Posts made by d3Sync

Alright! Hello all! Here's my list of the things I have found personally. Some are more suggestions, than they are bugs. My testing focus has mostly been on a few phases of the game that I find really important. Tutorial, UI intuitiveness, early progression and residential gameplay.

• Arrow buttons for attributes on character creation has no audio
• Arrow buttons also hard to see, due to background color
• When holding down right mouse button while moving around the world, your
  character randomly stops moving even if you're still holding down mouse button
• Horses still have no audio for hoofsteps
• Atmospheric audio cuts in and out
• Still no circle of transparency functionality
• Same footstep audio for different surfaces
• Character stuck in weapon swing animation after killing mob
• NEED CHAT BUBBLES!
• Add tutorial mission to create campfire - most frequently asked about in chat
• Add tutorial mission purchase home plot and become resident
• Purple texture in place of some spell effects
• With cities removed, map in serious need of POI's
• Need more variety in the musical score
• Middle mouse button doesn't work as a keybind option
• Blueprints should tell you the items needed and the amount
• Mounting should not disable passive combat abilities (IE bash, heavy blow)
• Hand position while running is not in alignment with weapon (spear)
• You should be able to zoom into map based on where your mouse cursor is
• Opening map should auto center to your location
• Sometimes shockwave doesn't trigger when activated or doesn't deal damage
• Grass tile not conforming to ground at -2596 W -262 N
• Many players not able to figure out how to claim plots now. They don't see
  the house icon in bottom right. It needs to be more obvious
• Inventory and character tab should be combined as QoL feature
• No audio for chopping trees, or the logs falling to the ground
• Alternate controls, such as rotating blueprints or detaching wagons needs to
  be updated to match a keybind change
• Mining mineral nodes has no audio
• Starter towns should be labeled on the map, as well as their building icons
  on the minimap
• No durability loss on items used to chop wood and mine ore
• Grass not rendering on -09 W axis
• Lots of armor and weapon clipping
• There is no city chat
• QoL Doors to your house should auto-close after 10 seconds and add auto-close
  toggle in house settings for people who don't want to use it, door locks
• Add gated fence to blueprints
• Logs not lootable. Falling through terrain or standing up.
• Hard to click on workstations that are against a southern wall
• More structures need to be represented on map (IE bridges)
• No way for players to know what governor policies mean (IE Authoritarian)
• No way for players to know resident and citizen permissions in a town,
  which is especially useful when deciding where to settle
• No way for players to know what researches are availabe in towns
• Tanning tub is not filled with liquid, like it shows in it's blueprint
• Zombies still sound like squirrels when they die
• Water tiles around harbor are missing -5927 W -3250 N
• Sea Trolls cast their shock nova even after death (I think this was fixed?)
• Invisible barrier on the road at -5568 W -3211 N
• Horse riding animation needs some serious work, sometimes character
  rocks back and forth in awkward motion when in full gallop
• Dire Wolf death sound should sound less like popping the cork off a wine bottle
• Bridge is off-center with road at -1748 W -616 N
• Farenheit toggle for temperature above minimap
• Players allowed to make plot farms, if it's not a bug, it should be. IE 20 smelteries

@Hilgard said in Bounty Hunting & Jails - Official Feedback Thread:

@d3Sync said in Bounty Hunting & Jails - Official Feedback Thread:

@Nekrage Can you have a civil discussion without insulting people?

Prometheus asked for a lack of toxicity. You are disrespecting him.

We can have a discussion without the childish behavior.

I thought it was weird that you were singling Nekrage out when there was someone else doing the exact same thing so I did some snooping.

Turns out you were attacking him on the Discord server yesterday lol. Seems like you have a horse in this race.

I think we can have a discussion without your childish behavior. Sound like a good plan?

I don't think Nekrage calling people morons, and worse in this thread after Prometheus asked people to be civil is an unwarranted criticism.

I'm not here for the toxicity. My discord interaction with him had nothing to do with my response here.

The fact that you are defending that sort of behavior out of him leads me to believe you have a horse in this race.

@Nekrage Can you have a civil discussion without insulting people?

Prometheus asked for a lack of toxicity. You are disrespecting him.

We can have a discussion without the childish behavior.

