But, you can just look at what Steven's quotes to see what his philosophy is: STEVEN:First of all, on the add-on front, we're not allowing add-ons.
Which means he wants players to play the game the devs designed rather than finding ways to make it easier to speed through the content.
STEVEN:Back in the day, when MMOs were great, you had to win your encounters through trial and error. You didn't have a DPS meter telling you, "Oh! We need to get up to 67.7% damage in order to achieve the whatever!" It wasn't some mechanical bullshit experience where you got to look at a graph or chart and say, "Oh! We need to do exactly this." Instead, you actually had to be present, you had to watch what was happening, you had to help your fellow guild members learn how to play the game and you had to excel as a group.
Back in the day, we used trial and error. Which is not as quick and efficient as relying on the mechanical bullshit of combat trackers, but brings us closer to an RP experience.
That's also why he's trying to get away from using numbers to indicate the health of combat targets in UI and instead display health decay as nameplate decay.
Focusing on discussing the characters' perspectives of what abilities were used - describing what the abilities that were seen or the abilities that could be used, rather than discussing DPS, brings us closer to RP.
STEVEN:From a roleplay perspective, we want people to be in-depth with their characters.
I don't think Steven is talking about this in RP in the form of making up your own dialogues with NPCs.
PEOPLE STILL USE TRIAL AND ERROR IN MMORPGS THAT HAVE COMBAT TRACKERS!
If you think combat trackers tells you what you exactly need to do, then you don't know what you are talking about. It only tells you what exactly happened, you then need to figure out how beat the boss by trial and error. As I said before, just look at retail wow.
Then the RP comment is also not relevant if you read my last post.
The add-on comment I can agree with to some degree. Addons like Weak auras and deadly boss mods in wow is to much in my opinion. However, combat tracker isn't an addon since it's already in the game, we just want a nice UI to go with it so we can easier read the information we are looking for.
For those of you that do not know what weak auras is or deadly boss mods, they are addons that can tell you exactly what to do during a boss encounter. When the next spell is coming, when to hide, when to run, when to attack, everything. I can see why Steven do not what that in the game.
If you think combat trackers tells you what you exactly need to do, then you don't know what you are talking about. It only tells you what exactly happened, you then need to figure out how beat the boss by trial and error. As I said before, just look at retail wow.
I didn't say that combat trackers tell you exactly what to do.
Don't just make shit up and then pretend I said it.
What did I say combat trackers do?
PEOPLE STILL USE TRIAL AND ERROR IN MMORPGS THAT HAVE COMBAT TRACKERS!
If you think combat trackers tells you what you exactly need to do, then you don't know what you are talking about.
This is 100% accurate as a statement.
The part about this that has me concerned is not that Dygz believes combat trackers remove trial and error, but that Steven believes it.
Such a fundamental misunderstanding of an entire section of MMO gameplay does not bode well for that section of gameplay in Ashes.
I think there's a correction to be made here.
Steven dislikes the idea of combat trackers, not only because he believes it breeds toxicity (which you can debate), but because it would then allow for other add-ons.
Other add-ons can then be used for less than legit practices such as botting and other forms of automations.
Or at the very least, that opening the door to that possibility would make it harder on the dev team to monitor and police them, if they believe it breaks terms of service, or just are "unethical" to the MMO experience.
No, I expect you to admit when you are clearly, blatantly and demonstrably wrong on a point you were very adamant on.
Also, ACT isn't mine, I have no affiliation with it, I use their icon as my forum sig for reasons.
You know that add ons have negative effects on the health of an MMORPG, yet you're still promoting them. Keep shilling dude, how much you getting paid?
So, this is a conversation I have had numerous times on these forums.
First of all, I am not asking for an add on. I am asking for a combat tracker - preferably one built in to the game.
Second, not all add ons are bad. It is bad if the game opens up the API like WoW did, but that isn't going to happen in any other game.
Third, I am not shilling anything. If I were shilling something, it would probably not be a piece of software that is free to use.
