but isn't that what we are talking about? You know... uh Darkfall?

I just think having a positive input rather than a negative "Go play XX" game has to stop. That's what I am saying.

drinkingjam
11-02-2009, 04:35
I'd re-sub to Darkfall if someone paid for me.

Simple as.

pvperLFC
11-02-2009, 04:41
caravans, full(or very near) local banking, i dunno some sort of content the pvp/grind skillsNstats loop can only last so long(maybe a huge revamp of the boats and warhulks thing so they are useful and worth the money), new NON-TRANSFER server(once the population allows, of course) the grind is fine as long as i can do it at generally the same pace as everyone else.

DeManiac
11-02-2009, 04:42
I still pay my account. But don't play frequently, mostly due to my hopes that they will fix thing, and because I don't have any other MMO to play atm instead of this.
So forumfall and brainstorming is my refuge to make my days feel better :)


What I'd like to see for me to truly enjoy this game and play it for as long as I've played allot of other games(I'm very dedicated once a game gets me).

That is.

Changed Alignment system, a system that is not carebearish, aka you don't have to worry of getting killed, you can totally rely on guarding, stand AFK in a city without a hesitation etc, no that's not what I'm looking for.

What I want, that is a alignment system that doesn't show black or white.
Blue or Red, but no color in-between, and the only thing that defines a person white rather then black is the people he come across on his journeys.
Because in darkfall, the color don't mater in other then convenience.
"Ok I'm red, I can't move to that trader, where to meet hmm", "I'm red, I'll have to avoid that town there".

It's really not a mater of choice if you take a fight or not versus a blue player, either you do, or you die.
There is no honor, there is no real choice, it's do or die.
And that's what I hate most about this game, the only ones you can be sure not to get attacked by are those in your clan and alliance, if they do, it's either a prank or a backstabb.


If they fix this, and make it truly worth it to stay blue, and make fixes so that being blue and changing to red can't happen by accident, or that you won't have to take stupid choices like those fighting your own kind over a mine or stuff, because they are still considered blue while doing so.

I mean, you get a kill if you "kill" them, and there is no real other way to persuade them to give you their items, to avoid being killed, being killed is all about what you wear, so it's a struggle of life or death at all times.



If we take Eve for example, you have Implants making it costy to die, you have to make a new clone, and the clone you have might be a bad one, thus you lose training.
What you lose in Darkfall, that's what you have on you, thus being "ganked" doesn't mater.
And taking someone to the position of gank, ain't possible without getting the penalty.


Until they fix this issue, with death not being really something to worry about other then your gear, and being blue ain't worth it enough, and being red happens to easy, with no real though behind it.
Until then, this game ain't gonna be as fun as it could be!!

But I sure hope, it will be one day, and I sure hope they fix that damn Anisotropy and Anti-Aliasing so I don't have to look at those ugly ass textures whenever I move around.

Guess I just had to get it out ;)

Signus
11-02-2009, 04:57
Well thats a good question, those of us in the non sub forums what do you think, what feature or change would make you buy darkfall in a instant?

for me it is this:

1) UO style hard cap

2) Full local banking, caravaning, trade routes, strict weight system, pack mules

3) player shops with npc vendors (stalls you can set up in player cities not a npc thats in your house like is going to be in the expac)

4) real animal taming, you shouldnt use grass to make a mount you should tame creatures in the wild like UO.

5) ARAC should have a strict penalty, the lore is ruined.. having the correct racially aligned clans should give bonuses so we can have race wars, if a huge guild wants to have all races their should be a penalty against it in some way.

6) Thievery skills.. lockpicking, pickpocketing, stealth, etc..

Well those are the main things id like to see to make darkfall a great game.

Several of these things they directly stated they did NOT want to be in the game, which makes me wonder why you subbed in the first place, because I'm not expecting them to add something that they firmly stand against, like thievery skills.

But either way, while we're making lists, though I am not unsubscribed, I too would like to see some sort of hard cap, at least for crafters, and pseudo local banking with caravans and whatnot. Seems that stuff is on the list for the expansion, in basic form, the first steps. You should check it out.

Haeso
11-02-2009, 06:06
Removal of the majority of offensive magic, keep the utility/conversions/heals etc.

And a healthy population, but that'll never happen.

Zarithas
11-02-2009, 06:09
I believe caravans and local banking were listed as a feature way back from 2003-2007 or so, but they said they scrapped it later on. I don't think that's really a make-or-break feature though.

