Goblin Squad Member
|
I hope PFO will have customizable actions similar to what is described here.
Of course, I hope it is not done exactly like Ryzom, but this is one of the things Ryzom did right. This is a sandbox innovation that stands head and shoulders over the action stanza systems of any other MMO (and this game came out at the same time as WoW).
For those who cannot be bothered with the link, what I am suggesting is that PFO have a way to customize actions. The training of skills and earning of merit badges results not necessarily in the receipt of whole skills, but rather the receipt of components that could be used to build new skills. To illustrate, I earn the "might swing 1" badge and what it gives me is +2 to melee damage that I can then add to any melee attack, even those which other special skills added (such as "precise attack 1"). Each subskill has a cost, stamina and/or mana, and when you add a sybskill to an existing (or new skill) the costs stack. So, you could build attacks that are massive, but drain your stamina quickly, or you could build a different type of character, one that uses quick precise, low stamina drain attacks for extended combat. The options truly are endless.
Where this gets really interesting (and where I suggest PFO can move beyond Ryzom) is that this allows for the addition of stanzas from differing archetypes. Why not add shock magic subskill to your rogues sneak attack? This would drain both your mana and stamina, but you could...and since you balance each subskill with an action cost, the game will always remain in balance because players pay for what they use. Massive attacks will result in huge drain of whatever type of reserve(s) are appropriate...limiting the attacks use...then leaving the character drained (and unable to use anything but the base attack).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Adding to this, give each archetype access to specific melee, spell, harvest, and craft subskills...and allow a character to add any melee subskills they know to any melee attack. They truly will be a combination or synthesis of their respective archetypes.
Then there are the basic, no archetype "trees" that add more generic subskills, perhaps more in harvesting and crafting.
As mentioned in another thread, I think as long as a player knows all the relevant subskills, they should be able to learn a preconstructed skill from another player.
And, it could even be done so that earning a badge does get you full skills that can be used as are, but these skills are just preconstructed ones. From that point on, the subskill components could be used to build future actions. To illustrate, in the previous example about the sneak attack with lightning, "Lightning strike" might be a mage or sorcerer skill that can be earned. It is a base melee attack with melee based lightning spell. "Sneak attack" is another skill available to rogues. It is a melee strike only usable when behind an opponent and stealthed, it is composed of a really expensive (stamina wise) melee attack that does massive damage...to counter the massive cost of this attack, the action comes with credits...which in some way dampen the costs (and once learned can be added to any relevant type of action). In this case, two credits, "flanking strike" and "stealth"...without these credits, the attack would probably not be possible because of the extreme stamina cost. So, a mage/rogue could hypothetically add the melee based lightning spell to their sneak attack, adding a mana and probably a slight stamina cost. Or they could just use each individually as the were earned.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
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.
Still you are all talking about a total WoW-clone and even more horrible actiony game than WoW...at least Saga of Ryzom smells that for a long way for me...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The particular feature we are discussing is about as far from WoW as you can get and still use a GUI. In fact, we just had a conversation the other day pondering the implications of modern MMO design had Ryzom become popular instead of WoW (they came out at about the same time...very different visions). Ryzom has many features that if released today, would still be considered revolutionary.
**Ryzom has its problems too, such as absolutely no themepark content; and only limited sandbox content. It just has a completely different focus and is hard to classify compared to more mainstream MMOs.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
As long as it both re-arrangeable on the screen and skinnable by the end user, then it pretty much allows for any customisation a players can come up with.
As far as what "features" are contained within the UI itself I would suggest it is way too early to speculate on that. Once we see a screenshot or two of gameplay, then perhaps we can start guessing :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
While I agree that customization of the UI and the ability to orient and arrange the various elements to suite my needs, I have to say, I absolutely hate anything like a macro. Its a lazy gamer's excuse to not have to think about the buttons they push or the interactions they make, which lends itself to a particular brand of arrogant and condescending ignorance.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
While I agree that customization of the UI and the ability to orient and arrange the various elements to suite my needs, I have to say, I absolutely hate anything like a macro. Its a lazy gamer's excuse to not have to think about the buttons they push or the interactions they make, which lends itself to a particular brand of arrogant and condescending ignorance.
Wow...
So, using macros means I'm likely arrogant and condescendingly ignorant?
Before I take offense at that, can you please give your definition of "macro"?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
While I agree that customization of the UI and the ability to orient and arrange the various elements to suite my needs, I have to say, I absolutely hate anything like a macro. Its a lazy gamer's excuse to not have to think about the buttons they push or the interactions they make, which lends itself to a particular brand of arrogant and condescending ignorance.Wow...
So, using macros means I'm likely arrogant and condescendingly ignorant?
Before I take offense at that, can you please give your definition of "macro"?
Clearly that's a leap. Perhaps my brevity might lend that impression but that was not my intent. Allow me to expand on that opinion (which by no means should offend, simply an opinion, and I freely allow that others feel differently).