If you think combat trackers tells you what you exactly need to do, then you don't know what you are talking about. It only tells you what exactly happened, you then need to figure out how beat the boss by trial and error. As I said before, just look at retail wow.
I didn't say that combat trackers tell you exactly what to do.
Don't just make shit up and then pretend I said it.
What did I say combat trackers do?
well if you agree with Stevens statement where he said, "Oh! We need to do exactly this." then yes you indirectly did so
PEOPLE STILL USE TRIAL AND ERROR IN MMORPGS THAT HAVE COMBAT TRACKERS!
If you think combat trackers tells you what you exactly need to do, then you don't know what you are talking about.
This is 100% accurate as a statement.
The part about this that has me concerned is not that Dygz believes combat trackers remove trial and error, but that Steven believes it.
Such a fundamental misunderstanding of an entire section of MMO gameplay does not bode well for that section of gameplay in Ashes.
I think there's a correction to be made here.
Steven dislikes the idea of combat trackers, not only because he believes it breeds toxicity (which you can debate), but because it would then allow for other add-ons.
Other add-ons can then be used for less than legit practices such as botting and other forms of automations.
Or at the very least, that opening the door to that possibility would make it harder on the dev team to monitor and police them, if they believe it breaks terms of service, or just are "unethical" to the MMO experience.
For me the difference between an addon and a combat tracker is that, an addon you use during combat to make it easier, while a combat tracker is used after the encounter to get a better understanding what actually happened.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited April 2021
I don't agree with your interpretation of what "Oh! We need to do exactly this." means.
To me, that refers to when people says, "Your DPS is low!! It needs to be xx!" "Your healing is supposed to be at xx! Slacker!"
No, I expect you to admit when you are clearly, blatantly and demonstrably wrong on a point you were very adamant on.
Also, ACT isn't mine, I have no affiliation with it, I use their icon as my forum sig for reasons.
You know that add ons have negative effects on the health of an MMORPG, yet you're still promoting them. Keep shilling dude, how much you getting paid?
So, this is a conversation I have had numerous times on these forums.
First of all, I am not asking for an add on. I am asking for a combat tracker - preferably one built in to the game.
Second, not all add ons are bad. It is bad if the game opens up the API like WoW did, but that isn't going to happen in any other game.
Third, I am not shilling anything. If I were shilling something, it would probably not be a piece of software that is free to use.
PEOPLE STILL USE TRIAL AND ERROR IN MMORPGS THAT HAVE COMBAT TRACKERS!
If you think combat trackers tells you what you exactly need to do, then you don't know what you are talking about.
This is 100% accurate as a statement.
The part about this that has me concerned is not that Dygz believes combat trackers remove trial and error, but that Steven believes it.
Such a fundamental misunderstanding of an entire section of MMO gameplay does not bode well for that section of gameplay in Ashes.
I think there's a correction to be made here.
Steven dislikes the idea of combat trackers, not only because he believes it breeds toxicity (which you can debate), but because it would then allow for other add-ons.
Other add-ons can then be used for less than legit practices such as botting and other forms of automations.
Or at the very least, that opening the door to that possibility would make it harder on the dev team to monitor and police them, if they believe it breaks terms of service, or just are "unethical" to the MMO experience.
For me the difference between an addon and a combat tracker is that, an addon you use during combat to make it easier, while a combat tracker is used after the encounter to get a better understanding what actually happened.
Slightly incorrect I would say:
The only difference is that a combat tracker is an addon. But not all addons are combat trackers. Simple as that.
You can have addons who simply alter the UI, or organise information differently on screen.
Of course some of those, as is the case with macros not being accepted in the game at this time, can be used for what you indicate: making a challenge, overly easier.
We, however, do agree that simplifying a fight so that you can almost do things on autopilot with the aid of addons, goes against the spirit of the game.
So I am in favor of having the option of combat trackers, but agree that having them via addons, can open the door to other issues.
What I think would be better is having an in-game one, but then you'd need to debate Steven on the issue of toxicity.
