Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: » Dimitraeos wrote: » That should absolutely be a consideration for people commanding large groups of players. NyceGaming wrote: » Someone understands this. Great take. Well said and thank you for respectfully not jumping to extremes. A question to both of you. What do you consider a "large group of players"? Ashes will have body collision, so it'll be physically impossible to fit more than a set number of people into an aoe (unless it's a persistent effect on the ground), and I'd imagine that number would be at most ~2 parties worth of people, which is nowhere near to being a large group. But if aoes scale so much that they can nearly oneshot 1-2 parties - day-to-day pvp will devolve into aoe flinging, rather than good strategic fights. And if you're ok with parties being wiped out by singular aoes - how do you expect siegers to breach gates/holes in walls/corridors? If a single aoe can stop a gathering of even just 15 people in one place, how do you expect 500v500 sieges to progress, when the attacking side gets wiped out as soon as they approach the walls?
Dimitraeos wrote: » That should absolutely be a consideration for people commanding large groups of players.
NyceGaming wrote: » Someone understands this. Great take. Well said and thank you for respectfully not jumping to extremes.
Dimitraeos wrote: » When none of this is what we are advocating for. Its simple: if you want to take advantage of greater numbers, then you have to do the work to coordinate them to prevent getting skull-fucked by a enemy that is prepared to leverage certain mechanics that punish overconcentration of forces
Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: » Dimitraeos wrote: » When none of this is what we are advocating for. Its simple: if you want to take advantage of greater numbers, then you have to do the work to coordinate them to prevent getting skull-fucked by a enemy that is prepared to leverage certain mechanics that punish overconcentration of forces Yes, and that overconcentration is a very vague term that doesn't really apply to what Ashes is doing
Laetitian wrote: » Make more of an effort to drum up the opposition. Engage in politics. Make alliances against superpowers, instead of becoming a superpower. Encourage other players to engage in more manageable, personally rewarding goals than "controlling" the entire realm as a mere underling to their big boss alliance leader.
Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: » A question to the faction lovers. What makes you believe you'd get even the tiniest bit of content if there's factions in the game? Do you think some strong guild will suddenly decide to let you take content simply because you're from the same faction? Also, isn't NW literally a faction-based game? And wasn't AA the same (which leads me to believe that AA2 would be as well)? How in the hell are they a good example for this argument?
Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: But like I said, I don't think that discussion is worthwhile, because Ashes won't be a faction-based game, and there are better solutions to find that might actually be applied in Ashes.
deathwish wrote: » Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: But like I said, I don't think that discussion is worthwhile, because Ashes won't be a faction-based game, and there are better solutions to find that might actually be applied in Ashes. Trying to reinvent the wheel and hoping by some miracle it works out is just pure gambling. Where is the proof of concept?
tautau wrote: » 1. AoC should be different, not trying to imitate other games and thus split that part of the player base. 2. AoC's plan of having players create their own, voluntary, factions of node and guild-based player groups is both an innovative and much more fun approach 3. This one is just my opinion, but I find faction based games to be rather childish, as if the game company has to tell me who my friends and enemies are since they don't seem to think that I can make that decision myself 4. Some players would prefer not to have an innate in game enemy. While they may end up with enemies in AoC, at least they have a chance at not having enemies, while a faction-based game forces them to.
Dimitraeos wrote: » Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: » Dimitraeos wrote: » When none of this is what we are advocating for. Its simple: if you want to take advantage of greater numbers, then you have to do the work to coordinate them to prevent getting skull-fucked by a enemy that is prepared to leverage certain mechanics that punish overconcentration of forces Yes, and that overconcentration is a very vague term that doesn't really apply to what Ashes is doing BDO had bodyblocking, and you still had deathball zergs. Ashes has bodyblocking, and without a handful of anti-zerg tools, will also have deathball zergs. Real simple.
arkileo wrote: » I disagree with the assessment that "because it didn't work in x game, it won't work in y game" Ashes is a systems-heavy game. If it devolves into 1-guild dominance, then I imagine they'll introduce some system to negate that. Just because x game didn't feel the need or spend the effort to find a solution, doesn't mean Intrepid won't. I'm not opposed to multiple factions, but like others have said, I think it's way too late. Plus, depending on how they're implemented, they can have the big downside requiring the devs to make content that only ~50% of the players will see, thereby reducing the amount of content available to everyone.
Githal wrote: » I would say: bring scaling aoe spells that the more targets the spell hit the bigger the dmg. So if you hit 1 target the spell would deal 300 for example. If the same spell hit 5 targets, it will deal 1k dmg to each of the targets. IF it hit 50 players it will one shot them all. GG now there are no mega zergs on the battlefield, and the positioning of players will be important Or can be balanced if needed that this increase dmg takes effect if you hit more than 10 targets. So if you hit from 1 to 9 targets the dmg is 300. Then the more above 10 you hit the bigger the dmg
Veeshan wrote: » Dimitraeos wrote: » Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: » Dimitraeos wrote: » When none of this is what we are advocating for. Its simple: if you want to take advantage of greater numbers, then you have to do the work to coordinate them to prevent getting skull-fucked by a enemy that is prepared to leverage certain mechanics that punish overconcentration of forces Yes, and that overconcentration is a very vague term that doesn't really apply to what Ashes is doing BDO had bodyblocking, and you still had deathball zergs. Ashes has bodyblocking, and without a handful of anti-zerg tools, will also have deathball zergs. Real simple. Reason death balls exist is because in almost every single game AoE have a target cap usually 5 players which are chosen at random, Lack of good AoE option leave to boring gameplay which tend to be zerg balling it up since u cant be focused down alot of the cases. Some games that didnt realy have the deathballs ive played was Darkfall and that was due to friendly fire and relativly decent AoE skill that were not target capped. Crowfall was another one that for a single seige/war before zerg guild cried and it got nerf. With that one there was a statue u could build in a guild city and during seige time it make every player zap anyone within 5m of them for a considerable amount of dmg every 3 seconds friend of foe, whioch force people to spread was actualy my best seige in that game but devs removed it when the zerg guild cried on the forums about it -.- TLDR: AoE need to be effective at clumps but less effective against single targets so like single target spell does 60% more dmg than an aoe skill so to get your value u need to hit 3 targets at a time kinda deal.
