Best Of
Re: 📝 Dev Discussion #67 - AoE Form and Function 💣
1. Area of Effect (AoE) abilities are a common staple in MMORPG combat. We’re curious to know what your thoughts are on AoE abilities and the way they’re displayed.
I think Mages are the dominant users of AoEs, however I think its important that all Archtypes have some limited access.
For both the user and the target, its important that the AoE has a very distinct indicator on the ground that doesnt get obstructed by terrain or verticality.
I think that if you dont have visual indicators on the ground, it harms people playing at low settings, and forces players to turn up the graphics which can turn the battlefield into a soup of VFX.
2. In PvP, which Area of Effect (AoE) abilities, should be telegraphed to enemies?
When telegraphing to enemies, it should be all non-instant cast AoE abilities within a certain reasonable distance to where there could be a threat to the user.
If the AoE has a well defined shape, there should be an equivalent telegraph overlayed on the terrain, whether thats a circle, square, cone, column, or oval. This includes abilities like the Rangers Air Strike, or the Bards Pheonix Saga ability.
If the AoE is a radius around the person casting the AoE, the telegraph should move with the user (such as bards melodies).
The only AoE abilities that I dont expect telegraphs for are those that can rapidly change, such as the mages prismatic beam, however I expect those types of abilities to be exceptionally rare.
3. How clearly should AoEs be to enemy and friendly players?
The AoE that the user is casting should be treated with the most priority, since its a direct feedback to the users actions.
The AoE that is casted against the user should be treated with the second level of priority, since it provides a level of danger to the user.
The AoE that is casted by the users party or raid should be treated with the lowest level of priority.
Additionally, the telegraph that gets overlayed on the ground needs to be color coded to differentiate between friendly and enemy. Obviously you dont want to color code the entire ability, but the telegraph thats overlayed on the ground needs to be differentiated.
Ultimately, my dream would be to be able to adjust the VFX for each ability individually, since I think it would be difficult for Intrepid to match the fidelity & intensity of each abilities level of VFX. However I expect this would be a UI nightmare.
4. Do your thoughts differ in a PvE setting?
Not really, while everyone will claim to have the sensory processing capabilities of Spiderman, very few people are going to be able to deal with all that information, and it will simply overload them. As I said previously, the users own actions take the most priority, while the party members AoEs take the least priority.
In a PvE situation, especially a raid, the enemies AoE is much more important than the raid members.
5. Do you have examples from other games in which AoE abilities are presented in a way you like? If so, please share them!
I would reccomend looking at the way GW2 handled displaying AoEs. You can specifically take a look at Necromancers that use Staffs. I personally didnt like the class design of the Staff Necromancer, since almost all of the abilities were AoE, but they were displayed well.
Here are some clips of the AoE placement in action.
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxpvxKFHADArzAHEcgC0T0UYwagzXfORGq?si=zRfG0XsdI7Dga1fc
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxFHk-K-kdnjUftgP68Mi30F2YkgceN_iS?si=c-1NyyTdhOZmbPHZ
Another GW2 AoE clip:
https://youtu.be/gih36QLKj5A
I think Mages are the dominant users of AoEs, however I think its important that all Archtypes have some limited access.
For both the user and the target, its important that the AoE has a very distinct indicator on the ground that doesnt get obstructed by terrain or verticality.
I think that if you dont have visual indicators on the ground, it harms people playing at low settings, and forces players to turn up the graphics which can turn the battlefield into a soup of VFX.
2. In PvP, which Area of Effect (AoE) abilities, should be telegraphed to enemies?
When telegraphing to enemies, it should be all non-instant cast AoE abilities within a certain reasonable distance to where there could be a threat to the user.
If the AoE has a well defined shape, there should be an equivalent telegraph overlayed on the terrain, whether thats a circle, square, cone, column, or oval. This includes abilities like the Rangers Air Strike, or the Bards Pheonix Saga ability.
If the AoE is a radius around the person casting the AoE, the telegraph should move with the user (such as bards melodies).
The only AoE abilities that I dont expect telegraphs for are those that can rapidly change, such as the mages prismatic beam, however I expect those types of abilities to be exceptionally rare.
3. How clearly should AoEs be to enemy and friendly players?
The AoE that the user is casting should be treated with the most priority, since its a direct feedback to the users actions.