PEOPLE STILL USE TRIAL AND ERROR IN MMORPGS THAT HAVE COMBAT TRACKERS!
If you think combat trackers tells you what you exactly need to do, then you don't know what you are talking about.
This is 100% accurate as a statement.
The part about this that has me concerned is not that Dygz believes combat trackers remove trial and error, but that Steven believes it.
Such a fundamental misunderstanding of an entire section of MMO gameplay does not bode well for that section of gameplay in Ashes.
I think there's a correction to be made here.
Steven dislikes the idea of combat trackers, not only because he believes it breeds toxicity (which you can debate), but because it would then allow for other add-ons.
Other add-ons can then be used for less than legit practices such as botting and other forms of automations.
Or at the very least, that opening the door to that possibility would make it harder on the dev team to monitor and police them, if they believe it breaks terms of service, or just are "unethical" to the MMO experience.
The information needed to make a third party combat tracker work and the API hooks needed to make a botting addon are very different things.
The game is already going to display the information needed for a combat tracker to work. If Intrepid took that text on screen and sent it to a text file, I could write a plugin and have ACT working in an afternoon.
That is really all we are talking about - taking information that we are given on screen, and sending it to a text file.
I don't agree with your interpretation of what "Oh! We need to do exactly this." means.
To me, that refers to when people says, "Your DPS is low!! It needs to be xx!" "Your healing is supposed to be at xx! Slacker!"
Do not change this in to a definition argument again xD
1) We need to do this, means that the whole group needs to do something
2) You need to do this, means a specific person need to do something.
"Your DPS is low!! It needs ti be xx" falls under 2).
The comment from Steven falls under 1).
Still, my points still stands to show that the three comments from Steven is based on, as Noaani said, a fundamental misunderstanding of an entire section of MMO gameplay.
PEOPLE STILL USE TRIAL AND ERROR IN MMORPGS THAT HAVE COMBAT TRACKERS!
If you think combat trackers tells you what you exactly need to do, then you don't know what you are talking about.
This is 100% accurate as a statement.
The part about this that has me concerned is not that Dygz believes combat trackers remove trial and error, but that Steven believes it.
Such a fundamental misunderstanding of an entire section of MMO gameplay does not bode well for that section of gameplay in Ashes.
I think there's a correction to be made here.
Steven dislikes the idea of combat trackers, not only because he believes it breeds toxicity (which you can debate), but because it would then allow for other add-ons.
Other add-ons can then be used for less than legit practices such as botting and other forms of automations.
Or at the very least, that opening the door to that possibility would make it harder on the dev team to monitor and police them, if they believe it breaks terms of service, or just are "unethical" to the MMO experience.
For me the difference between an addon and a combat tracker is that, an addon you use during combat to make it easier, while a combat tracker is used after the encounter to get a better understanding what actually happened.
Slightly incorrect I would say:
The only difference is that a combat tracker is an addon. But not all addons are combat trackers. Simple as that.
You can have addons who simply alter the UI, or organise information differently on screen.
Of course some of those, as is the case with macros not being accepted in the game at this time, can be used for what you indicate: making a challenge, overly easier.
We, however, do agree that simplifying a fight so that you can almost do things on autopilot with the aid of addons, goes against the spirit of the game.
So I am in favor of having the option of combat trackers, but agree that having them via addons, can open the door to other issues.
What I think would be better is having an in-game one, but then you'd need to debate Steven on the issue of toxicity.
While I do agree with you, all addons that change UI and what not is still used during combat and may help you (or not xD) in a combat encounter.
AND, combat trackers isn't an addon if it's in the game from the beginning
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Do not change this in to a definition argument again xD
1) We need to do this, means that the whole group needs to do something
2) You need to do this, means a specific person need to do something.
"Your DPS is low!! It needs ti be xx" falls under 2).
The comment from Steven falls under 1).
Still, my points still stands to show that the three comments from Steven is based on, as Noaani said, a fundamental misunderstanding of an entire section of MMO gameplay.
I don't know what you mean by definition - it's a sentence, not a word.