@Ostaff said in Change to Syndesia, the true mix of PvE and PvP?:

@d3Sync

As long as there is PvP allowed, there is nothing to keep people from going that route... and they shouldn't be forced to stay away from it. Which is why I came up with the levels of looting options which will allow a person to say just how far they want to go with PvP and sticks with the "risk/rewards". The greater the risk, the chance of the greater reward, but if you don't go that risk you can never get that full reward.

Yes.. it doesn't stop someone from being killed. But mobs can kill a player just as easily. Allowing loot settings allows a non-combatant to keep their loot that they farmed hours for. Also..loot options should be just like alignment settings... either a one time deal or only changeable at shrines/jails.

The other possible option for "crime" is to give greater penalties to people who pk people with a whole lot less KP than they have and lesser when the kp's are closer to even. The problem with this is... you don't know how much KP the other person has and its like playing russian roullett.

Personally, I think the bail time/amount plus loot options would be a good fit. However, the time and bond cost needs to be balanced a lot better than it is, and if the loot option is implemented, then the bail time/bond would drastically decrease in cost.

I have a long post in the Jail thread.

It involves altering the karma and crime systems.

But ultimately, I got your partial loot solved in a way that makes logical sense and isn't a game-y system.

Someone knocks you out. They become a temporary criminal. They can only loot your inventory.
Someone kills you. They become a temporary criminal, but gain a murder count. Now they can loot your equipped items.

Enough of those murders in a short span of time. You lose access to almost everything.

Thus making murder an end-game mechanic on Syndesia. And a risky one at that. But POSSIBLE.

There are some good points in this thread.

I think most of us agree that the current jail system is not working.

The sentencing for jail time is bad, especially for new evil players. If you keep the jail, those punishments need to scale with the crime. Both time and gold.

I really do hesitate when confronted with the idea of removing the jail completely. I feel that it's really a difficult problem to solve, given the situation we find ourselves in.

I personally believe that the current system is broken. And we are debating over systems that don't even exist, but are required to exist to get a clear picture of the problem. So a lot of us are left in the dark.

I have a serious dislike for the good/evil alignment system being toggled. This is a personal opinion. I agree with Nekrage about criminals being able to gain positive karma to reduce sentencing time and bail cost. But I also believe that all players should be able to gain and/or lose karma based on their own personal actions over time.

Thinking out loud here.

I'm trying to wrap my head around how this would work. And I'm also trying to see it from both sides. The purpose of this test is to try and find flaws in the crime system and the siege system. Will we even get to the siege system?

Do I listen to the PvP'er crowd, saying it's too harsh?
Do I listen to the PvE'er crowd, saying it's not enough?

Does that mean the punishment is just right? Probably not.

I don't believe that it's a valid point to suggest large swaths of the player base will quit the game due to being jailed. Let's assume that the developers will properly adjust the punishment to fit the crime. They also have to make it absolutely clear that if they die as an evil player, there will be harsh punishments. And this needs to be done long before the player gets to that point. See my dislike for the toggled good/evil system.

The Sheriff system that Nekrage suggests is a miss for me, to be honest. Evil groups will just adjust. They will flow through an area, and then leave. The Sheriffs will show up and no one will be there. So a dynamic system, like Legends, won't really do much. It's a waste of development time. Cool gimmick? Sure. A solution to our problem? Not in my opinion.

I'd do something like.. First, separate the criminal system and karma system. I think they fundamentally oppose each other as one system.

You'd still have a karma system from -10,000 to +10,000, or whatever arbitrary amount you'd like it to be. But it has nothing to do with what color represents your status in the game world. It may affect the deity system though, I fully expect.

Beastmen start at +10,000
At -1 karma, can toggle Abomination
If so, loses access to Arboreus permanently

Demons start at -10,000
At +1 karma, can toggle Angel
If so, loses access to Tartaros permenently

Humans start at 0
At -10,000 karma, can toggle Lich
Loses access to Arboreus

We all know Liches are evil. Let's not play games.
But Liches can, through the power of magic, REVERT!
Yay! Or let's say, extend their life and regain human appearance to please the RP crowd.

Can't lower karma on Arboreus
Can raise/lower karma on Syndesia
Can't raise karma on Tartaros, unless you are positively aligned.

All non-criminals and non-murderers are BLUE

Implement a criminal status, ala Ultima Online.
Add a list of petty crimes. If you commit these crimes, you'll be a 'criminal' (GREY) for a short period of time. For instance, stealing a cart, looting a player corpse, or attacking someone. It does not apply to Arboreus or Tartaros. There would be no repercussion for killing a criminal. Safe zones no longer apply to you when you have the criminal status.

