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
"I didn't say. . ." you said it was a PvX game and my ideas would diminish the PvP side of things; XP on Use was part of the remedy I suggest. What are you twisting.
Given it could be half-XP when not hitting something, level power scaling could be low, and various combat skills could go unprogressed; there are very good ways to execute it.
XP on Kill can still exist and this in combination with 'on-use' can make PvE == PvP dueling while exceeding random tree whacking. PvErs can still whack trees and swing at the air, or cast spells to progress. Depends on the class.
Combat is required for defensive and weapon skill progression and that could be a rather slow process similar to Leveling.
This should address your concern about progression efficiency. Unless there's more?
"Risk vs Reward" This allows PvPers to kill and still level. They get a reward. You still get gear, progress the area, improve the node, et cetera through PvE.
The entire "PvE Pressures you" is a Risk and beating them is the Reward and nets you Rewards such as loot or simply space to do other stuff.
I gave an example of players that smash buttons all the time. It's appealing to certain people. You even compared it to track & field. . . which is rather popular.
You're just arguing preferences and don't want any class to have that kind of tailored feel to it.
There are still 8x8x4 classes. For most classes any kind of button spam can be minimal or generally non-existant. It doesn't impede anyone and if anything it simply offends you for trying to appeal to those you don't like and aren't like you. Which is Ironic; Projection is pretty common I guess!
I think Fighter in particular should probably get the Button Spam that is appealing to more physical people. Maybe that is why you brought up the Fighter genre? lmao
Tank could get some limited Spam. Rogue and Ranger can get some limited Spam.
Effort and Skill should be rewarded though, no? And they are physical classes, no?
Fighter sub-specs could also get spam. Thus Fighter sub-Fighter is built around Effort, which is entirely thematic and there are still 49 other class combinations. The 4 augments could have a button spam option that rewards effort and even timing.
Effort was a lot more nuanced idea than you care to bring up right now, but to put it short: it can reward timing as well. Build up effort in 1 second and spend on moving or attacking? It could be elaborated upon and given more nuance by "designing minds".
As for the last paragraph:
If you're talking about "what's a good game to you" then I already answered you just didn't like it LMAO.
If you put in the work you would realize that crafting custom experiences and depth while also handling all 'issues' that pop up requires more work not less.
You say, "On Use XP will make it easier to level by spamming while standing in some spot than actually doing stuff". Which is a problem you could have solved yourself in your own post if you "did the work" so clearly you don't know much about the task of game design.
Honestly. All you've done is try and make it personal without responding to anything with any effort beyond your passive opinion. You have no will to help design or develop something. That makes what you say unconstructive, unproductive.
This shit is work (fun, relatively low difficulty, but still requiring something put into it rather than complete passivity)
so stop acting like there isn't a minimum input.
I think it's better to play the game and enjoy it rather than have something so static and old that it's basically 'complete' yet the crust that clings to it (players) don't know it yet. Then they resist any dynamic sort of gameplay that would keep the game 'fresh' for a very long time, because? Because their encyclopedia would lose its importance? lol?
We've talked about communication already. The Communication I've mentioned recently is between people on a forum. Lmao.
The communication in-game I'd like to be useful in the short-term. Tactical, dynamic, strategic talk for dynamic and new problems. Always fresh; fresh for longer at least. Not simply encyclopedic or attempts to figure out hidden systems (which for some reason are arbitrary!).
So what's your issue with that? Too social?
Left the forums for 3 hours, came back and there were 23 new posts in this thread.
Now, admittedly, they were all from just 4 posters, but still...
Oh, i am in favor in always more social in MMORPG, this is what i support this game, but also another one with this same element as base
And i also, on the message you answered, about communication on forum... For me it is part of the communication the game has to creates
You are asking some very good questions here.
Now hopefully you will understand me now when I say I don't want to waste my time with a 'solution' I've shat on to death.
You didn't get to the root of the topic and it will always be extremely slow talking to you.
I assumed you were reading through the pages before your first post (or first one in a while) with your post saying "It seems the topic/ issue is. . . my solution is. . ." a few pages back.
Given it was a repeat of the usual solutions, and usual issues, and you did not wish to cognize but instead throw out what I was saying
(demanding I "argue more, argue better" because you think I'm required to change your thinly veiled extremely stubborn and willful mind that is not changed by communication but instead a hobby of argumentation for you)
it seems you didn't want to engage with anything I had to say in the first place.