I don't agree with your interpretations of the sentence you quoted.
That's a disagreement; not an argument.
Do not change this in to a definition argument again xD
1) We need to do this, means that the whole group needs to do something
2) You need to do this, means a specific person need to do something.
"Your DPS is low!! It needs ti be xx" falls under 2).
The comment from Steven falls under 1).
Still, my points still stands to show that the three comments from Steven is based on, as Noaani said, a fundamental misunderstanding of an entire section of MMO gameplay.
I don't know what you mean by definition - it's a sentence, not a word.
I don't agree with your interpretations of the sentence you quoted.
That's a disagreement; not an argument.
So no comment to the statement about the combat tracker?
Do not change this in to a definition argument again xD
1) We need to do this, means that the whole group needs to do something
2) You need to do this, means a specific person need to do something.
"Your DPS is low!! It needs ti be xx" falls under 2).
The comment from Steven falls under 1).
Still, my points still stands to show that the three comments from Steven is based on, as Noaani said, a fundamental misunderstanding of an entire section of MMO gameplay.
I don't know what you mean by definition - it's a sentence, not a word.
I don't agree with your interpretations of the sentence you quoted.
That's a disagreement; not an argument.
So no comment to the statement about the combat tracker?
Dygz would rather argue semantics than substance.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I may be wrong here, and I am not generally keen on speaking for others - but it would seem to me he is asking for your comments on the bit where he says his point still stands.
Still, my points still stands to show that the three comments from Steven is based on, as Noaani said, a fundamental misunderstanding of an entire section of MMO gameplay.
[
But, you can just look at what Steven's quotes to see what his philosophy is: STEVEN:First of all, on the add-on front, we're not allowing add-ons.
Which means he wants players to play the game the devs designed rather than finding ways to make it easier to speed through the content.
Your interpretation leaves out the only important part - that is he wants to ship the game completed - so players don't need to solve game problems with addons
STEVEN:Back in the day, when MMOs were great, you had to win your encounters through trial and error. You didn't have a DPS meter telling you, "Oh! We need to get up to 67.7% damage in order to achieve the whatever!" It wasn't some mechanical bullshit experience where you got to look at a graph or chart and say, "Oh! We need to do exactly this." Instead, you actually had to be present, you had to watch what was happening, you had to help your fellow guild members learn how to play the game and you had to excel as a group.
Back in the day, we used trial and error. Which is not as quick and efficient as relying on the mechanical bullshit of combat trackers, but brings us closer to an RP experience.
That's also why he's trying to get away from using numbers to indicate the health of combat targets in UI and instead display health decay as nameplate decay.
Focusing on discussing the characters' perspectives of what abilities were used - describing what the abilities that were seen or the abilities that could be used, rather than discussing DPS, brings us closer to RP.
Back in the day encounters were stupid simple so the only true mechanic was beating a DPS check - that is just bad encounter design
If you can't create interesting mechanics that have nothing to do with dps checks then i'm sorry, but you suck at design
STEVEN:From a roleplay perspective, we want people to be in-depth with their characters.
I don't think Steven is talking about this in RP in the form of making up your own dialogues with NPCs.
Of course not - he wants people to create their own builds and have extremely wide variety of build options - funny thing is that combat logs actually help create wider variety of builds, because it is actually easier to experiment with the builds - if you make it harder then you just narrow the meta instead of enriching it
“Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil.”
― Plato
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Your interpretation leaves out the only important part - that is he wants to ship the game completed - so players don't need to solve game problems with addons
If you aren't going to allow add-ons you have to make sure you include all the features you want the players to be using. Knowing that, he is not implementing combat trackers - even though he knows there are people who want them and that he's not going to allow add-ons.
So... I really don't understand what your point is intended to be.
Back in the day encounters were stupid simple so the only true mechanic was beating a DPS check - that is just bad encounter design
If you can't create interesting mechanics that have nothing to do with dps checks then i'm sorry, but you suck at design.
Stupid simple is subjective.
