Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
Flow of combat and Raids
BlackBrony
Member
I kinda have 2 issues.
I've seen several post from this poser noani I think, and something they said make me think about the game.
First, about Raids. I can't hardly imagine AoC having content that would interest a hard core player when said content will be open world.
Having to deal with PvP during your PvE encounter doesn't make it hardcore in a way that hardcore PvE players are used to, and if only 1 digit percentage population is going to achieve such content, it would seem extremely illogical to also have PvP which is something you can't plan for, no matter how much good you are.
Maybe I'm missing something, or something else was said, but if they keep the 80/20 for raids, how are we going to have hardcore PvE content?
Second, I have seen several people that like the "movement" during combat. I've noticed animations that lock you in place and Steven said on streams that the higher the damage of the skill, the more the casting time.
So... how are they going to achieve this? I can imagine a Mage dropping a meteor being slow casting, but what about other classes? Will this apply only to the target side of the skills?
I wish we could have this information more out in the open, especially after the game went more mainstream with the big streamers.
I've seen several post from this poser noani I think, and something they said make me think about the game.
First, about Raids. I can't hardly imagine AoC having content that would interest a hard core player when said content will be open world.
Having to deal with PvP during your PvE encounter doesn't make it hardcore in a way that hardcore PvE players are used to, and if only 1 digit percentage population is going to achieve such content, it would seem extremely illogical to also have PvP which is something you can't plan for, no matter how much good you are.
Maybe I'm missing something, or something else was said, but if they keep the 80/20 for raids, how are we going to have hardcore PvE content?
Second, I have seen several people that like the "movement" during combat. I've noticed animations that lock you in place and Steven said on streams that the higher the damage of the skill, the more the casting time.
So... how are they going to achieve this? I can imagine a Mage dropping a meteor being slow casting, but what about other classes? Will this apply only to the target side of the skills?
I wish we could have this information more out in the open, especially after the game went more mainstream with the big streamers.
0
Comments
I think the big issue is that this game is still technically pre-alpha.
alpha is normally behind closed doors because it's literally the game's prototype stage.
Who knows, there may only be 1 prototype dungeon designed so far.
We know for AoC that a team focused on combat has only JUST been announced - so we're all waiting to see what they put together around March next year.
Just to re-iterate. It's really abnormal for Game Studios to be this transparent so early into developement. Ashes DOES have an NDA that will last until around March - and then we'll be able to see for ourselves the full state of the intitial prototype.
I'm aware it's in pre-alpha, but we haven't heard anything related to raids in a while. And last I've heard it was 80/20, and that 20% was made clear that it's story related.
On the combat side I know it's still early, but it would be nice to have an idea on how they will do it.
I'm mostly worried about the Raid stuff because that's a huge amount of players.
I was trying to remember why I wrote this game off a FEW years ago and I believe raiding was the reason. If I remember correctly, this game will be PVP. Unless someone else wants to chime in, I'll answer the OP. This is a PVP game with very little PVE content.
That's because a lot of development time went into creating AoC Apocalypse - and then they decided that there were core systems that needed to be redone from the ground up. If you look at Apocalypse, you'll see they had full combat systems, etc. whereas now they don't.
As stated by maouw. APOC was a great testing ground for them to realize issues they had with the systems they had in place at that time. They identified systems to be remade, and that is why we are just now seeing things like Combat start to be implemented in a more in-depth manner.
Realistically speaking, Ashes started development mid-late 2018.
When Intrepid had their kickstarter, the assets they showed off were mostly standard Unreal assets, with a few specific things thrown together added to it. The kickstarter was a way for Steven to gauge community interest in the idea, and the actual game had not started production at all at that point - it was nothing more than a few different lose threads of ideas at that point in time.
After the kickstarter and summer sale, Intrepid hired staff and started working on pre-production of the game - concepts, engine work and such. Then they hired more people and started work on the actual game. This happened in 2018, but even Intrepid wouldn't be able to put more of a date on it than that.
So no, this game is not going on 5 years in development, it is going on 2 years in development after a year or so of pre-production.
Current MMO's take 6 - 9 years of actual development time, so it would not be too out of place to say that Ashes could potentially not be released until 2027 (though my expectation is 2023/4).
You join a long list of people on these forums that have done that now, including Steven. I'm only really going to address this portion of your post.
The first thing I will say is that if you are reading threads on these forums and people say that Ashes won't have instanced raid content, you can dismiss those particular posters as not knowing what they are talking about. Steven has confirmed that they will instance encounters when it makes sense to do so.
Second, it is perfectly possible to have high end raiding in a game where 80% of the raid content is open world. It is not possible to have it if 100% of raid content is open world, but it is with 80%.
