Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
First and foremost, Do not bring compare me to Dygz, I am willing to bet he is one hell of a better person than I am, and it is not fair to him.
Second, I am not talking about Alpha, Beta, Pre Beta, Beta 8, or Alpha 4, I am talking about launch, always have been. And you do not agree with me about hardly anything.... and the one thing you did agree with, you turned into a reason to have one in the alpha... keep reading for my thoughts on that.
Third, Alpha testing is usually not used to test difficulty of content, it is to make sure something is not broken. Not sure how having a tracker in Alpha will help anyone, except people testing to see if their tracker works. Which is a slimey way of trying to getting it tested if you ask me. If there is something the devs want tested and they need you a certain level to do so.. no tracker needed, they will bump you to the appropriate level.
And that is it really... As far as I am concerned our argument over this issue is over... minus your incoming rebuttal to this post, which is fine, I will read it. We both know where we stand, we both know who will and wont use one after launch, and there is nothing else to say.
I've debated with him on these forums far more than you, and I can say with perfect confidence that you are the better person. Smarter, significantly more to the point, and from what I can tell, just a nicer person in general.
You can take that as a compliment to you, an indictment to him, or a reflection on me, I'm not concerned either way.
I know you are not talking about alpha, beta or anything, you are talking about live.
So am I.
In my mind, the best way to have well balanced top end content on launch day is to balance it in beta.
While most games do not balance their top end content in beta, there is no reason this needs to be the case. They balance low end content here, it is simply a matter of time that usually prevents them from also looking at top end.
So while I may be talking about beta, I am only doing so with an eye to launch day.
I am of the opinion that on launch day, content should be as balanced as possible for how players will play it.
This seems to be something you agree with - correct me if I am wrong.
I like Dygz, no need to try and talk me out of liking him. That would be a huge waste of your time. I like pretty much everyone... except those Pirate dudes in the other thread saying they are going to run a 800 man, full time corrupt player guild... ya... those guys are a different story lol.
Balancing will be impossible to figure out even with trackers.. 64 classes, each with what... 4 ways to augment different skills? The best way to balance that, is over time. Trying to do that over a week or so period, while testing sieges and whatever big mechanics they want to test, balancing should be the least of their worries. Save balancing for the beta when you have a larger sample size of classes playing to get a better picture. That is my opinion on it.
While time is always going to be the most important thing in balance - the game does have to launch. On launch day, we want it as balanced as possible. Not just the classes, but the content as well.
To me, the best way to balance things as quickly as possible is to have many thousands of people out there that are as keen on the game as possible, all generating and examining actual objective data about their own class, equipment and the games content.
It won't magically make the game perfect on launch day, but it sure will help a whole lot.
Then, going forward, either with continued balance passes or with new content, having these people armed with objective data means they are able to continue to contribute to this balance effort.
While you were not a part of that discussion, one of my main points in the 75 page combat tracker thread is that if players are equipped with combat trackers, we can find problems with the games combat system or content, obtain a full data set, examine that data, and present it to the developer. Every single game I have ever played has had players find issues using combat trackers and present them to the developers. I myself have done this a number of times, resulting in patches to the issues presented in multiple games.
If balance is what you want, either on launch day or later on, putting objective data in the hands of people that will use it to find issues should be a no-brainer.
They are talking raids tomorrow...
Any predictions on weather they will address our concerns about high end open world raids?
I want to take the safe bet where they give us the same lines about how the raids will be dynamic enough to challenge any group, but static enough so that you can feel a sense of progression. Without addressing the fact zergs will dominate open world raids.
The optimist in me says they might explain that some high-end bosses will need to be instanced, but the way to gain access to the instance will be competitive in the open world.
I am hoping we learn something new.
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
I've not had the time to watch any of the livestreams lately, but due to the lack of discussion about them here, I am assuming there is nothing actually new being talked about - maybe the odd piece here and there but nothing else.
I don't see this as being any different - and I am actually perfectly fine with that. I still don't expect to have actual details on raid content for quite a while.
I do expect combat trackers to be re-confirmed as not being wanted though.
Level cap is 20 and they only have half the Primary Archetypes available for test.
So, even if they have enough NDA testers to test raids, they don't have enough content to test high end raids.
I think they know a lot more than they have talked about in the past. There are two decade of MMO raid history to draw from, and some of the DEV are already a part of that history. They have not had much news about high end raids in a while. I feel like it is about time we heard something new. I am pretty optimistic about tomorrows live stream.
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
This question in mind is pretty important one, because my own free is becoming smaller and smaller and honestly I don't want to get invested into a game where raiding is defined by the word "Zerg" no matter what else the game might bring to the table
― Plato
having only 1 mechanic - that being a dps check is not simple in an objective sense, but in objective you are literally in a true/false state in terms of requirements to kill the boss. If you can't accept that having 1 mechanic is the definition of simplicity then i wouldn't be surprised if you believe the earth is flat
FOTM, cookie-cutter builds are enforced even without meters, because what specs are enforced depends on the game meta and you dont get rid of meta if you make for people harder to gather information
― Plato
It's highly unlikely you will get any info that addresses concerns about high end raids tomorrow. Pretty much the only way to get leaks about Steven's vision for high end raids is to ask him specific questions about it.
