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!

Discussion about grinds

1246

Comments

  • NeurathNeurath Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    L2 did not have decay. SWG is the base for the craft system. Enchant base was from l2.

    SWG had crafted bis - we made our own lightsabers.

    Anyway, while l2 has been referenced for some systems, it does not cover Ashes items because gear is secondary in Ashes. Not primary.
  • NiKrNiKr Member
    Neurath wrote: »
    L2 did not have decay. SWG is the base for the craft system. Enchant base was from l2.

    SWG had crafted bis - we made our own lightsabers.
    Yeah, that means that they added a ton of stuff to make the system even better. And I'm glad about that because I loved L2's crafting system already and AoC's seems even better.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    I think decay is more about Economy than Crafting "system".
  • NeurathNeurath Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    In an mmo you have limited storage space. Even less if you have to pay for extra storage space. Because we have cosmetic skins, transmogs, augments and crafter personal choice, it is important to split the looks from the function.

    The economy can have a plethora of gold sinks, but, the same economy can have no decay. In EQ, decay/Destruction was not about economy per say either.

    If decay was about economy, you would have chance of drop on death and chance of destruction on death only.

    In truth, you have reiterated an old wow trope where the pvp players wanted to smash the pve players by stumping the bis gear with durability and destruction under the guise of 'economy'. I understand your warlock reference now.
  • NiKrNiKr Member
    Decay definitely relates to economy though. Decay is a material sink which is a gold sink in a free market game. If you don't have a material sink, all your materials become super cheap because they're endless, and your gold inflates to all hell because everything is cheap. Decay influencing economy.

    L2 had "decay" in the form of 60% chance to craft a piece of gear and then even lower chances when OEing it. That was their material/gold sink. On top of the materials themselves being super rare, but that's more of a speed-controlling tool rather than a preventive one.

    But even with both of those tools, bots would outpace them in material production because the game wasn't balanced around 24/7 farming at industrial scale. Which is why Intrepid gotta do their best to ban any and all bots, cause they'll ruin the economy for sure.
  • NeurathNeurath Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    There are material sinks. 1. We don't know the cost of resources from each item. 2. We lose portions of resources upon death. 3. We have construction and destruction of structures/nodes. 4. We have limited time mounts. 5. We have limited time summons. 6. We have attunements. 7. We have horizontal enchantments. 8. We have item destruction in the enchantment system and soul bind system.

    At the end of the day, I will not remove decay. But, the economy would not face the great depression over the loss of long life decay.
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    NiKr wrote: »
    Decay definitely relates to economy though. Decay is a material sink which is a gold sink in a free market game. If you don't have a material sink, all your materials become super cheap because they're endless, and your gold inflates to all hell because everything is cheap. Decay influencing economy.

    L2 had "decay" in the form of 60% chance to craft a piece of gear and then even lower chances when OEing it. That was their material/gold sink. On top of the materials themselves being super rare, but that's more of a speed-controlling tool rather than a preventive one.

    But even with both of those tools, bots would outpace them in material production because the game wasn't balanced around 24/7 farming at industrial scale. Which is why Intrepid gotta do their best to ban any and all bots, cause they'll ruin the economy for sure.

    I'm not sure this is exactly true, though.

    A Material Sink is not in any way directly equivalent to a Gold Sink, and it's BECAUSE they aren't equivalent that the problems arise. It's a common mistake to make, but you may be thinking of deflationary pressures which are a big problem in MMOs due to the oversupply of materials.

    If you are used to games where NPCs buy materials, for 'reasonable prices' and not 'floor prices set equalized to the gold sinks' it can be this way, but in games where NPC prices for materials are much lower than standard player market price (related to time spent, not actual value) the only reason a Material sink appears to be a Gold sink is because people like me who hoard the materials also hoard the gold.

    So the gold disappears from the economy at LARGE until that type of person needs something, then they spend it and it bursts back into the economy. After that, just wait 3-6 business days and start all the mechanisms to return the gold back to you, a-grindin'.

