Best Of
Re: Loot System Changes
Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: »You gotta put control in their hands if you're not rewarding everyone in the raid. And if you are rewarding everyone - that goes against the economy that Intrepid have supposedly planned for the game.But honestly all that isn't even the biggest point of this thread, it's that putting loot control in the hands of players invites and enables bad behavior with no consequence. Steven said he won't allow any form of DPS meter because it would, or so he believes it would, negatively affect the community, despite the fact that it's an invaluable tool for players to understand their skill level and where they need to improve. How is it that these sort of outdated loot distribution systems, which are much more easily abused by the inherent way they work, are not only the permitted, but required?
And if you don't want everyone getting valuable loot and are satisfied with people getting 1 crafting material each - we agree.
I expect 40-man raidbosses to drop 1-2 full items and crafting materials for 1-2 more (talking about BiS stuff here, for context). And I expect those items to requre ~10-20 mats each, so the boss would be dropping ~40 instances of loot overall.
If you think that would satisfy all the people asking for "fair" loot - cool. I personally doubt that. Then on top of that, if you think that those mats won't be immediately pulled to craft full items (unless the boss drops ~40 absolutely random crafting mats) - we simply disagree there, because in my experience of this exact looting design, those mats always get used to craft items for a person who deserves them.
Honestly yeah I think it would be enough, though I’d want the craft material and amount to be determined by Gathering ranks like I mentioned before. Even if it’s minor, it’s an incremental step toward an upgrade and it’s enough to lessen a sting of missing out on a gear drop or the rarer items.
Guilds coming together with those drops of their own volition to get someone a gear upgrade would also feel much better and rewarding socially than having one person taking all the loot and handing it off with no input from anyone else. One fosters genuine goodwill, the other is going to inspire bitterness.
‘No no, that’s not your loot. It’s OUR loot.’ isn’t something that people enjoy, generally speaking, and all that should be done willingly by players, not mandated by game mechanics.
Caeryl
1
Re: Loot System Changes
Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: »I gotta add my feedback here as well, cause ooooohhh boi we've got a ton of "modern gamers" here.
Steven, I love the current looting rules (though the need/pass bs could go jump out a window) and loot design, so please keep it. All these "every single participant of the raid deserves loot" people are not the TA.
Did you not read any of the comments? Everyone who posted input are veteran MMO players.
The only possible reason you could like that thoughtless system is if you have a history of being a guild leader or an officer.
And that's cool if intrepid wants to make a game built on those systems to give sweats power. The game is gonna flop hard though. The second a new player or a veteran, with some form of a brain and respect for their own time and effort, encounters their first bad roll, they aren't tolerating it and will move on to a better gane. We have a handful of better options out there these days that respect our time and efforts.
Mdini
2
Re: Consternation surrounding the 8x8 Class system and how to move forward.
Dygz, it might be important for you to know that if you're trying to speak of it 'concretely'...
The devs actually don't yet know the Augment Schools for each secondary with certainty. Steven was asked to provide the ones for Bard in the Bard stream and gave an answer that very specifically 'provided two, then clarified that they had not decided on the other two yet'.
This is where a lot of my concern has been coming from, at least.
I'm not willing to assume that they know/have decided all four of the Augment Schools for ... anything, actually, but definitely if Steven gave an equivalent answer for Rogue, I would not be surprised.
(if you interpreted that answer differently for some reason, I'd like to hear your thoughts on why)
The devs actually don't yet know the Augment Schools for each secondary with certainty. Steven was asked to provide the ones for Bard in the Bard stream and gave an answer that very specifically 'provided two, then clarified that they had not decided on the other two yet'.
This is where a lot of my concern has been coming from, at least.
I'm not willing to assume that they know/have decided all four of the Augment Schools for ... anything, actually, but definitely if Steven gave an equivalent answer for Rogue, I would not be surprised.
(if you interpreted that answer differently for some reason, I'd like to hear your thoughts on why)
Azherae
3
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
Solo players are not particularly interested in being uber-efficient.
