Mob Kill Credit for XP & Loot Drops

ArchivedUser

Ferryman said:

@UnknownSystemError So maybe improvement ESO system could work? Lets say that if assits could be taken account to contribution equally than damage it would be more fair. And i have got that impression, supports, healers and tanks can land a decent amount of damage and are not just lock their supporting role. Also if players can create more dps focus builds with weapon and skill choises, i think solo mob killing can be nicely balanced with all classes.

The issue with that is that, unlike some games, there does not seem to be any way to switch between builds. Also hybrid builds are always worse at both functions, it's just a question of how much worse. But, most games these days take into account assists and I would expect that Ashes will as well (things like healing and buffs, but also mitigation of incoming damage). However: I think we might be overlooking something as well. Will solo questing even be a viable option? all the gameplay demos have been with a group, and it's not as if the group was steamrolling the mobs. That suggests to me that soloing content will be rare, so you aren't going to have ungrouped people running around constantly. Within a group context, it makes the most sense to simply have several options for loot assignment.

ArchivedUser

I really hope whatever the system, that healers/supports get credit in some way as otherwise it's going to drop the numbers of those classes. Even something like a kill assist/participation type set up that you get in Overwatch would be nice.

ArchivedUser

Just like any other MMOs lot system I think, healers in other MMOs still got loot and there is nothing stopping the devs from implementing a system that means healing assists help in party's and "tag" the mob that you assisted in the killing of it.

ArchivedUser

Does anyone know if there's going to be shared loot or individual loot (i.e. each player gets his own loot VS the mob/boss/whatever has fixed loot that has to be distributed by a system)?

ArchivedUser

Crusader2010 said:

Does anyone know if there's going to be shared loot or individual loot (i.e. each player gets his own loot VS the mob/boss/whatever has fixed loot that has to be distributed by a system)?

Fixed loot distributed by player chosen systems. Standard need/greed, auction, and others are planned. No individual loot planned.

ArchivedUser

It is rocky subject. A. Everyone gets credit, loot for a tag and then you get people who just run around getting a hit on something and then run around collecting  B. Loot and credit goes to the party that tags first, the problem is then having to wait for respawns to complete quests. I know I don't like the 'who does the most damage' system...nothing worse then fighting a mob and then someone 5 levels up runs by an and one shots the mob you were fighting and they get the loot.

ArchivedUser

Mobrechael said:

It is rocky subject. A. Everyone gets credit, loot for a tag and then you get people who just run around getting a hit on something and then run around collecting  B. Loot and credit goes to the party that tags first, the problem is then having to wait for respawns to complete quests. I know I don't like the 'who does the most damage' system...nothing worse then fighting a mob and then someone 5 levels up runs by an and one shots the mob you were fighting and they get the loot.

You can fix that by making the damage relative to level.
So if someway does twice the damage at twice the level then the effect would be 50/50 split.
Effort vs reward.
Both would have put the same effort into the fight regardless of the overall DPS if DPS scaled with level.

ArchivedUser

Pretty sure that, these days, games can track participation of each player.
So, loot should be based on contribution; not who has tagged the target first.

ArchivedUser

For world bosses/world event, things like damage dealt, amount healed, skills used, etc could be used to gather points that weighted the individual reward at the end.  For regular enemies, I would really hate to see a Guild Wars 2 style "individual loot" drops, but some system would need to be in place so kill stealing is not feasible. An enemy shouldn't drop more loot if 20 people attack it than if 1person solos it.  That sort of system leads to the mindless zergs that most GW2 event/event chains have.

ArchivedUser

The most fair system would be, that the game calculates contribution of all players and/or groups on the same target. Maybe the experience and money part of the loot can be easily divided by percentages between all contributors. Items in otherhand goes with lottery, where those who contributed most have also better chance to get drop. That can also be calculated by percentages of contribution. If the target is animal and can be skinned or something, this can also be measured by contribution percentage who gets the privilage.

With this system you can still kind of steel other players targets, but you cant push them totally out of the loot or chance to get something. Tagging system is ofc good to soloing low damage roles, but can also be used very wrong way by tagging multiple targets at once. 

ArchivedUser

Aiveleen said:

Ferryman said:

@UnknownSystemError So maybe improvement ESO system could work? Lets say that if assits could be taken account to contribution equally than damage it would be more fair. And i have got that impression, supports, healers and tanks can land a decent amount of damage and are not just lock their supporting role. Also if players can create more dps focus builds with weapon and skill choises, i think solo mob killing can be nicely balanced with all classes.