    In short, decay may relate to the gold economy, but there's at least one, if not two, intermediate steps in there, and if the Econ designer doesn't tune or notice these, other things break instead.
    Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
    
  • NiKrNiKr Member
    Azherae wrote: »
    word.
    Right, I mistook personal money spending for server-wide gold sinks. Main gold sink would be taxes in city shops and I thiiiink player stalls too but don't remember for sure now.

    So in a way L2's mat sink was more of a dispersal of wealth that would then be sunk by the taxes, rather than a direct gold sink, right.
  • NeurathNeurath Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    In my mind, a crafter won't suffer decay at all. The professions aren't tied to level I believe. Also, a crafter does not supply the resources in Ashes - gatherers and processors do.

    Therefore, you will not see a redistribution of wealth at all. Merely another mechanism to keep gatherers and processors with game mechanics to partake in for the long term.

    Bear in mind, I am not econ lead and I must use the concepts I have access to for the econ on most cases.

    The same applies in bdo with no resource sink for decay. The crafters still don't suffer much decay at all. Only the rng system in bdo equals the difference between crafter and warrior.

    We can stop economic nodes from taking over servers by my proposed economic update elsewhere and the fact we can trash the crafters in their home territory.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited May 21
    NiKr wrote: »

    Ashes will use all tiers of materials in the crafting process of all tiers of items (or at least close to that). L2 had this exact design.

    Ashes will use recipes to craft items. They'll be rare and can be learned and traded. L2 had this exact design.

    Ashes will have BiS be craftable, with mats for those items dropping from bosses together with full gear (iirc). L2 had this exact design.

    By this logic, I should be able to say that Ashes will allow you to craft swords. EQ2 had this, therefore Ashes is using EQ2's crafting.

    I mean, EQ2 had all of the above as well, in some capacity.

    The things you have listed here are all fairly generic, and are not the aspects of the crafting system that makes it what it is.

    The dials and the stats on raw materials are what makes Ashes crafting system what it is (or what it will be).
  • edited May 22
    Noaani wrote: »
    My friends absolutely did only have experience of one server in L2. However, in order for a game to have what I would describe as a good economy, it would need to function well on all servers, even if the economy of those servers are somewhat different.

    Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying the economy was bad or non-functional on those different official servers, its just that it wasn't as good as it was in the top official servers like Bartz, Kain and Teon, which were the most populated and competitive ones, high population and high competitivity directly influenced the game economy as it also does to many other games that don't have systesm like "universal Server or multi-servers Auction houses".

    Even tho economy and crafting are related to grinding, the thread drifted away from the Grind main topic :D

    Coming back to it, in my main post i wrote about RNG being the best counter against the grind worst detractor "repetitivity" and how L2 dealt with it, do you know any good methods to deal with grinds repetitivity? Maybe how EQ2 dealt with it's grind repetitivity?
    6wtxguK.jpg
    Aren't we all sinners?
  • NeurathNeurath Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Nothing stops repetition at all. The more you do the same thing the less it will hold you. Rng does not change anything and possibly even makes the situation even worse due to the extra time taken to get the same result.
  • edited May 22
    Neurath wrote: »
    Nothing stops repetition at all. The more you do the same thing the less it will hold you. Rng does not change anything and possibly even makes the situation even worse due to the extra time taken to get the same result.

    Only the act of grinding itself is a repetition that can't be stopped. But the factors involved in the grinding like the monsters, the drops, the combat, the area, can have variation and RNG in those factors pushes the variation even further. RNG changes everything and improves upon grinding's boring repetitivity.
    Repetitivity is already bad by itself, now imagine repetitivity that you know exactly what to expect.

    6wtxguK.jpg
    Aren't we all sinners?
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    Only the act of grinding itself is a repetition that can't be stopped.

    This is the part that can be stopped.

    As I have said, most games from the last decade have not required players grind at all. Many players still do, but not because it is required.

    If grinding is not required, that act of repetition that is grinding has been stopped - at least for anyone that doesn't want that repetition.

    What I would say is that if you start adding in RNG and variables to what people are wanting to grind, all of a sudden you are no longer grinding.

