Welcome to Crestfall Gaming

Register now to Crestfall Gaming. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

loeth

Member
  • Content count

    76
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

68 Excellent

About loeth

  • Rank
    Master Sergeant
  1. Prot warriors are maybe the least class in demand for raiding. Each raid needs 2-3 (which are players with VERY high attendance) and has other fury warriors who mostly also have tanking gear either for OT or for replacement. If one of the prot wars stops playing, they simple promote one of the DPS wars to tank and recruit another fury war.
  2. Have you played on any servers recently? Horde is more popular.
  3. Elysium PvP is having issues with this.. Faction imbalance in high level zones is very considerable. In Un'goro, Winterspring, Felwood, Burning Steppes and Searing Gorge there are AT LEAST 3 horde for each alliance. Ganking is very brutal indeed and leveling as ally past 50 is a very, very bad experience. It all started with the normal >50% horde population and its more inclination to PvP. Since more horde were queueing for BGs, they have to wait longer. What to do while waiting (given you are a ranker)? Go out in the world to farm honor. This means that well geared 60 horde started to roam the 50+ leveling zones. Ally did not, as their queue was super fast... Slowly this started to escalate as more horde were joining BG queues and roaming. This forced slowly ally to simply stop going into these zones, which in turn made the faction imbalance in them worse and worse. Status quo: There is usually 5 horde to one alliance in 50+ zones. Ally are either leveling in dungeons (there is a big gap between ~52 ST and 56+ BRD, most people will only take 58+ to BRD and LBRS, so leveling in dungeons past 52 is complicated), leveling in isolated zones without quests (no horde), like some parts of Silithus or simply giving up. In turn, this slower influx of 60 ally make the BG situation worse and the cycle can't be broken anymore. Having both horde and ally toons there, the difference in leveling experience is huge and it's unsure to where this situation is headed. The only blizzlike solution to this is, of course, don't allow such a high population to connect to the same game world, which was designed for 2k players. I would very much prefer smaller realms, of 2~3k and cross-server BGs than this stupid mess that Elysium is. (Cross server BGs were ruled out if I remember correctly, due to the complexity to code such a feature. A shame. I guess CF could really leave a mark if it had working X-server BG, even if that alone took a few more months to get it right)
  4. Vanilla leveling is too brutal and too long for that. Imagine one of those murloc quests. When you are about to kill one it flees and aggro another. You had 70% HP so no problems. You fight it until it flees and aggros another 2 murlocs. Now you had 40%. Damn, you pop all consumables and cooldowns to fight both with 40% HP. But then it runs and aggroes another... The mechanics are pretty harsh for perma-death, or at least the players are not used to the concept of always thinking about fighting in a clear area, alwaya pulling back A LOT, etc... Would be interesting for sure, but very hierarchical. As the few players who would make it to high levels first would have a lot of power over the game world. An interesting concept nonetheless.
  5. Common folks. Let's look at it with an open mind. The high respec cost in vanilla, in my opinion, had two purposes: A) money sink, as raiders were sometimes spending 100g a week in respecs and B) to make players chose wisely their builds. Running often not one of those optimal specs for raiding, but rather a more versatile spec, capable of raiding, farming, PvPing and some talents just for the fun of it. Now, let's discuss these two purposes in the case of a lowered respec cost. Would lower respec costs mean less people will be running sub-optimal, jack-of-all-trades specs? Possibily, since more players could afford the respect cost and they would then actually switch builds more often. But now think about this. While it would be a pitty indeed that those amazingly interesting hybrid specs would become a rare sight, more players would actually be respeccing. Remember the main purpose of respec cost: it would now work better as a money sink, as many players who were finding the 100g prohibitive now feel more confortable doing it. Now, for those 'rich' players, those who were respeccing for 100g a week, a lower respec will not change much their situation. The money sink purpose will continue to serve and they didn't ran hybrid specs anyway. These players usually are the so-called minmax 'hardcore' raiders and often have a lot of time to play weekly (to farm the gold and consumables). Note that these are not the majority. So IMO a higher respec cost only makes players with less playing time run hybrid builds. The purpose of money sink continues to be there even if the respec cost is lower, as then more raiders feel comfortable with paying the weekly fees to compensate for the lower gold spent by 'rich' players. I played a mage on K2 until AQ and I tell you. With respec cost of 5g, we were all respeccing often 10+ times per week. It brings also a new dimension of experimentation and freedom. Hell we were fine-tunning specs to run Strat Living and 4-man UBRS. Finding the perfect build for the each purpose is very fun (anyone remembers