I do think a soft cap of some sort would be nice, or perhaps a manipulatable hard cap (allowing 100 points in only one Elemental Magic+Archery, but Melee Mastery stops at 50, or some other combination you can choose from, yet also an ability to switch around what combinations you have by going to an NPC). That, and possibly a revamped siege system (taking the focus away from the stone and more on controlling the city, and also disabling the ability for anyone to spawn in the city during the final 2 hours of the siege) are probably the only things I could ask for.

Haeso
11-02-2009, 07:22
I believe caravans and local banking were listed as a feature way back from 2003-2007 or so, but they said they scrapped it later on. I don't think that's really a make-or-break feature though.

I do think a soft cap of some sort would be nice, or perhaps a manipulatable hard cap (allowing 100 points in only one Elemental Magic+Archery, but Melee Mastery stops at 50, or some other combination you can choose from, yet also an ability to switch around what combinations you have by going to an NPC). That, and possibly a revamped siege system (taking the focus away from the stone and more on controlling the city, and also disabling the ability for anyone to spawn in the city during the final 2 hours of the siege) are probably the only things I could ask for.

Removing spawning in the city would give the advantage to the attacker, it just needs to be a much slower respawn at the stone during it.

As it is, many sieges are literally forcing the defenders to bind outside their city and... attack their own city. It's kind of ridiculous. Either that or make a secondary respawn point that ISN'T the focal point of the siege.

Zarithas
11-02-2009, 07:52
Removing spawning in the city would give the advantage to the attacker, it just needs to be a much slower respawn at the stone during it.

As it is, many sieges are literally forcing the defenders to bind outside their city and... attack their own city. It's kind of ridiculous. Either that or make a secondary respawn point that ISN'T the focal point of the siege.
In fact, it was primarily CotC that employed the strategy of taking control of an enemy's city and occupying it before the 2 hour live period. You only say "many sieges" because it was successfully used on the Hyperion cities of Andruk and Sweetwater. I'd even go so far as to say CotC invented the strategy, as it was devised in our IRC and I don't think I had seen it previous to that. I do not know if it was used after CotC's disbandment.

I don't think it's ridiculous at all, as the strategy is extremely risky. For one, it revolves entirely around the occupying force being able to hold the city and actually survive, and second, the force has to be split between occupying the city and also defending whatever you're wagering, which puts both forces at a big disadvantage. Whoever you're sieging merely has to focus fire on whichever appears to have the smaller force; and considering they have nothing of their own that's vulnerable at this point yet, they have nothing to lose. If the occupying force is slain, the strategy falls through, and if the defending force dies due to the lack of reinforcements, then, well, you've lost the siege.

It is an unconventional and risky strategy, and it can be very easily countered, especially if the enemy can match your numbers. Part of the plan already consists of disabling all the houses and the keep to prevent naked respawn zergs. Honestly, I think Shadowbane's system of just disabling spawns at the city during a siege would still work fine in any situation. You are overestimating the power of the attackers here, and it worked so well on Andruk because most of them had already quit the game anyway. The strategy makes victory easier if you have superior numbers, since if you do it right the stone will go down within 3-4 minutes of the siege going into the live stage, but it makes it more difficult if you're more evenly matched.

Zaffax
11-02-2009, 08:00
In fact, it was primarily CotC that employed the strategy of taking control of an enemy's city and occupying it before the 2 hour live period. You only say "many sieges" because it was successfully used on the Hyperion cities of Andruk and Sweetwater. I'd even go so far as to say CotC invented the strategy, as it was devised in our IRC and I don't think I had seen it previous to that. I do not know if it was used after CotC's disbandment.

This is a completely BS statement. This strategy was used by nearly all guilds in this game. During the servers first seige (The VG sponsored seige against CB), Vg and allies secured the city and waited there the entire four hours.
Later, Hyperion employed the very same strategy when it attacked Tiquiya and other Yssamian holdings. If anything, Hyperion actually expanded on the strategy and was the first to destroy buildings when seiging a city as a means of removing the defender's binds.
This whole notion that the CC created the strategy is completely bogus as MANY guilds had employed this strategy prior to the CC's having any signifigance on the server.

exuras
11-02-2009, 08:12
#2 & #3

Zarithas
11-02-2009, 08:13
This is a completely BS statement. This strategy was used by nearly all guilds in this game. During the servers first seige (The VG sponsored seige against CB), Vg and allies secured the city and waited there the entire four hours.
Later, Hyperion employed the very same strategy when it attacked Tiquiya and other Yssamian holdings. If anything, Hyperion actually expanded on the strategy and was the first to destroy buildings when seiging a city as a means of removing the defender's binds.
This whole notion that the CC created the strategy is completely bogus as MANY guilds had employed this strategy prior to the CC's having any signifigance on the server.
Most of those were in quite the early beginnings of the game. It was used when clans were still figuring out what the best methods of siege warfare were, and went into hibernation for quite a while. I was actually unaware that Hyperion used it though, and I find it rather funny that Titus Ultor complained about it to no end despite the fact that they had used it themselves.