Thus, as soon as you try and push for the discussion to be railroaded according to your desired restrictions on what's relevant, what is stated and what is not (according to you), according to your desired conception of the conversation, based on an abstract yearning of yours, it is clear you are not attempting to communicate but railroad "for the win" or whatever bullshit.
So no, I try and make it simple to convey my intent and issues with something and suggest new direction while you are trying to hold court.
I really do not think he or anyone is saying Sales = Good.
But that popularity exists for a reason. McDonalds for instance is convenient and has some cheap options, while looking cartoony (lmao) thus approachable I guess. Vanilla WoW had some convenience, wasn't really cheaper, and was cartoony.
MMOs are never as convenient as other genres though, and lock players from anything mildly interesting for hundreds of hours. Old MMOs were interesting simply from how punishing they were and how impactful each individual everything was. Similar to real life I guess.
It's difficult to make a deeper comparison given Mag doesn't seem to believe Sales = Good; just that popularity exists for a reason. Maybe it's tangential? There were other more 'pressing' issues at hand.
That's my take and I bet Mag agrees.
But a more tactical, strategic, dynamic game with PvE pressures increases communication and you're still against it?
Clearly you have other much higher priorities than anything you or I've mentioned already so what are they?
Wait so you are just mad because I recommended something that may have been addressed 30 pages before I suggested it? I havent kept up with this thread. Thats literally why I stated what I did at the beginning. How can you recognize that yet still act like im dismissing some post I never even saw.
Go back and read it. You responded to me first. I Hadn't even addressed you, there's no way could could sanely come to that conclusion. The only point I stopped engaging was when you reduced the conversation to insults and misrepresentation...and even then I still engaged for the most part. I literally spent the first half of the conversation trying to get YOU to engage the actual points being made and you refused, so thats bullcrap to say I was the dismissive one. The only thing I was dismissive of at all was the points you made that were based on out of context/misrepresentations of what I said. I always address line by line each point that is used against mine, fully engaging, unless the other person becomes dismissive and uninterested in what I am trying to say.
Again, the only matter at hand is whether you can understand the other persons perspective and evaluate its legitmacy. If me being bent on evaluating something's legitamacy is an issue to you then it should only be because its illegitimate, or because you assume that it is and dont want to understand why I think its not. It only would become a "game" if you aren't properly getting your perspective across, to where I am addressing something you don't mean- in which case It certainly would not be my fault when I give more than enough opportunity to find the intent to what is being said, until you get impatient or triggered and change the topic unecessarily.
If you did I didnt read it, and even if I did that doesn't invalidate the newly proposed points I made in the topic that should be addressed instead of dismissed.
If I can I do, if I don't I am trying to. My initial post for the topic I introduced, was. It might not always happen immediately, but given time it will happen as long as I am not the only one engaging until the end.
Idgaf. Don't come to a forum to seek collaborative problem solving/community support if you cant take the time to make it happen. At least not if you want me on board. My judgement of true and false doesn't have a timer on it.
Here is your original post
You respond to Mag with another, where you say "organically uncovering info from an enemy is part of the strategy"
yet don't understand the issue with DPS numbers and how that reveals enemy resistances, health pool, et cetera.
Others, in particular Mag7spy, tried to make that clear to you.
Afterwards, seeing as the point had already been explained since you started posting and before you started posting, I assumed you'd have some update to your grasp of the situation and so I didn't think there was any need to harp on about something well-spoken about.
Instead you backtracked and started defending your original position because you thought I misrepresented your original point of view while saying shit like
"Had you taken the time to read that I don't support revealing enemy build details ahead of time, you would realize that I want skill to be rewarded and that being able to measure your own stats can be rewarding skill"
Because I want information to be limited to class or not exist in a clear form; thought I never said anything about stats lol it was your fixation though.
AND YOU DO ALL OF THIS instead of talking to Mag7spy about databasing the game because that would be too simple I guess. Because you'd rather argue with me about stats because THE POINT OF YOU TYPING IS TO ARGUE WITHOUT ANY PRODUCTIVE RESULT IN MIND.
YOU DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT A GOOD GAME BEING MADE.
Then, when I basically say a sense of time and sense of individual damage instances should be rewarded instead of gone unrewarded by the existence of a tracker:::::
"Rythm and pace is too vague and therefore would detract from the skill of theory crafting because of a lack of clear numerical feedback. I prefer to reward theory crafting skill over "rythm and pacing" if I have to make that choice."
