insorrow's page

Andius, those are mechanics, not functions.

So for example, I feel like a have a pretty good handle on the functional aspect of time based skilling: no need to macro in a corner, even increase in skills over time so there is parity based on time, etc. Functionally I think this means you're freed from grinding to be able to play different styles--the function of time-based skilling is to remove grinding.

I think I also understand the function of archetypes--instead of a game designed pressure to skill up a particular template to be competitive solo in PVP, there's a design pressure to stick within your archetype, and find your competitive advantage in synergistic grouping.

What are the functional implications of the other mechanics you've listed? Combat not being manual aim--what does that mean functionally for the game experience? Why is that important?

ok just to clear a few things . darkfall has a use-skilling and a time-skilling mixed approach .they changed it , sometime down the road. you can use a fireball to skill it , or you can meditate the skill offline .I think the benefit to their system is that the player has to log in and play ,in order to find the funds to spend in meditation ,keeping the world alive. goblinworks system has the benefit that you can easily play pathfinder without pressure to log in as a second mmo , or as someone who does not have much time.in darkfall the person who fights ingame for 8 hours and meditates offline for 16 ,will eventually get a better toon ,than the person who fights for 2 and meditates for 22.therefore there will be people with toon advantage .goblinworks system makes sure that there are no such people.

darkfall 2.0 made another shift (towards goblinworks approach really) .you will choose a role (mage -healer- skirmisher- warrior) and skill-up the role. you can change if you wish ,but you can only be one role at any single time, this way a noob warrior is no different than a veteran warrior , but the veteran can also choose to be a mage tomorrow and a healer next week etc.I think the system goblinworks has in place is more elegant really ,plus it has more roles. in everyday pvp etc ,both systems will play in a similar way .I think goblinworks having experience with the pen and paper version of the game ,will make sure their archetypes are properly balanced .i do not hold my breath for aventurine at least at launch .

combat being manual-aim is a huge difference .i am in favor of more action-oriented combat and i have pointed this out in this forum a while ago.so my opinion is biased .if you think that you can enjoy an mmo ,that plays like gears of war then go ahead and try darkfall. if you enjoy a slower more typical (some may call it tactical ) approach ,then you will enjoy the combat of pathfinder online .

darkfall tries to have a more mainstream approach with their relaunch , we will see if they make it .i will be there playing since it launches on november and pathfinder is not live yet. But it all comes down to your preference really .

darkfall is pvp oriented ,their combat system and ffa mentality illustrates this clearly.if your main focus is pvp give it a shot

pathfinder as far as i read ,has a lot of sandbox elements.the devs seem dedicated to make a proper coherent world .making various playstyles fun and viable , making sure that the world is immersive ,that you can take a lot of roles (not only combat roles ) .darkfall revolves too much around pvp ,conquest ,and clan warfare ,their sandbox elements score 4/10.

A lot of the sandbox crowd ,have to lower their expectation ,and deal with the lack of sandbox elements while playing darkfall , or simply pass and wait for something more complex (such as pathfinder) .If you enjoy pvp (like myself) you will probably stomach the shortcomings and have fun nonetheless .if you have a decent guild you might be able to have fun as a crafter and pve player but you will be paying full price for 30% of the product.

I do not know if you have played eve .darkfall starts at 0.4 and moves all the way to 0.0 .it does not have the complex crafting of eve , nor the well thought features,it does not have the racial wars ,or the faction pve . it just has a fast , intimate form of combat really

i favor the solution of one character per account for one reason only.

as mentioned earlier, any con worth his salt will go the extra mile and buy a second account if it is necessary. Spending 40+ dollars to buy an account and training time to set up an alt will give GW money .those money can be spent to hire an extra gm or two and help supervise these guys .

it is mostly an issue of resources. will GW have enough money to actively scan and ban those guys?making an alt in most games costs nothing ,while hiring a gm to check costs something .so the solution according to me is : making an alt costs something ,getting a gm costs something .go ahead and buy alt account while GW hires gm to shut them down .

Nothing you can do about that though.

there are games out there (darkfall) that deal with this issue by allowing only one character slot. I am a huge fan of this solution

you roleplay an alignment/behavior without avoiding the consequences .you cannot be a bandit/thug/cutthroat and then jump to your alt who is a trustworthy merchant (also your fence )

some people enjoy alts .well , buy another account and buy training time for the alt etc .plenty of people will do it , but at the same time it will deter a few as well

I agree with onishi that we must find a legitimate use of the spell .I also think like nihimon that something similar to the spell should be implemented for the sake of the spirit of the rpg.

my proposal is this .

the spell is available to high lvl arcane casters only.
the caster can only teleport himself. NAKED , i will repeat .NAKED
the caster is exhausted and cannot use the spell again for 24 REAL LIFE hours.

this is how clone jump works in eve online .it does what it says .gets you (naked ,so it is actually you, not you and a pouch of gems) somewhere. This is the only legitimate use i find so that onishi and various others like me can sleep at night :)

i would also propose that

there is a portal network that is regulated by some sort of mages society ( i am unfamiliar with the exact pathfinder lore ) .this makes teleporting around major cities simple and safe. It would require that you are

In good terms with the mages society. so that gankers/pk/scum do not use the portal network

pay a fee to cover the reagents and the robe. the robe is a gift for you on the destination teleport chamber because you got there NAKED.

losing yourself is impossible if everybody keeps finding you.

