Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
Everyone cannot be considered to be equal when the group includes people who think not everyone is cut out to raid.
I am not talking about ownership or leadership. You are.
The devs care about top end raid content but their opinion is that DPS meters lead to toxicity, so they are not supporting DPS meters. That's the opinion that counts most.
I just happen to agree with it.
https://www.theaocdungeon.com/threads/interview-with-steven-sharif-ashes-of-creation-community-podcast-024-bcg.105/
Steven: The sheer nature of our PvP systems and how we emphasize a legendary item/economy in Ashes, is all but going to demand certain performances from the competitive player base. I think where there is opportunity to excel and succeed past the performance of your competitors, it is when it becomes competitive. I don't believe the DPS meters are necessary. It might require more investigation to gather the information, but it won't be as wide spread as DPS meters and such tools. The key is to form bonds of community cooperation, and we don't want to import tools that hinder that.
Basically, you are claiming an elitist attitude where none exists.
Thing is, Intrepid can develop around what they want to happen, or what the community will make happen. They can't develop around both.
The community **WILL** have several combat trackers. That is inevitable, regardless of what Intrepid do or do not put in to the game. There will be some that are implemented in a way that is against the EULA (and I hope players using them get banned), but there will also be some that are done in ways that are not against the EULA - and thus players using them can't and won't get banned.
Knowing this, there is a simple question. Should Intrepid bury their head in the sand and ignore a player developed combat tracker that will still cause all the same issues they are trying to prevent, or should they themselves instead implement one in a manner that minimizes those issues?
Which is why I suggested adding in a combat tracker as an optional guild perk. It is the least problematic method of appeasing those that want a tracker while keeping out the decisiveness that some players can cause due to misuse of a tracker - and to be sure, it is the player misuse of it that causes problems, not the tracker itself.
I am using Intrepids reasoning for my argument for a combat tracker, you are using their conclusion. To me, their reasoning is sound. If you assume that they are talking about WoW style DPS meters in their conclusion, then I'm actually still all for that. I don't consider a live, on screen display to be necessary or even desirable - it is the analysis at the end of the fight that is.
I don't think that is a fair statement, and it could also be read as "Content is only challenging to players that rely on meters when they don't have them."
So, just because some players are willing to break the EUA and ruin any difficulty for themselves, IS should just give them what they want? I don't think IS should make effort to implement anything in their game they do not want to simply because people are willing to break the agreement and add it themselves.
If you decide to break the EUA and add a DPS/ACT and use it to outperform and make the game "too easy" and become bored with game in said state, that is on you. Not IS and not the community.
This is a very odd perspective... Why make rules and decide not to include things when people will just break the rules and add them? Why have rules if people will break them? These types of arguments are, imo, pointless.
Which, again, is why I clarified for you several time that the key word that indicates elitism is "get".
Your belief that not everyone is cut out to raid is also indicative of elitism.
Thinking that there is a question of whether IS should implement combat trackers is like questioning whether the devs should create an RP server. You can ask that question if you wish.
The answer is the devs are not going to implement either of those.
Everyone agrees that it's the misuse of the tool that causes problems, not the tool itself. Which is typical of tools that are banned due to rampant misuse.
I don't assume that the Ashes devs are talking about WoW style DPS meters - just as I don't assume that Ashes raids will be like WoW raids or raids in previous MMORPGs. Just as I don't think combat will be like combat in previous MMORPGs. The devs are talking about what promotes toxicity in previous MMORPGs.
We both agree that analysis at the end of the fight is desirable, we just don't agree that DPS meters/combat trackers should be implemented as a tool for that analysis - despite the fact that "top end raiders" think it's necessary.
Just as some people think that an RP server is necessary. We know that some people will try to create their own RP server, too. That doesn't mean the devs are going to create one.
Highly unlikely that people thinking they should will change their minds.
So, if we don't know this, asking for a meter doesn't make sense.