Add a murder system, ala Ultima Online. Allow for murderers to reduce their murder count by playing the game. And possibly even allowing them to lower their count by giving gifts to gods, such as gold. If you are a murderer, you can be attacked anywhere. Safe zones no longer apply to you in Syndesia. Not a city. Not your plot. If you want to play as a true RED, then you need to respect the decision that you made to kill other players, repeatedly.

For reference, Ultima Online had a system where if you kill a player, you become a criminal. Your murder count is now 1. You can work that off over a certain amount of time, say 8 hours in-game. If you kill again before the time was up, your murder count is now 2, and your in-game time to work it off is now higher. Say 12 hours. If you reach 5, you become RED.

Edit - Forgot to mention that once you work off your murder counts, you become GREY for a short period of time, before returning to BLUE (innocent). Not super relevant, but figured I'd mention it anyways.

Also Edit - Knocking out a player would be a crime. You can loot their INVENTORY and be a criminal. If you want their equipped gear, you must kill them and you'll be awarded a murder count for doing so. Here is the partial loot system that a lot of you are advocating for.

The jail system now kicks in. Sheriffs get to have fun. I like the idea being pushed around to limit them. Sounds fine. Punishments scale appropriately to the crimes. You might be able to keep them on the light side, considering the nature of being a true murderer. You are never safe.

A few adjustments may need to be made to city governance.

Sieges should be done by waging war on another city, or another guild. It shouldn't involve 'good' or 'evil'. Karma loss/gain should be suspended in a siege or raid.

We've fixed new players accidentally serving huge penalties by pushing the murderer game play to end-game. We've eliminated 'evil' player zergs to a degree. Though they will always exist. We've allowed for truly neutral, opportunistic combat situations with the criminal system, by making petty crimes common, but with light penalties. We've allowed all players to raise and lower their karma based on their actions, within their race restrictions. The evil/neutral/good world structure remains intact. This will not affect the player economy in a serious way. At least I don't think so.

The PvP crowd will HATE it. But if they want to be a true badass, then they either need to deal with it, or go to Tartaros and allow the design of the developers to work properly.

What Syndesia needs, is a full Tartaros. We need the demons to make their weekly incursions impactful. Which means we need the majority of you fighting each other, rather than fighting us.

One of the greatest games I've played from a PvP standpoint was Dark Age of Camelot. The factions did not interact with each other often. Not only that, but the races are unique, so fighting completely unique and alien players created a sense of fear and awe. The player staring back at you from across the battlefield did not look like you. They didn't play like you. That created a sense of rivalry.

I think the reality is, that whatever the solution is, it has to include players of all rulesets. All playing within their own environments. Occasionally mixing.

I also am entirely aware that the system I propose is highly unlikely, as it requires a pretty lengthy rework. So keep that in mind when responding.

Also, I purposely didn't go into any of those ideas in depth. Nor did I really think about them in depth. They may not work either. I have no idea.

Partial loot is certainly an option for looting.

I don't think that will prevent a PvP'er from killing you though. I don't think it will prevent someone from going evil. I don't think it will prevent a guild from going evil. I'm not saying there will be zero effect. I feel it's such an artificial system to employ. You have to choose this, or that, or two of the three. It's complex and convoluted in my opinion. Could it help? Maybe it could. But not alone.

But it's certainly an ugly way to do it in my opinion.

I don't think the issue is the full loot system. It's the criminal system. I think we can find a better solution.

Nah. My vacation time is worth a lot more than a day of playing a game. It will be there the next day. Next week. Next month. And so on.

I didn't have any reasoning behind where I spawned, as I didn't know where any POI's were on the map. And really, you can travel and set yourself up in any city once you get your feet under you. So it really doesn't matter.

Though I understand why people feel like being in the southern part of the map is better. If you know exactly where you want to settle, starting closer by is the obvious choice. I still don't know where I'm going to spawn in the next one. I'm not part of a guild. Don't know any of the city governors.

Kinda weird that this didn't get more discussion. I don't understand Logain's response. The question wasn't whether or not the inclusion of drinks should be priority. I don't understand some of the people in these forums who seem to simply want to shut down conversation or hijack the conversation, and make it about something else. Just discuss the topic, or don't respond.

