|Tasarak Goblin Squad Member|
I asked this question in the live session to Ryan.
Just got home. See, I assumed you knew it was on the Kickstarter Home page. =)
@Void Ronin, that was certainly the plan, but I believe Ryan has hinted that they might not be able to get all 11 done for the start of Early Enrollment. I may be misreading that, and I don't think I could find a quote right now.
Lets say they do get all 11 Core classes in. What about the next set of base classes?(Alchemist, Magus etc) Will we have to start a new character from scratch or will we be able transition/adjust training from an existing archetype? Same with Races. If want to switch to say a Drow or Kobold (if they put in) will we need to start from scratch?
I ask due to the length of time required 2.5 yrs to cap. It's a long, long road if they don't allow to make these changes if they introduce a new class/race years later into the game.
Which is why I purchased another Pledge in case they don't allow multiple characters from the same account. Going with 3! =)
All good points & I agree with LOS the target should be dropped automatically with name plates only being visible at close range...
Void Ronin wrote:
The main issue i see for this kind of system is bounties. How do i place a bounty on someone i "do not know" but has killed me or how do i collect a bounty if I do not know the name or could not see the name of my target?
We discussed this up top with unique ID Number assigned to every account name. So you would not need to know their name, rather their ID Nbr would be given, so you could place bounties or collect one.
Of course, if both parties agree or grouped, you can toggle the option to include your in-game name for all to see.
Ryan Dancey wrote:
The more interactive the better. Video's are the way to go with live discussions on PFO development with Q&A sessions for the fans.
Drakhan Valane wrote:
I just asked this question directly to Ryan today in the Kick-a-thon live chat session.
Good news. This is the current plan. I'm very excited. =) Hopefully they will have the session recorded to play back.
They can track it with a unique ID number, that is given for the player/account.(this is behind the scenes) So if there are instances of griefing or hate speech you can still right click, & report that player.
In addition to what I said, per Kakafika
So among your most trusted party/settlement community you may either decide to use your real name or nickname. Either way if it's offensive to GW or to others, people can/will still report if needed.
Again if they don't give you their Character ID, you still would be able to report the player with a Unique ID Number, that the client would provide to all account without the need of a name.
Marshall Jansen wrote:
I think it great you express your interest & possible issues with the game. That's what these forums are for. =) I think we have people on extreme ends of the spectrum and the ole phrase " the truth is somewhere in between " needs to be adhered to when the developers are describing proposed game mechanics. GW are very early in production, none of us truly know all of the details at this time. I suggest you not over think this, as we get more information on the game as it develops.
That's why having allies within settlements/player Nation will matter. You will be able to call upon their support if at War with an opposing settlement/Nation.
If multiple Nations A & B attack a single Nation C, they could make the resources to maintain battle during WAR higher for Nation A & B. Then Nation C could be given a bonus to lower the amount resources needed to maintain arms/field equipment during WAR.
If another Nation D also decides to wage war on Nation C, their cost would drive All A, B & D of maintenance higher, while driving the cost of C lower. This will deter " piling on ".
The ability for a single Nation to attack multiple Nations should require an extreme amount of resources to maintain. This should make it very difficult to carry out multiple Nation attacks.
This can still be achieved. They can provide Class details/location or guild association without saying " who " it actually is.
The Doc CC wrote:
Sure they could name the item the same, but that don't mean the stats will be the same output. I don't see crafters wanting to make the worst gear, so people that create the highest quality can be recognized & the frauds will stick out like sore thumbs. That's the beauty of it, resource gathering & giving stats to it & rotating the quality of resources will produce a market place for crafters to flourish.
Again, only if the crafter chooses to name his gear, should be at his/her discretion to either be recognized by his peers or kept hidden to conceal his/her identity.
I also would love to see no " Con " or " level " associated with my enemy/encounter, rather we all must figure out each encounter & not take anything for granite while exploring/gathering/pvp etc. I don't think we need (Fighter1/Wizard2) etc either. I just used classes as a substitute to names, but now that I think of it, no class description would be even better. This keeps everyone on their toes at all times.