    Everyone that I know in MMO's grinds as an activity to switch off from the world. It hasn't been a key progression task for a decade. The key progression activities are all organized events.
  • edited May 22
    Noaani wrote: »
    This is the part that can be stopped.

    As I have said, most games from the last decade have not required players grind at all. Many players still do, but not because it is required.

    If grinding is not required, that act of repetition that is grinding has been stopped - at least for anyone that doesn't want that repetition.

    What I would say is that if you start adding in RNG and variables to what people are wanting to grind, all of a sudden you are no longer grinding.

    Everyone that I know in MMO's grinds as an activity to switch off from the world. It hasn't been a key progression task for a decade. The key progression activities are all organized events.

    Not sure if you simple did not understood what i was trying to explaing with that quote and the rest of it, or if you are playing around with semantics.

    Yes, obviously grinding can be stopped by you simple not wanting to grind, mmorpgs are much more than simple grind, even tho grind is well known as an activity in mmorpgs.

    Grinding being "required" or a "key progression activity" or not is subjective by the objective to be achieved by the one grinding and may be irrelevant for someone who likes grinding, they simple will grind, even if it is a "non-required.non-key progression activity"

    If you have to kill 100 hogs to get 100 hogs tusks or have to kill 50-150 hogs to get 100 Hogs tusks,
    How could one be considered a grind and not the other? You are literally doing the same thing!
    Are our concepts of "grind" that far apart? :D
    6wtxguK.jpg
    Aren't we all sinners?
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited May 22
    Grinding being "required" or a "key progression activity" or not is subjective by the objective to be achieved by the one grinding and may be irrelevant for someone who likes grinding, they simple will grind, even if it is a "non-required.non-key progression activity"
    Is it though?

    In order for this to be true, grinding needs to be the best way to achieve a long term goal.

    While it may be true that grinding is the fastest way to gather many bear hides, it is not the fastest way to get gear upgrades, nor to level up a crafting profession (generally). It has not been the best way to get experience for well over a decade in virtually all mainstream MMO's (realistically, we could say two decades here).

    So, if it is not the fastest way to achieve a long term goal, how can one say that anyone grinds for any reason other than to grind?

    If you have to kill 100 hogs to get 100 hogs tusks or have to kill 50-150 hogs to get 100 Hogs tusks,
    How could one be considered a grind and not the other? You are literally doing the same thing!
    Are our concepts of "grind" that far apart? :D
    Neither of these are grinding.

    Both are simply content.

    Add two zeros on to the end, and you have a grind.

    However, look at your first solid definition of a grind from this thread - and imagine how much more painful (assuming you consider it a hard grind) it would be if the game added in random mobs in among your hogs.

    When you are grinding hogs, you only want to fight hogs.
  • edited May 22
    Noaani wrote: »
    Is it though?

    In order for this to be true, grinding needs to be the best way to achieve a long term goal.

    While it may be true that grinding is the fastest way to gather many bear hides, it is not the fastest way to get gear upgrades, nor to level up a crafting profession (generally). It has not been the best way to get experience for well over a decade in virtually all mainstream MMO's (realistically, we could say two decades here).

    So, if it is not the fastest way to achieve a long term goal, how can one say that anyone grinds for any reason other than to grind?

    Why would it need to be "the best way to achieve a long term goal."?
    Can't it be "A way to achieve a long term goal."?
    Are we talking about META now?
    Am i missing something?
    Noaani wrote: »
    Neither of these are grinding.

    Both are simply content.

    Add two zeros on to the end, and you have a grind.

    You know this was just a low ball simplistic example for a different point right?
    Sure Noaani, lets add as many zeros as you would like to make it a grind! :D
    Both would be grinds right?
    Noaani wrote: »
    However, look at your first solid definition of a grind from this thread - and imagine how much more painful (assuming you consider it a hard grind) it would be if the game added in random mobs in among your hogs.

    When you are grinding hogs, you only want to fight hogs.