senna wrote: » I'd be really impressed if a single guild manages to control and gatekeep the entirety of a 10,000 player server, that's some pretty hardcore dedication. Archeage, a game that Ashes intends to mirror a good number of design philosophies from, had a faction system that in no way prevented mega guilds or players intentionally gating content from others. Large guilds are inevitable to pop up regardless of faction, and the main factor for whether a faction succeeds or fails in Archeage is what amenities are reasonably available to the faction. Pirates were intentionally doomed to fail due to their position not allowing much PvE content outside of Auroria and other neutral zones. Stable factions designed by the developer will always have these issues to some extent, and whichever faction has the "best" access to relevant resources is where many competitive guilds flock, exacerbating the issue you seem to be trying to address rather than solving it. The reality is that factions only fully prevent mega guilds if the factions are so small by design that you can't even have a mega guild in them, which is obviously not fun or interesting for anyone. On a separate note, as Aszkalon stated, the way nodes and many other systems in-game are intended to work is as factions. Your allegiances lie primarily with your node, with your node members most of the time being considered as allies to you, and things like guild affiliation, religion, etc. impact who you are friends with as well. With this being said, you pretty much have factions in game already, thus solving the general gist of what you want. Join a node structure with players and resources you want, and you probably won't struggle nearly as much as you seem to believe. As it turns out, being in a node structure with large and successful guilds probably means you will have a good time doing to content you want.
deathwish wrote: » Githal wrote: » I would say: bring scaling aoe spells that the more targets the spell hit the bigger the dmg. So if you hit 1 target the spell would deal 300 for example. If the same spell hit 5 targets, it will deal 1k dmg to each of the targets. IF it hit 50 players it will one shot them all. GG now there are no mega zergs on the battlefield, and the positioning of players will be important Or can be balanced if needed that this increase dmg takes effect if you hit more than 10 targets. So if you hit from 1 to 9 targets the dmg is 300. Then the more above 10 you hit the bigger the dmg Scaling is very important, hopefully they have included it in their design but I'm not holding my breath until I see it.
Githal wrote: » deathwish wrote: » Githal wrote: » I would say: bring scaling aoe spells that the more targets the spell hit the bigger the dmg. So if you hit 1 target the spell would deal 300 for example. If the same spell hit 5 targets, it will deal 1k dmg to each of the targets. IF it hit 50 players it will one shot them all. GG now there are no mega zergs on the battlefield, and the positioning of players will be important Or can be balanced if needed that this increase dmg takes effect if you hit more than 10 targets. So if you hit from 1 to 9 targets the dmg is 300. Then the more above 10 you hit the bigger the dmg Scaling is very important, hopefully they have included it in their design but I'm not holding my breath until I see it. They can just put 1 skill like the living bomb of fire mage in wow. That hits 1 target, the target explodes hitting all nearby targets and putting the living bomb on all that were hit. Then all explode and they ignite new bombs on every new target. With mega zergs till the players split all will be with bombs. But in wow had some limitations that the second targets with the bomb cant transfer it. and also till bomb explode was too long time, like 5 seconds. There need to be no limitations, and bomb explode every 1 sec
Dimitraeos wrote: » Veeshan wrote: » Dimitraeos wrote: » Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: » Dimitraeos wrote: » When none of this is what we are advocating for. Its simple: if you want to take advantage of greater numbers, then you have to do the work to coordinate them to prevent getting skull-fucked by a enemy that is prepared to leverage certain mechanics that punish overconcentration of forces Yes, and that overconcentration is a very vague term that doesn't really apply to what Ashes is doing BDO had bodyblocking, and you still had deathball zergs. Ashes has bodyblocking, and without a handful of anti-zerg tools, will also have deathball zergs. Real simple. Reason death balls exist is because in almost every single game AoE have a target cap usually 5 players which are chosen at random, Lack of good AoE option leave to boring gameplay which tend to be zerg balling it up since u cant be focused down alot of the cases. Some games that didnt realy have the deathballs ive played was Darkfall and that was due to friendly fire and relativly decent AoE skill that were not target capped. Crowfall was another one that for a single seige/war before zerg guild cried and it got nerf. With that one there was a statue u could build in a guild city and during seige time it make every player zap anyone within 5m of them for a considerable amount of dmg every 3 seconds friend of foe, whioch force people to spread was actualy my best seige in that game but devs removed it when the zerg guild cried on the forums about it -.- TLDR: AoE need to be effective at clumps but less effective against single targets so like single target spell does 60% more dmg than an aoe skill so to get your value u need to hit 3 targets at a time kinda deal. 100% agreed and hence mine, @NyceGaming and other's suggestions regarding aoe abilities, scaling AoEs, etc