The point I'm trying to make is that development decisions regarding siege mechanics should not focus on attackers having an advantage due to the pre-live occuputation strategy, as it is by no means a fool-proof strategy, its history notwithstanding. Accomodating the defensive side really isn't necessary. Preferably, the entire siege system as a whole should be rehauled though, much how EVE is completely scrapping their current territory capture system and replacing it with something less tedious and more focused on actual PvP.

xerian
11-02-2009, 08:23
I am already subbed, but i think ARAC clans should be flagged grey at all time.

(im in an ARAC clan too)

Zaffax
11-02-2009, 08:31
The point I'm trying to make is that development decisions regarding siege mechanics should not focus on attackers having an advantage due to the pre-live occuputation strategy, as it is by no means a fool-proof strategy, its history notwithstanding. Accomodating the defensive side really isn't necessary. Preferably, the entire siege system as a whole should be rehauled though, much how EVE is completely scrapping their current territory capture system and replacing it with something less tedious and more focused on actual PvP.

I agree that the entie seige system of this game is in need of a complete overhaul. As is, it is very easy for an attacker to lock down a city assuming that they have the element of suprise. As is, 5 people can lock down nearly any city within the game (Atleast temporarily) as the defender will never be expecting them and thus be ill positioned, ungeared, annd roundly unprepared. Combine this with an entire raid of attackers and a city immediately falls to its attackers. This makes it very easy for the attackers to cut off all bindslots to a city and put the attackers in the mode of the defenders. This creates an irony in that city defenses in this game (assuming its the 5% of cities in this game whose geography doesn't completely bork the cities defenses), are ultimately used by the attackers. Assuming that city defenses worked correctly and people couldnt just walk into a city without system messages, the defenders would be better off not building any defenses in their cities save guard towers as these defenses would ultimately be used against them.
As to the best way of redoing the system, I really have no idea. But one thing for sure is that cities need to be corrected so as to have meaningfull/functional defenses, and the seige system needs to be redone entirely.

Shioni
11-02-2009, 08:46
After MO drops the ball hard many people will come crawling back to DFO and wish they had not wasted time dicking around and dropping Sub.

The fact is I have already met such individuals. Its commonly, "I didn't know the game has improved so much from the first few months."

AV doesn't give a shit if a small rabble of care-bears want skill caps and safety zones. The only real love they give this half of the community is a section called "Darkfall Non-Subscriber Forums" so people can bitch and moan to each other until they deiced they are willing to help fund the greatest game ever conceived.

Haeso
11-02-2009, 08:54
In fact, it was primarily CotC that employed the strategy of taking control of an enemy's city and occupying it before the 2 hour live period. You only say "many sieges" because it was successfully used on the Hyperion cities of Andruk and Sweetwater. I'd even go so far as to say CotC invented the strategy, as it was devised in our IRC and I don't think I had seen it previous to that. I do not know if it was used after CotC's disbandment.

I don't think it's ridiculous at all, as the strategy is extremely risky. For one, it revolves entirely around the occupying force being able to hold the city and actually survive, and second, the force has to be split between occupying the city and also defending whatever you're wagering, which puts both forces at a big disadvantage. Whoever you're sieging merely has to focus fire on whichever appears to have the smaller force; and considering they have nothing of their own that's vulnerable at this point yet, they have nothing to lose. If the occupying force is slain, the strategy falls through, and if the defending force dies due to the lack of reinforcements, then, well, you've lost the siege.

It is an unconventional and risky strategy, and it can be very easily countered, especially if the enemy can match your numbers. Part of the plan already consists of disabling all the houses and the keep to prevent naked respawn zergs. Honestly, I think Shadowbane's system of just disabling spawns at the city during a siege would still work fine in any situation. You are overestimating the power of the attackers here, and it worked so well on Andruk because most of them had already quit the game anyway. The strategy makes victory easier if you have superior numbers, since if you do it right the stone will go down within 3-4 minutes of the siege going into the live stage, but it makes it more difficult if you're more evenly matched.