    This looks like a mischaracterisation of something i already answered back in page 2-3 but with bears instead of hogs, Not random different mobs but possible random different types of hogs.
    Kinda feel like we are going around in circles now,
    i might as well stop before feeling too dizzy as solid common ground sadly seems nowhere to be reached. :/
    6wtxguK.jpg
    Aren't we all sinners?
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited May 22
    Why would it need to be "the best way to achieve a long term goal."?
    Can't it be "A way to achieve a long term goal."?
    It can, but at that point, a player is choosing to grind, the game isn't asking them to do so.

    This looks like a mischaracterisation of something i already answered back in page 2-3 but with bears instead of hogs, Not random different mobs but possible random different types of hogs.
    Kinda feel like we are going around in circles now,
    i might as well stop before feeling too dizzy as solid common ground sadly seems nowhere to be reached. :/
    The thing with just adding different types of mobs though, is that it still breaks up your grind.

    If we are assuming an actual grind that is given to players by the game (a single quest to kill 10k hogs would be a base start to meet my definition), you really don't want much variation. If you have a single type of hog, you know you can pull perhaps 4 or 5 of them at a time and kill them all. But if you start adding in hogs that have debuffs, all of a sudden, you can't do that, because they will kill you.

    There are two ways this could go. Either the game can give you an indication of the type of mob a specific spawn is, or it doesn't.

    If it doesn't you can only pull as many at a time as you know you can take on - likely halving the number you can pull, doubling the time you spend grinding.

    If the mobs do have some sort of indication, you then find yourself just attempting to pull the types you and your build find easier and then going for the ones you find harder afterwards, which means you spend as much time doing this as killing mobs - doubling the time you spend grinding.

    When you have a specific target, throwing in things like this are frustrating. Once again, they are great when you do not have a specific target or goal in mind (such as kill 10k hogs, or collecting enough bear hide to do what ever you want to do with them), but are absolutely a detractor when you do.

    I'm just not seeing any situation in which grinding is a thing people are required to do (as opposed to when people are simply grinding of their own free will), where any randomness would be a welcome addition.
  • NiKrNiKr Member
    Noaani wrote: »
    word
    I think the game should have party grinding quests that have rng for the mob sub-types.

    If the quests asks your party to get 10k boar hides, there should be boars that counter ranged classes, melee classes, mage classes, anti-debuff boars, buff boars that make other boars stronger, etc. Each of them gives the whole party a hide, if we go with a quest-based item drops, or some sub-types should just drop more hides (cause the boar is thicker or smth), if we go with a regular mob drops being a part of quests requirement.

    And solo quests should never make you grind, because solo quests will mostly be done by casuals (and off-primetime hardcores) so imo they shouldn't see the spooky numbers in the quest requirements.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    If you have to kill 100 hogs to get 100 hogs tusks or have to kill 50-150 hogs to get 100 Hogs tusks,
    How could one be considered a grind and not the other? You are literally doing the same thing!
    Are our concepts of "grind" that far apart? :D
    What changes that from being a grind is making that into a quest with some story/lore, and rewards that include a significant increase in XP and something tangible you can sell or use that is significantly greater than just the resources gathered from individual kills.

    With Ashes, both the "grinding" of individual mobs and the quest(s) involved with culling a bunch of the mobs could have a significant impact on the story of the server, so... that also might not feel as much of a grind as in previous MMORPGs.
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    NiKr wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    word
    I think the game should have party grinding quests that have rng for the mob sub-types.

    If the quests asks your party to get 10k boar hides, there should be boars that counter ranged classes, melee classes, mage classes, anti-debuff boars, buff boars that make other boars stronger, etc. Each of them gives the whole party a hide, if we go with a quest-based item drops, or some sub-types should just drop more hides (cause the boar is thicker or smth), if we go with a regular mob drops being a part of quests requirement.

    And solo quests should never make you grind, because solo quests will mostly be done by casuals (and off-primetime hardcores) so imo they shouldn't see the spooky numbers in the quest requirements.

    I would second this, but I already play with the 'superior system'.