Everyone seems to be picturing Raids ala Wow/other games, and maybe that's not the case. I don't possess that kind of imagination, but I can certainly think of raids where DPS is not the most important thing or won't change the time needed to clear a raid.
All Intrepid can do is ban software that directly interacts with the game client. They can't outright ban third party software, as this would include Mozilla and Chrome - and even Windows (as Microsoft is a third party, and Windows is software made by that third party).
They also can't ban software that captures in game images - otherwise we wouldn't be able to take screenshots or videos of the game.
So, using things that Intrepid **HAVE** to allow, players are able to get all the information they need and fed that in to ACT. All without breaking the EULA, all without doing any more than the average casual streamer would do.
So then it becomes the issue I said before - do you ignore what is inevitable because it isn't 100% what you want, or do you work with the inevitable to get things as close to what you want as is ever going to be possible.
The idealouge may want Intrepid to stick to their ideals (funny that). They would say that there should be no combat tracker even if one exists that doesn't break the EULA, and can't be tracked by Intrepid even if they did alter the EULA.
The realist, on the other hand, wants Intrepid to live in the real world.
Thinking you have the right to join a group - any group - sounds elitist to me.
And by definition, if it is not a right, then it is a privilege.
We know we will have many classes, each with many abilities, each with many augments.
We know players will be able to respec their secondary class, and we know that the secondary class is supposed to add at least 3 augments to each ability. If we assume each of the 8 classes have 30 abilities, that means each player will have access to 720 unique abilities just from their class choice alone, not including the additional augments that may be part of racial or social structures, or even as quest rewards or loot drops (speculation). This means each individual player may have as many as one thousand unique augmented abilities that they have access to, and are only able to select a small fraction at a time to use.
Now, if you think a company is going to put all of that in to one game and then add in content that they themselves have labeled "something for players to strive towards", and then develop said content in a way where all of those character choices are meaningless in favor of being required to jump on to a box, then I'm not sure what to say to you.
It still results in, according to the quote, players that use meters/trackers are not (or are less) challenged. So if there is not one in the game, and a third party one is used, and the game becomes too easy, that is a personal problem. The goal was to be overtly effective and then ask for the games difficulty to be raised, but there are many that don't play min/max that would be put off by the content designed to challenge min/max characters only.
There should not be a condition to achieve a meta build before being able to complete content. The variance should rely on players skill levels, not the exact rotation to eke out 1% more. If content is designed specifically for a min/max character at max level with the exact build/equip list or death, that content is designed for a niche group and effectively creates "chosen heroes." (being that only very specific types can complete all the content)
I believe IS should not try and please the masses, but that argument goes both ways too. Not adding a meter/tracker might deter some hardcore players. Open world PvP will deter some PvEs, corruption and limited PvP looting will deter some PvPs. The game is clearly not trying to please everyone, but I think the balanced methodology IS uses is more my style than not.
This is all a very WoW-centric view.
In WoW, someone posts a build, then everyone uses that build. Very few people ever question anything, and combat trackers were used more as a measuring stick against that build than as an actual tool (though a measuring stick is a tool too, I guess).
In other games, there isn't such a thing as "the build". Other games - good games - vary the player situation enough that a single build will never be considered the best.
When I played EQ2 for example, none of the top 10 of my class in the game ever used the same build. Some abilities some players said were useless, while others would swear by them (Manaburn was one example). Yet both groups had weeks where they would parse better.
Part of the reason I want some form of tool in Ashes is because I believe the combat `will be varied enough to warrant it. We won't have a WoW type situation where people claim one build is always the best (and watch me destroy that argument if anyone tries to make it).
Instead, what I'm hoping we will have is a multitude of different individual situations, where the only way anyone can know what will work best for them is to figure it out for themselves.
The single worst thing I can think of for Ashes is for there to be no way for players to assess their own builds. If there is nothing at all, then the bulk of players that just want to get in the game and kill stuff will simply look for some cookie cutter board on a wiki or forum somewhere and just use it blindly.