The first siege I saw it during was on Yssam. But okay. We actually used it ourselves in a fashion.


After MO drops the ball hard many people will come crawling back to DFO and wish they had not wasted time dicking around and dropping Sub.

The fact is I have already met such individuals. Its commonly, "I didn't know the game has improved so much from the first few months."

AV doesn't give a shit if a small rabble of care-bears want skill caps and safety zones. The only real love they give this half of the community is a section called "Darkfall Non-Subscriber Forums" so people can bitch and moan to each other until they deiced they are willing to help fund the greatest game ever conceived.

... LOL You can like DFO, that's fine, but that one statement - you're so utterly stupid that it pains me to know you're alive.

Sayton
11-02-2009, 08:56
My only two real problems with DF right now are 1: magic and 2: turtle blocking.

Then after that there's a long list of improvements that I'd like, more specialization, guild logos and tabards, more fluff, RP stuff, so on. But as long as I can play without magic nukes and aoes and not be a total gimp, I'll continue paying and playing.

Zaffax
11-02-2009, 08:59
greatest game ever conceived.



... LOL

You seem to be missing the point.

con⋅ceive  
verb (used with object) 1. to form (a notion, opinion, purpose, etc.): He conceived the project while he was on vacation.

Haeso
11-02-2009, 09:03
You seem to be missing the point.

con⋅ceive  
verb (used with object) 1. to form (a notion, opinion, purpose, etc.): He conceived the project while he was on vacation.

I'll say again, LOL.

The game itself is bad, and the idea was at best exceptional, nowhere near best anything.

drinkingjam
11-02-2009, 09:09
I'll say again, LOL.

The game itself is bad, and the idea was at best exceptional, nowhere near best anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

I know people who claim Runescape to be the greatest game ever. Everyone's got an opinion.

Zarithas
11-02-2009, 09:10
I agree that the entie seige system of this game is in need of a complete overhaul. As is, it is very easy for an attacker to lock down a city assuming that they have the element of suprise. As is, 5 people can lock down nearly any city within the game (Atleast temporarily) as the defender will never be expecting them and thus be ill positioned, ungeared, annd roundly unprepared. Combine this with an entire raid of attackers and a city immediately falls to its attackers. This makes it very easy for the attackers to cut off all bindslots to a city and put the attackers in the mode of the defenders. This creates an irony in that city defenses in this game (assuming its the 5% of cities in this game whose geography doesn't completely bork the cities defenses), are ultimately used by the attackers. Assuming that city defenses worked correctly and people couldnt just walk into a city without system messages, the defenders would be better off not building any defenses in their cities save guard towers as these defenses would ultimately be used against them.
As to the best way of redoing the system, I really have no idea. But one thing for sure is that cities need to be corrected so as to have meaningfull/functional defenses, and the seige system needs to be redone entirely.
You know, DF needs those siege tower things from Shadowbane. I can't remember what they were called exactly, but they disabled certain abilities in the city and a small radius around it for a period of time, and they were mainly used for sieges (I can't remember if they could only be activated during sieges either). Like, one would disable stealth, one would disable flight, one would disable teleport, etc. Adding one that, say, disables launch and similar levitating spells (for everyone) for 6 hours may make sieges rather interesting. Of course, the problem is if the enemy has already overrun your city before you even knew a siege was coming, so you wouldn't even get a chance to activate it. Maybe they could be run 24/7, and activated or deactivated as necessary. They should probably up cannon damage as well.

Otherwise, can you really think of a way to prevent attackers from gaining control of your city and using its defenses against you? Again, doing so places your enemy's defending force at a big disadvantage. Of course, if not many people are online in your alliance, then there's not much you could do, but then you wouldn't be able to do much no matter how they attacked you.

Zaffax
11-02-2009, 09:10
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

I know people who claim Runescape to be the greatest game ever. Everyone's got an opinion.

Why must you ruin the fun of a 3 thread tug o war? :(

drinkingjam
11-02-2009, 09:12
Why must you ruin the fun of a 3 thread tug o war? :(

Sorry man, I'll do better next time :ohno:

Zaffax
11-02-2009, 09:13
You know, DF needs those siege tower things from Shadowbane. I can't remember what they were called exactly, but they disabled certain abilities in the city and a small radius around it for a period of time, and they were mainly used for sieges (I can't remember if they could only be activated during sieges either). Like, one would disable stealth, one would disable flight, one would disable teleport, etc. Adding one that, say, disables launch and similar levitating spells (for everyone) for 6 hours may make sieges rather interesting. Of course, the problem is if the enemy has already overrun your city before you even knew a siege was coming, so you wouldn't even get a chance to activate it. Maybe they could be run 24/7, and activated or deactivated as necessary. They should probably up cannon damage as well.

