Costumes and Single piece cosmetic skins - Facts, and improvements?

Hi All, I think it is safe to say that given the current topics active in the community as well as one of the topics which are considered one of the negatives of Ashes of Creation (not all without Merit, but in some cases there is extra information known which the greater community could learn - as well as some clarity we could get from Steven/Intrepid Studios) - is about the cosmetic pieces. I see there is quite an active thread right now regarding identifying armour types and it is starting to detail a bit, so I wanted to make this thread to elaborate on how the system is known to work (or how we think it does) - and how it could be balanced to be suitable.

Single Piece Cosmetic Skins:

These require first acquiring an actual in-game item that matches the base of the skin. My understanding is that the skins will at least somewhat resemble the design of the original, my hope is that it will resemble the original enough as such that there wouldn't be any ambiguity between what type of armour is being used.

Full body costumes:

These have no requirements and can just be equipped from level 1. This is what has caused the most discussion and where we can find a solution that doesn't cause any issue.

My belief of how it currently works is that you can have your normal gear equipped and the costume will act as a full body overlay/transmog. To me the term costume feels like something just for show though the choice of word isn't important here.

My form of "balancing" this would just be to make costumes non-combat armour. It could be worn but would actually occupy all the armour slots when in use and not provide any combat stats.

The issue I do see with my suggestion is that if alot of costumes will be in the shop and you can only safely use it in Towns but not out in the Wilds then it doesn't really incentivise getting them. And I think this is probably the dilemma of how to make the system work fairly seamlessly.

--

What are your thoughts on balancing this, thoughts on my idea/s and clearing up any facts I might not know about that can be backed up with source?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Atama

Okeydoke wrote: »

Geronimo wrote: »

The tank should definitely hide under this:

For some reason I would have a 100% tendency to go after this guy first.

That's kinda what I'm talking about. There will be tanks wearing stuff like that. End of the world? No. Clown show? Yes.

In Lord of the Rings Online, I knew a dwarven champion who was a badass and ran around with a couple of huge swords. He wasn’t in my guild but would do dungeons with us sometimes.

He always wore a frilly yellow sundress. It was just his thing I guess.

Giving players customization options gives them the freedom to look stupid. People have fun in different ways.

Noaani

Okeydoke wrote: »

Crow3 is right in that there's a lot we don't know right now that will affect how big of an issue it is. Weapons and race may or may not be big indicators of class, so that'll help with threat assessment if most healers are of X race and carry staves, not great axes. But if there's valid reasons for both healers and warriors to carry great axes, it becomes that much more confusing.

While this is true, the thing that armor absolutely will tell you is what armor they are wearing.

If you are directing a small group vs another small group (potentially the most common form of PvP in the game), you want to know who has plate armor and who is wearing robes if for no reason other than to get appropriate DPS on to appropriate targets.

There is all kinds of ways we could debate the scale of the advantage that costumes will have, absolutely without doubt. We could also debate whether this is a pay to win advantage or not.

What we can't really do is debate that there is no advantage to it at all.

I think most of us agree that any solution is simply not going to happen if it impacts on the visual look of any item. Players will be able to display what they want to look like at all times, and any suggestions that prevent this from happening are just not going to happen from Intrepids perspective.

I still believe the only avenue at all for a solution is the UI, which is why I still believe the suggestion I have made in this and another thread is the best solution.

Okeydoke

Well people having fun with something doesn't necessarily equal good design. There are many people who would have more fun if Ashes was full loot no consequences pvp, or fast travel, or instanced dungeons, or flying mounts for everyone.

It's all subjective though, there is no right or wrong in most cases including this one. My main argument in this thread is that they could have allowed people a ton of leeway to look how they want, including the freedom to look stupid, with just a wide variety of individual armor piece skins, which they already will have, without sacrificing pvp integrity, immersion or threat assessment.

Okeydoke

Yeah I know Noaani, my next paragraph after that one I said that you still can't see their armor. I agree with you, Intrepid isn't going to change this. This discussion is just academic at this point. But out of it came your suggestion that I agree with, that this armor indicator needs to be so ridiculously clear and apparent, and I'd like UI customization options to personally make it as clear as possible for me (as you also suggested).

Geronimo

Okeydoke wrote: »

Geronimo wrote: »

The tank should definitely hide under this:

For some reason I would have a 100% tendency to go after this guy first.

That's kinda what I'm talking about. There will be tanks wearing stuff like that. End of the world? No. Clown show? Yes.

I just bought it, I think the full costume thing is intended by de$ign.

I'm also a fan of the Py'rai vibe tho, not just to hide my tank under it.

