@Alexian said in Trade caravans...?:
(...)send trade caravans across the map(...)
Did they mention actual caravans? (If so would you happen to have a link)
Counter question, would some players driving a cart with goods be considered a 'caravan' by you?
Nice idea and it seems to fit the general 'demon vibe'. It would seem to make a good addition to Fractured 
Thanks and congratulations to all winners!
I wasn't sure in the beginning either, but so far, I've got to admit that the developers knew what they were doing with the quests. The result seems to be very net positive for them.
Bugs are part of alpha testing, that's to be expected, don't worry
And thanks for the Alpha 2 release, keep rolling!
@Jetah said in Int, is the most important crafting stat!:
(...)i can tell you that people will min-max and 'best builds' will develop(...)
Most certainly, but that's inevitable regardless on how you design a game.
@Jetah said in Int, is the most important crafting stat!:
(...)I dont need to play the game or even test it(...)
And that is where I'd dare to disagree. Crafting is 'just' one aspect, so, if let's say constitution provides enough of an health/survive-chance in combat, plenty of people would flock to that regardless of the crafting bonus int provides.
Don't get me wrong, I am not much in favor of the current system, but I'm willing to provide faith in the developers and test what they have in mind before flat out condemning something.
@Jetah said in Int, is the most important crafting stat!:
(...)Wouldn't it be better to acknowledge that INT is a problem when it's the primary attribute for every craft?
The problem with finding a problem (pun intended) before a game is feature complete is simply that you can not properly weight different functionality by that point in time. Frequency of appearance is only one factor.
(...)I'd prefer to let DS know now than when it's in beta and harder to change the UI and other systems.
Given an object oriented approach, there's nothing more trivial than that. Even on a functional programming design, that is far from a challenge.
Wouldn't that be something to adjust and discuss in/during beta, when the game is feature complete and one can really evaluate and compare the concrete usefulness of stats?
Welcome to Fractured!
I hope you're going to enjoy your time here!
Welcome to Fractured!
I hope you're going to enjoy your time here!
Welcome to Fractured!
I hope you're going to enjoy your time here!
Welcome to Fractured!
I hope you're going to enjoy your time here!
I'd rather the developers focus and spend their time developing the game right now
Later down the road, I'm sure they are going to revisit the Foundation system again.
Welcome to Fractured!
I hope you're going to enjoy your time here!
Welcome to Fractured!
I hope you're going to enjoy your time here!
@Jetah said in How many channels will there be if implemented?:
(...)i'm thinking more from the datacenter side(...)
Basically, the important point for this thread/discussion is the fact that it is difficult for a game company to require more physical resources than can be provided by Google's Cloud data centers. The tricky point is in software implementation and that is what only time/testing will tell.
@Jetah said in How many channels will there be if implemented?:
at least with using 2 of 10 you could turn off 5 of them and save that power until your 4-ish are at 80%.
I think you misunderstood what I intended to explain.
In a traditional concept, where, like you mentioned before, a customer is warranted a certain number of blades, it doesn't matter if these blades run at 0, 1, 5, 10, 50 or 100%, they have to run. That is what you paid for as a customer and if you're not getting it, it's fraudulent. Since, as a company, you likely have high and low times for customer access (you see these spikes when looking at almost any game over 24 hours), you need to plan for the high end usage and most your hardware runs idle during the low end usage phase.
With cloud computing, you are not guaranteed a specific number of blades, but instead a specific amount of resource (per time). Where and how you're getting these resources is abstracted from you (black box). Your game company still has high and low usage times, but now, you can just pay for more during the high and less during the low times. And in the back end the cloud hosting company can mix and match you with other customers, without you ever noticing. That way, while you have a low time, you are paired with others that have a high time. In the end, you just share one physical blade, where in a traditional scenario, you'd be on two blades one running at maybe 25% and the other at 75%.
Sweet, congratulations on your constant and steady progress!
Nothing like gameplay to instill confidence in a developer!
@Jetah said in [How many channels will there be if implemented?]
(...)i would have thought it would have been part of the same hardware. instead of using 5% over 25 servers they'd use 90% over 2. this way the power usage is lower.
No, it would use more power. The reason is as simple as you trying to fit the most baggage into a car when going on a ride with friends. You would rather try to squeeze some small bits into free spaces instead of driving with a second car.
Cloud computing relies on the same mathematics as assurance companies and banks. Not all of a customers resources are used at all times, so you can take what is not used and hand it off to another customer in the meanwhile.
Actually, you can even try it out yourself if you're curious Google's cloud has a 'free tier'