How will open world dungeons function properly

So I seen on the wiki that you have to press a specific key combination to hit another player who is not flagged.

With the corruption mechanic surely no one is going to actually fight each other at the dungeon, instead just fighting the monster to get the 40 or 60% dmg needed to claim the drops. Which will make the dungeon very easy.

Is there something i'm missing? Cause this seems like a very poor system. I'm hoping that people are auto flagged as combatants upon entering a dungeon, but i haven't heard anything on this yet.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Ludullu

Noaani wrote: »

Honestly, that just sounds mind numbingly boring for the bulk of the time.

Yeah, it's gonna be a very difficult balancing act for Intrepid to pull off. I wanted to suggest a mechanic inverse to the bosses' powerup when there's more people around, where normal mobs would instead become weaker, but then realized that this would just lead to everyone zerging mobs and easily farming shit.

I think that a threat control tool in several classes could probably make this interaction more interesting and keep the mob difficulty high. Something like "the current threat list gets cleaned" and a "generate threat against a picked target" could throw a huge wrench into the newcomers plans, where the super hardcore mob suddenly forgets all about its original attackers and now goes for the new dudes.

Have those abilities on a long cooldown and maybe make them class-synergistic and you'll have yourself a unique tool to use for those kinds of situations, which would be somewhat useless during a normal fight against the mob. Like, yes, you can use those abilities to counter some particular mob mechanics, but if you know that you're farming a highly contested mob, I'd assume you'll save that threat control in case some competitors come to you.

Noaani

George_Black wrote: »

No. Just the bad rep is enough. Stop hsndholding gamers in a social game. Let them deal with scum. Not everything has to be coded for.

It isn't about handholding, it is about Intrepid being able to make a game with actual enjoyable content.

If you are not engaged by the content itself (ie, the PvE), then you are not enjoying the content at all. If you are having to keep an eye out for potential PvP while participating in PvE, then you are not engaged in PvE at all.

Having the game designed like this would be great for a game that is billed as a PvP game. In fact, I would go as far as to say that is what I would expect.

A game that is trying to claim to be PvX though, it needs to do better.

However, it is people like you that are the reason I said it shouldn't just be made so you can't attack a group while they are in combat with PvE - I know you would be happy to take a bit of a corruption hit (or some other small penalty). I'm absolutely saying that you should be able to do that - it just needs to be so rare that people aren't always on the lookout for would be attackers - so that they can engage with and enjoy the PvE content.

Noaani

NiKr wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Honestly, that just sounds mind numbingly boring for the bulk of the time.

Yeah, it's gonna be a very difficult balancing act for Intrepid to pull off. I wanted to suggest an mechanic inverse to the bosses' powerup when there's more people around, where normal mobs would instead become weaker, but then realized that this would just lead to everyone zerging mobs and easily farming shit.

I think that a threat control tool in several classes could probably make this interaction more interesting and keep the mob difficulty high. Something like "the current threat list gets cleaned" and a "generate threat against a picked target" could throw a huge wrench into the newcomers plans, where the super hardcore mob suddenly forgets all about its original attackers and now goes for the new dudes.

Have those abilities on a long cooldown and maybe make them class-synergistic and you'll have yourself a unique tool to use for those kinds of situations, which would be somewhat useless during a normal fight against the mob. Like, yes, you can use those abilities to counter some particular mob mechanics, but if you know that you're farming a highly contested mob, I'd assume you'll save that threat control in case some competitors come to you.

This isn't a bad idea at all.

George_Black

Noaani wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

No. Just the bad rep is enough. Stop hsndholding gamers in a social game. Let them deal with scum. Not everything has to be coded for.

It isn't about handholding, it is about Intrepid being able to make a game with actual enjoyable content.

If you are not engaged by the content itself (ie, the PvE), then you are not enjoying the content at all. If you are having to keep an eye out for potential PvP while participating in PvE, then you are not engaged in PvE at all.