That said, guilds moving from games like either of the EQ's, WoW or FFXIV would have some adjustments to make. There would only be one night a week of raiding where you know you have targets, but there would be plenty of targets for other nights of the week, if you and your guild put the effort in to it.
I have been a top end raiding in most games that I have played, and I absolutely see the possibility for Ashes to have top end raiding while still keeping the PvX aspect of the game. Other posters here don't see it, but them not being able to see it seems to me to be their issue, not ours.
If you can't see it, I'm going to go over three potential things I can see Intrepid doing to make Ashes feel worth it to top end raiders, while still being a solid PvX game. Note that the following are my interpritations of how I see things. While there is nothing following that goes against what Intrepid have said they want for Ashes, they have not specifically said anything to assume the following will be in the game.
---
All content is tied to nodes - the general setup of nodes dictates exactly what encoutners will spawn, and even what dungeons will be available. There is no reason this wouldn't apply to raid encounters, including instanced raid encounters.
My assumption with this is that raid content will mostly be influenced by the specific type of metropolis node that has over all control of the area. This would mean there are essentially 4 major versions of raids. Each version may have totally different mobs and may be located in a different area, but my assumption is that each version will have similar difficulty tiers of encounters, and similar numbers of instanced vs open world encounters.
Based on this, it would be awesome if each node type had the instanced encounters a different difficulty. It could well be that raids that are influenced by a military metropolis will have the hardest encounters all be open world, and the one or two instances would be the easiest mobs under that metropolis type. Conversly, a scientific metropolis may influence content in a way where instanced raids are the hardest and most rewarding, and open world encounters are easier.
This would mean that raiders would have a vested interest in the node state of the server, which will see them active in sieging nodes that they want to change, and also in defending nodes in order to hold on to the content that those nodes have opened up for them. It also means that rival guilds could siege specific nodes in order to deny content - the ultimate form of contesting content.
---
I can see instanced content (especially harder instanced content) rewarding players with a few high end raw material drops to make epic level items, but occasionally also dropping an item that makes a legendary item - but this item needs to be transported by a caravan to a specific node (the nearest metropolis, perhaps).
Additionally, just for added fun, when a player accepts this item drop/caravan, there is a serverwide message saying '[player] of [guild] has just looted [item] from [encounter] in [location], and needs to transport it to [node]!"
This basically tells the entire server that you have one of the best items in the game, and are transporting it in a vulnerable state, from a known point to another known point.
What this does is taking the rewards from an instanced encounter that is completely instanced off, and opens it up to the PvX ideal of Ashes.
While some raiders wouldn't be at all keen on this, a good number would see the added fun and tension that it brings to the situation. This also brings up diplomatic options for your guild - form an agreement with another raid guild to assist each other in bringing these rewards back, or even hiring a more PvP focused guild to assist.
---
Another form of content I can see Ashes making use of is semi-instancing.
Imagine a room in a dungeon, with a boss encounter in it. The room has a single door, no respawn points, and also prevents players from logging in to the game in this room.
Now imagine a raid is able to enter this room and close the door behind it. Then this raid is able to force spawn that boss in this room. Upon spawning this boss, there is also an encounter spawn outside the room (this could even literally be the door). If this second encounter is killed, it opens up the door to this room.
This means that rival guilds are able to fight and kill that secondary encounter, and if they manage to do it before you and your guild kill the primary encounter, they can attack you mid fight. It means you have a chance at an uninterrupted attempt at that encounter, but you and your raid are up against rival players - you are essentially pitting your PvE ability vs their PvE ability, if you win you get rewards, if they win you get PvP.
---
These are the kinds of things Intrepid could do with raiding in Ashes, and I can see the possibility as being really enjoyable for a wide range of players - not just raiders.
In order to get to this point though, Intrepid need to realize that contesting content doesn't always need to happen on that specific and exact piece of content - it can happen while players are on the way to that content, or while players are attempting to bring the rewards of the content to safety.
The above general possibilities have me excited for what Ashes could bring - if Intrepid have the balls.
I feel targeted by this statement.
I ask you to re-watch this part of last months live stream.
From 1:16 until the next question.
At no point in the discussion about instanced content do they use any form of decisive language. This is true for both Steven and Jeff. They use words like "Maybe", and "If we need to we can". Then when talking about open world bosses they use words like "we will", and "This is a down side of open world raids". The language when talking about open world raids just seems more certain.
I know we have had this argument like three different ways by now. At the very minimum right now, based on everything I have seen. Interesting instanced PvE looks like a idea that is being kicked around by the Dev team. Not a confirmed feature. Which is more than I thought it was last month.