Eliminate our name icon over our avatar & instead list the Class type when adventuring/exploring in the world. That way you will be anonymous to the attacker. (but maybe show your settlement name) Then people can travel the world without being detected simply by individual name, but by settlement group name. Maybe some holes, but just a quick thought...
I actually think it would be a fairly simple thing for them to include not only the name of the final Crafter who made the item, but also the name of the Settlement where the item was made. I think that's a very good idea, with a really low cost.
This was a very good concept used in SWG. Crafters were able to name their item created. In addition, their name was associated with the object creator so people could see who produced the work & see them out for future business. Serial numbers tied to the item created, were also unique. I don't see why this could not be implemented here.
Flying should be implemented if it's meaningful & requires a high level of training/time. This should be an important choice in your build if you choose to do so. I would prefer it not to be the common/expected form of travel for every character type. Maybe as a reward for capstones?
Aion introduced flying combat, & while it was fun at times, it was extremely frustrating for PVP purposes if on the receiving end. In combat, it was easy for me to swoop down from the skies above and prey on the victims below. There was no way for them to react in time to defend themselves. I understand alignment (choices I make) will take care of that here as this would move me to CE.
In PFO, there will not be any PVP instances (correct me if wrong)& one server. If people are given capabilities to fly from the get go, this will damage the player experience. It takes away from the resource search/discovery/crafting & exploration control of territory. Only the most dedicated trained individuals (if implemented) should be allowed/allocated skill training time to fly/summon capabilities. This to me is a huge advantage & should require the training time necessary to unlock/pursue.
I'm not against flying, only if implemented meaningfully & not a common ability we see for all.
I appreciate you taking the time to really read and understand Goblinworks vision for PVP. I don't post here much but I read the boards daily. As someone who's lives/breath's PVP in MMO's, I understand people such as yourself don't. You're right, they may not succeed but I believe this team can pull it off. It won't be 100% perfect, but I think we as a community can contribute to make that happen. =)
In general, the closer the game gets to letting me play with my UI turned off - by showing me visual cues for everything in the game world - the happier I'll be.
We are on the same page. I really want a sleek/minimalist UI. Allow customization for people's play style but make sure the baseline UI rules are the standard for everyone.
What I mean by this, I don't want to have to download macro/add-ons that do a better job then the default UI.
This is the only real way to rid of gold spammers/bots/farmers etc. They need to dedicate separate staff to monitor " in-game " 24/7/365. It's an additional cost companies don't want to spend & would rather have software do their work for them. Once again, something hard or expensive to do is not attractive.
Ryan Dancey wrote:
Then consider no loot drops whatsoever. I'm assuming the unique spawns are totally random in location & time/duration. Instead, allow for the rare spawns to contribute to a Player Nation/Settlements construction. Possibly decreasing the production times, or lower the cost of materials.
This does two things: Even though the whereabouts & timing of unique mobs are completely unpredictable, the responses we get as a player will be logical. And second, this contribution would not go to one individual but to their Player Nation/Settlement.
So instead of the drops/materials becoming the focus & as you said fails due to the lack of interaction with each other, I think this solves the problem & emphasizes group participation while it can also be repeated by individuals, small groups & large organizations. Now the details of how much & amounts, those would obviously go through testing as the game goes into alpha/beta etc. That's my 2cpr.
Ryan Dancey wrote:
If this is any way shape or form Pathfinder is going, you just lost me as a supporter. As a $100.00 Kickstarter contributor I will not support any game that is a P2W model. I have no issue with paying for fluff items or maybe a head start on training what have you but this is where I draw the line as a consumer and say no. I understand you said " not really commenting on Pathfinder Online in speciifc" but I have been around long enough to read between the lines.