Basically, the way I see it, the simpler a combat system is, the more damage a combat tracker can do. The more complex a combat system, the more damage not having one can do.
I guess elitists might be restricted to that binary view.
Reminds me of my mom’s fear that my niece wouldn’t be able to learn how to walk if she didn’t wear shoes.
Combat trackers are not required for players to assess character builds.
Just as some modders will create combat trackers for Ashes, some players will go for the flavor-of-the month cookie-cutter builds... regardless.
It’s typically the people using combat trackers who think they know what the best builds are.
Not just in WoW.
If it’s not like that in EQ2, EQ2 is probably the outlier, but... other people can weigh in on that.
Seems strange that the SOE/Daybreak devs seem to agree that combat trackers typically lead to toxicity if that’s not an issue that is rampant in EQ/EQ2.
Being in a group is a privilege, end of story.
No one is obliged to group with you or I, and so when people do, it is a privilege for us to be in a group with them. This is according to the very definition of the word, not to any view you may think I have.
If u see someone using a build u like u can on observe them and attempt to figure out the build from visuals.
Nor is ACT a tool for hardcore players, quite the opposite. ACT is for those who lack imagonation and cant properly utilize their vision.
If someone is demanding you to build ur char a certain way, you can ask why.
If they cant give proper arguments you should obviously keep with ur own build. If someone bases their opinion openly on 3rd party software, they deserve a ban.
You're bleeding for salvation, but you can't see that you are the damnation itself." -Norther
If I am skilled, my character might be able to handle a few things a few difficulty levels above my character. However, if I still get my butt kicked by level appropriate challenges then the game is either better balanced than expected or my build could be better.
If I continue to get my butt kicked by content a lower level (or more) in difficulty, than my skill level needs to come up. If practice doesn't help, then maybe my build is sub-par.
The more complex the system, the more I need to focus on my skills not the build. With a simpler system, an introductory skill level should suffice, so that would encourage me to build a "whatever da'fuq" character.
This is the way I determine character effectiveness in all the other RPG's I play, I'm pretty sure it will work for Ashes too.
Very Good number cruncher like someone that deals in statistics all the time gathers all data they can about lets say mage. They crunch all the numbers most likely using spreadsheet.
Then with all that data in hand information is posted on websiite
Players go to website and take everything they read as gospel and true. And think that every one else should do the same or they got it wrong.
Thing is because of dps meter I have been able to prove that although useful well not necessary best setup and found few mistakes on some of those websites. Do not think there is a way to escape the cookie cutter builds.
People a naturally want to do better and for that to happen they are going to have to have data one way or another.
How is company going to perform better and make more money with out financial records?
How did I do? Well I do not know. How much better have I gotten? Well I do not know. How much further do I have for my dps to be acceptable for very difficult content? Well I do not know. So being in the dark about performance is more fun?
Maybe better solution is private combat data that cannot be posted in chat. Sure they could find a way to share data but they are going to find a way to get the data any ways. I will probably just time how long it takes to kill certain monster and divide by seconds. So I am going to use a calculator to get dps and if raid leader is present well they could use their own calculator also to figure out my dps.
This all works well and good when you are solo or in a small group, but when you are in a large group or a raid, how are you supposed to know how effective you are being?
You can tell how effective the group or raid as a whole is by the level of success it has, but you can't break down how well any individual within that group or raid is doing - yourself included.
It isn't even like we can take a good solo build and use it on a raid, because on a raid you are far more specialized than you are when solo. A DPS on a raid wants DPS and almost nothing else - but when solo they want some survivability, and perhaps some CC abilities as well. A healer on a raid wants to be able to heal as well as they possibly can, and nothing else really matters. When solo though, that healer still needs to find a way to kill mobs.
This is why very few games have builds that are effective for both raiding and soloing.