    So I'm going to 'plug' Tactical Points once again.

    Give all boars five or six abilities, each countering a different situation or enemy type. They don't even need to properly react to who is attacking them. Just 'when being attacked by a full party, build up the Gauge faster for their special attacks'.

    They then randomly 'become' a boar that 'counters Ranged', 'cleanses debuffs', etc.

    Similarly, a related 'proc' system where the boar that uses 'Ironhide' ability drops more hide. The player doesn't control this, but they can at least observe it. Then you don't even have to do as much work with drop tables, you can tweak the AI.

    "Boars in this area use one less ability, raising the overall chance that they will use Ironhide, therefore raising the hide droprates in this area slightly."
    Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
    
  • NiKrNiKr Member
    Azherae wrote: »
    Give all boars five or six abilities, each countering a different situation or enemy type. They don't even need to properly react to who is attacking them. Just 'when being attacked by a full party, build up the Gauge faster for their special attacks'.
    Eh, I personally like seeing a "community" of mobs of different kinds. And that lets the devs to make some small type-based animations that add an "alive" feeling to the world. I also prefer parties for fight several mobs which requires more teamplay, than playing a semi-boss-like mob that does a ton of dmg on each hit.

    But whatever Intrepid goes with, I can get used to it.
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    NiKr wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Give all boars five or six abilities, each countering a different situation or enemy type. They don't even need to properly react to who is attacking them. Just 'when being attacked by a full party, build up the Gauge faster for their special attacks'.
    Eh, I personally like seeing a "community" of mobs of different kinds. And that lets the devs to make some small type-based animations that add an "alive" feeling to the world. I also prefer parties for fight several mobs which requires more teamplay, than playing a semi-boss-like mob that does a ton of dmg on each hit.

    But whatever Intrepid goes with, I can get used to it.

    I don't see these things as exclusive? Perhaps I was unclear about that? Though now that you mention it, Alpha-1 did not do a particularly good job of matching what I'm used to in that regard, so I can't be sure that they intend to actually have enemy diversity around.

    I continue to be surprised and amazed that the default experiences of others vary so massively, but I have been focused on one game for many years, so I definitely have some tunnel vision. I too easily 'discount' BDO style design as 'this can't possibly be the norm', when it probably is...
    Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
    
  • NiKrNiKr Member
    Azherae wrote: »
    I continue to be surprised and amazed that the default experiences of others vary so massively, but I have been focused on one game for many years, so I definitely have some tunnel vision. I too easily 'discount' BDO style design as 'this can't possibly be the norm', when it probably is...
    I mean, pretty much the only mmo I've played is L2 :D I've played BDO to maybe lvl 20? WoW classic to 30. B&S to somewhere around 40. Up to 30 in FF14. And maybe under an hour of gameplay in a few other mmos.

    So I am insanely biased towards all the things I loved in L2. And there you'd have mobs with different subtypes and each type had their own abilities and when your group fought all of them you'd have to properly move around and control mobs. Get a silence on the mage, try to hold stun mobs away from healers/range players, put dagger classes on ranged mobs, try to nuke the debuffer mob first just so it's easier to fight everyone else.
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    NiKr wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    I continue to be surprised and amazed that the default experiences of others vary so massively, but I have been focused on one game for many years, so I definitely have some tunnel vision. I too easily 'discount' BDO style design as 'this can't possibly be the norm', when it probably is...
    I mean, pretty much the only mmo I've played is L2 :D I've played BDO to maybe lvl 20? WoW classic to 30. B&S to somewhere around 40. Up to 30 in FF14. And maybe under an hour of gameplay in a few other mmos.

    So I am insanely biased towards all the things I loved in L2. And there you'd have mobs with different subtypes and each type had their own abilities and when your group fought all of them you'd have to properly move around and control mobs. Get a silence on the mage, try to hold stun mobs away from healers/range players, put dagger classes on ranged mobs, try to nuke the debuffer mob first just so it's easier to fight everyone else.

    Well, I'll give you some data since it's relevant to the thread, always good to share, since you've given yours.