WHO IS MAKING A CHOICE? IF YOU'RE GOOD AT BOTH YOU GET MORE. IF YOU'RE GOOD AT ONE YOU GET SOMETHING.
Everything you say is just to play an argument mini-game, just like theorycrafting is your mini-game all else be damned and people with valuable input be Ignored (Mag). EDIT: I may have misremembered other's conversation a bit.
"Stop making annoying comments acting like I dont know what Im talking about, we've been over this before. I will gladly explain my stance so I don't need you to act like I just have no reasoning behind what I am saying. "
The only reason you're arguing btw. To sound like you know what you're talking about.
"Because you are acting like I think all of this info should just be revealed, which I am not sure how you could have possibly gathered that from actually reading the few paragraphs I posted today."
I'll just keep it clean by reiterating: Exact DPS reveals enemy HP and Resistances. It is conducive to building a database of the game as well.
And you don't like variability in mobs or much of anything so that database can be built (looking at your attempt to misrepresent me to convey what you want; A+ on conveying you hate variables "RNG RNG RNG").
Done and doner.
EDIT: I guess I am the only one to harp on the issue of databasing since you've started posting in this thread 5 or so pages back. Not sure.
But the message is clear: Fuck off. Get good or get left behind. Skill and Growth through Playing > 999 hours of backroom tooltip researching.
and exact numbers build databases
this is where you do an error... the same from the begining... you do claims, you define yourself why people says this or that but in the end...
I spent most of my time to do test, experiments, share with people, debate about what is best, try again, adapt tactic, see results, debate, rince & repeat.
and your will to just "play, train, practice, and no analysis" would feel boring for me, and also remove most of communication with teammate... This is maybe what you like in video game, just play it... Not me, the more i play a game, the more i enjoy dissect it, and the more i dissect, the more i socialize with others, and so, get more fun. Getting into a virtuous circle.
Also, add any variability you want to ennemies... it won't avoid the database to exist. Instead of 1 000 000 life, the boss will have between 900k and 1,1m...
And because of this RNG in boss stats, you can't make real tough fight... just longer to figure out strategy maybe, but easier to apply it after... And the strategy will include "proc the fight until low life boss" ... yay funny.
And RNG in informatic is not even pure RNG, always sit on other factual element like the miliseconds when the roll is done for example. So you just open another thing to study, dissect, do test about.
Clearly, the kind of game design (still wait to have a game name...) is not the kind i love. And i doubt this "hostile design" can really exist to the point people will "just play"... i see 2 endings for this : they get thru, and still manage to understand, just longer. Or it is so chaotic and uninteresting to understand that those people will leave, and will remain only "simple enjoyers" who don't care about the understanding, and just use their controller.
And about Mag7spy sillyness around "a game is better because more sale" :
This is exactly what he is saying... numbers speak for themselves. more sale for wow than EQ, so wow better than EQ...
You keep saying I make errors but you're rather passive and secretive. l o l
or disassociated.
You are saying that you want more communication and analysis and that is fine. I'd rather there be more short-term analysis from dynamic content though. More about organization, direction, plan of action.
This is also mid to long term planning, strategizing, et cetera so your objection makes no sense
Are you saying it's too difficult to analyze dynamic and real-time things?
I gave an example elsewhere of some possible situation where "stone golems" invade the mine to eat Iron or whatnot.
And someone trying to get coordination going and find those that can help deal with the problem.
It might not be interesting to you since the answer is obvious of what to do about it? ?
? ? ?
but I do not see any solutions coming out of you. Just "min max the numbers".
That is the most game you can imagine?
I'd like there to be more action, strategy, tactics, and nuance so there's something to communicate; "map control" concerns; "if we do X then Y will attack" discussions; "their defenses seem to be. . . terrain looks like. . . so we should. . . .et cetera."
How does that not apply to what you're saying?
Or does it simply boil down to passivity, quest for omniscience, and preferences that lean into those? lmao
make room for green and red
It simply obfuscates feedback from Time to Kill, their damage output; and requires more Risk Management. Risk Management.
Think about how actual high level finance and business works -> more analysis than an MMO lmao.
Truly Random is easiest to analyze; complex behavior is not. Complex behavior is how groups wipe. Variability between similar mobs in general is great; slightly unique/ specific abilities that usually fit their slightly altered/ unique visage is great. Mobs having something unexpected is just fine and good as well.