Please clarify if this going to be a P2W game or not. I expect to pay $12-$15 a month for all the bells the whistles..not $15.00 a month + micro transactions. (If micro transactions are for fluff items, don't care)
I have high hopes for this game & I'm been following this very closely but to hear those words is not the direction I want this game to follow.
I 100% agree with the op.
SWG for me had the best economy a sandbox could ever dream of. I was on the Bria server with a guildhall/city (Silvercity) on Naboo. The best thing Ryan & Goblinworks can take is the player driven economy & personal shops/vendors. This type of interaction between the players is essential. This creates a portion of the content for our Sandbox. People working together or against one another. This allows people to make their " mark " in a dynamic, breathing world.
In terms of resources in the game, something along these lines..
Dynamic resource spawns on planets needed for complex crafting. Each having unique name and random quality of appropriate resource statistics. Resources are divided into complex tree of origins and properties. All player made items require specific resources listed in schematic. Statistics of gathered and used resources determine item's parameters
Resource collecting was a game in itself. I don't want a carbon copy, but the essence of what made it special to the community.
That is the beauty of their combat system. It's about hard interrupts for casters, positioning/styles for melee classes. In order to be successful, everyone needed to be aware of their adversaries race/class & abilities, in order to counter or position themselves to damage/heal/debuff/mezz/stun etc. The rolling combat was one that I preferred.
Truly an iconic spell with many uses, one I would enjoy. In addition, I would would like to add Elemental Body or Telekinesis. These have several offensive, defensive abilities that can be used in numerous conditions. One can dream these can be implemented some how. =)
This type of system is extremely flexible & highly customizable which I'm a big a fan of. I like the idea of allowing us to create our own spells that compliment the many different play-styles that define our character.
I also think this will create vast differences in the archetypes, which is welcomed. This helps with character customization & alleviates people using the same standard builds between classes.
This can really make people stand out by /con a mob and designing a custom action that best suits the encounter/situation. People should be able to share this information and link the abilities they created for others to see.
F1-F12(any key-bind) could allow for fast swap out based on the activity your are doing. Say your crafting, hit F1 and that will swap to your archetype skills that give + armorsmith bonus, blacksmith, etc. Now your in combat and in PVP, hit F2-F5 based on the type of different enemies your are facing.
One of the concerns I see with this system is that it will require tremendous amounts of editing on the users part. All the changes to spells, skills, items & the different types of encounters they come across throughout the lifespan of the game can become consuming. I understand in Ryzom there are over 250 levels to unlock. Here we will only have 20 levels, so I don't know how it would scale in this game.
I have played DDO also & while I agree the combat was engaging, the combat animations themselves were less then desired. It felt very clunky, choppy & turned me off. To me it's more then just the type of combat they choose, it's the way character moves, performs an action/spell & the feeling or responsiveness you get back as a player.
Combat & art direction go hand in hand. It is important that is also relates to the environment or world that it is designed for. Sound also effects a players overall experience when in combat.
To me, these are all important to consider when choosing the right combat system.
Player defined actions. Some thing similar to this.
Thanks for sharing. Never seen this design element before. This adds a whole new dimension to combat & learning skills. If they could enable a "quick swap" setting so you can swap out different player defined actions based on your encounter/surroundings, I think would be refreshing. The reason for this would be for a different set for PVE/PVP spells/abilities.
I also share your point of view. I think a even balance would be preferred. I don't think it has to be all or nothing on both sides.
I believe performing actions at the right time is better for tactical/action combat. I want combat to be engaged with the right amount of player input & my character abilities that allow him to perform his feats.
Weather I need to use a macro to use the basic attack at maximum effectiveness or just toggle a flag isn't really a critical portion of combat. Weather I need to perform some action which requires skill (as in DCUO, where the primary attacks are determined by click/directional combos) or simply tactics (press the hotkey and the attack happens) is a major difference.
I agree with you here. I do not want macro's to be the main focus of combat or crafting. I think SWTOR got this right. (the combat part)