Dygz
5
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
AirborneBerserker wrote: »I gave you a clear answer: I know that Intrepid makes mistakes and if you cant even filter that from 13 words, how are we to discuss more complex systems than that?
This was your "clear anwser"Just so I understand this right: The entirety of Intrepid, a studio full of veteran MMORPG players themselves with the additional experience of being game designers for years if not decades, ALL overlooked as you said it "way larger problems" in almost all its core systems and you have figured it out despite only having joined something like 2 months ago? With all due respect despite the fact that Intrepid obviously is not perfect and on point with each of its decisions, that sounds to me like you are just quite full of yourself even though nothing indicates that you are either knowledgeable about the project or game development.
First of all there are 113 words there not 13. Second of all the first 65 words are you making a reductio ad absurdum argument in direct reference to me asking you "Do you think the devs can make a mistake". That tells me you don't think the devs can make mistakes.
The next 35 words of that paragraph are you saying "Intrepid obviously is not perfect" which isn't what I asked about. I asked specifically "Do you think the devs can make a mistake?" If you think that was a "clear answer" then you are very wrong. You said "Intrepid" at no point did I refer to the entire studio
If you wanted to give a clear answer it should look something like this; "Yes I agree that the devs can make a mistake." Then after that say whatever else you want. Use the same language because it's possible for intrepid to not be perfect, and the devs to not make a mistake.
Old man yells at cloud
Caeryl
3
Re: 📝 Dev Discussion #67 - AoE Form and Function 💣
-PvP AoE needs to be discernable. Whether hard cc, slows, cleaves, or damage. Healing should be easily able to discern in its own way between enemies and friendly indicators that looks environmentally flush.
-Thematic AoE is somewhat acceptable, i shouldn't always be able to see a single "Meteor" drop even tho its going to knock me to the ground.
-PvE environments that consistently show the floor effects seems too cookie cutter in most cases. Often an ability is telegraphed already, a floor effect for EVERY mob gets draining for the design. (However some raids can be the difference for heavy floor mechanics unless it already has great animation). It wont always need a cut "red" circle, cone, or floor effect that adds a flair of fun to learning mobs or mechanics.
Friendly fire & unfriendly fire in a PvP scenario should be shown without blinding or taking too much animation which is already headed in a great direction. If there is a mass of people. I want to see the bards range, I want to discern where the healer is from its unique animations.
A boar holding its head down and hind up ready to charge is absolutely an immersive telegraph. Or a minotaur with its horns down for example. A dragon spreading its wings, or planting itself taking a deep breath.
-Thematic AoE is somewhat acceptable, i shouldn't always be able to see a single "Meteor" drop even tho its going to knock me to the ground.
-PvE environments that consistently show the floor effects seems too cookie cutter in most cases. Often an ability is telegraphed already, a floor effect for EVERY mob gets draining for the design. (However some raids can be the difference for heavy floor mechanics unless it already has great animation). It wont always need a cut "red" circle, cone, or floor effect that adds a flair of fun to learning mobs or mechanics.
Friendly fire & unfriendly fire in a PvP scenario should be shown without blinding or taking too much animation which is already headed in a great direction. If there is a mass of people. I want to see the bards range, I want to discern where the healer is from its unique animations.
A boar holding its head down and hind up ready to charge is absolutely an immersive telegraph. Or a minotaur with its horns down for example. A dragon spreading its wings, or planting itself taking a deep breath.
Re: 📝 Dev Discussion #67 - AoE Form and Function 💣
Limited AoE please. The harsh reality is that unless you make each individual mob strong enough to not be AoE'd down, then the gameplay will become tedious and boring like BDO. BDO's entire gameplay loop got ruined because everyone can AOE everything down and take no damage because they're too mobile. It's interesting in the beginning but the long term ramifications of this is that no matter what kind of content you add, it all plays the same because you just AoE everything down in the exact same way.
I think AoE should only be used in a context of a swarm of 4 or more mobs being held together by a tank and healer. No one should be able to be tanky enough to hold multiple mobs and AoE them down. If there's AoE CC, it should be on a long enough cooldown that you cannot do the WoW mage thing where it's the only class that can kit a whole group of mobs around by itself. I know mages love that but the reality is that it just breaks the game on so many levels. The whole game would turn into mages getting gold by boosting players through dungeons, same as classic WoW.