imagine that secluded beach in a Greek island , the sky is blue ,the water crystal clear and the beer is cold .If only you could close your eyes ,think of this place and go there in an instant .

thats what teleport does.It gets you and everyone else there.in the same "secluded " beach .your neighbor and his fat wife and 2 brats are there too. he closed his eyes and moved there just like yourself

i will post my proposal again ,as i did at the other thread. This comes from my experience with other openworld games like darkfall and eve , where cyno and runstones cause issues

people like to travel fast because it is convenient for everyday activities. you do not want to travel for 40 minutes to clear a dungeon that takes an hour .It is a legitimate concern, people have jobs and time is an issue for most

On the other hand , too much ,easy fast travel , makes the world feel smaller .If you can open a portal easily , you could move troops from around your empire to a border region in minutes.border is no longer a remote secluded area if you can port 500 guys in 5 minutes time .

money cost for spell reagents is NOT a solution .darkfall had a costly component, teleport rune.This had the opposite effect to the problems i described .Few would use the rune to get to the dungeon and they would prefer to walk instead of paying extra . Everyone and his mom had 5 of them ready to port in the "border" regions if the enemy moved there in force .essentially solving nothing .the casual player had to walk and waste his time , the guilds could move troops in no time anyway.

best solution is (for me that is) some kind of portal chambers network scattered around the map (like ultima online moonstones i think) , that you can use with a small fee. the entrance and exit should be guarded to avoid ganking and camping of the area. The portal network would thus be able to be used by anyone , but at the same time anyone can scout the stones for intelligence ,so if you move a large force through the system you lose the element of surprise .guilds would fight over the "control" of the portal system having skirmish squads or scouts at those key points .

having a fee at the permanent portal network would ease the problem with transporting commodities .you can use the fast travel and pay a fee in gold , or not use it and pay a fee in personal time .in terms of risk , you can take the fast route that most certainly bandits will scout or the long route that might go unnoticed

moving troops is an issue mostly when you deal with powerhouse alliances .lets say an alliance of guilds owns 3 forts. woodfort ironfort and stonefort. another coalition tries to besiege their settlements .( i expect a siege timer ,preparation time etc) they all start the siege event at the same time and it will go live on e.g saturday night .

- offenders attack stonefort , defenders port to stonefort.
- midfight a group of offenders assaults ironfort.defenders now port 100 men to ironfort that were previously inside stonefort .
- offenders leave a skirmish group in ironfort to trick defenders.they move back to stonefort to a fast assault.
- at the same time a roaming raid group hits woodfort ,defenders take 20 men from ironfort to woodfort just in case it gets serious
-etc

This is not exactly how i would like fighting .people teleporting around.
I think the idea of ravening about implementing cooldowns based on character skill and distance is a solid one and could be expanded

I see a lot of people that focus on the transportation of commodities ,while the "problem" with teleportation spells is the fast movement of troops

As i mentioned earlier ,i expect none to use teleport for everyday pve ,crafting , mining ,moving goods.I do expect however something like 1,2,3 go on ventrilo and 500 guys in plate along with their 100mage friends
porting outside your city walls ready to say hello. cost is NOT a balancing factor

there was a specific reason i asked about the 200vs 2000 kingdoms.

a new/pve/solo/casual (any of those types of ) player is usually impossible to win against a veteran , well equipped ,specifically trained to gank him .

at the same time the 200 people kingdom has pretty much similar chances against the 2000.

in both cases the answer to their problems is "get more friends".And of course my concern is where will gw draw their protective line , both for the single player pvp and the kingdom pvp. I can understand protecting the individual can be a strong focus for the company since this makes people quit .I also hope there is some place (similar to empire) where a wounded kingdom can retreat to and "heal" if they get crushed .

I also hope for a feature like the board you mentioned

there is a need for people to be able to take part in guild activities without having to spend many skill points deep inside a tree.therefor i do not think there should be a crafter archetype .I will give an example

you want to do a mining operation (there is a reference in the blog) and you ask in guild chat .a new player says he wants to join ,an old player that has many skillpoints in fighting wants to join and a dedicated miner wants to join .I strongly believe there should be some synergy so that they can all play together despite their differences in skill in "mining"

this can be done with 2 ways .

1. each one has a role crucial to the operation .the new player can scout the region for pvp or pve threat. the fighter guy can be the carriage driver who will stockpile ore (he is strong etc ),but also take arms in case of need , the miner runs the drill

2. they all contribute their skills to the operation, lets say the drill goes faster combining the 3 guys skills.

if you have a dedicate crafter archetype then , assuming each drill has 3 spots to operate it , you will always want 3 dedicated miners or else you slow down the process.

do people consider piracy as it is implemented in EVE to be griefing ? it sure is ganking but i find it legitimate ,so it is not griefing for me.

do people find kingdoms trying to become powerhouses to be griefing?

You have a 200-people alliance trying to settle to an island ,next to a 2000-people kingdom who owns the whole peninsula.One day the kingdom simply decides to crash the small guys , no particular reason other than they could crush them .Is this some form of griefing?

i think choosing a "race" or human culture should be mostly about looks .

you could also be given a range of choices to make.Things like your ancestry ,how you were raised or previous professions etc .Those choices would reflect on skills BUT they have little value on the long run because of how raising skills works

For example, you choose to be from brevoy , you would have skill points in using a sword ,dual wielding it etc .If i understand correctly from the blog , raising a skill takes time .You have the skill "dual wield" in novice lvl , you need 5 hours to get it to apprentice , 2 days to get it to normal , 1 week to get it to veteran ,and 2 months to get it to master.