The issue with that is that, unlike some games, there does not seem to be any way to switch between builds. Also hybrid builds are always worse at both functions, it's just a question of how much worse. But, most games these days take into account assists and I would expect that Ashes will as well (things like healing and buffs, but also mitigation of incoming damage). However: I think we might be overlooking something as well. Will solo questing even be a viable option? all the gameplay demos have been with a group, and it's not as if the group was steamrolling the mobs. That suggests to me that soloing content will be rare, so you aren't going to have ungrouped people running around constantly. Within a group context, it makes the most sense to simply have several options for loot assignment.

We don't know what kind of system there will be related to changing secondary class. If you can't change that reasonable way, i would say that will be just poor gamedesign. Imo opinion there should be option like save two different kind of builds. Then healers, tanks and supports can choose more damage oriented build for soloing. On top of that players can for sure change armors and weapons to favor different playstyles. So i would not be concerned about solo leveling even tanks, healers and supports wont be as effective as damage dealers. Thats how it just goes and if they get at least some help and boost to damage, that will be enough, because they will be more wanted resource when groups will be assembled. 

ArchivedUser

@Ferryman Except that we do know that there won't be an "on-the-fly" system for changing secondary builds. The great thing about them answering the same softball questions over and over the past year is that we have multiple quotes on how they envision the system working. They haven't provided specifics as to the mechanic just yet, but we know that it will take effort, be costly in currency and time, and won't be something that can be done "in the field." As recently as the last interview he did with Aggelos, Steven mentions their thinking behind this is they want your choice of build to have meaning and consequence before you set out into the wilderness. If you are advocating for a swapping build system a la WoW or FFXIV, you are going to be disappointed. They haven't even clarified that once you have built out a secondary through their envisioned horizontal advancement, then decided to swap to a different one, that you retain progress in that class should you decide to come back to it. So you could very well grind out a mage secondary to a high "level," drop it and go rogue, grind that out, find you don't like it and go back to mage, and find you don't have access to the augments and abilities you had ground out before.

ArchivedUser

@UnknownSystemError There is no need to implement on the fly system, but maybe option to chance in the city for example. Now if they market that you can change your secondary class, but makes it like it will cost a lot of money and you will loose the progression of old secondary class, i am pretty sure that devs wont get good response for that. And like you said nothing has confirmed and i really hope they wont do any stupid moves what it comes to QoL things. 

ArchivedUser

Unisol said:

@Banditman Healer number vs DPS number vs Tank mitigation numbers in their visual form to us don't necessarily mean anything though, the backend mechanics that we never truly see will run an algorithm to create an output which can relate easily to the design difference in numbers between npc hp and pc hp.
A very simplistic example not taking into account mitigation etc, only straight DPS and HEALS, where design sees 1,000,000 boss health per 100,000 intended party size health could be:
Effort Score =  (1*DPS)+(10*Heals)

Of course real algorithms are often much more complicated than this and would not likely be as directly linear as this, for example a "tag" value could be added giving everyone a larger minimum % than just straight dps and the numeric multiplier values would be shifted to better reflect the level of difficulty of an npc (eg. whether you are likely to need to heal a lot or not).

If done right the numbers we see in games and the differences between them should not have any negative effect.

Heal, DPS, Mitigation + CC
Let's not forget CC in the equation as well as buffs.

Gonna be complicated but if done right will be very nice.

I just feel bad for the waterboy who will probably get nothing.

ArchivedUser

1. First person or group to hit it gets the loot, unless they all die, or run away out of the npc range, then it's free for someone else to attack/loot.
2. If in a group, all members get the ability to loot regardless if they got a hit in or not.
3. Raids, and special character boss/quest should be instanced where appropriate.

The above is usually the most equatable, and stops the majority of ninja looting/kill stealing.

ArchivedUser

Since a lot of the design is open world.  Open world events, open world dungeons, etc.  I think anyone that participates in a meaningful way should get rewarded.  "First person/group" that tags a mob doesn't foster participation, it fosters exclusion.  Where as anyone that comes in and heals, buffs, debuffs, damages, etc gets rewarded fosters a much more community driven attitude.

Now what constitutes "meaningful" will be open to interpretation and shouldn't just be "oh I did one attack and left so I get something"  but also enough to say "I came in toward the end and stayed to help finish it off." should get something.

ArchivedUser

Twist said:

Excellent question, I have also seen it where if you get a hit on the mob you get quest credit and loot. Hopefully something along that line would be good.

This is by far my preferred method. I think it really creates a more helpful and respectful community. Weeds out a lot of trolls as well.