Having the game designed like this would be great for a game that is billed as a PvP game. In fact, I would go as far as to say that is what I would expect.

A game that is trying to claim to be PvX though, it needs to do better.

However, it is people like you that are the reason I said it shouldn't just be made so you can't attack a group while they are in combat with PvE - I know you would be happy to take a bit of a corruption hit (or some other small penalty). I'm absolutely saying that you should be able to do that - it just needs to be so rare that people aren't always on the lookout for would be attackers - so that they can engage with and enjoy the PvE content.

"People like me"...the f you talking about? You are just jumping to conclusions.
As for the whole enjoyment/look behind your back that's just irrelevant.

Four reasons why I dont want it coded.

First, it's not needed. In L2 people have managed to turn around such an attack, taking the PKers items as well. That's what people like me like. To get red players gear. Or the enemy healer and support can try to defend the PKr, resulting in combatant status, leading to PvP.

Second, staff like that, low behaviour leads to clan wars and alliances. A protective system like you propose takes away the human anger and resolve.

Third, small guilds will benefit from being able to jump on the large raiding groups that most definatly will dominate the open world raiding scene. Why add corruptiom as an added obstacle? You hinder the bandits.

And fourth, it's a stupid proposition. You basically make a PvE race to decide which group gets to loot. You are making all open world RBs semi-instanced. To hell with that. Dont prohibit player interaction.

People like you should learn to stop trying to make the opposite side seem like the unreasonable one, especially when they come from a place of first hand experience (L2 pvp and raiding).
God it makes me angry when you think you got everybodys motives figured out; they are the bad guy and you are the voice of reason...

Noaani

George_Black wrote: »

"People like me"...the f you talking about? You are just jumping to conclusions.

I wasn't jumping to any conclusions that you don't want systems that prevent players from doing things they may want to - that is the kind of people I was talking about when I said people like you.

Am I wrong on that point? Do you actually want systems that prevent players from doing things they would want to do?

To your 4 points:

1, Ashes is not L2. L2's PvE content was shit. If Ashes has L2's PvE content, the game will fail. People expect better these days - and developers need to provide better. Even pure PvP games have better PvE content now than L2 had, PvX games need to be a step up from that.

2, The proposal isn't preventing anything in this regard - this is a non-factor.

3, Small guilds should not be able to easily prevent larger guilds taking on content. Attacking players while they are engaged in difficult content is an action that increases potential reward, but decreases risk. Adding the possibility of corruption gain in to the situation adds back some risk.

4, Intrepid are specifically adding a mechanic to the game to facilitate this PvE race you are speaking so poorly of. Also, if you actually read what I have written, you would note that I specifically said any world bosses should specifically be in battlegrounds - meaning corruption is simply not possible on them.

People like you should read and consider reasonable suggestions before you start trying to pull them to bits. Literally none of your points above are valid, and several of them have been literally directly addressed to make them non-issues.

Dygz

Placing opposing playtstyles on the same server is going to result in a volatile clash of perspectives.

George_Black

Not gonna happen noaani

PherPhur

NiKr wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Honestly, that just sounds mind numbingly boring for the bulk of the time.

Yeah, it's gonna be a very difficult balancing act for Intrepid to pull off. I wanted to suggest a mechanic inverse to the bosses' powerup when there's more people around, where normal mobs would instead become weaker, but then realized that this would just lead to everyone zerging mobs and easily farming shit.

I think that a threat control tool in several classes could probably make this interaction more interesting and keep the mob difficulty high. Something like "the current threat list gets cleaned" and a "generate threat against a picked target" could throw a huge wrench into the newcomers plans, where the super hardcore mob suddenly forgets all about its original attackers and now goes for the new dudes.

Have those abilities on a long cooldown and maybe make them class-synergistic and you'll have yourself a unique tool to use for those kinds of situations, which would be somewhat useless during a normal fight against the mob. Like, yes, you can use those abilities to counter some particular mob mechanics, but if you know that you're farming a highly contested mob, I'd assume you'll save that threat control in case some competitors come to you.