In your mind you want to be an ulfen duelist. a min-max choice would require you to be from brevoy instead. This does not matter in such a system .Make an ulfen character , talk to a veteran warrior etc and get the "dual wield" skill, start training and voila one hour later you have the skill in novice lvl .sure the guy who chose to be from brevoy is one hour ahead , but 5 months down the road it does not matter

this comes with a debated issue. Fast travel .

It seems to be very hard to balance travel time in open pvp games .especially those who feature territorial control.

people like to travel fast because it is convenient for everyday activities. you do not want to travel for 40 minutes to clear a dungeon that takes an hour .It is a legitimate concern, people have jobs and time is an issue for most

On the other hand , too much ,easy fast travel , makes the world feel smaller .If you can open a portal easily , you could move troops from around your empire to a border region in minutes.border is no longer a remote secluded area if you can port 500 guys in 5 minutes time .

money cost for spell reagents is NOT a solution .darkfall had a costly component, teleport rune.This had the opposite effect to the problems i described .Few would use the rune to get to the dungeon and they would prefer to walk instead of paying extra . Everyone and his mom had 5 of them ready to port in the "border" regions if the enemy moved there in force .essentially solving nothing .the casual player had to walk and waste his time , the guilds could move troops in no time anyway.

best solution is (for me that is) some kind of portal chambers network scattered around the map (like ultima online moonstones i think) , that you can use with a small fee. the entrance and exit should be guarded to avoid ganking and camping of the area. The portal network would thus be able to be used by anyone , but at the same time anyone can scout the stones for intelligence ,so if you move a large force through the system you lose the element of surprise .guilds would fight over the "control" of the portal system having skirmish squads or scouts at those key points .

@ patrick and orthos. I am a huge advocate of open world pvp .this is one of the few games that features this. But i honestly cannot see where people get the idea that there will be no pve .

it is clearly stated in the blogs that you can find instanced pve .a scout searches for "the troll caves" and once the party is inside they will clear "their" cave.No pvp can ruin your dungeon crawling .

it is also stated that there will be high security areas ,it will be highly unlikely that you die there.

even in the wilderness , people can feel "safe" .usually the good and established guilds protect their team members if they contribute to the team. if you want to kill a dragon ( who does not hide just outside a highly protected city) , you have to go to a remote region ,that a guild controls. you will clear your end game pve content to get dragonscales .At the same time a pvp group of guildmates that enjoy pvp , fights at the borders of your region to keep away any invaders .

they keep you safe to fight the dragon and you keep them well equipped by providing the guild with dragonscales .A person that is good in pve will be of value. if you can kill the dragon fast then the pvp group will have to spend less time protecting you etc. if you are a good scout ,you will be of value since you can find the dragon lair faster , if you are a good armorsmith you will be of value since you can craft the dragonscale armor. this makes a small community where you know people and trust people .you do what you like they do what they like and the guild prospers .

@insorrow, stretch just a little bit and you'll see that I'm talking about retreating from towers/outposts, not retreating to them.

so? if you retreat from the tower the raid party still cannot destroy it ,since in any serious game destroying a tower will not be possible by a raid group.

just give me a single example where retreating from combat after it has begun puts something to the table for the offender.

@insorrow, to your first point, controlling territory doesn't just mean protecting buildings. It can also mean protecting the entrance to a dungeon, or protecting your traveling caravan. Both of those would qualify as "spontaneous" pvp.

It sounds like you're making a pretty big assumption that what I was talking about only applies to sieges.

I hear you loud and clear expressing your opinion that retreat should not be an option. I'm just expressing my opinion that it should.

insorrow wrote:

if you always have the option to retreat from skirmish then the war cannot be resolved since neither side suffers from attrition or asset destruction

If I retreat, leaving you free to destroy my assets, then how can you say that the option of retreat means neither side suffers from asset destruction? This makes no sense to me.

lets go back to game examples .

you own a tower in a region and you have a few people there farming the nearby trolls .some scouts try to find the troll caves aka instanced pve etc . an opposing group comes in the region to raid.your scouts sense them and alert in guild chat/ventrillo, most of your people regroup/retreat at the tower , but a party was slow to respond to the alert and they now engage in combat and face the raiders. should they have a good chance to "retreat" again?

what do the raiders gain if your group retreats to the tower safely, constantly? what "asset" can they destroy now that your groups are safe behind their walls? My guess is nothing.I actually wonder what is the asset destroyed in this scenario according to you? If the late group cannot retreat they lose gear , loot and morale.Try to stay in a border region when you know that anytime now the place will be full of raiders.It can break your nerves because you (the individual player) have something to lose .

The only thing that could be an asset as you mention it would be the caravan.lets give an example again.you own a region rich in minerals and you have a nearby outpost .people do mining operations and stockpile ore at the outpost.you have a refinery at the outpost as well and you can smelt ore into iron bars.once a month you need a caravan to move a months work of mining ,from the outpost to the city/headquarters of the guild.

