Sol Raven wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Sol Raven wrote: » Completely disregarding player skill because your gear is higher is called being gear carried, in PvE and PvP. Gear is literally an indicator of what you have accomplished in a game. If a game puts in some big boss mob, and I am able to kill it and you are not, I should have an edge over you just because of that fact. If a game has a strong economic side and I am able to earn more money than you, I should have an edge over you just because of that fact. If a game has a community focus, and I have friends that hand me gear, I should have an edge over you just because of that fact. In each of the above three cases, it is someone playing the game better than you. You can tell they are playing the game better than you because they have better gear than you. If they are playing the game as a whole (as in, all aspects of the game combined) better than you, why do you think you should be able to beat them? Sure. As long as it's just "an edge" and not "I auto-win every fight even though I may suck or you may be better than me" sort of thing. Having an edge is completely different from being unequivocally gear carried.
Noaani wrote: » Sol Raven wrote: » Completely disregarding player skill because your gear is higher is called being gear carried, in PvE and PvP. Gear is literally an indicator of what you have accomplished in a game. If a game puts in some big boss mob, and I am able to kill it and you are not, I should have an edge over you just because of that fact. If a game has a strong economic side and I am able to earn more money than you, I should have an edge over you just because of that fact. If a game has a community focus, and I have friends that hand me gear, I should have an edge over you just because of that fact. In each of the above three cases, it is someone playing the game better than you. You can tell they are playing the game better than you because they have better gear than you. If they are playing the game as a whole (as in, all aspects of the game combined) better than you, why do you think you should be able to beat them?
Sol Raven wrote: » Completely disregarding player skill because your gear is higher is called being gear carried, in PvE and PvP.
NishUK wrote: » PenguinPaladin wrote: » The casuals who are just here to play a game and enjoy themselves.... probably want something worthwhile to obtain. And probably dont care about the further depth of the combat and so on. Then I highly encourage easy and recommended classes for those people to select, otherwise it's just tarnishing the potential depth of the multiplayer experience. If there is a frustration from a casual, from tid bits of combat that happen rarely, as PvP or very difficult PvE does, then they can relax for a while on another game or chill out with life like they usually do, I cannot fathom why the complete experience almost, if not all, has to be a walk in the park!
PenguinPaladin wrote: » The casuals who are just here to play a game and enjoy themselves.... probably want something worthwhile to obtain. And probably dont care about the further depth of the combat and so on.
NishUK wrote: » Then I highly encourage easy and recommended classes for those people to select, otherwise it's just tarnishing the potential depth of the multiplayer experience. If there is a frustration from a casual, from tid bits of combat that happen rarely, as PvP or very difficult PvE does, then they can relax for a while on another game or chill out with life like they usually do, I cannot fathom why the complete experience almost, if not all, has to be a walk in the park!
Chroninho wrote: » And WHY would you want to "protect" casuals?
PenguinPaladin wrote: » Guys. Lets read the name of the thread... "protecting our casuals: gear." Its a discussion prompt, on how gear and its potency can be a turn off for casual players as players with more time invest will obviously have the better gear.... on that point, my part of this discussion was, i dont believe gear potency effects casual players in a worse way that inpotent gear... I feel like even bringing casuals up, and trying to see from their perspective has caused this discussion to lack any real talk about gear in general. And its more become people upset by the thought of caring about the casual players at all. There will be casual players. The reason for discussion exists. The ability to dicuss ideas exists. My stance is, build a good game and not worry about the casuals. The the counter arguments to that are... ashes isnt for everyone...?
Chroninho wrote: » No idea why people keep posting daily a lot of "ideas" thinking that he will change his game just because you dont agree with him. You dont have to agree with him, and thats totally fine, but probably the game that you seek and want to play will not be AoC if thats the case.
PenguinPaladin wrote: » Chroninho wrote: » And WHY would you want to "protect" casuals? Because its an mmo. If you want your server to have enough population to not be shut down. You want to protect your casuals. Not through a mechanic based way, but in a social player to player way
PenguinPaladin wrote: » I think the real question on protecting the casuals, is how do we keep top lvl try hard from ganking the dad loging in for 2 hours every sunday... and its not by nerfing the try hards, or buffing the casual... its the social interaction in game. The since of community. If you're a try hard in your node, you should be watching out for and protecting your casuals as they pay taxes to your node. I want to bring attention back to, this thread being over power level of end game gear, or gear in general. And how it affects casuals, and my opinion is it doesnt.
NiKr wrote: » I think you two just have difference views on RPing. I like having one character that is playing the role that I want to play. And I stick to that character and his role for a long time. You seem to like trying out different roles. Both playstyles are RPing in a Game, and both styles are valid. And some games encourage your style (FF14), while other games encourage one character style (L2).
PenguinPaladin wrote: » This would be what i would think would turn off a casual... if everything ends up taking strategy, and forethought, and effort, it stops being a game.
PenguinPaladin wrote: » Also casuals can look to hard core players and think, i could get that powerful. They can see there is something to achieve. Which i think is a driving force in games like this. Why nerf the high end destination of playing for the people not willing to commit and get to that destination? Id be more likly to stop playing knowing there is nowhere to go as gear doesnt get that much better, than i would be from being intimidated by other players power lvl
mcstackerson wrote: » The point of this thread is for those people. People who want to be a part of sieges, caravan raids, pirating, etc. but due to the vertical progression, they would have to invest months into the game before they could participate in those activities. Vertical progression should be curved in a way that it doesn't require a large time investment to be able to play with/against the people at the top. If people think that the video goes against this premise, he says he wants those 3 things (gear, skill, build) to decide combat. He doesn't say he wants gear to decide combat and those other 2 to be tie breakers. I also don't see 40-50% mentioned in the video as being much different from 20-30% asked for in this thread.