ArchivedUser

GrimHarlequin said:

Since a lot of the design is open world.  Open world events, open world dungeons, etc.  I think anyone that participates in a meaningful way should get rewarded.  "First person/group" that tags a mob doesn't foster participation, it fosters exclusion.  Where as anyone that comes in and heals, buffs, debuffs, damages, etc gets rewarded fosters a much more community driven attitude.

Now what constitutes "meaningful" will be open to interpretation and shouldn't just be "oh I did one attack and left so I get something"  but also enough to say "I came in toward the end and stayed to help finish it off." should get something.

Only if both parties involved get the loot.  Cause it really sucks if you are solo, or in a small group that has waited for a particular boss to spawn only to have it stolen away half way through the fight by larger group who can out dps you.  If you are against the first person "tag" loot ideal, then we should go for the converse, where every attacker gets the loot.  Which would foster more cooperation.  

ArchivedUser

Personally, I think the best way to do this is to tie an encounter to whoever attacks it first.

If you are the first to tag an encounter, and you kill it, you get the loot. If someone else tags an encounter before you or your group, you can help them if you want, but you don't get any loot for it. As long as it is clearly visible if you or your group have loot rights to an encounter, I personally think this is really the only way to work it.

If loot rights are up for anyone that puts in a small amount of effort, people will simply camp mobs, figure out the least they need to do and then rid the coat tails of other groups that kill the encounter - a type of behavior I think should be discouraged.

In regards to quest credit, whether that credit is kill credit or corpse loot (collect me 10 rat skins type quests), if you or your group attacks an encounter and it is killed without resetting, you get credit.

ArchivedUser

 said:

hypothetical:

a tank/rogue and a mage/fighter and a cleric/cleric party take on a boss

just to survive the battle, the cleric has to keep the other two alive, not allowing time for any offensive attacks

boss dies

so does the cleric miss out on loot?

side note: cleric looks like the least or one of the least picked classes

There have in fact been a number of games with this stupid mechanic in them.

It sucks having to remember to hit the boss a few times at the start and a few times at the end just to make sure the boss remembers you were on aggro list.  

ArchivedUser

Honestly, if it just looked at the agro list, that'd work too, honestly.  It already tracks participation, in the form of "who do I kill next?"

ArchivedUser

I forget where I heard it but I believe there was things communicated about participation for credit and healing would be included based on healing someone who tagged said targets.

ArchivedUser

^ Yah healing should count as contribution, if the character they are healing is damaging target.

ArchivedUser

SystemTTB said:

^ Yah healing should count as contribution, if the character they are healing is damaging target.

Not just healers, but defenders as well.

If a Guardian was spending the majority of his time blocking attacks aimed at the clerics and the archers then she should get as much contribution credit as well.

But then I suppose we're touching upon that whole "holy trinity" territory again aren't we?  

Thankfully, we now live in an age where games have advanced to accomplish more intricate combat encounters.  And more intricate encounters mean more subtle and nuanced game play.   I think we're long past the days where you have to spam an enemy with attacks to register your participation. Participation can be counted for more things - not just healing and defending too, but laying traps, manipulating the environment, dispensing ammunition, acting as a decoy, and so much more. All of this could be possible for contribution to an encounter. 

Just thinking about those possibilities make me more excited for the game....

ArchivedUser

Most games of today use the very lazy method of most dmg gets more contribution.

That method obvisouly screw healers/support/tanks.

Hopefully a dev team actually comes up with something that skips the individual and rewards the group/raid as a whole and splits it evenly. Can even give the group/raids bonuses on contribution over single players.

ArchivedUser

interesting. Great read. very good comments to you all. 

ArchivedUser

I'll be playing a healer.  If the party's loot distribution is something that does not appreciate my contribution, then I will not join that party.  Let the boss kill them all!  If you need a healer or other support to succeed, then reward them as much as you do any damage dealer.

ArchivedUser

;;;

ArchivedUser

Banditman said:

One thing that has always bothered me as a healer, even in games that do "very well" with regards to healing and support classes is the disparity of HP pools between mobs and players.

For example, a player avatar might have 25 or 30,000 HP.  That player might be fighting a mob with 5 million, or far more HP.  So the healer might contribute by keeping the tank and the rest of the party alive, but his healing will in no way come near to what these DPS players will contribute.  The disparity in size between HP pools makes it very challenging for the player to contribute in similar numbers.  I am hoping that the folks at Intrepid recognize this disparity and address it in some way.

In Raids i have healed (I havent done a raid in Ashes yet though) i've easily surpassed 1 million or 2 million health given to the raid across the duration. While i agree this doesn't compare to 5 or 10 million damage done it is quite enough to prove the raid team would be dead without my heals.