The AoE that is casted against the user should be treated with the second level of priority, since it provides a level of danger to the user.
The AoE that is casted by the users party or raid should be treated with the lowest level of priority.
Additionally, the telegraph that gets overlayed on the ground needs to be color coded to differentiate between friendly and enemy. Obviously you dont want to color code the entire ability, but the telegraph thats overlayed on the ground needs to be differentiated.
Ultimately, my dream would be to be able to adjust the VFX for each ability individually, since I think it would be difficult for Intrepid to match the fidelity & intensity of each abilities level of VFX. However I expect this would be a UI nightmare.
4. Do your thoughts differ in a PvE setting?
Not really, while everyone will claim to have the sensory processing capabilities of Spiderman, very few people are going to be able to deal with all that information, and it will simply overload them. As I said previously, the users own actions take the most priority, while the party members AoEs take the least priority.
In a PvE situation, especially a raid, the enemies AoE is much more important than the raid members.
5. Do you have examples from other games in which AoE abilities are presented in a way you like? If so, please share them!
I would reccomend looking at the way GW2 handled displaying AoEs. You can specifically take a look at Necromancers that use Staffs. I personally didnt like the class design of the Staff Necromancer, since almost all of the abilities were AoE, but they were displayed well.
Here are some clips of the AoE placement in action.
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxpvxKFHADArzAHEcgC0T0UYwagzXfORGq?si=zRfG0XsdI7Dga1fc
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxFHk-K-kdnjUftgP68Mi30F2YkgceN_iS?si=c-1NyyTdhOZmbPHZ
Another GW2 AoE clip:
https://youtu.be/gih36QLKj5A
Re: 📝 Dev Discussion #67 - AoE Form and Function 💣
Interesting.
I think in a modern large scale MMO, AoE attacks should be telegraphed in PvP, and in PvE. Imagine being in a large scale 100v100 fight. It will go one of two ways.
1. Players are incredibly frustrated because they are randomly being damaged and can't really comprehend what is happening due to the large amount of effects and players. Sure, they can make out some longer, more defined AoE attacks sometimes to avoid, but otherwise it is difficult for them.
2. Players are frustrated because enemy AoE attacks are telegraphed, and the entire battlefield floor is a some shade of flashing red because there are so many AoE attacks being used.
How do you balance this? I don't think it will be possible to please everyone, and I don't think it will be super possible to make it a very accessible user experience on either end of the spectrum.
An example of what I personally like is GW2, there are red shaded floor spots of Aoe attacks, and even an indicator of WHEN the damage will be done for certain attacks. This is really nice in PvE encounters, and also appreciated in PvP.
However, it can be more interesting than just red circles everywhere. AoE abilities can be telegraphed intuitively based on their effects. Like what if you are casting a meteor shower over 2s, the floor could start cracking, or the meteors could appear in the sky before actually falling to the ground and doing damage. This would be more interesting, and leave it to players to learn over time what AoE abilities look like before they actively affect you. Instant AoE's are harder to telegraph warnings about, but as they happen it can be tastefully done effects to make it obvious where it is hitting, or a well defined red polygon that shows the accurate area of effect.
Either way, I'm sure there is a sweet spot somewhere about this.
I think in a modern large scale MMO, AoE attacks should be telegraphed in PvP, and in PvE. Imagine being in a large scale 100v100 fight. It will go one of two ways.
1. Players are incredibly frustrated because they are randomly being damaged and can't really comprehend what is happening due to the large amount of effects and players. Sure, they can make out some longer, more defined AoE attacks sometimes to avoid, but otherwise it is difficult for them.
2. Players are frustrated because enemy AoE attacks are telegraphed, and the entire battlefield floor is a some shade of flashing red because there are so many AoE attacks being used.
How do you balance this? I don't think it will be possible to please everyone, and I don't think it will be super possible to make it a very accessible user experience on either end of the spectrum.
An example of what I personally like is GW2, there are red shaded floor spots of Aoe attacks, and even an indicator of WHEN the damage will be done for certain attacks. This is really nice in PvE encounters, and also appreciated in PvP.
However, it can be more interesting than just red circles everywhere. AoE abilities can be telegraphed intuitively based on their effects. Like what if you are casting a meteor shower over 2s, the floor could start cracking, or the meteors could appear in the sky before actually falling to the ground and doing damage. This would be more interesting, and leave it to players to learn over time what AoE abilities look like before they actively affect you. Instant AoE's are harder to telegraph warnings about, but as they happen it can be tastefully done effects to make it obvious where it is hitting, or a well defined red polygon that shows the accurate area of effect.
