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
The argument is that these mechanics should exist in the top end mobs - and probably only the top end mobs. People taking on these mobs will be using a tracker anyway, so having mechanics that require a tracker isn't am issue.
If you are able to kill the hardest encounters in Ashes without a tracker at all, then the PvE in Ashes is just shit - there really is no other way to put it.
And as I have said in the past, Ashes long term viability as a game is reliant on it's PvE content attracting PvE players, who in turn make up the population that the PvP players need to thrive. Without good PvE, you don't attract that PvE crowd, and thus PvP players are left with only other PvP players to fight against, and this will see a steady level of atrophy as even these PvP player leave the game.
Don't buy it, its simply one step at a time to have trackers being main stream on AoC.
Its pretty obvious it will take more time to figure it out as you use another tool to make deciphering it easier and much more clear needing to rely on tool that have nothing to do with actually playing the game with detailed tracking to look for the answer.
Using trackers to cheat simply means the game play isn't being about difficult but unreasonable. Gameplay is about gameplay, and gameplay difficult, trackers are there to cheat and give you easier answers away from gameplay.
Sorry, I don't have the time to sift through the 1000s of posts you and others have made on this topic over the past 3 years...
With that said, this seems MUCH more of a productive conversation instead of talking about designing fights specifically for trackers or not.
To me the most important part of this whole debate revolves around the "toxicity" aspect, and I think that's where we as a community should focus on. (sorry if you already have done that, but the recent conversations I was reading felt a lot like 2 sides just screaming that the other is wrong)
I will admit that your ideas have potential to solve a lot of the "toxicity" problems...but the game HAVING a tracker, and the game being DESIGNED around a tracker are two completely different debates.
I'll refrain from talking about specific encounter design, as I don't find it very productive. But I'd like to call out the things that I agree with you on about reducing the toxicity revolved around trackers:
Based on your idea, it seems like you admit that toxic behavior CAN be caused by specific tracker features. Or maybe you don't think that, and this is your attempt at a compromise? I'm curious what your end goal actually is: do you want to reduce toxic behavior? or do you only want the most challenging encounters possible? both? or something else?
This is the same as saying: I can just pirate all the shows on netflix, therefore netflix is pointless. History and the market have proven that people will pay for conveniences.
We are talking about more elite player types the 1%, They won't waste points and min max everything. It is why im saying his goal is to get trackers to be ok so he can use third party ones. You aren't talking to a honest person.
unlike with netflix however, in a game it will be a competition between players sooo yea
As such, I do not believe that trackers cause toxicity. If you believe they do, I'd ask you to explain the above.
However, I am aware others have experienced toxicity that involve trackers. I'm not at all saying these situations do not happen - I am simply saying that trackers are not inherently the cause of them.
So, the suggestion is an attempt at a compromise. It eliminates the bulk of the situations where players see combat trackers and toxicity existing together, but leaves trackers available for those that know how to make good use of them (the game is better off with players having access to trackers, we have a history of finding bugs that even developers cant find).
As to my end goal, it is multi-faceted. It can probably be best described as wanting to make Ashes the best game for the most number of people possible.
A part of this means the fame needs to have PvE on par with WoW, FFXIV, EQ2 et al. Not necessarily the same design parameters, but the same challenge, variety and quality.
But it also means making the game as approachable as possible for people that are not in the top 10%.
The other thing an optional tracker like this will do, is force Intrepid to develop some content for people that use trackers right at the top end (where everyone both wanting and able to take it on would be using trackers anyway), but to then develop the bulk of content under the assumption that people are not actively using trackers, but where perhaps a third to half are using builds that are created using tracker.
To me, this result seems to be the best outcome any group of people can hope for.
I dont believe there would be a need to develop third party trackers if the game has a first party tracker that meets minimum viable functionality.
I would like to add my voice behind the above quotes as both are well said.
I would hate for globally accessible metering. It leads to class (subclass) exclusions by meta-crunching players that think they can tell by a single number if you are a good player or not. Support classes would get hit the hardest in what many refer to as "end game" content. DPS/Healing meters do not tell you what NPC-debuffs lead to the biggest increase in damage, just that Barb-x did the damage. DPS/Healing meters do not tell you who prevented players from taking damage via buffs/debuffs, just what cleric-x did the most healing.