The best place AoE abilities can be in is in situational rotations where you are in a group, or specific encounters where the mob splits into multiple mobs on death. Besides that, the best PVE encounter is against a well made mob with actual mechanics to play around.
As for PvP, it's best to nerf AoE damage as much as possible because everytime a ranged character can do good AoE damage, group PvP just devolves into "Who has the most AoE to dump on the other group wins".
I think AoE should only be used in a context of a swarm of 4 or more mobs being held together by a tank and healer. No one should be able to be tanky enough to hold multiple mobs and AoE them down. If there's AoE CC, it should be on a long enough cooldown that you cannot do the WoW mage thing where it's the only class that can kit a whole group of mobs around by itself. I know mages love that but the reality is that it just breaks the game on so many levels. The whole game would turn into mages getting gold by boosting players through dungeons, same as classic WoW.
The best place AoE abilities can be in is in situational rotations where you are in a group, or specific encounters where the mob splits into multiple mobs on death. Besides that, the best PVE encounter is against a well made mob with actual mechanics to play around.
As for PvP, it's best to nerf AoE damage as much as possible because everytime a ranged character can do good AoE damage, group PvP just devolves into "Who has the most AoE to dump on the other group wins".
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.
- 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.
This is exactly my thinking as well.
But a lot of people default to - different faction = KoS. For them, just the fact that another player is in another faction is enough of a excuse to PK them. I guess I'm looking for something more than that.
Early WoW was like that based on what I've seen, as the general setting and lore set up was really about 2 sides going to war against each other.
Archeage in theory was similar, but it just didn't feel like that at all. Besides, you could purple against your own faction, you'd see alliances between different factions, aka one guild turning against another guild from the same faction, while getting support from another guild from a different faction.
Factions are okay, if the general setting of the game, lore, and gameplay elements really emphasize and give you good reasons to PK another faction. In most cases, that's just not the case, and it's just like you mentioned - "fake".
Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: »Which faction game worked like this? Afaik WoW descended into "pick this faction or you won't be able to play normally" relatively quickly. Same was true in NW afaik. Don't remember which other games had factions (I think AA did, but I dunno how its servers turned out in terms of faction sizes), but an example from 20 years ago and one from just 4 years ago kinda imply that faction-based gameplay barely changed throughout the years.I personally think that factions are healthy for a game's longevity, as it gives the more casual a shelter inside a preset group. Once a game only has hardcore elite players (because they've driven everyone else away), it's going to fade fast.
One faction becomes stronger, then all the wealkings go to that faction to join the strong people, which then forces anyone else to join it as well, cause otherwise this now-huge faction simply wins through numbers. This is why I dislike those kinds of games.
In my latest experience from AA Classic, factions can easily become unbalanced. Here the "devs" allowed certain guilds to transfer, in order to balance it out, but it often came with its own problems (basically it was one server where EU/NA/OCE all played together, so you also had to account for different time zones as well, because East faction would absolutely dominate at NA time zone, but will get steamrolled during EU times, anyways, more complicated than usual).
Also most people will look to transfer to a stronger faction, if the game allows them to, as playing in a weak faction is basically pointless, as you cannot challenge any content, and you get steamrolled. If you cannot transfer, you'd likely quit.
Idk how it worked when they introduced player nations, I think it only got worse, but someone that has actually played during that version can let me know.
iccer
1
Re: Race & Class
This is what im afraid of.
I am an overthinker and litterely could not get past ESO's character customisation because of racial bonuses.
It seemed that you could actually fail at the character customisation screen,
Guild, nodes, religion and every meta augment you can change later. I don't think you can change race. Keep race to be a roleplay option not a meta option.
I am an overthinker and litterely could not get past ESO's character customisation because of racial bonuses.
It seemed that you could actually fail at the character customisation screen,
Guild, nodes, religion and every meta augment you can change later. I don't think you can change race. Keep race to be a roleplay option not a meta option.
Orym
1