I imagine this will be a guild event.most of the guild would take the time to guard this caravan throughout its journey .the precise time should be a secret.this is not spontaneous pvp either.it is something any competent guild master will plan ahead , spread scouts all over the place , make sure only 2-3 officers know the exact time and route of the caravan.If you cannot protect your caravans when you have the initiative and you "control" the region then i am out of words.this is not skirmish or random border action

There's nothing wrong with retreating after combat has already started. In fact, you'll find historically that most retreats happened after combat started.

One thing to keep in mind is that many of the battles in PFO will revolve around controlling territory, not killing characters. If you don't want that bandit horde to burn down your Inn, you're going to need to stand and fight. If you don't want that bandit group to steal your caravan goods, you're going to need to stand and fight. Retreating in these situations will be almost as bad as dying.

i would like to point 2 things. It is almost certain that battles that revolve around controlling territory will not be spontaneous .I expect a protocol/mechanic to be in place .so that you do not wake up and your tower is burnt.something like , setting up a siege camp or building warmachines etc ,that gives time(probably a day or two) to the defender to organize.defending the tower/city/fort/mine etc is a tactical decision and it is not exactly "combat rules"

I was actually concerned about small scale pvp ,skirmish fights .something like , you are trying to find the entrance of an instance as a scout while an enemy scout is in the region .once you know that he is around you have to decide to wait for an ambush , actively find him and fight him , or leave the area and report back .if you have eye contact you can always mount up and try to go back to safety .he could try to shoot at the horse to kill it ,or mount up himself while he alerts his team of your position etc

i do not think that beyond the "chase" phase, retreating would or even should be possible.resolving fights in my opinion should end with one side dead .my motives are tactical and do not revolve around " ganking " or petty pk for loot.

small scale combat should be lethal as a way to put pressure on the losing side of a war. having a tower in a region does not make it your region unless you have the man power to control the region , patrol the region etc. if you hold the tower but lose every single skirmish you cannot actively capitalize on your holdings .you cannot farm around the tower or mine at the nearby mine or kill the trolls for pve in the area etc

if you always have the option to retreat from skirmish then the war cannot be resolved since neither side suffers from attrition or asset destruction .border fights will revolve around who has more people at a certain time to "own" the region for half an hour .we will simply have rubber-band pvp . oh guys they are 10 and we are 5 retreat.oh guys we are 10 and they are 5 go get them , pff what a bunch of sissies ,they left .

a few words on retreat.

since the game features partial looting (people get items from you once you are dead) it is important that you have a good chance to escape combat when you are prepared and you make the choice to leave in time.

i think it is also important that you have low chance to disengage once combat has started ( people jump on you but see they are losing and poof they vanish )

i am curious tho on how this will be implementing.How will the pray and the predator will be able to "track" each other down and decide in advance if they should engage and commit or not.Eve online does this in a strange way ,it has an "area" channel .if you see people at the channel that you are unfamiliar with ,it is time to start packing. In areas where this channel is non-existant you should manually track each other using some kind of tracking skill . the problem is you need to scan constantly
because the response window is very small .

@ waruko

"Most of all if they are enjoy the game as it is and don't cry about it."

but they do.That is exactly my issue ,exactly my point.they do cry about changing the game ,removing the pvp part or making a great part of pvp consensual .

I am not even the "i kill you , i am l33t" kind of guy.I was a dwarf smith in lineage2 , an explorer for a construction corp in EVE , and pretty much a crafter in darkfall. Those games have open world pvp ,2 are partial loot (like pfo) and one is full loot.Unlike what was posted in this thread earlier , i am probably the kind of guy you want in your guild in pfo , helping new people and enjoying the game .FOR WHAT IT IS.

i am the kind of guy who will be ingame after being ganked 300 times , losing everything and standing on his feet for 301. I have been in an alliance trying to get a hold of npc 0.0 and failed 3-4 times. ORE space , syndicate space , thukker space etc.I enjoy losing , winning , fighting ,plotting , building ,destroying .

I am really worried about the pve-only crowd.reading the blog ,the game pretty much feels like a fantasy eve online .It is a game of conquest , territorial control and partial looting.Half (if not more) of the people at the forums imagine building a castle , opening a tavern ,studying for scrolls at their mage tower.Not even 1/10 of them ,can deal with their mage tower turn to asses , their tavern burnt and their castle in ruins .

I am worried ,about this crowd .they do not appreciate that the ganker is part of the setting ,part of the excitement , part of the adventure.they do feel entitled to cry at the forums ,to change the game so that the game fits their need.they want to remove the ganker so that they can "mine in peace" , "pve with friends" when all they have to do is find a game that suits them .

do not worry about them leaving the game ,there is a reason wow has 12million people and eve has 900k.As i said 1/10 can handle it, enjoy it , appreciate it.

@waruko

I enjoy your view on pfo and eve , but i would like to point out a few issues.

3am "off hours" simply does not exist in EVE online.it is a single server and 3am in europe could be prime time in korea.

you cannot play 2hours a month and enjoy the game. well you can who am i to say otherwise but , i am sure that paying the same 12 euro for a single player game in steam would offer you "more" for your money.
In eve you cannot be an
-inventor with 2hours a week , you need to do the logistics for the towers fuel them , manage the inventions etc
-trader , as 0.1isk games need constant attention , at least daily in remote systems (not jita or amar)
-pirate ,pvper of any sort , no need to explain
-be a part of any involved alliance.most ask for attendance for fights on reinforced bases etc

you can only mine (which make the least amount of isk/hour )
or do lvl4 missions , which is not even end-game content.to do any meaningful pve you should find deadspace complexes rated 8+ or do wormholes etc

for those unaware of eve .my point is that you pay a monthly fee to see 5% of the game content.which is probably fine by you , it is your money and all .but maybe you shouldnt be the group of people that the company takes into consideration when they decide balance or features or content for example.

insorrow wrote:

i only have one question for the pve crowd (aka carebears ,diminishing how it may sound)

[remainder of dismissive and demeaning message omitted]

Wow.