If the Devs decide on a meter (I honestly hope they don't) it needs to be a private meter so that players can tweak their own class and not have some other person telling them how they should be playing. Personally I would allocate that Dev time to other tasks.
This is just outright incorrect.
As a top end player, raider, raid leader and at times guild leader, experience says that this absolutely will not happen.
I can even give you examples of this.
EQ2 is a game that had 24 classes and 24 raid slots. Of those 24 classes, 4 were support classes.
With the same number of classes as raid spots, the logical assumption would be that you would take one of each class. With your assertion that support classes would be left out of top end content in a game that had combat tracker use on par with WoW, we would assume that if any class was under represented, it would be the four support classes.
Yet, literally every top end guild in the game had the aim of filling a total of 8 raid slots with those 4 support classes. Support were better represented in raids than literally any other class in the game.
This isnt an accident or anything - and is also directly due to combat trackers.
When your DPS casters do 500 DPS normally, but then do 850 DPS when they have the right support classes present, it is really easy to justify taking those support classes along.
Without combat trackers telling you exactly how much better off you are with support than without, there is no guarantee that players in general will value their contribution at all - you cant value something you cant see.
A combat tracker can indeed tell you this.
See, people that have this particular view are odd. They complain about what a combat tracker can and cant do, but in doing so are showing us all that they haven't really explored what a combat tracker can do - as almost without exception they are able to tell players the thi g they are trying to say combat trackers cant tell players.
So, combat trackers can indeed tell you who prevented damage in your group or raid, but obviously you dont actually care about that, otherwise you would have known that trackers can tell you that.
First of all I have ZERO intention of trying to argue with you or 'counter' any of your perspectives, but I would like some context on it...
What game do you know of that has meters where somehow the Support Classes ended up getting shafted or excluded from content because of them?
Apologies if the question seems snarky, it IS an alien concept to me, so any bias you perceive in the question is probably real, but I'd still really like the answer if you're willing to give it.
I guess I should have stated that I am replying to the Dev, not the Forum. I am not here to give my CV to the forum. It should not matter if I am older than dirt and have played 50+ games from The Bard's Tale (1985) -
ELDEN RING. Nor is it the Forum's business what games I have helped design, beta tested, or what mods I have made. I don't judge anyone here if they do not have the skill I have in UE5.
I don't know what the meaning of this is. I am not sure what you are apologizing for, unless you feel guilty
I don't know you, and you don't know me. Yet you think you can judge me? This is how you interact with others even without the benefit of Trackers and logs?!
/snark on: you are exactly the type of person I would trust with that info! /snark off:
You are correct, I do not know you.
I dont know what nationality, race, religion, gender, caste, or profession you have, are or identify with.
Nor do I care. Not even a little bit.
What I do know about you - literally ALL I know about you - are the words you type on these forums.
I absolutely will form an opinion of you (or "judge" you, if you prefer) based on that. You are more than welcome to form an opinion of me based on the words I type here.
If you want me to not form an opinion of you based on the first list of things I have already said I dont care about, that's actually fine. You are well within your rights to not be judged by those things, as far as I am concerned.
However, when we post on the internet, we are posting our thoughts and opinions, the essence of ourselves. These are the things people generally want others opinions of them to be based on, rather than things like that above list.
Sharing an opinion that you hold and then complaining that people shouldnt form an opinion of you based on your opinion of other things is just weird.
If someone is forming an opinion of you (or "judging you" if you prefer that term) based on that essence of yourself, and you do not like the opinion of you that they then form, dont go complaining at that person for forming that opinion. Look at the aspect of yourself that you out forward that lead that person to form the opinion of you that they did.
---
Now, more specifically, if you are going to say "I dont like trackers because they cant do this thing", but trackers can indeed do that thing, that is giving people that just know you are wrong very little to work with.
Truth be told,I hadn't formed an opinion of you until reading your second post in this thread. I left you room to back out and say "oh, I didnt know trackers could do that, please ignore my previous post".
But you didn't, you came back and doubled down. That is what settled my opinion of you.