I think what you mean is that back in the day encounters were not designed to give combat trackers meaningful utility. If you're going to implement combat trackers, you're going to design encounters to be difficult enough to support players using combat trackers.
he wants people to create their own builds and have extremely wide variety of build options - funny thing is that combat logs actually help create wider variety of builds, because it is actually easier to experiment with the builds - if you make it harder then you just narrow the meta instead of enriching it
They could help with that, but are most commonly used to enforce FOTM, cookie-cutter builds.
IME
0
Options
CambiguousMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
So let us throw out toxicity and whatnot and get to the real meat of what is going on here.
There are two views on why combat trackers should not be allowed.
1. The developers view.. Their view will mostly be against them at launch because players will get through content faster. They can throw toxicity in there and whatnot, but this will be their core argument, admitted or not. This is actually a very good argument for them, because creating content is time consuming, and if they follow a 6 month update schedule, the people who are finished with most of the content before then, will take breaks and or leave the game. Which hurts the game, because they are judged by their population, not their sales.
2. The Players... This is where the book gets thrown at trackers because no matter what people say to "nay say" them, we will be told that is not the case, and although there is evidence of every single reason told, in truth, there will never be ENOUGH evidence to prove our argument.
When you look at the players arguments, the one that should be argued the most, is the one least mentioned. That argument being that it gives them an advantage over the players who do not use them. This is after all the only reason need given to go against them. No game should ever allow any player to have an advantage over another player.... ever. And with a chunk of the community saying they are against having them, the easiest solution is to not have them. To put them in, does not fix the issue, it makes it worse. To leave them out does not fix the issue either, but it minimizes the polarity of it.
It is like performance enhancing drugs in sports.. You do not allow them, to make things better. You ban them, This way it allows players who do not use them to compete on an even playing field. And while players will still use performance enhancing drugs, it minimizes its use, and it reduces the polarity of it, so it is only talked about when caught.
There are two views on why combat trackers should not be allowed.
These are views that have been discussed in the larger thread. I don't think they are the major factors, but they are definitely reasons.
To me, the idea that a combat tracker will get players though content faster is actually a reason to have one built in to the game.
Players absolutely will have a combat tracker, and so will complete the games initial content in that same amount of time.
Intrepid can say they don't want combat trackers, and can even ban accounts seen to be using them, but that won't stop - or even really slow - their use. It will just mean people don't openly talk about them.
If that combat tracker is built in to the game, it means the content we have at the start can be tuned for combat tracker use during beta. This is the only way to slow down the rate that players complete content - design it with combat trackers that players will be using in mind.
There are two views on why combat trackers should not be allowed.
These are views that have been discussed in the larger thread. I don't think they are the major factors, but they are definitely reasons.
To me, the idea that a combat tracker will get players though content faster is actually a reason to have one built in to the game.
Players absolutely will have a combat tracker, and so will complete the games initial content in that same amount of time.
Intrepid can say they don't want combat trackers, and can even ban accounts seen to be using them, but that won't stop - or even really slow - their use. It will just mean people don't openly talk about them.
If that combat tracker is built in to the game, it means the content we have at the start can be tuned for combat tracker use during beta. This is the only way to slow down the rate that players complete content - design it with combat trackers that players will be using in mind.
Why do you even respond anymore?
You just basically said the same exact thing I did.... but tried to spin it as I was wrong for what I said. I told myself I was never going to respond to you again, so now that I lied to myself, I am going to lie to you.. I hope you are successful in AoC.
There are two views on why combat trackers should not be allowed.
These are views that have been discussed in the larger thread. I don't think they are the major factors, but they are definitely reasons.
To me, the idea that a combat tracker will get players though content faster is actually a reason to have one built in to the game.
Players absolutely will have a combat tracker, and so will complete the games initial content in that same amount of time.
Intrepid can say they don't want combat trackers, and can even ban accounts seen to be using them, but that won't stop - or even really slow - their use. It will just mean people don't openly talk about them.
If that combat tracker is built in to the game, it means the content we have at the start can be tuned for combat tracker use during beta. This is the only way to slow down the rate that players complete content - design it with combat trackers that players will be using in mind.