There is someone who seems to embody every single concern I have about playing PFO.

*shrug*

I'll give it a shot. If players like insorrow are few and far between, I'm sure I'll enjoy it.

it seems people like to look at the tree instead of the forest.There is nothing wrong with wow or other themepark games .they offer a specific gameplay experience that is fun for a great deal of people.

the themepark model is about 100% security , playing with your pace ,on your terms.

the sandbox model is about freedom.and there comes risk .In well designed sandbox games (it seems pfo is one of those) each player finds a risk level that they feel comfortable with.

I will give you a card games example.

themepark is like , bridge.it can be a smart competitive , excellent game

sandbox is like poker.there is the thrill of risk.It is up to you to decide the table .you can feel comfortable at the 1 dollar blind or at the 1000 dollar blind.

I want to be very emphatic here.you should choose a game that you enjoy , but you cannot ask for poker without money.Poker becomes dull without any risk , with nothing to lose or gain .I would choose bridge any day over poker without risk.you should not come at a sandbox game forum asking that risk , or pvp is removed.it simply does not compute .If you get an answer like "maybe wow is better for your taste" this is not an attempt to diminish you or your gamestyle , it is probably the truth

With all due respect, this is pretty harsh, and frankly quite unfair. It seems to me to demonstrate precisely the attitude which causes the concerns I have about PvP...namely "I can kill you ha ha and I will again and again just because I feel like it ha ha and if you don't like it, go play WoW hardy har har".

this is a sandbox mmo .

sandbox is defined by the amount of freedom you give to the players.
the more freedom the more content they can create with their imagination
there is a huge difference between dieing in pvp and griefing.

lets talk in game terms.

there is a swamp where a "valuable" flower grows .
you want to be an alchemist.I want to be a bandit.
on your way back from the swamp i kill you and you lose all of the flowers you gathered. you can

-cry at the forums and rage quit then go back to wow
-call some friends from the alchemist guild and ask for protection/form a caravan and go to the swamp prepared
-pay a bounty on my head so that some paladin/hero guy kills me for you and i no longer raid the road to the swamp
- contact me and ask for protection so that you send me 5 flowers a month and i never attack you again while you are doing business at the swamp
-join our gang and become the alchemist of the bandits ,where you help us kill other alchemists by making potions and poisons for us.you pretty much have a monopoly of the flower and we all become filthy rich

that was the sandbox approach.each of those options (besides going back to wow) was pretty much an adventure and that was a game i would like to play.

now for the "user friendly" , "wider audience approach" ,you can

turn off the consensual pvp flag, and walk in the swamp with an unreasonable invulnerability bubble around you .where you gather in "peace" and enjoy the "content " (as if the content is gathering flowers and avoiding human interaction).

maybe you would care to explain why was the flower valuable in case no2, since anyone can go to the swamp and get it?
why do you play a massive multiplayer game ,if the content you want is to gather flowers avoiding contact with any other player?
maybe your idea of human interaction is to press the "looking for group" button where you and 3 others teleport to the swamp and fight a giant mosquito in order to be rewarded with a "valuable" flower for your "deed of valor"

i only have one question for the pve crowd (aka carebears ,diminishing how it may sound)

why do you play MMORPGs ?As far as i am concerned it means massively multiplayer online role playing game.

massively multiplayer , massively , mass .

if you can play for 2 hours a month ,buy skyrim

if you want to play solo at off hours , buy skyrim

if you want to play in co-op mode with 3 friends fighting the scripted AI
buy wow

if you want to chat with your friends and click at plants etc , i heard farm ville does that.

not all shoes fit all feet.

the point is there are a lot of games out there .the mmo genre was made in an attempt to have games that feel like a world .it is about immersion.

mmo is not co-op.it is not an irc channel either .many people come from wow or similar "mmo" games unable to understand probably what it means

-mmo
-sandbox
-open world

and they try to change the game to fit their views.I hope goblinworks can deliver an AAA quality sandbox mmo , so that i can play and enjoy the risks and the adventures.The rest of the people can buy wow , i heard it is pretty consensual and convenient and user friendly .you can play 30 minutes a day , do your daily quests , and join the "i found you some friends" raid on weekend. you collect "high five" badges and at the end you get a shiny epix tinfoil hat. thank you

the goblin was smart enough to bring his friends, what about you?

darkfall has the most intelligent mobs i have seen .they are practically bots equal to low level players

-they use cover and try to break line of sight when you shoot at them
-they drink pots and try to heal when in low life
-they try to kite you -keep their distance if they are ranged
-they leave when at low hp and try to cover or call for reinforcements

it is definitely not a case of .tab target mob press 1-2-3 move to the next mob

I am 30 and i do not have children. I am also European .Most of the Europeans , especially in the south couldn't care less about what is politically correct .

it is a term north americans developed and hold dear.the cultures here are scoptic , both the greek and the latin languages usually have hidden meaning in polite words that hurt indirectly, you are most likely to be offended if someone is polite at you than if someone is vulgar .if you are offended by implied sexuality or "improper" remarks most people would consider you an idiot , an insecure person or someone deeply antisocial.talking politics ,religion and sexuality in public is more common than sunshine .The meaning is , different cultures find different things offending

back to gaming and "ratings" . Mortal kombat was banned in australia and the blood is green in germany. Now imagine if midway had to make adjustments to aim for a Teen rating. the game would probaly be Super Smash Bros. Brawl

That being said , my opinion is that the setting of the game has demons ,deities ,and it is a place of conflict and treachery.the game should build an atmosphere to reflect those parts where it is appropriate.

i pretty much stand where Andius stands. You should make a game that feels right and not find workarounds to make it fit a certain rating.if the game is right ,it is right.

