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
Agreed. It would encourage strategic thinking about how to use the environment to your advantage. This was well done in MO2, where you could retreat into a forest to disadvantage mounted and archer specs then take them down in melee.
It would also make someone think twice before crossing a big open field or skylining themselves.
Not when ranged weapons have a minimum distance. Another reason to have the environment usable for cover.
I agree with @CROW3, I really like it when you need some strategic thinking in PvP, I think it makes it more meaningful.
It's not a MOBA.
Yeah I know you're poking to have a semantic argument, so I'm setting it up so you have it with me to save the poor forum database.
Won't someone please think of the Text Columns?
I thought it was pretty cool in the mage showcase.
I scrubbed through it to see if they ever showed what happened if you didn’t aim the electrical arc around the rock but did not find it. They did however talk about collision when talking about the electricity so my hopes is that it will fizzle.
My hope would be that they use that tech for abilities that it makes sense on, but also use your standard LoS mechanics and collision for others.
It's too early to really examine game balance, as the kits aren't done yet.
Honestly, mechanical aptitude addresses a lot of the issues melee has vs range. But I'm not seeing much in many requirements in the games combat so far.
We will have to wait, really.
not semantics. im asking what are the characteristics that make a game an rpg
The character has a choice of a role.
The expression of that choice is through representative values normally referred to as 'stats' that are innate to the character.
Those stats, which are usually not easily changed as they are a representation of the character's strengths and weaknesses, are either not easily reset or are known/limited when changed (often so others can recognize the role if it is an MMORPG).
The expression of that choice affects the game world in some specific way (usually through the interaction of those numbers with opposed numbers).
Some people consider that there is some persistence involved, i.e. that previous choices of role, stats, and expression lead to further specific choices, and that the character is not entirely reset commonly.
All debatable of course, but thankfully we're talking about moving closer or further from an RPG, not 'which games are RPGs or not', so anything that moves away from those is 'less RPG' and anything that enforces them is 'more RPG'.
Other games tend to cheese up ranged classes with abilities and skills that spam mobility action rather than let the player skill dictate things. I think it’s a reason some complain about tab targeting, viewing it as easy mode.
But with their rock-paper-scissors approach you will never have a balanced 1-v-1 against two different roles/archetypes. The math just doesn’t add up.
not at all. but ill let a few more people answer and then ill enlighten you all. plus im going to sleep
Character INT is more important than player intelligence.
A character with high WIS should be be able to Spot things the player cannot.
A character with high Dex should be able to hit a character with low Dex. Even if the player has high dexterity.
Also, RPG are likely to have spells, like Magic Missle. Which auto-locks. We should expect some Ranger Active Skills with auto-lock and move around obstacles. Because it’s a High Fantasy setting.
Tab Target Active Skills will emulate that.
I'll never stop laughing at the notion RPGs require output rng and tab target.
Even though something as something as being a leader of a guild is a role.
Expands your definitions yall, you can have an action combat game and it's still an RPG.
On the contrary, I think we should avoid ranged attack spells for melee classes and favor defensive/malus spells. I don't want a melee class that looks like a hybrid that can do anything and everything.
- I would better give them an entangle spell with % of sucess depending on magical block chance, your magical attack damage and magic resistance of the target.
- Melee should be able to wear armors whith high level of magical resistance
- Charge spell, that ignore malus to reach your opponent faster
- Making weapons condondant stunning hard ennemies.
- Higher HP regeneration
- Think about graphic resolution and zooms potential issues to avoid range classes to attack you for the corner of the screen (I don't know if it can still be an issue in 2023, but before it was).
In some MMO I played in the past, melees were stronger than magicians in PvP, but their XP was 2 or 3 times longer and harder (because no zone spells). Magicians use tu be also much better class for farming. But this is sensitive coz not everyone want his class to become a PVE class.
well, rpg originally were turn based, so by your own logic, any rpg that isnt turn based is pushing the genre farther away from rpg
Another main characteristic of an RPG is when there is character development and that development affects the character's journey and (possibly) the story of the game.
A skill system, stat system (whether you can reset it or not, it doesn't matter), magic missiles, finding traps, etc, etc, etc aren't really characteristics that define an RPG. those are implementations of the character development concept because the player has the option to develop his character how he wants.
pvp, pve, action, tab, turn-based, real-time, dungeons, those are simply obstacles or modes, but they aren't what defines an RPG at its core. Developers use these modes and obstacles because people like them, target audience, etc, but that doesn't mean you are moving away from the genre. That is just ridiculous.
You can also not have a stat system and you can have an RPG that doesn't have any combat at all, and you progress through the game by simply talking to people and choosing different answers. you can develop your character's personality instead of physical power. for example, your character can be good, evil, neutral, etc, etc.
The two key concepts in an RPG are character development controlled by the player, and the player being an actor in a play and there are many ways to implement those two concepts.
Yes, we agree, that's what I said.
I put 'stats' in quotes because some games track 'number of times you did X' instead of 'My character has X combat power' and then they use that number in their systems as the progression tracker for character development.
Do you want to have a semantics discussion with Dygz about it specifically? Because that's what's going to happen if you keep holding this weird stance. I don't mind, I was joking somewhat about trying to skip it (in the sense that I don't care if you do or not).
I don't actually agree with Dygz at all that 'needing to aim to deal with the Line of Sight for the rock or wall' is in any way moving the game away from being an RPG, I was just poking at you for going straight for the 'definitions' angle when talking to someone who you should know by now will dance with you on it for multiple pages if you keep leading.
Waltz on.
I’m hoping for a broad selection of cc to gain distance, mobility skills to close distance, and some thoughtful use of the environment to help in both cases.
For classes : For rouges i like them either squishy or evasion based but still low defense low hp pool and offensive either dots or bursty. I think the way rogues counter ranged dps is by surpriseattacking them bursting them and maybe poison them
for the fighter i think its especially more important to give him different options.
For example a bladedancer. I would like if you could play the bladedancer really mobile doing aoe bursts or dmg retreating etc. as a balance he wouldnt have a huge hp pool and less single target burst. A fighter/tank could instead have a higher hp pool and attack that slow or something like that. But for that the warrior archetype has to be really diverse.
.
This is the only legitimate answer. While it may be fun to speculate about how things will and should work, attempting a conversation about balance for a game where the combat and classes barely exist is impossible. Take fighting games for instance, even when kits are revealed and people make their speculations about the balance they're rarely even close to the mark. To posit balance changes when no one has a clue about what is and isn't strong yet is begging for futility. This conversation will be much more interesting come A2.
I can only pray you wouldn't assert that a member of an organization or any individual in the world has less of a role respectively in said organization or life in general because they aren't, directly through their own being or indirectly from some outside mover, taking turns for their actions.
Hopefully, albeit with less horror if I'm wrong than the previous point, you wouldn't claim that playing is less playing if it's not done by taking turns or a game is less of a game if the same can be said.
An RPG is simply a game in which you play a role in the world/being of that game. The more the world is believable and the mechanics of the game give you freedom within that world, the more of an RPG it is. Mechancis only facilitate the believability of the world and the ability and scope of engagement with it to lesser or greater degrees. There are turn-based games that closer reach the idea of an RPG than some action games and vice versa. Implementation wholistically is important, whether or not a particular broad-brushed style is included matters exactly 0.