So, while success levels on content are absolutely a valid way to measure the combined effectiveness of the whole, whether that whole is someone soloing, a group or a raid, it fails to measure the individual within that whole.
Why do you need to measure any individuals? You forgo your individual ambitions in order to further the progress of the whole. The raid's success is all that matters.
You do not need a combat tracker to evaluate your own performance. Have you ever thought something like "I could have done x better"? Have you ever thought that even after you succeeded? This was you evaluating your own performance. (obviously in a situation where there was no data involved in your evaluation)
Invincible Tank
Unrivalled Dps
Queen of Growlgate
Kraken Tamer
Super Cutie
H8 me cuz u ain't me
If someone in your raid was playing in a way that was a detriment to the raid's success but they liked playing in that way would you continue playing with them? What if what they like doing is so harmful to the raid's success that the raid will never win while they are a part of it?
I strongly suspect you would demand they change how they play (which you have said you don't do), kick them and say it's because they are playing in a harmful way which would make you the same as people that kick because someone's dps is low, or you kick them and say "you don't like playing with them" which would make you the same as people that kick for low dps but also disingenuous.
Invincible Tank
Unrivalled Dps
Queen of Growlgate
Kraken Tamer
Super Cutie
H8 me cuz u ain't me
My Bartle score is Explorer 87; Socializer 73; Achiever 47; Killer 0
One the aspects of exploring in conjunction with socializing while having 0 as my Killer stat is that I'm far more interested in exploring the unique builds of other players and devising winning strategies from the abilities other players like to use than I am on actually clearing the content. We might have to retreat and take some time to think of new strategies - we might need to return with better accessories - we might need to return with more or different combat aids, like potions. We might even want to return with different combat mounts. What I would never do - and never condone doing - is tell another player that they must start using an ability that player feels is not their role - especially if that ability belongs to a different secondary archetype.
Because I'm playing an RPG; not an FPS. And the RP is more important than which mobs we kill or which dungeon or raid we kill.
I've never been in a situation where it was impossible for us to find a strategy to defeat the content... eventually.
Several years ago, in Salsa class, I noticed a student struggling, so I danced next to her for some extra support. She said she has no peripheral vision so it was difficult for her to see what the instructor was demonstrating. I started giving her verbal instructions. And, in the moments when she was rotated in to be my dance partner, I was able to guide her physically as well. A few months later, she disappeared for several weeks. When she returned, she exclaimed, "Thank you so much! You can teach dance to the blind! You are the only reason I staid in class. I just got back from visiting my in laws in Puerto Rico and I was able to dance with them!!"
That is indicative of my core philosophy. I roll that way in real life - and I roll that way when I play games, too.
I'm not going to kick someone from my group because they lack an ability, rather I'm going to look for ways to accomplish our objectives even without that ability. Maybe I won't succeed, but the journey of helping that person get as far as they can get without it is more important than whether we actually succeed especially if the objective is just killing a mob.
It's common in comics, for the superheroes to fail the first time they encounter super-villains and then devise a winning strategy. I'm not going to kick Superman from the JLA just because he has all the abilities of Martian Manhunter, but lacks Invisibility, Telepathy and Phasing. I'm not going to tell Black Canary that she can't fill in for Batgirl because she lacks a utility belt and I'm not going to tell Batgirl she can't fill in for Black Canary because she lacks the Canary Cry. I'm going to try to find a way to make it work.
I primarily party and raid with friends. I'm only going to kick a friend from my group if they start acting hateful and unfriendly. I'm never going to kick someone from my group because they refuse to use one ability. And I would probably refuse to group again where someone was kicked for not using an ability other players thought the individual should be using.
Because we don't do that in D&D. We play with friends. We don't dictate what abilities other players should be using - we might make suggestions, but it's up to the player if that's what they want to do. D&D dungeons and bosses are not designed such that they can only be defeated if specific abilities are used. That should be the case for MMORPGs as well.