Eve online has an average player age of 28 years old.the game is sci-fi it has no nudity and no gore .The gameplay is such that minors do not have the attention span to play and enjoy Eve .i spent most of my time ingame with the rest of my corp (guild) talking politics , morality , religions etc

if the game is indeed as complex as i read and as sandbox as it is advertised then the mechanics will filter out immature people of all ages.

to make a long story short , i do not feel gw should AIM at neither a mature rating or a teen rating.they should aim at making a game that feels like a virtual golarion

i am not sure what people mean with "52 lvl rats" the game is a sandbox ,in my mind a rat is rat , a bear is a bear and a wolf is a wolf .they do not have levels. you can even see this on pen and paper rpgs.they say 4d6 hit points , 2d4dmg bite,1d6 dmg claw .next time you see a bear it will still be a bear.

to go on with a rant. sandbox games usually allow you to explore and make you feel that the game is a world , thus the bear of riverwood should be similar to the bear of stoneshire .only in themepark games riverwood is a lvl9 area and bears have 20hitpoints while stoneshire is a lvl56 area and bears have 2300 hit points

insorrow wrote:

they seem to be weak end-game when scripted encounters specifically need a certain number of dps or whatever and a rogue or mage will "do the job better" .

2 points to respond to that,

1. having at least one bard is a huge boost to DPS of the entire party when you are talking about the bard adding a few damage to his own hits, and to everyone elses hits. Raising 10 peoples DPS by 10% is already one full person, and then everything else the bard himself doing good damage is a bonus.

2. you are right that versatility's value goes down on scripted predicted encounters. The question is when on earth has pathfinder online made any reference to endgame being about scripted encounters? The blog posts have only barely touched at the idea of repeated modules, and it has never even remotely been implied that they are intended to be the main end-game content. Actually more or less there has been no implication of anything that is defined as an "end-game" as something different than the normal gameplay up till then.

the magic word in my sentence was "seem" .they seem to be weak.plenty of things can usually go wrong with hybrid classes and inexperienced players .to put it simply a noob can mess it up and then be frustrated about all the time he "lost " etc. since the game will have a model similar to eve i will not consider it time "lost" but expect a lot of threads like "omg balance bards" and jokes like "hunter's gear"

as for the instanced dungeons , i seem to get the idea that they will be scripted or modular .I am unaware if they will have a party limit or you can clear them with 5 or 50 .if the game is sandbox in the pve part there will be no party limit , then a bard could and should be useful since he can buff a lot of people and his value goes up.

i love the bard class, i do not enjoy singing when i play one , but i do enjoy a seducing dancer and other forms of "perform" . the problem with bard or similar implementations in mmo is that "core" classes overshadow them .they seem to be weak end-game when scripted encounters specifically need a certain number of dps or whatever and a rogue or mage will "do the job better" .

most of what is fun when playing a bard is not the numbers of the character sheet ,it is how you roleplay the class , how well can you adapt to the storytelling etc , this is easy to do with a good gamemaster but hard to implement in a video game

i would like to back blaeringr in most of his posts throughout this thread .

1) I would like a tera/ddo/GW2 engaging combat and not an wow/sotr/eq type of "combat" .the mechanics of tab , press 2 and watch the toon execute the action ,is really outdated. i do not favor fps combat for those worried about it.i just want something more engaging and immersive than autohits.

2) combat should have the open-world pvp in mind ,friendly fire ,cover ,terrain, flanking should be taken into consideration or we will end up with "whoever has more guys wins the fight" . autohit combat is a step in the wrong direction here , you can tab to target someone behind a tree , you can cast a spell and it does not check line of sight , you cannot have backhits or flanking. it is definitely a no go .

3) it is clear that some people want to avoid combat , simplify it , or make it a non-issue .i am not sure if those people have played EVE or any other open warfare mmo. combat is what makes the world go round in this kind of games .it needs solid mechanics to make sure everyone feels that the game was fair. eve does this very well, everytime i died in eve it was my mistake.i misjudged a situation , i was ill prepared , i was overconfident ,but i could never blame the game.the thrill of losing something if you are careless is what makes you want to get better , more careful ,more prepared , more social .

to be honest i just hope they license the engine of darkfall

if you check videos on youtube the game looks crap but this is because everyone turns everything to low , the combat is very very fast and mostly fps so everyone wants maximum performance and minimum quality. If you bother to turn everything to high the game gets pretty nice .

the good points are that , it can handle fast combat in an open world with more than 500 people simultaneously , while it keeps track of aiming , hitboxes and weapon reach etc .