Okeydoke

lol Geronimo. smooth

Just has to be said though, the de$ign could have been just as lucrative doing only individual armor piece skins, if not more lucrative.

And I just wanna say again, I'm not trying to whine about this. I fkn love this game and I've defended the game and Steven personally on other gaming forums. I am a 100% Ashes fanboy. But I call balls and strikes and give my honest opinions, no sugarcoating. It's just me.

-T0Mb-

I am against purchasable full body costumes, full armor skin sets and weapon skins but I would allow people to buy single piece cosmetics for armors. I don't mind if some one wants to use a little money to buy some little detailing for their armors. The main focus must be still kept in game achievable items.

Songcaller

Hmm. I still don't understand the usefulness of the concept. So, we could glean the armour type and the grade of armour but it won't tell you the stats to my knowledge. In any scenario with a build how you want policy, it is impossible to glean any substantial benefit over which person to attack when all are in top tear gear and multiple people are in the same armour types. They would look identical in indicators, different from cosmetics and individual in build. I usually focus on a target called out, a target doing well in the pvp (ending kill streaks etc) and even when targets are called out it is because the player plays well and must be neutralised. Its why you kill all healers, not just healers in heavy armour.

Okeydoke

The usefulness of knowing the armor type/quality is the same usefulness that gives reason to why they're adding the armor icon in the first place. If it didn't matter, they wouldn't bother adding it. It just doesn't matter the same amount to different people evidently heh.

For me personally, some fights it matters a lot and some fights it doesn't matter at all. But for many pvpers, it's pretty normal to make split second decisions based on the visual cue of opposing player's armor. Hopefully the armor icons are good enough to let us do that as well.

Songcaller

Yes, I do not deny that pvp in a class styled lock is far smoother than pvp in a costume styled lock. I referred to the calls to replace the name and guild bars with the indicators instead. I do not believe it would be good for large vs large. I want someone to call 'Kill Phantom X' not 'Kill the person with gold trim, heavy armour, two handed hammer and the Paragon of Virtue Cosmetic'.

I should not have to learn thousands of cosmetics in order to determine a target. We should still keep name tags and guild tags. In sieges there won't be cosmetics but obviously guild wars will be in open world.

I do not deny that in small scale pvp the indicators will be better placed to be effective. I'm not opposed to indicators, just some proposals around indicators. Naturally, when you can apply cosmetics to any armour the lines become even more blurred without indicators. It is true I could learn all the cosmetics eventually, but I'd rather just learn about those that take my fancy.

Noaani

Neurath wrote: »

I referred to the calls to replace the name and guild bars with the indicators instead.

I agree thisnwould be bad - though I have not seen anyone asking for it.

That said, I often tend to stop reading posts if they are too stupid, so it may just be that I didn't bother finishing to read the post in question.

The suggestion I have made in relation to this is to add that additional information to nameplates, but to then give players full control over customizing the way nameplates are displayed on their client.

Okeydoke

That would be bad. Noaani's idea is for UI customization options to display the armor indicator icon how individual people want it. Not a blanket replacing of names with armor indicator icons for everyone at all times.

Songcaller

Noaani wrote: »

That said, I often tend to stop reading posts if they are too stupid, so it may just be that I didn't bother finishing to read the post in question.

It's not about silliness it's about covering all bases. I don't believe a bunch of yes people will see a good game. I take words literal and sometimes you do seem to emblish. Most of the time I can appreciate your direct approach even if I disagree.

In my head, I have issues with the active situation. How big would the icons be? What would the draw distance be? I have no aversion, I've seen it done before with PvP Shields and Guild Shields. The shields were unicolours and rather small.

I know name plates are rather long but a big square block next to all names would be unsightly. I just see a lot of mess in large scale if it was enabled. Of course, it could be hidden for sieges. Each to their own. I live and let live

Noaani

Neurath wrote: »

In my head, I have issues with the active situation. How big would the icons be? What would the draw distance be? I have no aversion, I've seen it done before with PvP Shields and Guild Shields. The shields were unicolours and rather small.

The first two would be customizable, as would the size of the icons to denote armor type.

That way, you can see the information you want to see.

I agree that many people would also not want to see a big square block next to every name. That is why it is customizable, and why there is an option to customize a second nameplate viewed by holding down right ctrl.

You could make it so that you can see that icon all the time if that is what you want to do, you could make it so that there is nothing displayed on nameplates as standard, and only showing basic information like name and guild when you hold that right ctrl. If either of these are things you want to do, have at it as far as I am concerned.

For me, with this system, I would have first name and guild displayed, with pressing right ctrl showing me level and gear information, and title if titles do anything (I would never see a title if they do nothing and I have the ability to not see them).

Child Item