I'm sure you know of desire paths, or paths of least resistance. The easy illustration of this is a designed path that looks great, but is sat beside a worn trail of where people actually walk to get from where they are to where they want to be.
A good designer designs around what the users will do. With paths, that means that instead of creating nice, neat paths in a pleasing, symmetrical layout, you place paths where people will walk.
In terms of game design, what you are saying here is that Intrepid know where players (many players, even if not all players) will want to walk, and are purposefully not placing a path there.
All this means is that players are going to wear in that trail, and that trail is where the path should have been built. Even if Intrepid attempt to built a fence where users want to walk (which is just horrid design - all things considered), users will still take the route that is closest to where they want to walk, not where Intrepid lay their path. In fact, players will even help each other get over that fence, if need be.
Now sure, it's Stevens game and he can design it how he likes, but that doesn't mean every decision he makes is a good decision, nor that every decision is the right decision. It is foolish to think this is the case, and there is no aspect of this game that this is an appropriate defense for.
Indeed, any decision that a company makes that is going to see many people create their own trail rather than follow the designated path is a bad decision by definition.
I think we all understand what you want. What matters is that Steven doesn't want what you want.
I don't agree with your assertion about a true/false state in terms of requirements to kill the boss.
As in, I don't believe there is a true/false state of requirements.
Some people will try to promote them. It will be more difficult to get others to accept them.
I didn't say not having combat trackers will "get rid of" meta.
― Plato
For me this is reason enough to no have a Combat Tracker. Even if the game ships with one, I am 100% sure it won't be enough.
People will want more, and will still have another combat tracker outside of the game.
So having or not having a DPS meter ensures the same result, might as well make it harder like Steven wants.
only someone who uses only front page with dps leaderboard can say something so out of touch
― Plato
If you have combat trackers, and the developers know this, they can design the content with that in mind.
Assuming the combat tracker offers up all needed information, there is nothing left to be gained by having an additional combat tracker.
I definitely believe he meant that players would start making play assist addons that play in part instead of you
― Plato
And do you know what information is this? Is there a blue print IS can follow to make sure everyone is happy? I mean, people can't even agree on what a Combat Tracker is.
Nope. It makes it more likely the FOTM meta is bullshit that can be disregarded. Especially in Ashes class design.
Throwing more variables into the table just means more confusion so ppl will cling harder to the meta instead breaking off of it
You know when you watch a youtube video where a guy showcases a build that kills the same mob you are killing in half the time then most people just say fk it and respec
― Plato
The result was something like
So it appears in the forums there is a vocal minority that are not representative of the majority.
The development of something like this does not rely on anything at all to do with a combat tracker.
It is every ability used by players and the target, and the results of said ability use.
Player run polls are never of any value.
In order to get an accurate result, you would also need to include how much money Intrepid would need to spend to do a half decent job at trying to keep trackers out of the game on an ongoing basis, and exactly what content it is that this money would be used on instead.
As such, a poll about combat trackers should be "would you rather have combat trackers and xyz content, or fewer people using combat trackers and no xyz content", as that really is what it boils down to.
Forum posters are not a good representation of the actual playerbase. I know this might hurt, but it is true - a lot of ppl here on forums are hurt from playing other MMOs and most of them had only negative experiences with meters. That's like taking polls in the reclamation department in a store
― Plato
No combat tracker makes finding a must have meta more difficult...and more difficult to prove the assertion that the FOTM is the most viable truly comports with reality.
A guy showcasing a build that kills the same mob in half the time doesn't mean you have to respec exactly the same. I don't agree that that one strategy necessarily is the best or even the FOTM - it's just one strategy that is better than yours was.
If people are relying on YouTube - we definitely don't need combat trackers.
Basically, players will have a meta, a combat tracker means that meta is more likely to be good.
meta is found almost instantly - the problem is that without meters improving, enriching, revolutionizing the meta is much harder.
And with the hypothetical that no meter exists for ashes once it is live ;-) then ppl will use any common method to measure a kill speed for something that has the most amount of health and the builds will be compared in that way - if it comes to this primitive stage
And you can bet that the drive to find the best builds will be big, because who doesnt want to clickbait the shit out of youtube to show that their raid cleartime is just running straight ahead with 30s pauses to demolish the boss.
if the meta build is "only" 5% stronger than average build then the whole 40man raid is as strong as the "average" 42man raid
however i've never seen top meta build in any hyperoptimised build mmo be below 20% stronger than the average ones - this alone brings a full 40man raid of top meta specs on par with a 48man average raid
and you can bet that with the amount of additional customization through a ton of augments that were spoken about so heavily will in my opinion be way bigger than the 20%
I would bet real money that 40man raid of top players with top meta builds will be way stronger than 100 average players that raid
― Plato