The most hopeful thing he says that would confirm your theory at this point is the line:
"When we want to confine a encounter to a set number of players due to the narrative or because the loot drops are special in some regard that's when we will likely use that 80:20 rule on instancing vs non-instancing"
Like I said, all very indecisive language.
I am not yet sold on the idea that there will be any instanced raids. I think there is a very strong chance Intrepid leans harder into making the open world bosses as amazing as they could possibly be and just scrap the idea of instanced raid content. Surly you would agree if it came down to a choice between one or the other. Intrepid would scrap instanced raids long before open world raids?
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
I had people in mind when I typed that out, you weren't one of them.
When is a more decisive word than if.
If they weren't sure they would be wanting to develop instanced raids, they would have said "if we want to confine an encounter" - since they said "when we want to confine an encounter", if we are going to make an assumption, it should be that they are past figuring out "if".
This idea would never make it past alpha - hopefully people like Jeff wouldn't let it get past a discussion stage.
If you make an awesome encounter, one that is really detailed, lots of fun, heaps of things going on, really hard - as soon as you have one rival player get to your tank, the fight is done.
This is the issue EQ2 had on it's PvP servers. The game was designed as a PvE game, with PvE content, including open world raid encounters. Yet the game maintained some open PvP servers as well.
Most of the open world raid encounters were never killed on PvP servers - not because the raiders weren't up to it, they managed to get some top 5 kills world wide for a few years. They weren't killed simply because if an encounter is designed to be a challenge in and of itself, is designed to push 40 players to their limit and be the hardest the game can possibly make PvE while still remaining killable, a single player can very easily turn that barely killable encounter in to an impossible to kill encounter.
{edit to add; as far as I know, EQ2 is the only game to ever have undiluted raid encounters in an open PvP setting, due to designing the game for one ruleset, but allowing a second. Every other game with open world raids in a PvP setting have had diluted encounters}.
This is why all games with open world content in a PvP setting have incredibly boring, mundane content there. The developers actually want the content to be killed, even when being fought over, and in order to make it able to be killed, it needs to be able to be killed while in PvP with untold numbers of rivals.
The only way to get around this issue is to either instance the encounter, or design a psuedo-instance as my above post suggested (and as I have also been saying for many years).
Yeah, I would agree. I've never argued that instanced raiding should be the primary raid type - I've simply said that it needs to exist if Intrepid wish Ashes to have a to end raid game.
However, I can't see any reason at all as to why they would need to only have one type. As my post above points out, there are many ways you can add instanced content or psuedo-instanced content to Ashes while keeping or even enhancing the competitive nature of the game.
If done well, a limited number of instanced raids would add to the PvX aspect of the game, not detract from it.
Ooooooh, part of me wants to start guessing...
And yes, I feel targeted by your statement. I don't know what I am talking about when it comes to this game. Thats why questions are asked. As far as I know, this will be a PVP driven game. I came by to see if the game has gone in a different direction. I don't see anything that says otherwise. SO, i am going to assume....that its still PVP driven and walk away. IF its not PVP driven, please tell me otherwise.
Btw, if your ACT from EQ2flames...hell ya! thanks for all your hard work on ACT. ACT helped make my EQ2 and Rift Experience something i'll remember for the rest of my life. So thanks. If not, well I hope you take that job seriously.
It's both PvP and PvE-driven, and they drive each other.
People tend to say it's a 'PvP' game because PvP has the scope and ability to infringe upon/impact many of the other systems (e.g. trading, nodes). The key takeaway here is the fact that there are many other systems besides PvP driving server development.
If you want to look at development in the way you are now, you need to look at EQ2 starting development in 1995, 9 years before release.
While comparing the development t times if games is in itself a pointless exercise, comparing the pre-production time of them is even more pointless.
If someone were indeed to want to compare development times, or as the case is here wanting to figure out where a game is in the development t process,looking at pre-production is disingenuous, as it has no bearing on what actual production
Also, Intrepid didn't "learn" anything from what they threw together for the kickstarter. They threw it together based on actual decades of knowledge - compiling some stock resources in an unaltered game engine may be something where you or I could learn a few things, but not seasoned, experienced game developers.
I'm actually not sure you would be able to guess them all -youd be able to guess one, maybe two, a good number of posters I have had these discussions with haven't been around for a while - in some cases haven't been around since we moved to the new forums.
Wow so many great ideas! I hope they implement something like this Noaani! Got it right this time!
I can see now how many options we could have despite not having instanced content while maintaining the core and ideals of Ashes!
There should be no surprise that the devs are currently more focused on designing and developing the 80% content than they are the 20% content.
I'm mostly confused/curious because of all the people coming from streamers, like Asmongold, which are extremely PvE oriented.