Complex but organic/ intuitive variables once you know them is great. You don't need precise values to know something exists though. You don't need to know everything under the hood either.
It makes for an interesting world and complicates basic basic data such as Time to Kill.
Completely depends on how low effort the function is. It can be entirely opaque with strange behavior that can't be dissected by casual 'data analysts' which seems to be your actual concern lol.
The hostility is towards casual data analysts that want it to be very easy for them to analyze everything and have complete information with numerical accuracy and bar graphs and out-compete everyone with this information. lol.
That's it.
Fun for anyone else.
You keep trying to characterize Ashes of Creation as your new game (to metagame) but nothing about its premise suggests this.
My suggestions and 'wants' are more in line with the basic premise of AoC than yours most of the time.
It's a hybrid combat system. You don't see (edit: player) mana or HP. It's open world with Events triggered, some civ building, players spread out and competing civ vs civ [map control anyone?], groups will be required for a lot of open world content, resources and resource management is a big deal, players are being put into leadership roles in a Civ Builder, players create the best gear and have a chance to loot gear during resource competition, gathering triggers PvE Sieges/ Pressure, Progressing triggers Sieges/ Pressure, so on and so forth.
Everything you say is extremely disassociated from reality. Are you sure you know what game is being made?
Ahhhh, I see, the issue is that I hadn't fully comprehended what you are saying Mag had posted. You had assumed that I read Mags response and dismissed that point that the dps could be used to reverse engineer the enemy data. I didn't catch that part. So because I didnt address
that you based further points on that, of which it came across as me being dismissive of said points, even though I never made that original connection, so I thought you were misrepresenting me.
No no, thats a common take people have about me. Its just the result of this exact situation that tends to happen when assumptions are made, just because I am willing to take the conversation so far it is thought to be for "alternative motivations", but 99% of the time its just caused by an early miscommunication is all. Like I said I hadn't put much thought into it other than my initial response- so I didn't really consider the fact that the dps could be used to reverse engineer the enemy data, which I wouldn't necessarily like in a competitive setting.
No backtracking, just wrong assumptions from the miscommunication.
No, I just didnt fully read his post at the time before re-entering the convo later on. Would have ended right there (or at least shifted in another direction potentially after some thought).
Yes I do, hense the problem solving appoach I take.
It just comes across like that when dumb stuff like that happens.
The rng was about having not enough build feedback, discouraging good theory crafting and builds being boiled down to rng because of the lack of feedback. In a vaum dps is good info to have. In a multiplayer competitve setting where it can be used to reverse engineer enemy data to give a player advantage againat thise who want to organically uncover that info I think is an unfortunate and unhealthy downside to having a feature like that. I do like the variability of mobs and gameplay, I just like being able to optimize things solely on my end of that experience, but without trivializing the challenge. This could be more doable in a single player game where you could choose to do this without the player factor of those who want to exploit in that sense.
So yes I understand now. Really the main issues are what the more recent discussion has been about as far as whether that will happen anyway regardless of the approach intrepid takes.
Because the choice would be having more of one (exact data) vs more of the other (less data more feeling)- the point of including or not including exact dps feedback presents this choice hense my answer. But I would not neccessarily still hold this opinion if it means sacrificing the strategy of organic enemy info acqusition.
-It should have been fairly obvious that I had missed that point- when I was going on about wanting to keep enemy info hidden. You need to delay your nervous breakdowns until you are sure that someone is just trying to be avoidant. That is not me so stop doing that, else we will unnecesarily continue to relive this in an attempt to clear it up. It would have been a lot simpler to take this approach from the beginning.
I think having a simple way to conveniently measure dps in a vacuum without enemy influence would be good for players like myself who dont feel like calculating everything manually while not making enemy tracking a thing, such as the training ground dummy I suggested.
The problem is, a tracker cant do this.
Like you, Mag is arguing from a position of not knowing how trackers actually work.
Well I haven't been reading the convo so I'll drop it.
But many old MMOs surely waste people's time and are dogshit lmao; that's at least a significant point. Some fast-food is just good and not over-priced. The hashbrowns are good. Breakfast burrito with hashbrowns in it, no meat, is good.
Unless we're trying to make a vegan MMO?
I was a bit off about Mag clearing things up.
Why calculate anything.