As I said in my previous post, I was responding to the Dev. It was simple, what are your thoughts on X? I shared those thoughts. The Dev did not ask for a 1000 word thesis with citations or my qualifications. The Dev understands that all that matters is that I am interested in the game. The Dev wants me to stay that way so I will be here when the game launches. The Dev may even gleam something from what I share.
You and I disagree on Meters and Logs as it relates to it being public. That is fine, I would even say it is helpful for you to say so and for the Devs to read as much.
What is unhelpful is when you try and imply and or impugn that someone's value to a topic is less than yours. You seem intelligent (although you seem to have a thing against apostrophes), so I would encourage you to discuss the topic and not engage in motives or assumed lack of knowledge of the person you disagree with. It may be an IQ vs. EQ issue, I can't say for certain. What I can say is making it personal is not helpful to the Devs.
Who knows, you and I may be in more alignment on the next topic. I would encourage you to not be so "settled [in] my opinion." Until next time.
I dont actually care about what games you have played. For all I care, you could have spent a total of 5 minutes playing MMO's. However, if you are able to back up your opinion, that opinion is as valid as any other persons ever could be.
Azherae is interested in knowing what games you have played, but they have a different motivation for asking that (they are genuinely curious as to the basis of your opinion).
On the other hand, if you are unable to back up your opinion, you are making it lesser in value than others opinions - and your particular side of the discussion is not a factor here.
Fact is, you claimed that your opinion was in part based on two specific factors. One of those was how you thought support classes would be left out, and the other was what you thought trackers are not able to do.
Both of those specific factors that you claimed are at least partially responsible for your opinion are false, and can be proven to be false.
That's cool, we all have incorrect information at times, and we can only form an opinion based on the information we have.
However, put aside the value I place in your opinion, put aside the value Intrepid place in your opinion - let's look at the value YOU place in your opinion.
If those were indeed factors in forming your opinion - even of only minor factors - the fact that you now know they are incorrect should result in you reconsidering your opinion.
If you are not at least reconsidering your opinion, all that says is that you dont actually think your own opinion is worth much. You should always strive for your opinion to be based on as accurate a set of facts as you can.
If you dont think your opinion is worth much, why should I, and why should Intrepid?
No there wont.
Why would I do that?
Give me one or more examples of Raid/Public Meter or Log that helps future raids but doesn't also allow or even encourage blacklisting of players or classes?
I have played a lot of games and have yet to see such a device. I have never even read of one. That doesn't mean there isn't one, so here is your chance to educate me and change my mind as you say they exist over and over, but never state what you base that on.
It has been my experience that either you have one and are willing to have the player base suffer its deficiencies in the hope that the benefits outweigh them or you don't have one.
My opinion of my opinion is that it is MY opinion. Having an opinion is not complicated, we all have them. Enumerating a life-time of reasons or even a day's worth is complicated and unnecessary (IMHO). The difference between Fact and Truth is the same as the difference between Math and Statistics
I thought my first post was concise, it appears I was mistaken. I will fix that.
I await your inevitable reply
I never expect any new recruit to a top end guild to be as good as people that have been in that environment for a while - especially if gear is involved.
Rather, you recruit people that have appropriate personalities to fit in to the guild, have a desire to play the game in that kind of environment, and are wanting to learn and improve.
Still nope.
What you are suggesting is that not having a combat tracker in Ashes will mean that the game won't develop a class or build meta.
To that, I say the following:
If a game has a class that is so bad that players with objective data on all classes simply do not wish to take that class along on content, why are you blaming the fact that players have that data?
Should the blame for this not be squarely, 100% on the developers for failing at class balance?
Further to that, if eliminating a meta is your objective, I would like to direct your attention to Archeage.
In that game, there is VERY low combat tracker use. Yet in that game, there was a very rigid meta, where if you weren't one of three builds, you weren't coming. This is in a game with 56 classes at launch (220 now, from my understanding - and now I believe there are about 7 classes that are accepted by the player base).
What happens is, the player base in general either accepts or rejects specific builds. If objective data exists to base this on, it is used. If objective data is not available, then subjective data is used. The one thing that remains though, is that the player base in a game like Ashes will have a meta, and if you want to join in, you will follow it.
So really, what I'm saying is that this thing that you are saying trackers should not exist in order to prevent is something that will happen regardless, and if objective data on classes is present, is a result of poor class design rather than being a result of trackers existing.