I do think that both food and drinks should be in the game. For nothing more than it being realistic. You don't even need to change much. Both food and drink can increase satiety. However, food could give you physical bonuses, such as HP regen, bonuses to physical attributes like STR, DEX, CON, and physical resistances that are limited buffs. Drinks could give mental bonuses, such as mana regen, bonuses to mental attributes like INT, PER and CHA, and mental resistances that are also limited buffs. Half hour. Hour long buffs. Adding drinks really wouldn't require a huge amount of development and could be done alongside large pillar systems that haven't yet been implemented.

There's nothing wrong with this discussion. I have wondered why drinks were shafted, for no real reason. Doesn't seem to really have a logical reason.

@Ultimate said in Do we have any idea of sever localisations?:

But I mean.. even if there will be many servers in the end.. we can server hop at will right?

If we end up with multiple regional servers, I doubt that you will be able to move your character around at will. I don't want to get into too much speculation, but even if they did allow you to move your character, it would likely be something you have to pay for.. And you probably wouldn't be able to take any of your belongings.

@Razvan said in Spell Tomes/Books?:

Tbh I'm not a fan. A well-off player can create an endgame alt within minutes. It takes away from the sense of accomplishment and eliminates the risk of going out in the wild and being ganked, which is the whole point of this game.

I would say that this is already the case. A veteran player will be able to equip their alt with the best available gear to them, minutes after character creation. There are no levels or item restrictions. They will know where the creatures are for the skills that they want. All of that could probably be done in a day, or a few hours depending on the abilities required. Currently, the only thing blocking you from creating a good character within a few hours, is knowledge points turned into perk points. So because of that, you'd have to go out and kill things anyways, in order to get the knowledge points. So it doesn't hurt exploration.

Would you like the idea of having consumable professional textbooks that increase a crafting ability just by using them? If no, why have one and not the other?

I'm not sure what kind of answer you are looking for here. It's almost as if you are assuming what my answer is going to be, and you're asking in a rhetorical manner.

What does 'increase a crafting ability' mean? There aren't any crafting abilities in the game. Are you talking about recipes? Recipes are currently learned by the creation of a workbench, or directly through your inventory. There is some old information where crafting recipes will be learned by 'inspecting' an item, and sort of reverse engineering it. And if that is still the case, then a veteran player would just bring their alt home and allow them to inspect all of those items. That is nearly identical to what I'm proposing. Instead of buying abilities off of the market, you'd be buying items off of the market in order to learn the recipe. This system is hypothetical, as we don't really know a whole lot about what the current plan is.

PS: All in all, I understand that this would have minimal impact upon the game (the rich guy can create the same alt in a couple of days, the Arboreus people probably have alternatives to some Tartarus spell if they don't wanna go through all the trouble), but this feature would pretty much go against the whole idea of this game.

I think that people are under the impression that this goes against the idea of the game. I don't think it does. I think it simply gives options to players because of the points I stated above.

I know this. Hypothetically. As a veteran of the game, who has done all of the grinding mobs for abilities, reverse engineering items for recipes, and everything else that the game has and will have to offer.. I'm not going to be all that interested in doing all of that over again for an alt. And I don't think it's in the best interests of a game developer to want to punish their veteran players by forcing them to 'experience' a bunch of meaningless things more than once.

I like their idea in having to find abilities through killing creatures. I just don't think it's all that important in the long run. If balanced properly, my suggestion shouldn't really hinder your game play. It should support it. Either way, thanks for responding. I actually hadn't considered the alt angle.

Hello cruel world..

I'd hope that they could work out a system that the player isn't required to actively toggle, but prevents clicking on most interactable objects.

Yeah.. Not being able to remove buildings as a governor is absolutely illogical. Because 'game', isn't a reason.

I also hope this becomes a thing of the past.

You didn't get the full desk mat like I did. That's my only gripe =P

I wouldn't mind seeing a test server, post launch. Whatever 'launch' means. Full release. I don't know, but certainly not right now.

Dynamite has to weigh all of the tasks they need to do for importance. Ultimately, this is something that will fall down the priority list as they focus on pillar game play mechanics.

Once most of those are complete, they will likely consider something like a test server.