This is actually a really cool Idea. Though, considering how many players there are in the area i'm not sure it'd work well most of the time. Unless of course when it resets threat it picks a random person not in your group that's within ranged class range.

Or it could be like a hunters misdirect skill in WoW except you can use it on people not in your party lol.

Noaani

George_Black wrote: »

Not gonna happen noaani

Probably not as I have opined, but I would expect Intrepid to come up with something - potentially not until after launch though.

I do not think Intrepid want boring PvE content, and they can not have engaging PvE content and also expect players to be able to take on PvP at the same time.

And rest assured, literally the only solution any game has come up with so far to resolve this issue is to have boring PvE content. L2, Tera, Wildstar, Archeage, Albion - the one thing they all have in common is that 99.9% of the content is dead easy to the point where you don't even need to pay attention to it.

PherPhur

George_Black wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

No. Just the bad rep is enough. Stop hsndholding gamers in a social game. Let them deal with scum. Not everything has to be coded for.

It isn't about handholding, it is about Intrepid being able to make a game with actual enjoyable content.

If you are not engaged by the content itself (ie, the PvE), then you are not enjoying the content at all. If you are having to keep an eye out for potential PvP while participating in PvE, then you are not engaged in PvE at all.

Having the game designed like this would be great for a game that is billed as a PvP game. In fact, I would go as far as to say that is what I would expect.

A game that is trying to claim to be PvX though, it needs to do better.

However, it is people like you that are the reason I said it shouldn't just be made so you can't attack a group while they are in combat with PvE - I know you would be happy to take a bit of a corruption hit (or some other small penalty). I'm absolutely saying that you should be able to do that - it just needs to be so rare that people aren't always on the lookout for would be attackers - so that they can engage with and enjoy the PvE content.

"People like me"...the f you talking about? You are just jumping to conclusions.
As for the whole enjoyment/look behind your back that's just irrelevant.

Four reasons why I dont want it coded.

First, it's not needed. In L2 people have managed to turn around such an attack, taking the PKers items as well. That's what people like me like. To get red players gear. Or the enemy healer and support can try to defend the PKr, resulting in combatant status, leading to PvP.

Second, staff like that, low behaviour leads to clan wars and alliances. A protective system like you propose takes away the human anger and resolve.

Third, small guilds will benefit from being able to jump on the large raiding groups that most definatly will dominate the open world raiding scene. Why add corruptiom as an added obstacle? You hinder the bandits.

And fourth, it's a stupid proposition. You basically make a PvE race to decide which group gets to loot. You are making all open world RBs semi-instanced. To hell with that. Dont prohibit player interaction.

People like you should learn to stop trying to make the opposite side seem like the unreasonable one, especially when they come from a place of first hand experience (L2 pvp and raiding).
God it makes me angry when you think you got everybodys motives figured out; they are the bad guy and you are the voice of reason...

It's a pretty fucked up system to have people attacking someone while they are fighting something and letting them die, escaping corruption, just so they can get the mob. I think the vast majority of people here would agree with that. And I'm on the PvP side of the PvX. I will be doing my fair share of getting corrupted lol.

So we just have to ask whats a FUN solution. We certainly don't want to take away the pvp aspect of encounters in the open world dungeons, that's, i think, the main reason they are open world.

Nikr brought up a really cool idea. I think some kind of skill for the tank that can insta reset threat is neat, cause it adds a lot to the pve side of things but it also helps solve that problem a little. Because if threat works like it does in WoW then just buffing causes threat generation. So if someone starts attacking you and the tank yells to his team "FREEZE" and everyone stops what they are doing, then someone on the attacking side is going to pull the mob.