    FFXI, desert biome style zone. Most populous enemy, medium sized birds that flap around. Then some big lizards interspersed. More rarely, some Goblins, which have approx 4 different classes (don't usually spawn with the class itself randomized), and rarer, amongst all this, giant scorpions.

    If you choose to fight the Scorpion, and you hit it physically about 7-10 times (or it hits you that much, but if it's at-level you might die by then if you do absolutely nothing about it), it now has the ability to do one of the following, randomly.

    Death Scissors: Very high damage, single target attack.
    Mandible Bite: Single target damage + Knockback.
    Poison Sting: Single target damage and Poison. (1 HP/tick)
    Cold Breath: Cone Attack Ice damage and Bind.
    Numbing Breath: Cone Attack Damage and Paralysis.
    Earth Pounder: 15' AoE Dexterity Down, earth damage, wipes shadow images.
    Wild Rage: 15' AoE physical damage, absorbed by 2 shadow images
    Sharp Strike: 50% Attack Boost. 4 minute 15 second duration.

    This means that most of the time, the Scorpion gets at least one chance to 'randomly' counter whatever your class is. If you are very defensive, it may overpower you with Sharp Strike. If you are very mobile, you may have to worry about Cold Breath. If your spells take a while to cast, Mandible Bite is guaranteed interruption of the cast. If you are squishy, you better have your health up in case of Death Scissors or some instant defensive ability.

    This is what I'm used to relative to 'it not feeling as much like a grind'. Sure, you can get to the point where even this is no issue, or you're overleveled, but the general case is 'I need Scorpion Claws, but I have to worry that the special attack any given Scorpion uses will be a counter to my class and be ready to adapt'.

    And of course, watch out that you don't get randomly aggroed by a nearby Goblin while you're fighting it and have two problems instead of one.

    There's a whole subsystem for 'recognizing which types of enemy you are basically strong against in almost all situations' but for the strongest enemies in an area, their type normally prevents this, there aren't as many 'full counters to Scorpions'.

    Given the way that Intrepid describes their design, this level of thing is the bare minimum I'm expecting, so it's hard to think about 'grinding' on the level of 'individual boars being just a point-and-click-rotation source of materials', even for the simplest enemies, unless you're just one-or-two-shotting most things.
    Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
    
  • NiKrNiKr Member
    Azherae wrote: »
    Given the way that Intrepid describes their design, this level of thing is the bare minimum I'm expecting, so it's hard to think about 'grinding' on the level of 'individual boars being just a point-and-click-rotation source of materials', even for the simplest enemies, unless you're just one-or-two-shotting most things.
    Yeah, Intrepid do claim that they want to get away from the idea of "grinding through repetition", so most likely it'll be lone strong mobs that give the required reward. But we'll have to see how it plays out, cause due to my own bias I find it hard to believe that an mmo can exist w/o some kind of grind, be it mobs or gathering or questing.
  • NeurathNeurath Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    I'm not sure what concept we discuss here. In my mind, if you want resources become a gatherer. I'm not convinced 10 years of grinding mobs will get you anywhere in the grand scheme.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    NiKr wrote: »
    I think the game should have party grinding quests that have rng for the mob sub-types.

    If the quests asks your party to get 10k boar hides, there should be boars that counter ranged classes, melee classes, mage classes, anti-debuff boars, buff boars that make other boars stronger, etc.
    For sure, but this doesn't change the point.

    My point was that if there are different types of boars, hogs or bears (whatever) that all fulfil the requirements of the grinding (drop the same item, further the same quest), then players will pick the ones that are easiest for their build.

    If you expand this to a group setting, you need to expand the mobs to group mobs, as opposed to solo. You are now also expanding your build from that of a single character to that of your group.

    There will still be mobs within the available selection that your build (group) have more and/or less trouble with.

    If all the mobs in the selection are so easy that your group doesn't have any trouble no matter what individual mobs are present in a multi-mob pull, then what is the point of even creating that diversity?