If we assume Intrepid are competent developers (if you do not wish to make this assumption, let me know), then many builds of all classes will be viable in many different situations.
In order for players to understand this, we will need objective data on those classes. The more accurate and complete that objective data is, the greater the number of builds will be generally accepted by the games population.
That's the problem with having opinions against something as near omniscient as a tracker. If you say "this thing happens with trackers", and someone can find a game where that thing didn't happen, or if you say "this thing won't happen if trackers aren't in the game", and someone finds an example of a game where tracker use is low but that this still happened, then it kind of renders your point moot.
If you wish to still maintain that same opinion on trackers, despite it being built on a non-existent foundation, again, that just shows the value you place in your own opinion. To maintain this position right now, you must view your opinion as so weightless as to not even need a foundation to rest on.
however that is not really what trackers are used for by raid leaders, because these guys focus on getting the encounter killed first and the measuring contest begins when guilds transition to farming out the raid instead of progressing through it
however in ashes afaik there will not be "farm raids" because as i understand it, when you clear a raid - that raid stays cleared until you open a different raid - so in essence you shouldn't get into a situation when guilds are on grind farm of a certain raid
- at least that's the design goal afaik
― Plato
No. As long as there is air to breath there will be jerks, what I am suggesting is we don't need to give tools to them.
I do trust the Devs at this point. I think they should have the tools and if they see a need for balancing they can take action. What I have seen in the past is when jerks with tools think they should weedout players, games wither and die.
This part was almost constructive and then you had to fall back to your twisting of logic, words, and the value you put on your point of view over anyone else's.
Marten:
Noaani:
Marten:
Okey, I get it. I am wrong because you are right!
Moving on.
I can foresee Noaani's next post...
@Hatham How do you eat an elephant?
First, I never said or suggested that a meta wouldn't result in players knowing which builds were best in what ever situation. I specifically singled out your case in regards to support classes as being actual bullshit - as there are real world examples of the literal opposite of what you were assuming would happen actually happening.
Further to that point, you made a supposition based on an assumption. You then asked a question based on that supposition.
I pointed out to you that the assumption at the start of that is incorrect. I know it's unfair to quote your own post to point out where you are wrong, but I'm a dick sometimes, so I will do it.
See what you said there? You said combat trackers lead to a game having a meta.
This is factually incorrect. A meta will exist with or without trackers - and as such a combat tracker absolutely DOES NOT lead to a meta.
I mean, you are even agreeing with this point now. You initially stated the above - that a combat tracker leads to a meta - and are now saying that a combat tracker is just a tool that some people will use in order to assist them in creating a meta.
The next point with a meta is simple. Because Ashes will be more unpredictable than most games (than WoW, at least), there is scope for more classes to be accepted. Where in a game like WoW, one build of one class may be the best DPS and thus the only viable build, in Ashes, a second build of that same class may have better survivability, and so is viable in a PvP setting.
Since the group doesn't know if they will see PvP or not, they are likely to be accepting of either build.
Further to that, since dungeons are open, there is no guarantee as to what bosses you are going to come up against. This opens up the meta to even more classes.
However, this will only be the case if the classes are actually objectively known. If they are not known to this level, there will be three or four accepted builds per primary architype, as opposed to three or four builds per class that would be accepted with trackers.
---
Lets try and break this down. You are aware that the game will develop a meta. We both agree on this. This isn't just jerks being jerks, this is people making the most of obfuscated information in order to try and pull as much success out of the void as possible.
So, from that corner of understanding that a meta will exist, I have to assume your next priority is for that meta to be as wide as possible - that players accept as many builds as possible. Again, if this is not something you agree with, let me know - I don't want to be seen putting words in your mount or anything.
So, a meta will exist, but we want it to include as many builds as possible. Ashes has content that lends itself to many different builds being viable at many different points in time. We agree that we think Intrepid are capable of developing classes with many viable builds.
Now the thing you need to get past is the decades players have of meta bias - many players have spent years or actual decades in games where there were only ever one or two viable builds for a given class. That is the mindset people will be going in to Ashes with.
That is what you need to break through. Not jerks, decades of experience of a monolithic meta.
Literally the only way to break that is with objective data.
You think anyone at Intrepid is reading this?