Additively, or alternatively a hunter type misdirect that can work on other players outside your group is a neat addition as well. All the cool dynamics that could arise from that I think most people would consider fun. It'd just have to only be usable on someone who is flagged as a combatant so people don't use it on unflagged people for a corruption free kill.

Having a misdirect type skill on all classes would be interesting as the person doing the most damage to the other is going to have the mobs support as well(if they both have misdirected). Prehaps make it a weapon skill or something that people don't automatically have to make it slightly unique. Not sure on that.

There's also the option of having mobs be weak by themselves but strong in numbers which would help the situation and add a risk vs. reward aspect to things as well. Although that will lean the game more to the aoe side of things which might not even be possible with all the systems AoC already has baked in at this point.

PherPhur

Noaani wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

Not gonna happen noaani

Probably not as I have opined, but I would expect Intrepid to come up with something - potentially not until after launch though.

I do not think Intrepid want boring PvE content, and they can not have engaging PvE content and also expect players to be able to take on PvP at the same time.

And rest assured, literally the only solution any game has come up with so far to resolve this issue is to have boring PvE content. L2, Tera, Wildstar, Archeage, Albion - the one thing they all have in common is that 99.9% of the content is dead easy to the point where you don't even need to pay attention to it.

Sorry, but did you not read my post about making singular mobs on the easy side? Just because you can do AoE to mobs doesn't necessarily make mass pulling and AoE'ing any less engaging, it just favors certain classes and builds more than others.

The thing is though that say in WoW, that's the meta way to level and do dungeons, if you aren't playing a cleave you're a lot less useful. This is different though, you can't just pull multiple mobs all the time because now you have something else to worry about, other players.

This doesn't mean you can't make some mobs more difficult, it should probably just be the main type of encounters in the game. It appears that weapons can aoe hit and from what I can tell it looks like every class is going to have access to some kind of AoE. If they did something like this they could do it very well and make it very engaging. Not a spam AoE, but maybe an aoe with a cooldown like multishot for WoW hunters. A combination of trapping for CC, multishotting, single target attacking.

Making the more mobs you gather more difficult. None of that pull 20 things, ice nova them and blizzard them down until they make it to you, rinse and repeat stuff.

I mean you had other players to sort of worry about in WoW with the other faction, but you didn't in dungeons. The way AoC is set up would work perfectly with this system.

And like Nikr said, bosses are already going to scale depending on your previous fights apparently so for single mob bosses they can keep doing exactly that. If you AoE pulled all throughout the dungeon then they are going to be more difficult. If you had some jackasses following you the whole time waiting for their moment to strike, and you decided to play it safe, then the boss is going to be easier as well to give you some advantage for when/if they do decide to gank you mid fight.

JamesSunderland

NiKr wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Honestly, that just sounds mind numbingly boring for the bulk of the time.

Yeah, it's gonna be a very difficult balancing act for Intrepid to pull off. I wanted to suggest a mechanic inverse to the bosses' powerup when there's more people around, where normal mobs would instead become weaker, but then realized that this would just lead to everyone zerging mobs and easily farming shit.

I think that a threat control tool in several classes could probably make this interaction more interesting and keep the mob difficulty high. Something like "the current threat list gets cleaned" and a "generate threat against a picked target" could throw a huge wrench into the newcomers plans, where the super hardcore mob suddenly forgets all about its original attackers and now goes for the new dudes.

Have those abilities on a long cooldown and maybe make them class-synergistic and you'll have yourself a unique tool to use for those kinds of situations, which would be somewhat useless during a normal fight against the mob. Like, yes, you can use those abilities to counter some particular mob mechanics, but if you know that you're farming a highly contested mob, I'd assume you'll save that threat control in case some competitors come to you.

Remember Lineage 2 Dark Elf Fighters Skill Confusion?
That made a targetered monster(or player) lose its threat and original target and forcing them to randomly pick another one(player or even another monster) within a certain range?