If the only way a dungeon or raid can be defeated is if the Hunter uses Freeze Trap, that is a poorly designed dungeon or raid.
I don't really care much at all about DPS. I don't believe that damage per SECOND really matters. DPS is more of a gamer perspective than a dev perspective - the seconds usually aren't crucial. It's usually damage within a span of minutes that is crucial, but... let's go with the colloquial meaning of DPS.
If I thought an individual's DPS was low -especially if that player's character was max level- and I suggested they use an ability that player says they never use or they something similar to, "Well, that is a Repel ability and I'm an Ice Wizard so I don't use that ability...," I would start thinking of abilities other players could use to increase that player's damage input -via buffs or combo synergies, etc- or, how we could debuff the opponents such that they are more vulnerable to that individual's damage abilities - in this case, "What can we do to increase the power of that person's Ice abilities and what can we do to make the opponents more vulnerable to Ice abilities?"
Teamwork in an RPG shouldn't mean that the individual sacrifices their vision of character build for the good of the team, rather it means the team tries to persevere with the characters each player has brought to the adventure - flaws as well as strengths. Of course, in MMORPGs, there are lots of gamers who don't care about the RPG aspect - they just care about winning as quickly and efficiently as possible.
Lots of playstyles in an MMORPG because it's massively multiplayer.
I tend not group with Killer/Achievers.
I most commonly group with Explorer/Socializers and Socializer Explorers.
When I do repeatedly group with Killer/Achievers, they will have asked me to join them primarily to socialize - achieving a kill will be a low objective for that period of time. We always end up killing a bunch of stuff anyways because we know how to fight or... they know how to fight and I learn how to support them with the abilities I have.
The key should be understanding how to fight rather than focusing on specific abilities you think other players should know how to use. Especially at max level when the game has no level booster options.
Finding some situation where I would kick someone from a group would not inherently mean I'm being disingenuous.
If I were saying the devs should not have a kick mechanic, but you could devise a scenario where I would kick, but I don't think other people should have the ability to kick - that would be disingenuous.
If I were advocating for a tool we could use to evaluate how well a person explores and socializes and I will kick people if the tool indicates they're low in exploration and social skills, but I don't want the devs to implement a tool that would evaluate achievement and killing skills, that would be disingenuous.
If what you mean is that I am biased by my playstyle, I'm sure that is true.
I expect that Killer/Achievers and Achiever/Killers are going to care more about killing the boss quickly and efficiently than they will about keeping people who don't facilitate that in their group...even if those individuals are friends or relatives.
I'm an Explorer/Socializer, so I'm going to want to keep people in my group even if we don't make a kill (even though we always accomplish that goal...).
I'm just glad the Ashes devs also feel that DPS meters tend to be disruptive to group harmony and, therefore, are not implementing and not supporting DPS meters in their game.
I'm also hoping that means they are designing the game with ways for us to evaluate how to well the various roles are functioning based on seeing how we can support the abilities and combos other players like to use with the abilities and combos we like to use.
Also, I'm expecting the way we group in this open world environment to be significantly different in Ashes than in other MMORPGs because, during a Node siege or Monster Coin/Horde attack, it needs to be all hands on deck - we won't have the luxury of kicking people from groups because they don't use the abilities we think they should be using.
For arenas it is basically a must have. Cause things are so competative. What if I am a new healer doing arenas. Think combat tracker would be useful in this situation.
When this is the case, you need to diagnose where the problem is, and then you can address that problem.
You don't swap out a car's engine just because the spark plugs are not working, you simply diagnose the issue, and deal with the one component.
A combat tracker is literally a diagnostic tool. It allows you to find what part of the whole needs attention - how you then deal with the need to fix something is then up to the individuals involved, but if you don't know where the problem is, there isn't much you can do to fix it.