That part of a game mostly takes care of itself unless everything is arbitrary, such as WoW gear upgrades that require a tooltip to look at numbers rather than common sense like 'Sharpness', 'Hardness', 'Durability' which can have qualitative descriptions (tiers) and results tried out on appropriate objects.
Blunt vs Rock for instance. Sharp vs Rope. Pierce vs Wood? Then look at result -> look at how far the weapon is in the object or Press E[xamine] to check after a small delay.
So Training Dummies still work but numbers are not fun. They're not good design. People calculate all the time but they decipher experience and use such 'informal' measures, and that's fun.
Sword too stiff? Brittle. Shatters. Too flexible? Bends when trying to parry or block.
More depth and GAINS in reality than numbers. It is fun to adapt and improve at something that carries over to reality better than just tooltip crunching.
tl;dr Estimating the quantitative from the qualitative is more fun; because qualitatives are more interesting and lend themself to elaborations of the game.
EDIT:
The encyclopedic side of the game could be a lot more interesting.
In real life you have material scientists trying to invent alloys and methods of creating alloys; using cheaply sourced materials.
Something like tungsten is extremely difficult to work with but one of the strongest pure metals there are (or is the strongest).
Usually there are natural obstacles to using the best, they still degrade, might not be fit for you, and it can heavily depend on the Artisan that created it "Ah BigDick makes the best Swords dude! Top notch" or "Damn he messed up big time. Hit or miss weaponsmith."
Qualitative
It can if you are just doing trial and error and wanting the more experiential route, but some people like to theory craft in their head rather than test everything, in which case its a lot more convenient to get immediate points of comparison rather than manually calculating or by going to compare in a more tedious way by killing things. It also lets you isolate opimizing your build aspect, rather than introducing other combat variables that annoyingly get in the way when you are trying to optimize.
Theory crafting is a skill, and should be rewarded as much if not more than experiential optimization, providing it doesn't take away prioritized gameplay aspects. The design should account for it to make it way less efficient (through more complexity) to just endlessley go through calculations of different build combinations to optimize that way- that trial and error approach will happen regardless in any system where builds have an effect, because its possible to do. But if they make it less efficient it would encourage more skill based approaches of which a tool could support through added convenience of comparison, while still prioritizing the skill elements.
The strengths of weaknesses of something should be obvious and no theorycrafting required.
You can only have the game you are asking for by throwing in as much arbitrary BS as is possible.
Sword is sharp. This one good, this one bad. Hammer beat rock.
simple
so what are you even talking about
sord sharp. hamer hurt. ez
Yea but the whole point of a theory crafting process is having a system complex enough that which choice combinations leads to the above result, isnt immediately obvious, until you take the time to figure it out which is enjoyable to some and takes skill if designed right.
Give me an example of something complex that requires theorycrafting, that isn't arbitrary.
I'm still working on the assumption that you are totally unaware that this general mentality is exactly how many people play MMO's, regardless of trackers.
As with any activity, you can play an MMO at the absolute base level. "Sord sharp, hamer hurt" seems to be as good a summary of this as anything.
However, like literally any activity in the world, if you put more effort in to it, you gain more out of it.
If you dont want to put that effort in to it, that's great. Trackers absolutely wont stop you from being able to do that.
What I dont get is, since you are able to play the game the way you want to play the game, why would you want others to not be able to play the game the way they want to play it? It doesnt impact your ability to play the game the way you want to play it - a tracker wont stop your sord being sharp, nor will it alter the fact that your hamer hurts.
I mean, setting aside the fact that you literally cant stop people putting in that additional time and effort, why would you even want to?
If Attributes affected relevant things in a 'realistic' manner then that's a sort of time management and situation-prediction theory craft.
There's various situations to consider; Agility might not let you kill something but allow you to run from certain death.
Sure, strengths and weaknesses are obvious just seeing the foe in any good game. and it doesn't need a game to have it, it is ALREADY the case in lot of game
But then you say "You don't need precise values to know something exists though. You don't need to know everything under the hood either." Which is true, no one here said it was mandatory to enjoy a game, and most people play video games without it. I love to know the precise values, (or the range when it is RNG). Give me a game with RNG in ennemies healthpoint, i will fill a spreadsheet with all amount of damages used to kill it.
You only think that we want to do all those numbers study because we think we need it, but... it is simply mostly how we like to play games.
gathering data thru experimenting 10, 100 1000 time same thing (as "killing this ennemy and collect all information) is what i like.