    I mean, in order for there to be a point to it, some of them need to be harder than others for the intended audience (whether a solo player or a group). If some of them are indeed harder, then players will simply skip over those ones as best they can, and those mobs then become a simple frustration.

    In order for there to be a difference in how a mob is fought, there has to be a difference in how hard each mob is to various builds - it simply isn't possible to not have this. If there is a difference in how hard various mobs are, players will opt for the mobs they find the easiest. Group or solo - or indeed raid - doesn't alter this.
  • NiKrNiKr Member
    Noaani wrote: »
    I mean, in order for there to be a point to it, some of them need to be harder than others for the intended audience (whether a solo player or a group). If some of them are indeed harder, then players will simply skip over those ones as best they can, and those mobs then become a simple frustration.

    In order for there to be a difference in how a mob is fought, there has to be a difference in how hard each mob is to various builds - it simply isn't possible to not have this. If there is a difference in how hard various mobs are, players will opt for the mobs they find the easiest. Group or solo - or indeed raid - doesn't alter this.
    Yes, we totally agree on that point. I'm just used to mobs always agroing in a group (cause L2 loved mob trains and aoes), so for me "having a group of mob sub-types" means "my party will have to fight all of them at once and find a way to win because fighting a group of mobs that have a counter to pretty much my whole party is difficult".

    So like I said, whichever way Intrepid goes, I'll get used to it. It just needs to be fun for all the other people that would leave a game over some mobs not being to their liking. Though obviously you can't appeal to all.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited May 23
    NiKr wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    I mean, in order for there to be a point to it, some of them need to be harder than others for the intended audience (whether a solo player or a group). If some of them are indeed harder, then players will simply skip over those ones as best they can, and those mobs then become a simple frustration.

    In order for there to be a difference in how a mob is fought, there has to be a difference in how hard each mob is to various builds - it simply isn't possible to not have this. If there is a difference in how hard various mobs are, players will opt for the mobs they find the easiest. Group or solo - or indeed raid - doesn't alter this.
    Yes, we totally agree on that point. I'm just used to mobs always agroing in a group (cause L2 loved mob trains and aoes), so for me "having a group of mob sub-types" means "my party will have to fight all of them at once and find a way to win because fighting a group of mobs that have a counter to pretty much my whole party is difficult".

    So like I said, whichever way Intrepid goes, I'll get used to it. It just needs to be fun for all the other people that would leave a game over some mobs not being to their liking. Though obviously you can't appeal to all.
    This is fairly standard in MMO's.

    Most games have social agro - where if you have generated hate or threat on a mob, any nearby mob will go after you as well. Some games have this with any and all mobs in a specific range, some games have this based on mob type or mob faction, and some games mix it up and have all of these in play at the same time, all having an affect on the range at which a mob is socially agro'd, and also the leash range of said socially agro'd mob.

    All fairly normal stuff.

    EQ2 had a mechanic where some mobs were formed in to what essentially amounts to groups in the same way players group up.

    If you agro one mob in that group, the whole group comes for you. Mobs in that group could then socially agro mobs in the same way as above (EQ2 had all variables that I have seen in any game). However, the mobs that could be socially agro'd in this manner could also be parts of groups themselves.

    The game also had specific AoE abilities that worked on a given range from the specific mob you target (or within the telegraph you place on the ground), but it also had AoE abilities that worked only on mobs within the same mob group.

    One day, L2 players will understand that nothing in that game outside of PvP is anything special. It is the basic level of the original EQ, but with PvP added. All MMO's since EQ have taken that same basic formula and added other things to it - in the case of EQ2 it added an entire layer of PvE content - as well as combat system - complexity on top of the basic EQ game.

    Even EQ has surpassed L2 in terms of all non-PvP aspects of the game (and some would argue the PvP aspects as well) - but that will happen when a game has 28 actual and full expansions (how many has L2 had in it's life again?).

    Honestly, every time an L2 player says "L2 did this" in regards to something that is not PvP, I roll my eyes because the thing they are gushing about is literally a base level aspect of MMO's.
Sign In or Register to comment.