the engine was built with an mmo in mind , unlike cryo for example .cryo and unreal seem to be built around fps games and then mmo developers adjust the engine to their needs.Most of the times i am not happy with the results

the feature you mentioned is part of a themepark game (daoc) and that is where it belongs . i cant think of any reason why any high "lvl" character cannot visit an area in the game ? how can you prohibit access in a way that comes natural , or logical or within the lore ?

i understand the "instanced" approach for the dungeons since they are supposed to be areas that the character "found" after exploring , they are a cave , some ruins etc. But pvp in most sandbox games means fighting over something valuable, a mine , a castle ,a trade hub , a port, a region . they are not a secret cave you just found.

besides "lore" or "logic" , the problem is gameplay itself .I simply think that the game should offer reasons to pvp and "guide" the players by making it worth the effort to risk something , in order to get something of greater value.

e.g you can only get dragonscales by killing dragons. dragons do not live inside cities or anywhere around them. bandits , raiders and the like often live around cities . you can kill bandits for some bounty while you are near the convenience of the city and this will make you buy a nice set of plate mail. or you can risk that platemail and try to kill a dragon up in the mountains. anything can happen in the mountains as long as there is noone around to see it.

i have to agree with most posters on this.I do enjoy some casting animations as long as they are not too fancy.it should be easy to identify which spell the enemy is using but i do not want my screen turn into a disco in every fight

in open pvp situations , pretty much anyone is needed , even a noob is another pair of eyes that can scout , another pair of hands to man a cannon or drive the boat/war machine .

if this game goes the EVE way , and seeing most of the features ,thats where it is going , even a new player will have a spot in combat.

i agree with southraven about the 4 points of "skill"

-Being able to push buttons faster/in the correct sequence/better than your opponent?

-Reacting more optimally with skills and situational awareness.

-Having assembled a superior set of gear for the situation?

-Having planned skills out in advance for a scenario such as this?

i have faith that the developers will realize that combat is a core element in any sandbox mmo mostly because people will fight over resources .it is essential that combat has a good mix of the above 4 points .It is also important to make sure that combat is not just a 2vs3 situation but more like "warfare" with room for tactics .taking into consideration terrain ,cover , numbers , logistics etc

Quote:

Their combat system is simply unfit for open world warfare.

WoW handles large scale combat just fine.

where? would you plz name the part of the game where large scale warfare is an intended feature . ( alterac valley does not count, you run past your opponents and kill a pve boss to win)

link me a video of anything with 500 people simultaneously in wow fighting over something that matters ingame.

as for arena pvp or any other kind of restricted pvp .check what is the definition of e-sport. It is enough to say that wow was dropped out of the esport list , check sk gaming or the esport site.you can see that due to the simplistic combat and class imbalance , arenas are not considered competitive pvp gaming

Guild wars on the other hand was made with combat in mind , it even had a tv show in korea about the top pvp teams and fights.

in short .you need to make pvp and combat a core gameplay mechanic and think about how it works in the long run , not an aftermath.

hudax .

would you mind to post us the rotation of the arcane mage plz?

would you also mind to inform us how viable the demon warlock is in end game guilds .

would you care to inform us ,what is the relevance of optimizing your dps in a scripted fight with actual open world pvp warfare? how does keeping a rotation "up" help you in actual battlefield .Have you seen an EVE online 500vs500 fight? a darkfall 300vs200 siege?

there are simple issues that need answers , other than pressing 3 buttons.

will area of effect have friendly fire? both eve online and darkfall have friendly fire to make sure that numbers do not always win ,but proper coordination and dps focus does . e.g do you want to see any more mages hopping casting nova?

will the players have collision? can you block the way of an enemy using your fighters/warriors/tanks or can the enemy mount up and pass through your defense lines? wow models have no collision ,you pass through people as if they were ghosts.

will the terrain provide cover? or can i tab at the guy behind the wall? you can tab people that you cannot see in e.g wow.

will the spells "follow" you ?in wow a bolt tracks you down even if you hide behind a wall and hits you

WoW had no organized pvp at launch , no arenas , no battlegrounds , no world pvp objectives like capturing towers/mines etc.

the combat was designed to do exactly what you describe in your post .PVE against scripted bosses where optimizing dps is important.

Their combat system is simply unfit for open world warfare.

About what coldman says above. i get the tldr as " combat is one of the sandbox tools , as long as there are plenty of tools that form a nice , coherent world then i will be playing the game "

the point is that there are different kind of players , and a sandbox game must aim to provide enough content and fun for all of them

for example i am an explorer , i will be doing here exactly what i was doing in EVE , trying to find the dungeons and getting the spoils while avoiding pirates/bandits .

there are crafters , socialisers , diplomats and tacticians in sandbox games .and i can see the tools for them apparent in this game

then there are the fighters , pvp oriented guys , those guys who are usually the pk , the pirates, the bandits the mercenary or bounty hunters .they provide content for me and for pretty much everyone.they buy the armor from the smith , they follow the tacticians command , and they protect the mining operation .

Combat is their tool. I would like a good tool given to them.I do not mind if it has a more tactical approach or a more action approach. I just hope that combat feels like a feature of the game not like a supplement .

since you mentioned darkfall , the game has an action oriented combat system , but crafting or empire building or exploration feel generic.The game attracts only the pvp oriented players and didnt become successful.Likewise Mortal online has great crafting but combat sucks and didnt become successful.

every single aspect of the game should be made with their intended audience in mind. combat shouldnt become "easy" to cater to the crafter , same as crafting shouldnt become easy to "cater" to the fighter.A great crafter is proud that he masters all the little details .So does a fighter .there is little room for skill in ( 3iron = 1 iron boot ) as well as in tab 1-2-3.