Why do you even respond anymore?
You just basically said the same exact thing I did.... but tried to spin it as I was wrong for what I said. I told myself I was never going to respond to you again, so now that I lied to myself, I am going to lie to you.. I hope you are successful in AoC.
I'm not sure what this is all about.
As I said, I agree that the fact that players will get through content faster with combat trackers vs without them is a factor to consider, I disagree with Intrwpids view that this is a reason to not have them - as I said above, it is a reason to have them in the game during beta so the content can be properly tuned to take the appropriate amount t of time when the game goes live.
In other words, I agree with you and your points, I disagree with Intrepid.
Dont turn in to Dygz, he thinks everything is about him.
Comments
I was actually thinking just after I posted that - maybe I should have removed those two @'s.
In hindsight, I think it may have been Damokles in that conversation.
well its one of us
PEOPLE STILL USE TRIAL AND ERROR IN MMORPGS THAT HAVE COMBAT TRACKERS!
If you think combat trackers tells you what you exactly need to do, then you don't know what you are talking about. It only tells you what exactly happened, you then need to figure out how beat the boss by trial and error. As I said before, just look at retail wow.
Then the RP comment is also not relevant if you read my last post.
The add-on comment I can agree with to some degree. Addons like Weak auras and deadly boss mods in wow is to much in my opinion. However, combat tracker isn't an addon since it's already in the game, we just want a nice UI to go with it so we can easier read the information we are looking for.
For those of you that do not know what weak auras is or deadly boss mods, they are addons that can tell you exactly what to do during a boss encounter. When the next spell is coming, when to hide, when to run, when to attack, everything. I can see why Steven do not what that in the game.
The part about this that has me concerned is not that Dygz believes combat trackers remove trial and error, but that Steven believes it.
Such a fundamental misunderstanding of an entire section of MMO gameplay does not bode well for that section of gameplay in Ashes.
Don't just make shit up and then pretend I said it.
What did I say combat trackers do?
I think there's a correction to be made here.
Steven dislikes the idea of combat trackers, not only because he believes it breeds toxicity (which you can debate), but because it would then allow for other add-ons.
Other add-ons can then be used for less than legit practices such as botting and other forms of automations.
Or at the very least, that opening the door to that possibility would make it harder on the dev team to monitor and police them, if they believe it breaks terms of service, or just are "unethical" to the MMO experience.
Okay, keep shilling man.
well if you agree with Stevens statement where he said, "Oh! We need to do exactly this." then yes you indirectly did so
For me the difference between an addon and a combat tracker is that, an addon you use during combat to make it easier, while a combat tracker is used after the encounter to get a better understanding what actually happened.
To me, that refers to when people says, "Your DPS is low!! It needs to be xx!" "Your healing is supposed to be at xx! Slacker!"
@Ironhammer
Slightly incorrect I would say:
The only difference is that a combat tracker is an addon. But not all addons are combat trackers. Simple as that.
You can have addons who simply alter the UI, or organise information differently on screen.
Of course some of those, as is the case with macros not being accepted in the game at this time, can be used for what you indicate: making a challenge, overly easier.
We, however, do agree that simplifying a fight so that you can almost do things on autopilot with the aid of addons, goes against the spirit of the game.
So I am in favor of having the option of combat trackers, but agree that having them via addons, can open the door to other issues.
What I think would be better is having an in-game one, but then you'd need to debate Steven on the issue of toxicity.
The information needed to make a third party combat tracker work and the API hooks needed to make a botting addon are very different things.
The game is already going to display the information needed for a combat tracker to work. If Intrepid took that text on screen and sent it to a text file, I could write a plugin and have ACT working in an afternoon.
That is really all we are talking about - taking information that we are given on screen, and sending it to a text file.
Do not change this in to a definition argument again xD
1) We need to do this, means that the whole group needs to do something
2) You need to do this, means a specific person need to do something.
"Your DPS is low!! It needs ti be xx" falls under 2).