Either way, I'm sure there is a sweet spot somewhere about this.
Michael
10
Re: 📝 Dev Discussion #67 - AoE Form and Function 💣
I'm curious to know how AoEs work in the PvE setting, especially relating to flagging.
If you're unflagged, what happens when another unflagged player walks into your AoE?
What if they're a combatant? What if they're corrupted? What if they're corrupted AND attacking you?
My main concern is whether players can abuse your use of AoEs to flag you against your will.
You have to flag before aoe affects players, supposedly you can even change it so you can only target combatants.
Corrupted players can be attacked by non-combatants without them flagging which I really hope they change.
Re: 📝 Dev Discussion #67 - AoE Form and Function 💣
clear, distinct edges of aoes via colouring or customizable settings that take precdence over the rendering of the skill effects would be very helpful for large-scale pvp/group content tbh.
lolage
1
Re: Ideas on goldsellers and ban that feels?
They need detection rules which detect bots and rules which monitor player accounts for sudden and unexpected changes in available resources.
Also the banning aspect...I really believe they should accept only limited number of credit card issuers and credit card types, and ban not the means of the payment, but the identity associated if that is possible. No pre-paid bs.
Also the banning aspect...I really believe they should accept only limited number of credit card issuers and credit card types, and ban not the means of the payment, but the identity associated if that is possible. No pre-paid bs.
Re: Node alliances should be thought about like factions
Peeps, learn this... gamers will not hate the unknown people from the other nodes, they will hate the people within their own node. There will be a lot of beef happening because the dungeons, the trees, the flowers, etc, almost always you will hate the people who live around you
Re: Node alliances should be thought about like factions
I do not care about 'factions' unless they are natural and real consequences of how people approach the game, otherwise they are just fake reasons for conflict and snowball almost immediately. Node Alliances that are supported too much by ingame functions that aren't either 'economic' or 'philosophical' feel too 'fake' to me.
A simple opinion to illustrate my point:
I think New World would have been a much better game if they made more effort to make the Factions much more ideologically different, with more clarity about it. I don't just mean flavor either, I mean outcomes, ways they handle things, bonuses, etc.
New World couldn't escape this because its roots are as a PvP game, not a PvX one. I'm used to playing PvE or PvX 'territory control' type MMOs, and the thing that keeps those going is that they are better at making the 'factions' feel properly distinct in how they approach things.
It wouldn't have been as disturbing for New World's servers with their 2000 Concurrent Users to be taken over by one 'Faction', if it really just meant 'everyone on this server prefers the same playstyle'. Because that's fine, it becomes a 'PvE server', sure, but with only 2000 Concurrents, who really cares?
Ashes is too large for that, but I also don't want the usual artificial 'we're supposed to fight because we belong to different Nodes/Nations'. I want there to be something behind that friction. RP-PvPers can use it, Econ players can use it, PvE players can mostly ignore it, and the GM/CM team can build off it.
It adds to the world, for me. If Intrepid makes Node Alliances do most of the things mentioned in the OP, I'd expect only drama/'abuses' of those systems, and a hollow feeling, for me personally.
I do not mind #3, I would expect something like it as part of the Vassal system because it's easier to understand for the 'common man' than economic reports or whatever.
A simple opinion to illustrate my point:
I think New World would have been a much better game if they made more effort to make the Factions much more ideologically different, with more clarity about it. I don't just mean flavor either, I mean outcomes, ways they handle things, bonuses, etc.
New World couldn't escape this because its roots are as a PvP game, not a PvX one. I'm used to playing PvE or PvX 'territory control' type MMOs, and the thing that keeps those going is that they are better at making the 'factions' feel properly distinct in how they approach things.
It wouldn't have been as disturbing for New World's servers with their 2000 Concurrent Users to be taken over by one 'Faction', if it really just meant 'everyone on this server prefers the same playstyle'. Because that's fine, it becomes a 'PvE server', sure, but with only 2000 Concurrents, who really cares?
