tupactopus wrote: » So are you willing to have an objectively worse class without hope of change because it relies all on the devs? You're not going to be limited to being worse than other players in just pvp. They will level faster, they will quest faster, they will see more of the game than you, quicker, and advance quicker. It trickles into every aspect of the game.
Steven wrote: Balancing in Ashes of Creation is "group focused".[10] There will be match ups in 1v1s where one class will be superior to another; and that application should be a rock-paper-scissors dynamic. We want there to be counter-play between the different classes... Instead it's going to be a group focused balance, where as long as you have the diversity of classes present, that's going to be an equal level playing field. It's going to be very dependent on skill and strategy.[10] – Steven Sharif Certain secondary archetypes are capable of "bridging the gap" between their counterpart.[11] Certain archetypes are capable of moving the gap between their counterpart per-se. If I am a Tank archetype and a Mage is my counter, I can take a Mage secondary and kind of bridge the divide slightly; and then move my identity that direction ever so slightly.[11] – Steven Sharif
BlackBrony wrote: » tupactopus wrote: » So are you willing to have an objectively worse class without hope of change because it relies all on the devs? You're not going to be limited to being worse than other players in just pvp. They will level faster, they will quest faster, they will see more of the game than you, quicker, and advance quicker. It trickles into every aspect of the game. The system is based around trinity and hard counters. You can soft the hard counter through secondary class and augments, but some classes at equal footing on skills/gear WILL lose against other. I don't mind this, why would I? It's how the dev intended the game to be played. Steven wrote: Balancing in Ashes of Creation is "group focused".[10] There will be match ups in 1v1s where one class will be superior to another; and that application should be a rock-paper-scissors dynamic. We want there to be counter-play between the different classes... Instead it's going to be a group focused balance, where as long as you have the diversity of classes present, that's going to be an equal level playing field. It's going to be very dependent on skill and strategy.[10] – Steven Sharif Certain secondary archetypes are capable of "bridging the gap" between their counterpart.[11] Certain archetypes are capable of moving the gap between their counterpart per-se. If I am a Tank archetype and a Mage is my counter, I can take a Mage secondary and kind of bridge the divide slightly; and then move my identity that direction ever so slightly.[11] – Steven Sharif
tupactopus wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » tupactopus wrote: » So are you willing to have an objectively worse class without hope of change because it relies all on the devs? You're not going to be limited to being worse than other players in just pvp. They will level faster, they will quest faster, they will see more of the game than you, quicker, and advance quicker. It trickles into every aspect of the game. The system is based around trinity and hard counters. You can soft the hard counter through secondary class and augments, but some classes at equal footing on skills/gear WILL lose against other. I don't mind this, why would I? It's how the dev intended the game to be played. Steven wrote: Balancing in Ashes of Creation is "group focused".[10] There will be match ups in 1v1s where one class will be superior to another; and that application should be a rock-paper-scissors dynamic. We want there to be counter-play between the different classes... Instead it's going to be a group focused balance, where as long as you have the diversity of classes present, that's going to be an equal level playing field. It's going to be very dependent on skill and strategy.[10] – Steven Sharif Certain secondary archetypes are capable of "bridging the gap" between their counterpart.[11] Certain archetypes are capable of moving the gap between their counterpart per-se. If I am a Tank archetype and a Mage is my counter, I can take a Mage secondary and kind of bridge the divide slightly; and then move my identity that direction ever so slightly.[11] – Steven Sharif this is funny because with that level of detail and balance that goes into each class, there's literally no way classes are going to be balanced well
BlackBrony wrote: » tupactopus wrote: » BlackBrony wrote: » tupactopus wrote: » So are you willing to have an objectively worse class without hope of change because it relies all on the devs? You're not going to be limited to being worse than other players in just pvp. They will level faster, they will quest faster, they will see more of the game than you, quicker, and advance quicker. It trickles into every aspect of the game. The system is based around trinity and hard counters. You can soft the hard counter through secondary class and augments, but some classes at equal footing on skills/gear WILL lose against other. I don't mind this, why would I? It's how the dev intended the game to be played. Steven wrote: Balancing in Ashes of Creation is "group focused".[10] There will be match ups in 1v1s where one class will be superior to another; and that application should be a rock-paper-scissors dynamic. We want there to be counter-play between the different classes... Instead it's going to be a group focused balance, where as long as you have the diversity of classes present, that's going to be an equal level playing field. It's going to be very dependent on skill and strategy.[10] – Steven Sharif Certain secondary archetypes are capable of "bridging the gap" between their counterpart.[11] Certain archetypes are capable of moving the gap between their counterpart per-se. If I am a Tank archetype and a Mage is my counter, I can take a Mage secondary and kind of bridge the divide slightly; and then move my identity that direction ever so slightly.[11] – Steven Sharif this is funny because with that level of detail and balance that goes into each class, there's literally no way classes are going to be balanced well Because they will plan 8 vs 8, not 1 vs 1, so you can't expect and shouldn't expect balance between classes. That's my take. The game will be balanced on a 8 vs 8 having each one of the archetypes
GazerGrazer wrote: » I just don't understand your guys fear of a DPS meter. Have you guys been kicked from a group because of bad DPS? I've never kicked someone from my raid group because of bad DPS. I've never been kicked from a raid group because of bad DPS. When I go into a raid encounter that is easy enough to where optimal DPS doesn't matter, I still want the DPS meter. I want to be able to see how I'm doing compared to the other players. If everyones pulling 5k DPS and I'm pulling 2k DPS, I want to know so I can improve. People are always going to bar others from joining dependent on some standard. If there's no DPS meter, they're just going to say you're not allowed to come because you're items aren't high enough level, you don't have the achievement of killing this boss, no one has ever heard of you, or you don't have the right food buff. There's always something. No DPS meter isn't going to change that. No DPS meter does ensure there is no reason to strive for a better rotation. No reason to try to optimize your build. No reason to put any risk/reward toward your character. The best part is, even if you do try to optimize your character, there is no way of even telling.