The notion that you don't need a combat tracker because you put aside the individual in order to further the whole can only come from the perspective of only using a combat tracker as a means of e-peen waiving, which is all many people know how to do. However, that is a misuse of a combat tracker as a tool, and in no way takes away from the value of it when used correctly.
To me, this is no different than someone using their cars dyno results to gloat to others - when the actual purpose for putting your car on a dyno is to make sure all the individual components of the car work in harmony, and that improvements made to it provide the expected results.
I know we've gone over this point before but depending on how the combat and raid encounters work, you might be able to diagnose the problem without needing a combat tracker. If that's the case then looking too deeply into the combat analysis will just muddy the waters and make it harder to discover the real issue.
Any doctor will tell you how easy it is to get set on a line of questioning and analysis that leads to the completely wrong diagnosis, and start ordering tests which are totally pointless. Sometimes too much information can cause problems, which is why I'm very fond of KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid).
In the case of a raid encounter, let's say someone died at a crucial moment, so the raid leader digs deep into the combat tracker to find the problem. They see that one of the healers who was assigned to that group reduced their healing output, when really all that happened was the person who died was stood in the wrong place. But now because the combat tracker says that the healing output was low, the raid leader gets fixated on that and tries to get the healer to do better. If they had just looked at the position of their raid team instead of going immediately to the combat tracker, they would have picked up on that problem instead of being lead down a rabbit hole to a very wrong conclusion.
Yes this is a completely hypothetical problem but it's still worth addressing. I believe that if you can do the raids and diagnose any problems without a combat tracker, then there is no point putting one in the game. If it turns out that you physically can't do without a combat tracker I will be one of the first to ask Intrepid to put one into the game. Until then though, I am content to see if we need one or not. There's no point putting something in the game that we don't need and is just going to cause problems.
Plus if a dps meter also measures damage taken it will show right there if someone was standinging in the fire or not IF the dps meter recognizes different types of damage not just damage in general. Plus good way to find out who is standing in th fire.
Raid leaders will know peoples dps and will remove toons from raid groups for low dps but will not be able to tell them cause that would let them know they are using a dps meter. Really no way to get away from it. Besides think it is unfair to blame it on the dps meter really it is the people that want to show off their dps and belittle others that is the problem. Toons will find a way to do that no matter what.
Think no dps meters just puts a band aid on the problem.
Then there is the enforcement. How is getting punished for using a dps meter going to fair with the community. Thinking a lot of people will just find this too restrictive even if you explain it to them.
There are games out there that have dps meters that are not overly toxic. Right?
Or does dps meter automatically makes the whole game toxic.
Nothing at all above that I disagree with.
However, in your hypothetical situation with the player dying, there is a note to take in to account.
Abilities that mobs have that kill players standing in the wrong place have names. In fact, all mob abilities have names.
If someone dies in a raid, the first thing anyone that is trying to figure things out will do is look at what ability the mob used that did damage to that player. This information will tell you far more than what a healer readout will tell you. This is especially important in encounters that have multiple things going on at one, and multiple viable ways a player could die - but is still the first step when diagnosing a failure on a base population (trash mob) pull.
If the damage came from an ability that will only do damage to a player if they are in the wrong place, or will do more damage to a player if they are in the wrong place, that will be absolutely evident on a combat tracker. Also evident will be if that damage came from a normal/expected source of damage, that was at a normal/expected level - and only if the damage taken is normal/expected can anyone turn to the healer and look there.
So again it comes down to people in leadership positions knowing how to use the tool properly - your example is that of someone that isn't using it properly - which obviously will happen but isn't, in my opinion, a thing to hold against the tool itself, but rather the user of the tool.
Jinkies! I didn't realise raiders were inanimate objects that will get replaced as soon as the raid leader has ordered in a new part. If only it were possible to trust an inanimate object to fix its own mistakes and communicate when it can't .
Invincible Tank
Unrivalled Dps
Queen of Growlgate
Kraken Tamer
Super Cutie
H8 me cuz u ain't me