Otherwise, can you really think of a way to prevent attackers from gaining control of your city and using its defenses against you? Again, doing so places your enemy's defending force at a big disadvantage. Of course, if not many people are online in your alliance, then there's not much you could do, but then you wouldn't be able to do much no matter how they attacked you.

Tbh, I've been arguing that launch, wall of force, ad levitate should be removed from the game sinse launch. If the attackers are going to have the advantage of suprise, atleast make them have to break through the walls of the city to get inside.

Edit: To further elaborate, the principle behind launch is the very reason why flying mounts could never work in this game. It completely fucks up all geographical defenses that exist within the game. Unless you want to add something rediculous like anti-air to the game, people shouldnt be able to "soar" above city walls and other fortifications, whther city based or surrounding geographical advantages.

KtinoS
11-02-2009, 09:14
I will re-sub if they make a hard skill cap and make the blocking mechanism better.

lkx
11-02-2009, 09:15
It is too late too make ARAC guild penalties. Entire clans/alliances would be destroyed by this.

This.
The damage is done, and can't be recovered.
It would be almost like a server wipe.

Zarithas
11-02-2009, 09:15
Tbh, I've been arguing that launch, wall of force, ad levitate should be removed from the game sinse launch. If the attackers are going to have the advantage of suprise, atleast make them have to break through the walls of the city to get inside.
I don't think they should be removed from the game entirely, but being able to enable or disable their use in and around your city should be an option given to those who own cities.

Though, I wouldn't mind them being removed if they allowed gates to be opened remotely, and also be opened by alliance members of the appropriate ranks. Otherwise it'd just be a huge hassle to leave and enter cities.

Zaffax
11-02-2009, 09:22
I don't think they should be removed from the game entirely, but being able to enable or disable their use in and around your city should be an option given to those who own cities.

The problem is that surrounding geography could still be bypassed. Take Talpc for example. Theoretically, it should be a very defensible city. However, (assuming the walls and geography were fix'd to work as intended) even if launch was blocked within the city, people could still just launch onto one of the surrounding mountains to get into the city. Such a tower effect could only go so far and one could hardly expect the radius of its effect to be handcrafted based on each individual cities surriouding geography.
Though, I wouldn't mind them being removed if they allowed gates to be opened remotely, and also be opened by alliance members of the appropriate ranks. Otherwise it'd just be a huge hassle to leave and enter cities.
10+ chars were waisted...

Average Joe
11-02-2009, 09:32
I'd resub if I could use more of the forums =P

xpiher
11-02-2009, 09:47
Removing spawning in the city would give the advantage to the attacker, it just needs to be a much slower respawn at the stone during it.

As it is, many sieges are literally forcing the defenders to bind outside their city and... attack their own city. It's kind of ridiculous. Either that or make a secondary respawn point that ISN'T the focal point of the siege.

There isn't a problem with launch, there isn't a problem with wall of force. There is a problem with just being able to jump over the wall in some cases. The main problems with sieges are the fact that sieges last 6hrs and you can begin a siege without PvP. Basically, if sieges lasted 4 hrs and you could only siege a city when the defenders would be around, the system would be a lot better. One way to prevent the PvB that many people hate is to have a 12hr window of oppertunity set by the defenders starting at a PM time. I've said this since launch, it would give defenders the "home court" advantage without removing the attackers surprise attack ability.

Honestly, I've participated in sieges where a single attacker could not get into the city because the defenders didn't let them. Well that's a little exaggerated since some did get in, but we let them. Now, this was before a lot of people had wall of force, but the point still stands, a well coordinated defense can ensure people, at least a massive amount of people, won't get into the city.

Larocco
11-02-2009, 12:51
Removal of the majority of offensive magic, keep the utility/conversions/heals etc.

And a healthy population, but that'll never happen.

^

+

also lots of other stuff taht was mentioned b4 such as no arac clans, stronger consequences for being a pk and dev events

Firzenizer
11-02-2009, 18:46
Well those are the main things id like to see to make darkfall a great game.
Fail. Those are the main things that would make darkfall look like UO. Fanboy.