Guild Wars 1?? That game was purely finding the best build and tactics for each map) Summing it up: Pros: I think lower respec costs are only prohibitive for non-hardcore players. It would serve arguably even better as a money sink if the average player also respecs weekly. It allows for more freedom and experimentation, which is very fun. Cons: Less 'blizzlike', whatever that means after 12 years of tactics, specs, itemization improvements. Less players running jack-of-all-trades specs. I have many problems with the term blizzlike anyway. People scream for it without really knowing what they want. If they want all 'values' and 'parameters' of the game to be set up to those done by Blizzard 12 years ago, they they want 'small' servers, scarce resources in case of a high population server, and other blizzlike problems. If they want a gaming experience similar to that one of 12 years ago, then they want resources abundance tunned to the server's head count, a feel of discovery and experimentation (boss tunning, lower respec cost, etc) and small but little improvements or bug fixes. I go for the second one, a blizzlike EXPERIENCE instead of blizzlike 'values'. Lowering the respec cost only makes the game more fun for curious and experimenting players, as hardcore raiders were respeccing anyway and the money sink function continues to be fulfilled.
  6. You get one sixth of two times a triple mount.
  7. I'd say a disc priest is more versatile than a Haladin. You have better damage burst capability as priest, which can be very useful in wPvP. Ocasional dot and fear are also great. But of course pallies are hybrid by nature. I can imagine playing a trully hybrid paladin in wpvp to be quite fun, but you mentioned you wanted to be a 'healer' so no hybrid build I assume.
  8. ?? RFD is not so bad. Loot is great for its level range, but the design is too similar to RFK.
  9. Paladins provide a reasonable edge over Shaman buff-wise. Alliance raids have it easier because they have better buffs. But usually the top Horde guilds are on par with the best Alliance guilds, meaning finally that Horde is better, because the same is achieved with less powerful buffs...
  10. Mage or hunter would be the most efficient.
  11. Ah, glad to hear that. Thanks!
  12. Good luck and thanks for hearing some of us out and answering, Elicas. I hope the bandwidth of information from CF to the 'community' increases. @Outstanding, do you still have access to the server? Is the fishing testing complete?
  13. When Kronos 2 released, I managed to join a cool guild and we leveled in large groups of dungeon farming to level 60 (quest areas were overpopulated). While farming LBRS for a week in 10 man raids until we had some UBRS keys I was hearing a neighbour also play something during the farm. Due to voice chat, we found out to be in the same game, guild and raid! -moments when you realize the world is indeed small :-)
  14. I very gladly would pay for quality. I still subscribe to Ryzom 2 years since I last played it, just because it is such a brillant game. But I wonder how good can CF really turn out. Some people who really care about the server like Elicas (thanks for the reply) and Outstanding, maybe the 2 most active community members, have no voice in this little dictatorship of Asura. On top of that, many things point now to a very late 2017 release at best. Between keeping your 'community' benched and then disappointed with delays or just announcing a 2018 release, the latters seems more reasonable. In past matters like the LGN, it turned out the community was right. Ignoring it over and over is no longer a mistake, but stupidity. Nevertheless, knowing Crestfall will also be my last WoW experience, I also hope it turns out to be a real/good server.
  15. The big question is: why Asura decided to hide development status? If development is slower than imagined and they still need 2 years to release, they would benefit from saying it: people would stop creating these threads, stop asking for updates and would not have their 'last hopes' broken by a major 'delay' (from what they expected, or were told). Then hyping it now is a bad idea and they should just be frank and cool things down. If they are getting comfortable with the progress and release is emminent, they would also benefit from saying it: hyping the server and atracting a big player base is needed in order to get a healty population and to provide a good WoW experience. Elysium is bleeding players by the hour and many of these might leave the emulation scene for good if there is no clear signs of a good alternative. Players from projects running 2.0+ will also come, but in much lower numbers as CF supposedly is planned to start with 1.X. If development is on track and release is to be expected until the end of 2017, then where the hell is the website with a progress bar? Why bi-weekly updates where very basic aspects of development are being described? (Energy generation, weapon procs, etc...) There will be a plethora of higher complexity bugs only seen during a larger scale testing but from what Darkrasp describes, they are still plagued by lower level ones. My guess to answer the question formulated in the first line of this post is: 'because they know release will be way overdue their 2017 mark'. Judging simply from the frequency and content of the so-called 'Darkrasp's Updates', that seems to be a reasonable conclusion. If you disagree, please let me know why.