@Gothix said in Why don't you open a test server for the packs:

@Nemtor said in Why don't you open a test server for the packs:

Why don't you open a test server for the packs

I'm sorry but we are not packs... we are people.

We could be a pack...

Of people =P

Last Q&A discussed plans to eventually add some wilderness housing plots in the region outside of the city.

@Gibbx said in Spell Tomes/Books?:

@GamerSeuss Yes despite your long posts you still seem to be missing the point: Its a freaking cool idea. It opens up lots of game play/role play possibilities. It would be sweet if you could turn your obvious gaming experience to exploring how something like this could work in game, rather than list all the ways why it shouldn't.

I agree. I was hoping to have a more balanced discussion. It's theory crafting. I enjoy having these discussions, and rather than crapping on the idea, maybe offering suggestions as to how it could work. Maybe we come up with something completely different? That's the fun in doing something like this.

@GamerSeuss said in Spell Tomes/Books?:

@d3Sync said in Spell Tomes/Books?:

I think it's actually a net positive. It helps to give guilds the upper hand in recruitment

As it has also already been stated in several places, the Guilds don't need an upper hand. The Guilds already have a distinct advantage over the solo/small group/guild player and the devs have said they are trying to equalize play across playstyles, not trying to clearly set one group above the others, so again, this counts as a Con, not a Pro.

Being able to buy something you should go out and earn is never going to be a Pro in the long run. Sure, the one doing it sees it as a shortcut, but shortcuts shortchange a player from the total experience of the game. The arguments about still not getting the upgraded spells don't hold water, because as Prometheus has also said, Base spells are going to be just as good as the 'upgraded' spells, all spells will just have their niche usages. As to not learning the weaknesses of a given creature, well, as the buying of skills/spells makes it to where the player doesn't have a strong incentive to go out and confront that creature anyway, it no longer matters if you learn their weaknesses or not. Even though the game is set to cater to craftsman and skillers as much as mercenaries and bounty hunters and PvP types, they do want some incentive to have everyone go out and explore and do a little bit of the killing, to get their feet wet, and acquire those initial base skills/spells, even if they never need the more 'advanced' spells and skills you talk about. Being able to buy them eliminates that incentive all together.

So again, I state that I see no real Pros to this idea, and lots of Cons.

Also, comparing this game to Ultima Online is definitely not a fair comparison. Ultima Online was the first real MMORPG out, period, over 23 years ago, and as such, many things worked for that game that wouldn't work now, because the game had no competition whatsoever for the MMORPG enthusiasts...they were the only game in town. Before UO came out, you had MUDs, MUSHes, MOOs, and MUCKs, which were all pretty much text based, and just the graphics aspect alone was enough to draw people into the game who want the MMORPG type experience. This is the reason that when EverQuest and WoW came about, Ultima was pretty much dead in the water. Shoot, RuneScape was a dead copy of UO because the devs didn't want to pay the monthly fees, and while UO is practically unfindable nowadays, RuneScape has 3 different versions that still can be found (and OSRS, the one based around RS2 still gets 100s of thousands of players logging in daily) so your practically comparing Apples to Oranges (or, more accurately, Apples to Dutch Apple Pies) as we as gamers have far matured in our expectations for a game.

For Fractured to maintain their overarching goal of catering to all 3 major playstyles as evenly as possible, PvP, PvE, and a fair mix, as well as balancing out Solo and Small to Large group play, so that no group has too much of an advantage over any other group, they have to be careful how they skew things.

You are being absolutely unreasonable and impossible to talk to. I've noticed this in many of your posts and it is becoming really difficult to continue to converse with you in an honest manner.

I wasn't comparing two full games. I was comparing a similar mechanic within those games. Please stop taking everything I say out of context. A history lessen is not relevant.

I reject your first point, because it both helps guilds and solo players alike. It gives both options. It's another way for guilds to make money and another way for players to get their spells.

I reject your second point because if we are to dismiss any mechanic that allows people to buy things, by your logic, it damages the fabric of the experience by players bypassing a small part of the game, then let's remove all markets from the game. No trading at all. No harbors. Everything is player crafted and there is no barter system. If you don't find it yourself, then you don't get it.

Now obviously that is an absolutely awful idea, everyone would agree with that. You are cherry picking where logic applies.

It's fine. You don't like the idea. And while I think I've given reasonable counter-points, you still don't agree. I'm fine with that.