General Discussion - Dungeon Scaling

I love reading what other people think about in the Dev Discussions, but those threads usually aren't setup the best for discussions and I didn't really understand the points some people were making this go around.

Figured if anyone else wanted to talk about it/share their opinions might be better in its own thread.

LieutenantToast wrote: »

Dev Discussion #19 - Dungeon Scaling
Should open world dungeons scale up in difficulty significantly as you go deeper (ex. level 30-50), or should the difficulty band of a given dungeon be more narrow from top to bottom (ex. level 45-50)?

My main question was open world dungeons means they just exist and you can run into them whenever right? I saw a few people mentioning they wanted instanced dungeons, but isn't that not open world anymore?

But my answer to their question was I thought a mix would be best depending on the content in the dungeon. Smaller dungeons, like a pack of animals protecting a monstrous mother animal could work for narrow scaling, while more permanent fixtures like a cult that keeps re-emerging would work better for the larger scaling.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

George_Black

I think some dungeons should be left for high lv xp and farm with full group, no duos trios and such. 40-45, 45-50.

For the rest is nice to see 10-30, 30-40-50
People will feel the challenge to keep going deeper, plus there is a reason to revisit older locations.

unknownsystemerror

They have already confirmed there will be instanced content and dungeons. The numbers they threw out at the time were 80/20. Like so many things here, people have a bias towards the system they like and want to see and try to spin the narrative thinking if they just repeat what they want enough times that no one will notice and it will just become reality. The official scaling discussion thread is just the latest way for them to distract a bored population from focusing on the pace of development.

Jamation

unknownsystemerror wrote: »

They have already confirmed there will be instanced content and dungeons. The numbers they threw out at the time were 80/20.

Oh yeah I see that on the wiki now and the split is more obvious now. Since they were asking about open world though I assume the people that mentioned instanced dungeons just weren't paying attention enough or got confused or something.

unknownsystemerror wrote: »

The official scaling discussion thread is just the latest way for them to distract a bored population from focusing on the pace of development.

I mean, if that's how you want to look at it. I'd rather they ask these kinds of questions though to gauge how their player base enjoys things. And if anything it's a nice way to collect data and share opinions.

Corpier

I see value in both and could understand both being in Ashes simultaneously, but I still think the narrow scaling is best. No matter how a dungeon that scales from 45-50 it gets implemented players in that level range will get content where they can be challenged, rewarded, and won't have to slog through redundancy. That doesn't mean I don't think wider scaling is without merit. I see value in it being able to entertain a larger player base with a single piece of content, and it supports Intrepid's desire to create a game that feels massive by having players congregate around epic content.

The main point I tried to make in the Dev Discussion was how implementing a wider scaling poorly could be problematic. Having a larger group of players compete, with a significant portion of those players being disadvantaged to others, for the same area and enemies could lead to predatory behavior. Also if higher level players do not get rewarded or get inferior rewards, while backtracking through content they have already completed, then it could lead to a lot of hassle and frustration if they cannot skip lower level sections of the dungeon to get where they should be playing.

I will say for full disclosure that I am not experienced in content designed to have a multiple specific levels in one dungeon. In most game's I've played dungeon content either has a specific level and once a player out levels it there isn't a reason to go back(more common in open world content), or player/dungeon scales to the other(more common in instanced content). There might be merits to the wider dungeon scaling I don't know about or have overlooked, and the problems I see with it might be easily solvable.

Jamation

Corpier wrote: »

Having a larger group of players compete, with a significant portion of those players being disadvantaged to others, for the same area and enemies could lead to predatory behavior. Also if higher level players do not get rewarded or get inferior rewards, while backtracking through content they have already completed, then it could lead to a lot of hassle and frustration if they cannot skip lower level sections of the dungeon to get where they should be playing.

This was also one of my biggest concerns with a large scale range. I doubt teleporting to different levels would be used for the open world content since fast travel is limited to a built up science node, so it'd seem weird to have it for dungeons. I feel like either having an aggression range where lower level mobs won't attack you, or having branching pathways in the dungeon could make it a little more pleasant for returning players. That or make the rewards/loot worthwhile for any player regardless of level, like unique crafting items or something specific to that dungeon so you'd need all the different levels of items.