Ashes is too large for that, but I also don't want the usual artificial 'we're supposed to fight because we belong to different Nodes/Nations'. I want there to be something behind that friction. RP-PvPers can use it, Econ players can use it, PvE players can mostly ignore it, and the GM/CM team can build off it.
It adds to the world, for me. If Intrepid makes Node Alliances do most of the things mentioned in the OP, I'd expect only drama/'abuses' of those systems, and a hollow feeling, for me personally.
I do not mind #3, I would expect something like it as part of the Vassal system because it's easier to understand for the 'common man' than economic reports or whatever.
Azherae
4
Re: Vassal resentment
after today's podcast. I am 100% one of the petty & vindictive people that won't accept being a vassal no matter what the reward structure looks like. the thought of someone else being in an inherently better position than me (if not mechanically then prestige wise) is something I tend to act in resentment of. I would rather do everything to tear down the owning node than join it in any capacity.
there are absolutely going to be people like that in the game.
now that being said. we have not actually tried the vassal system at all. but what are the community's initial view on it?
it seems to me that a lot of people are having a gut reaction to immediately want to rebel but are there some who see this in a more optimistic light?
The average players have to understand that a hierarchical structure is just a content generator, the idea of being at the bottom of the chain is making the whole thing fall apart.
Ashes need enough gaps among the many rules so people have the freedom to destroy the chain if they want to
Re: World boss and greater loot drop idea/discussion
Very much in favor of gatherer systems over the tiny amount of gear loot from World Bosses, but caravans can only launch from a town so it’d have to be some other system if there’s gonna be a decay feature.
I believe caravans can be launched from anywhere it just takes more time to launch the further from a node u are
Their current design plan is to only let it launch from a specific building in a node and I haven't heard any rumors to the contrary, so any decayable trophy loot would have to be lugged back manually by an induvial before the expiration.
When you destroy a caravan, you can create a new one right there to take all the loot, we saw as much during the pvp caravan stream
Not sure if it was locked to only after destroying a caravan, but they did wait like 5 minutes for the caravan to arrive
That's not creating it right there though, you're calling it up from the nearest town where you've already set one up, hence that wait time based on distance from the node. So while a rapid decay sounds interesting, it wouldn't work out due to caravans not arriving/spawning quickly at the dungeon area (which I wouldn't want them to, to be clear. Wouldn't be good for the spying/plotting systems they want when it could be done on a whim). I'm also pretty sure it'll just be for successful Caravan attacks, since as far as I could tell the cargo was loaded up before the original Caravan actually launched from town.
I'd much rather a generous timer (15 minutes or so) and it require a manual trek back to the node the player wants to buff up, at risk of dropping on death.
The decay timers were just a idea, it would obviously need balancing
There wasn’t any indication on wether the new caravan to collect from the looted one, and the crates were on the ground until the new caravan finished setting up
I based it more on the first caravan video where we saw the caravan being loaded up before the team went out of town to call to it to launch from the town, and I can’t remember if there was any UI system brought up for placing the cargo of a defeated caravan into that empty one they called from town.
Still think the gather from everything in the boss arena, including the boss to fill a caravan would be the best way to make raiding and world bosses more satisfying and have a risk/reward
Need/greed on random shit items each boss kill is boring and if it’s gear, well then there is no risk on getting it back to the node to sell/ breakdown/wear, since it can’t be dropped on death
On this we definitely agree. I think Steven’s comment about Hunters not having any interaction with the dragon is a huge backpedal. It started as ‘you’ll want to bring Gatherers to get the best drops’ to ‘Hunters will just be hunting specific mobs and get nothing extra from world bosses’
Caeryl
2
Re: Node alliances should be thought about like factions
That's why you need to think of node alliances as factions. In faction based games your harmful actions against people in your faction are limited. Node war is a harmful action, and you can't do it to allies. But...you can still slap people around in your faction if they are jerks. It's nice.
And like with factions, you don't have total control over who is in your alliance, since node membership looks like it will be first-come first-serve. AKA you joined Horde and your current node is the Barrens
The classic guild affiliation is much more PvP related
Look, I play factional warfare everyday and the limitations create unecessary drame ingame and almost everyday people ask for a civil war within the faction so we can sort out some stuff
Because we are locked within the faction now I am creating neutral alts so i can kill people from my own faction, they will get hurt bad and it is a chore to me creating more alts and skilling them. Everybody loses like this!!
Just let me kill and declare war anyone I want