You choose your level of difficulty when you choose your opponent. Same with WoW. Questing is incredibly easy. PvP, raiding... not so much.

There's nothing "simplistic" about WoW's design. There is simple content, yes. And you have the freedom to use a one button rotation if you don't care about your performance.

A hardcore game has far less appeal than a casual one.

You cannot choose your opponent in sandbox games, certainly not in sandbox games made right.that is the fun part. I am not sure if you played any or if you play pnp games or if you are the Dungeon master in one. does the party of adventurers in your sessions always win the encounters? they do not have to plan ahead ? , role play a way out of a hard situation or even mess it up and start over again from scratch , naked in a cell?

is the quest always like that? kill the cultists loot the necromage ,come back to the npc and be the town hero?

I think goblinworks should aim at a target audience properly.once you decide your audience you can then make gameplay decisions.I do not think this game targets the same audience as wow , nor that it should.so far the game has

-partial looting (you die and lose your inventory other than those items you have equipped )
-2,5 years of character development to get to lvl 20. skill planning of 5 years etc

-territorial control and open world pvp.

do you think the wow crowd , will still play the game ?you read those features and "casual" is the first word that comes in mind?

wow does not have simplistic game features? really? you press a button and you teleport inside a dungeon , perfect for your equipment lvl ,where you will win the "boss" if you manage to "master " the 1-2-3 rotation? you do not even have to step out of stormwind ffs , they even teleport you back outside the AH after you complete the dungeon. it cannot get more simple than that or it will turn into a movie , you will not have to press 1-2-3 just buy snacks and enjoy the loot.

i think the game speaks for itself. Back to combat mechanics , I expect a good combat system to match the rest of the game mechanics . tab 1-2-3 was fun in 2000 when EQ was out .kill 20 goblins quests were fun in 2000 .rock paper scissors ( warrior mage rogue) classes were fun in 2000.Even blizzard tries to move away from the autohit combat .their new class the monk never autohits , you have to time every single attack . they will present it as a revolutionary feature in mist of pandaria , mark my words

i want to see a lot of emotes.

Age of conan was not a really good game at launch but their animator was really good.the game launched with more than 30 emotes and you could effectively role play. I was on a role playing pvp server and the role playing community really made me forget all the setbacks of the actual game .

no one in particular wrote:

WoW combat sucks.

How hipster of you to say. Last time I checked, WoW still had almost half the MMO market share. Meaning well over half of people interested in MMOs enjoy that style of combat (read: the MMO style) just fine.

Quote:

twitch o.O

Twitch based design is the opposite of skill based design.. Or worse, mean that one person has a huge skill gap over another.

Last time i checked wow was a theme park mmo that has 12 million players. maybe we should copy its combat style , its battlegrounds and its dungeons but we will license a brand . lets say conan online , or lord of the rings online , or star wars , or warhammer or pathfinder or , or or .

i think you get the point.many studios tried to copy wow.they all failed miserably. blizzard has a single approach to the games they make.The common denominator. make the game so easy that a 5years old can play it.their games offer you convenience , ease and product quality.they can play in the most humble pc ,by any person , with the least amount of time .Anyone can be a "hero " with 11euro/month as long as you do your daily quest.

there is nothing wrong with doing casual games.i have a real life too.But simplistic game design is the wrong direction in a sandbox game. press tab to target a monster and now press 3 , 3, 3 until it is dead.

As far as skil cap goes. I am not sure what is your gaming experience on open-world games.this game is e.g about territorial control , diplomacy politics etc .You should be prepared to lose , lose often .you cannot always win in sandbox games , this is not a themepark where you always win the big bad dragon and get a token .the opponent is usually another person. A clan that wants the same mine as your clan , a smith that offers a better deal that you.In these kind of games everything goes , you can be outskilled , outsmarted , or outnumbered. having a huge skill-cap is what makes chess a great game and tic-tact-toe a not so great one .

I have played several mmo games , including sandbox titles such as eve online and darkfall . TAB targeting combat needs to go away .I cannot stretch how old it looks .it is probably the only reason i am not playing archeage atm. It is also the most boring part of EVE which admittedly is the most successful sandbox atm.

As previously mentioned , the combat system pretty much defines the game.You cannot go back and revisit combat .you can go back and revisit the way crafting works ,or kingdom management works etc , but i have never seen a game rework combat.

that being said , i have played darkfall a lot ,and although it is fun , fps combat simply doesnt feel right in a fantasy mmo.i know traditional rpg like might and magic , eye of the beholder and elder scrolls were first person , but even bethesda now made skyrim fully playable in 3rd person.

in my humble opinion the best way to go would be something similar to tera or mount and blade .the games are 3rd person ,and their combat systems do not scare customers away .you can manually dodge and you "aim" at a general direction.

As far as technology goes .Tera did it ( 3rd person, manual dodging , partial aiming ), mount&blade did it (3rd person ,manual blocking-dodging ,aiming , weapon reach) ,darkfall did it (open world pvp of more than 500 players simultaneously ,front and back hitbox ,fps aiming). It can be done .I am not sure how much extra that might cost , but i am sure it will be worth it