Corpier wrote: »

No matter how a dungeon that scales from 45-50 it gets implemented players in that level range will get content where they can be challenged, rewarded, and won't have to slog through redundancy.

I also originally thought that narrow scaling would be good for content relationship to characters levels, but then it got me worried that it'd turn the game into an extremely linear mode (if they only went with narrow and didn't implement any large scaling). I feel like it would be people going from the level 5-10 dungeon to the 10-15 dungeon, etc etc. With less exploration then was intended. This also made me a little worried that if that does turn out to be the case then people might clump up too much together as a lot of people would probably go in the same direction on a specific server reducing the amount of mobs per player.

But like you, I see merit in both. I hope they implement both types of scaling because if I had to pick just one type for the entire game I don't know which one I'd rather have

Corpier

Jamation wrote: »

I doubt teleporting to different levels would be used for the open world content since fast travel is limited to a built up science node, so it'd seem weird to have it for dungeons. I feel like either having an aggression range where lower level mobs won't attack you, or having branching pathways in the dungeon could make it a little more pleasant for returning players. That or make the rewards/loot worthwhile for any player regardless of level, like unique crafting items or something specific to that dungeon so you'd need all the different levels of items.

I agree that teleportation is unlikely to be used to enable players to skip content due to its rarity, but there are other ways to fast track players through a dungeon. They could have mobs not attack or branching paths like you said, or progressing so far could unlock shortcuts like hidden passages that are discovered upon getting so far in the dungeon. However, I wouldn't totally rule out teleportation as the pre-alpha video in which the devs take pre-alpha testers to fight a dragon shows them using a portal to enter and leave the boss room. Though that could have just have been for the convenience of pre-alpha testing and not make it into the actual game.

Also, while I share your concern for how narrow level scaling would likely be linear, I feel that wide scaling dungeons are between a rock and a hard place when it comes to how to implement them. I see there being complaints and problems either way they are done. They can make it so players of all levels are rewarded for killing everything in the dungeon, which gives level 50s a reason to compete with level 30s. A situation where higher level players are likely to become annoyed with the lower level players competing against them and lower level players being frustrated with having to compete against higher level players they are at a disadvantage to. On the flip side, if the lower level sections of the dungeon are skippable people will complain the dungeon is too linear, discourages the point of returning to the same areas, stifles exploration, or breaks immersion.

Either way they can't please everyone with one type of content. Can't please everyone ever, but they are more likely to please more people by implementing both narrow and wide scaling so that which ever the other lacks the other can provide.

Some of the posts in the Dev Discussion I've seen supporting wide scaling dungeons have been on the basis that it would be immersive or lore friendly to have dungeons that get harder as they get deeper, and it would have an adventurer-esque feel to not be able to clear a dungeon all at once. Personally, I've always seen practical game design (not that I'm a professional game designer) to value fun and entertainment value over lore and immersion. Not to bash those who love lore, immersion, and roleplaying, but I can willingly ignore or use my imagination to explain away issues with those. When something is boring, tedious, unrewarding, or plain frustrating due to unnecessary hassle it can't be ignored. Its why I face palm when I see people complain about other players coming in and killing the same boss they just did as if it devalues what they did or breaks their chosen one/legendary hero rp. I'd rather only have to wait 5 minutes for something to respawn if I missed it the first time and have my immersion broken than have to wait an hour and feel special when I do kill it. Basically the point I'm trying to make in this paragraph is that I think it would be better if wide scaling dungeons favored letting players get to where they are challenged and rewarded than be immersive and force everyone to be in the same space, and if they do go the immersive route then it might be best to also include narrow scaling dungeons to provide the challenge and rewards the other lacks.

Jamation

Corpier wrote: »

However, I wouldn't totally rule out teleportation as the pre-alpha video in which the devs take pre-alpha testers to fight a dragon shows them using a portal to enter and leave the boss room. Though that could have just have been for the convenience of pre-alpha testing and not make it into the actual game.

I didn't consider that. That's actually a fair point.

Corpier wrote: »

When something is boring, tedious, unrewarding, or plain frustrating due to unnecessary hassle it can't be ignored.

I am all about lore and immersion (nooooot so much on that roleplay train), but even I completely agree with this. What worries me though is that this could happen for either type of scaling. Either type could be all of these things, I think it's just going to end up being more about how they choose to implement the dungeons.

Child Item