I kinda want bards to have a skill like that but AoE, i believe making it specifically target something/someone you want would be insanely strong and would hella boost the skill griefing potential instead of working as a chaos creator that can flip the table and make a boss or groups of monsters to possibly attack another group(s) wanting to take over your grinding spot or raid boss while your party is with its hands full dealing with it, reseting your party threat points and giving it the chance of changing focus to deal with the enemies amidst the chaos created.

And yes such skill would require a hella long cooldown to justify its power and potential, it would even allow counterplay by having the enemy bard give its try at playing their own AoE confusion if they get the inital unlucky result of having most of the monsters/boss thrown at their party..

Noaani

ChipsAhoy007 wrote: »

Sorry, but did you not read my post about making singular mobs on the easy side?

Killing many small, easy mobs at once is not engaging.

That said, if this were how the game was designed, the basic meta would be that you only pull as many as you can manage if you get attacked half way through.

The one thing even less engaging than killing many small easy mobs is killing fewer small easy mobs in case you get attacked.

Ludullu

JamesSunderland wrote: »

And yes such skill would require a hella long cooldown to justify its power and potential, it would even allow counterplay by having the enemy bard give its try at playing their own AoE confusion if they get the inital unlucky result of having most of the monsters/boss thrown at their party..

Yeah, there'd obviously have to be a ton of testing to properly time the cooldowns and the effects themselves, but I think there's a ton of potential variety in threat gameplay abilities, same with detargeting stuff. Hell, those abilities could just be the same ones, but with different effects on mobs/humans. Saves the game from bloat, while providing the split-second decision making for pvx situations, while also being useful in pure pve or pvp situations. Just design them well enough and you got yourself a ton of fun tools to use

akabear

@Noaani "In my opinion, attacking a player or a group while they are taking on content is low."

Yes, you are right and it wasn`t fair and it was not enjoyed but that is exactly the drama that made L2 players have objectives - sly play/stealth play / secrets/revenge pking/amnesties/alliances, or just politics in general.

It was the players that created the substance to the mmo. far more than mod difficulty could ever.

Noaani

akabear wrote: »

Yes, you are right and it wasn`t fair and it was not enjoyed but that is exactly the drama that made L2 players have objectives - sly play/stealth play / secrets/revenge pking/amnesties/alliances, or just politics in general.

It was the players that created the substance to the mmo. far more than mod difficulty could ever.

Yeah, this is why my suggestion specifically isn't to remove it, just to make it more rare by adding a small deterrent.

To me, an activity that isn't enjoyed yet causes further gameplay should be deterred, but not prevented. I mean, that is why we have corruption in the game in the first place.

Dygz

We will test it in Alpha Two.

Noaani

Dygz wrote: »

We will test it in Alpha Two.

Alpha testing is only really any good at seeing how things work on a technical level.

You can not test social aspects of a game in an testing situation.

PenguinPaladin

Noaani wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

We will test it in Alpha Two.

Alpha testing is only really any good at seeing how things work on a technical level.

You can not test social aspects of a game in an testing situation.

Actually, humans are involved in the testing. Alot of them are not professional testers, and are in fact just players hoping to have some time in game sooner. And a prolonged alpha 2, can test social settings as well, by simply having some testing servers receive no instruction, and just seeing how things develop.

Noaani

PenguinPaladin wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

We will test it in Alpha Two.

Alpha testing is only really any good at seeing how things work on a technical level.

You can not test social aspects of a game in an testing situation.

Actually, humans are involved in the testing. Alot of them are not professional testers, and are in fact just players hoping to have some time in game sooner. And a prolonged alpha 2, can test social settings as well, by simply having some testing servers receive no instruction, and just seeing how things develop.

Everyone going in to alpha testing knows that the server will be wiped eventually.

Second, people put less time in to testing a game than they do in to playing a game - generally speaking.

Lastly, testing environments don't generally have peoples full social circle in them.

These all combine to not being able to properly test out how things will work on a social level.

Child Item