And no video game yet managed to forbid people to do such thing... Some tried to get mysterious as FFXI, but in the end, players had what they wanted.
From the begining you try to convince us that your way to see this is better than ours... while we are trying to explain you that taste is just taste and that we never said our taste were better than others.
And yes, your ideas are far from what devs promised...
The simple fact you think that invasion on nodes fit the base idea is a proof you don't understand this project. Adding this would be a turn down for lot of people on this forum, for lot of people there from the kickstarter...
And while you think to have the truth, and hope ashes of creation to be your dream video game, while you hate video game (again... what are you doing on a forum about a hobby you hate ? ) You remain an absolute nobody...
you don't trust me ? look back at answeres to your ideas... people just rejected it... Some in harsh way, others trying to say you "yes good but... not for this game sorry"
You say "no one wants a good game" ... False, everyone here want a good game. but i have a BIG spoiler for you ; in the reality, "good" and "bad" are subjectiv, based on personnal opinion, on your own tastes. what is good for you can be bad for others. And what other find good, you could fine it bad.
This is one reason i asked "give me example of good games" ... because it would help a lot to understand your taste...
Also... realism in video game never was a sale argument for me. this never was what i looked for a game. Neither in "pro" or "cons" ... (even if it can become a "cons" when the realism is here just to make the gameplay slower, uselessly complex like the hunger or thirst bar.)
Why are you even talking about fifa. Moving on from this comment.
I dont need to prove you wrong, WoW killed EQ, and eq is still dead. You are so desperate to want some new eq when no one wants anything like that kind of game. It isn't even inspiration for AoC.
And desperate I didn't even @ your ass wit the original comment, like who are you. You are in here desperately trying to defend your game and have yourself be right because that is all you can do even though you are wrong more than half the time with some of the worst takes I've seen on a forum..
Your takes are so bad actually full of manipulation, i know you aren't dumb. Data exist doesn't mean its important to a game based on how it is designed. When you play a fighting game a tracker isn't going to make you better, your skill and knowledge of the game and characters is what is going to be the difference on who wins.
Since you want to bring up sports(lol) they aren't looking at a tracker to improve they are using skill and knowledge. Your lay of looking at things is not based on life experience again you are desperate to be right and trying to compare everything to being the same. Same reason you used food as an example (again that made 0 sense).
That is funny I've already go over go create game design where its not as valuable with skill.
What is also funny is your lack of attempt or care to even try. This isn't about them not being in the game, this is about you personally trying to have them in the game and create weird arguments for it. You don't care what anyone thinks, you only care about your own selfishness. You easily could have gone on supporting the devs and trying to give your ideas on how to create content that makes trackers much less effective, while still being fine if they were there in the future. But again its not about that or what the devs are trying to do, it is simply what you want. And most likely out of fear knowing your skills in a mmorpg are most likely lacking.
Data: Can be changed easily. It is simply your taste that it remains static and that your spreadsheet is particularly useful.
If you do not even know the precise damage but simply time to kill then you do have information but it doesn't "solve the game".
So at the end of the day whether it is easy for you and others to dissect in terms of precise numerical values and probabilities is a Design Choice.
Many decisions you support is a turn down to people that would like to play the game and already support it.
Many ideas I suggest are appealing to supporters and those that would play the game.
At the end of the day it's simply a matter of 'taste' but if that's all we're left with then how about this:
There are 8 classes. 8 sub-classes. And you don't have to enjoy every single one of them.
Those that like to sit in this forum are not even close to the majority of people that would spend money on the game.
And neither of us are developing it or have invested millions.
I'd simply like for there to be a better game that has less niche appeal.
But if you want this to be about tastes then how about this: A person's tastes says a lot about them.
And a taste for video games sure does as well.
Try to see the broadening of the game as an opportunity for growth and a broadening of your mind as well. An evolution for the game, for the players.
Many survival elements are not necessary but the critical issues to me is a lack of dynamic PvE Pressure, lack of PvX progression, and lack of Class Uniqueness and Depth.
Thank you.
Imagine tracking how much dmg it took to kill a player number wise and then making this statement.
Noaani likes to be manipulative also enjoys being insulting to people that don't agree with him, ALSO enjoys not respecting people and thrives on the tension it creates
If that's not a "tracker" being used to figure out the best way to reach their goal - I dunno what is.
As a matter of fact I'll go rewatch it right now cause I haven't seen it in a long while and it's a great movie