SgtKeeneye wrote: » GazerGrazer wrote: » I just don't understand your guys fear of a DPS meter. Have you guys been kicked from a group because of bad DPS? I've never kicked someone from my raid group because of bad DPS. I've never been kicked from a raid group because of bad DPS. When I go into a raid encounter that is easy enough to where optimal DPS doesn't matter, I still want the DPS meter. I want to be able to see how I'm doing compared to the other players. If everyones pulling 5k DPS and I'm pulling 2k DPS, I want to know so I can improve. People are always going to bar others from joining dependent on some standard. If there's no DPS meter, they're just going to say you're not allowed to come because you're items aren't high enough level, you don't have the achievement of killing this boss, no one has ever heard of you, or you don't have the right food buff. There's always something. No DPS meter isn't going to change that. No DPS meter does ensure there is no reason to strive for a better rotation. No reason to try to optimize your build. No reason to put any risk/reward toward your character. The best part is, even if you do try to optimize your character, there is no way of even telling. Ever played a class and don't get accepted to groups because you AOE numbers suck? That the exact reason, they don't want DPS meters. Its makes a meta and kills classes that don't perform as #1 and generally makes it toxic experience. "HaHa YoU pLaY ThAt sHiT ClAsS"
WMC51 wrote: » We raided the first 10+ years of MOORPGs and cleared content without meters. So definitely not anything that is needed.
Monorojo wrote: » Lack of dps meter will hide bad players won't it? You can have no idea how to play your class and your rotation be completely broken but because you are friends with the guild leader everyone else is the group will be carrying that bad player and not have a clue. How is that fun for anyone but the bad player?
Khana wrote: » WMC51 wrote: » We raided the first 10+ years of MOORPGs and cleared content without meters. So definitely not anything that is needed. I love this kind of stupid reasoning. I can do the same too: Mankind lived their first few thousands of years without electricity. So definitely not anything that is needed. I mean, sure, if you like to stay at stone age, be my guest, but don't drag down people who want to improve/optimize with your own ideals that a dpsmeter is not needed, you're free to not use it if you don't want it, as many people said, it's very unlikely that you'll be kicked out of a group because your dps is too low, unless you're doing hardcore endgame content that requires optimization obviously, and in that case, well, it's better for the people you're running it with that they know where the problem comes from, so that they can either replace you or help you fix it, rather than making everyone waste days or weeks of tries without knowing where the problem comes from.
Caeryl wrote: » It’s honestly hilarious that some people will excuse multiboxing as ok and are happy to leave it be cuz “well what can you do” despite all its harm, and yet rage that people using a tool that does nothing but provide objective, unbiased information that holds everyone on equal playing field, should be banned. It’s just wild
DaRougaroux wrote: » No it's not a mistake. Sick to death of elitist asshat tools being used to trivialize other peoples gameplay to the point of harassment. Goodbye. Good riddance and about time.
SgtKeeneye wrote: » Ever played a class and don't get accepted to groups because you AOE numbers suck? That the exact reason, they don't want DPS meters. Its makes a meta and kills classes that don't perform as #1 and generally makes it toxic experience. "HaHa YoU pLaY ThAt sHiT ClAsS"
BlackBrony wrote: » My "argument" against meters is the fact that forces developer to consider the potential of min maxing to extremes, having to make extremely hard content, otherwise the hardcore PvE raids will find it "easy". Meanwhile the gap between the top and casuals will widen, forcing developers to create more content that will be completed by less people. When the focus of the game is mostly around PvP, player/guilds/node friction than hardcore PvE raiding, I find it hard to justify the amount of resources needed to sustain hardcore players expectations, which we know are never satisfied.