Number 1 this aint UO this is Darkfall.
Number 2 I doubt that anyone thinks that those things are THE things that they would really want to see on Darkfall.

Rosco
11-02-2009, 19:02
Balance, is all I want for me to resub. As of right now its magic or get out of the way. When I first started playing DF, archery was the style of combat that I wanted to play, along with melee. Thats it, so I hope the expansion is it, or that is it for me.

thedrumchannell
11-02-2009, 19:11
Less CounterStrike and more RPG Elements

Area 51
11-02-2009, 19:11
i love it!

people who are trying to ruin the game with skill caps can't even post in the real forums because they don't even play LOL

FastEddy
11-02-2009, 19:27
nudity

jonyak
11-02-2009, 19:33
More RPG elements.

More fluff.

Better siege system.

Less grind

more balance.

jonyak
11-02-2009, 19:34
Fail. Those are the main things that would make darkfall look like UO. Fanboy.

Number 1 this aint UO this is Darkfall.
Number 2 I doubt that anyone thinks that those things are THE things that they would really want to see on Darkfall.

less of these idiots.

Bill OReilly
11-02-2009, 20:04
1) Redo the framework around the game. Fixing the way PvE is done, fixing the way skills are leveled (Hard Cap), etc.

2) Balance combat.

3) Completely wipe all characters clean and leave them as if they were brand new except for the names, but allow them to rechoose race before logging on.

4) Penalize ARAC and promote race warfare (good rewards, not 150 gold bullshit.)

5) New, Fun, and Challenging siege system.

6) Racial Presidents/Leaders - Each race should be able to elect a President who can set things such as bounties, change allegiances with other races, cont. to point 7 ->

7) RACIAL SIEGES. For example I think it would be refreshing to see all Mahirims show up and fight for their own city against whoever owns it. However each race should be limited to one city.

8) Content, Content, Content

9) Content, Content, Content.


I could add more, but I'm lazy.

Blixa
11-02-2009, 20:07
Wow, BillO is right!

Bill OReilly
11-02-2009, 20:22
1) Redo the framework around the game. Fixing the way PvE is done, fixing the way skills are leveled (Hard Cap), etc.

2) Balance combat.

3) Completely wipe all characters clean and leave them as if they were brand new except for the names, but allow them to rechoose race before logging on.

4) Penalize ARAC and promote race warfare (good rewards, not 150 gold bullshit.)

5) New, Fun, and Challenging siege system.

6) Racial Presidents/Leaders - Each race should be able to elect a President who can set things such as bounties, change allegiances with other races, cont. to point 7 ->

7) RACIAL SIEGES. For example I think it would be refreshing to see all Mahirims show up and fight for their own city against whoever owns it. However each race should be limited to one city.

8) Content, Content, Content

9) Content, Content, Content.


I could add more, but I'm lazy.

I'm going to add one more thing that was really important to me, but never made it into the game.

10) Raiding Starter/NPC Racial Cities. If they end up putting an emphasis on race alignments, and local banking and the server pop spikes up, I would assume these cities would popular, and raids on them should be possible, but should require a lot of teamwork and strategy.

I came into this game thinking their was NO SAFEZONES, and this just isn't true. I know the idea of raids on these cities was eliminated due to not having actual npc guards, but I still there's there's more ways of doing it that should be explored because this along with meaningful sea travel, battles, content, was one of the things I really wanted to do when I started looking at darkfall.


ps: fix jumpshooting.

pss: :)

Also, when AV gets their shit together, and they clean up all the bots and chetz, and make pve fun and interesting as well as the combat, advertise free 14 day trials.

Draxous
11-02-2009, 20:42
Everyone also said it was too late to put cool downs on spells..

Yeah.

I don't think it's too late to put penalties down on ARAC's.


No hate intended.

Why do people think we need to penalize players for playing the way they want to? If players want to be in a clan with every race, then that's their choice.

There should be incentives given to clans who go racial... but fuck the idea of punishing players for no reason.

It's the reason why there's no stupid cap on skills in this game. We're sick and tired of being punished because we don't want to choose what others think we should be forced into choosing.

Freedom of choice, fuck restrictions.

Draxous
11-02-2009, 20:44
i love it!

people who are trying to ruin the game with skill caps can't even post in the real forums because they don't even play LOL

hah!

Bill OReilly
11-02-2009, 21:39
hah!

A lot of the people here are sub'd.

Mr.LichTwitch
11-02-2009, 22:15
It's gonna take a character transfer from EU to NA for me to come back. See you soon :D