The comment from Steven falls under 1).
Still, my points still stands to show that the three comments from Steven is based on, as Noaani said, a fundamental misunderstanding of an entire section of MMO gameplay.
While I do agree with you, all addons that change UI and what not is still used during combat and may help you (or not xD) in a combat encounter.
AND, combat trackers isn't an addon if it's in the game from the beginning
I don't agree with your interpretations of the sentence you quoted.
That's a disagreement; not an argument.
So no comment to the statement about the combat tracker?
Dygz would rather argue semantics than substance.
I meant it's up to you, If you find something you have an argument against, then feel free to state that argument here.
I may be wrong here, and I am not generally keen on speaking for others - but it would seem to me he is asking for your comments on the bit where he says his point still stands.
This bit.
If you can't create interesting mechanics that have nothing to do with dps checks then i'm sorry, but you suck at design
Of course not - he wants people to create their own builds and have extremely wide variety of build options - funny thing is that combat logs actually help create wider variety of builds, because it is actually easier to experiment with the builds - if you make it harder then you just narrow the meta instead of enriching it
― Plato
So... I really don't understand what your point is intended to be.
Stupid simple is subjective.
I think what you mean is that back in the day encounters were not designed to give combat trackers meaningful utility. If you're going to implement combat trackers, you're going to design encounters to be difficult enough to support players using combat trackers.
They could help with that, but are most commonly used to enforce FOTM, cookie-cutter builds.
IME
Someone you otter know.
There are two views on why combat trackers should not be allowed.
1. The developers view.. Their view will mostly be against them at launch because players will get through content faster. They can throw toxicity in there and whatnot, but this will be their core argument, admitted or not. This is actually a very good argument for them, because creating content is time consuming, and if they follow a 6 month update schedule, the people who are finished with most of the content before then, will take breaks and or leave the game. Which hurts the game, because they are judged by their population, not their sales.
2. The Players... This is where the book gets thrown at trackers because no matter what people say to "nay say" them, we will be told that is not the case, and although there is evidence of every single reason told, in truth, there will never be ENOUGH evidence to prove our argument.
When you look at the players arguments, the one that should be argued the most, is the one least mentioned. That argument being that it gives them an advantage over the players who do not use them. This is after all the only reason need given to go against them. No game should ever allow any player to have an advantage over another player.... ever. And with a chunk of the community saying they are against having them, the easiest solution is to not have them. To put them in, does not fix the issue, it makes it worse. To leave them out does not fix the issue either, but it minimizes the polarity of it.
It is like performance enhancing drugs in sports.. You do not allow them, to make things better. You ban them, This way it allows players who do not use them to compete on an even playing field. And while players will still use performance enhancing drugs, it minimizes its use, and it reduces the polarity of it, so it is only talked about when caught.
These are views that have been discussed in the larger thread. I don't think they are the major factors, but they are definitely reasons.
To me, the idea that a combat tracker will get players though content faster is actually a reason to have one built in to the game.
Players absolutely will have a combat tracker, and so will complete the games initial content in that same amount of time.
Intrepid can say they don't want combat trackers, and can even ban accounts seen to be using them, but that won't stop - or even really slow - their use. It will just mean people don't openly talk about them.
If that combat tracker is built in to the game, it means the content we have at the start can be tuned for combat tracker use during beta. This is the only way to slow down the rate that players complete content - design it with combat trackers that players will be using in mind.
Why do you even respond anymore?
You just basically said the same exact thing I did.... but tried to spin it as I was wrong for what I said. I told myself I was never going to respond to you again, so now that I lied to myself, I am going to lie to you.. I hope you are successful in AoC.
As I said, I agree that the fact that players will get through content faster with combat trackers vs without them is a factor to consider, I disagree with Intrwpids view that this is a reason to not have them - as I said above, it is a reason to have them in the game during beta so the content can be properly tuned to take the appropriate amount t of time when the game goes live.
In other words, I agree with you and your points, I disagree with Intrepid.
Dont turn in to Dygz, he thinks everything is about him.