I would much rather that a tight guild with good communication is able to succeed in dungeions, raids, and PvP regardless of whether or not they are playing the optimal race/class/build.
I don't think that a vast majority of players are trying to be world-first raiders or the top DPS on their server. I would rather not know the exact numbers even if means that my class or build is sub-optimal.
palabana wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » It’s honestly hilarious that some people will excuse multiboxing as ok and are happy to leave it be cuz “well what can you do” despite all its harm, and yet rage that people using a tool that does nothing but provide objective, unbiased information that holds everyone on equal playing field, should be banned. It’s just wild My response in a spoiler because it's off topic.Ok let's ban multiboxing but do not prevent families and friends from playing in the same house. By the way, you can't prevent multiboxing. It's impossible. And if you try, you will also have to prevent friends and family from playing in the same house, using the same internet. This is just one of the examples. Multiboxers can bypass other counter measures just as easy. What Intrepid is trying to achieve is correct, it is only a matter of words that they chose. They decided to say "multiboxing is allowed" and that's what caused the multiboxing controversy. --- I'm fine with personal DPS meters, to be honest. But tell me, what game provides built in DPS meters while you're fighting a boss or any mobs out in the open? The question here is everyone is asking for DPS meters. However, most games usually provide training grounds of some sort for you to gauge your strength and not a real time DPS meter in the HUD. Best example is The Division 2's shooting range. I like that the best because you can play around with your builds, see your DPS and can choose the type of enemies as well as their levels.
noaani wrote: » @BlackBrony regardless of whether a combat tracker is present or not (there will be several), players will dissect the games combat system down to the smallest component possible. Developers have to develop every system in every game with the expectation that players will at some point come to understand it. Even if all I have to work with is my own characters HP pool, I'll likely work out more about the games combat system in alpha than most players will work out in 10 years. It really doesn't take a combat tracker to min/max. As to your comments on balance - I would be wary of any game that doesn't allow you to check their working in some manner. Archeage didn't really have an easy way to do this (though I had a working combat tracker for that game), and it's classes were among the worst balanced in the genre (due to having a combat tracker running for years in the game, I am somewhat uniquely qualified to be able to say that). Archeage also completely disproves the notion that not having combat trackers will mean there are no required classes - I have never seen a games playerbase stick as closely to what builds and classes are acceptable as the playerbase of Archeage did. People were literally too scared to try out a different build, as there was no real way to test it out objectively, so every time they grouped up with a new person, they would get laughed at for their build/class. This is the future we can all expect in Ashes if we don't have open access to a combat tracker in order to actually be able to prove that a new build is viable.
Caeryl wrote: » palabana wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » It’s honestly hilarious that some people will excuse multiboxing as ok and are happy to leave it be cuz “well what can you do” despite all its harm, and yet rage that people using a tool that does nothing but provide objective, unbiased information that holds everyone on equal playing field, should be banned. It’s just wild My response in a spoiler because it's off topic.Ok let's ban multiboxing but do not prevent families and friends from playing in the same house. By the way, you can't prevent multiboxing. It's impossible. And if you try, you will also have to prevent friends and family from playing in the same house, using the same internet. This is just one of the examples. Multiboxers can bypass other counter measures just as easy. What Intrepid is trying to achieve is correct, it is only a matter of words that they chose. They decided to say "multiboxing is allowed" and that's what caused the multiboxing controversy. --- I'm fine with personal DPS meters, to be honest. But tell me, what game provides built in DPS meters while you're fighting a boss or any mobs out in the open? The question here is everyone is asking for DPS meters. However, most games usually provide training grounds of some sort for you to gauge your strength and not a real time DPS meter in the HUD. Best example is The Division 2's shooting range. I like that the best because you can play around with your builds, see your DPS and can choose the type of enemies as well as their levels. I'm not and have never been asking for just DPS measurements. DPS on its own is not that valuable a metric unless every boss fight is a tank-and-spank fight which would show a really godawful design team. Combat tracking, what I want, and what everyone here with sense is asking for, is the ability to objectively analyze encounters after the fact. Yes that includes who did the most and least damage. It also includes who took the most damage, who stood in stupid, who didn't cleanse when they should have, how often the tank lost aggro, how many times a player spread a debuff to another, how many times someone crit, how much overhealing the healers did, how high the uptime on key buffs were, how many times someone died. All of this information is necessary to understand what is going wrong in an encounter, or what is going right. Thankfully, it seems we will in fact have combat logs, so we will have combat tracking at least from third party sites that parse such information into an easily read format, which is what most of us want. I don't need real-time dps feedback, but I absolutely need a clear, coherent way to judge a build's effectiveness. "Trial and error" cannot occur without clear, detailed, and accurate feedback.