Portion 1: Macros as tool to more easily interact with the environment when all it does is remove the requirement to actually "play" and make choices. Example. push button1 which is macro'd to change its context in a predefined order that basically allows the player to 'face-roll' on the keyboard and still perform adequately for the purposes of say combat. Example 2, Situational Series of abilities that are "programed" into a macro and again initiated by a single button push and then allowing a timing and mechanical advantage to those that use them. Its my opinion that this sort of "optimization" of the gameplay comes from a number of different drives, but generally results in less interest in the choices made, since they tend to have automated results. Which leads me to...
Portion 2: With the context of above used as a generality, Its my opinion that less interesting choices lead to people less interested in the gameplay and the has a tendency to make people bored with said gameplay. As such, bored people + internet anonymity also tends to lend itself to arrogant players. Like herd immunity, once a certain amount of these people enter the social ecosystem, it can spread into an overall unpleasant social environment.
I was not intending to say that "if macro than person = unpleasant jerkface". I oversimplified what is a point of contention I have with various games I've played.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Example. push button1 which is macro'd to change its context in a predefined order...
So, if I were using the following macro, that changed functionality depending on my state, would you judge me as having suspect "drives" and generally less "interest" in the choices made?
IF (IsMounted) THEN Dismount();
ELSIF (CanFly) THEN Mount(<myDragon>);
ELSE Mount(<myHorse>);
END IF;
Or, how about a macro like this?
/emote murmurs in sheer ecstasy as the magic courses through his veins.
/cast Shield
The first alleviates a bit of tedium. The second adds significant "Role Play" to a "Role Playing" Game.
I should probably leave it at that.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Both of those examples fall outside of what I was thinking. One is clearly of limited utility purpose, and the other is purely for interaction.
I suppose I was more lamenting the type of macro that results in a priority system bound to a scroll wheel, or the type of complex macro that allows for a dippy bird desk toy to manage combat encounters.
It would seem when I stated "anything like a macro" I was confusing my dislike for combat related macros, and my ambivalence for utility ones as posted. Thanks for allowing me to clarify without offense.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Gruffling has a point about Macros they can be a hinderance to people that put multiple combat cast into a castsequence macro as many have done in WoW but this will be nothing like WoW. I feel they should have a actual spellbooks that you have to rememorize your spells every "hours" and then those buttons would appear on your action bars/ UI for a length of time.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Both of those examples fall outside of what I was thinking. One is clearly of limited utility purpose, and the other is purely for interaction.
I suppose I was more lamenting the type of macro that results in a priority system bound to a scroll wheel, or the type of complex macro that allows for a dippy bird desk toy to manage combat encounters.
It would seem when I stated "anything like a macro" I was confusing my dislike for combat related macros, and my ambivalence for utility ones as posted. Thanks for allowing me to clarify without offense.
Is this what you had in mind when you used the word "macro"?
I keep hoping that someday there will be a game that will actually let my Fighter or Monk character engage in melee combat as effectively as that character should, without relying on me for anything other than decision-making. I keep saying I want a severely physically handicapped player to be able to play effectively. And while we're at it, I hope that it is ultimately possible for someone who is mentally handicapped to be able to play a wizard where their character is good at solving riddles, etc.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Can you describe a macro which doesn't require thought in activating but provides a significant benefit?
If the "ideal" sequence for the events to come is already known, what is the difference between "ctrl-4, wait 4, repeat" and "rclick, rclick, rclick, rhold, beat, 4, repeat" (that's the combo for my finisher in DCUO)
The only difference I see is that manual input is easier to adapt to changing situations; it's not even difficult to implement perfectly many times in a row.
I expect developing a few dozen macros for combat purposes, as I determine that a predetermined sequence of actions is worth repeating often. Why is that different than developing the muscle memory of executing the same commands manually?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Hmm. Sounds like this thread needs splitting, as there's one section about the UI and macros and one part about customizable skills, like Ryzom.
By the way, I'd never heard of Ryzom before reading this, and that website link almost made me cry with joy. That's the kind of combat system that's easy to learn, but can take months and many forum discussions to master.
I'll re-ignite the Skills discussion: That sounds like one way to both support an open-ended character who isn't bound by a single "class", and also allow for some strategy in combat; assuming that the skill mechanic options are complex enough that there is no one skill or group of skills that everyone gravitates to. EvE Online only recently got rid of the swarms of Drakes and supercapital ships, as I understand it...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It never ceases to amaze me how worked up people can get over how someone else wants to play a game.
@Blaeringr, yes, I really do want to see a game that physically handicapped people can play and not suck at. That made me think it would really be nice for mentally handicapped people to be able to play as well. Now I'm thinking it would be really nice for socially handicapped people to be able to play characters with high charisma too.
I'm sure there are those who will ask "what's the point in playing a game that plays for you?" Well, it's simple really. For some people, the skill required to "play" combat isn't really the part of the game they're interested in. Maybe they just want to "play" a character in a fantasy setting, and be able to have that character interact with the environment according to the [i]character[]'s skills.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The macros I believe Gruff to be talking about is situational abilities in combat dependant on certain actions being strung together in one button so all you have to do is hit that button.
<a> situational
<b> a high power CD attack ability
<c> normal attack
macro would be something like this
/cast <a>
/cast <b>
/cast <c>
if the first two aren't available, it does <c>. this just takes all thought out of it.
or some thing like this
/cast [targethealth≤25%;greater heal] flash heal
These types of macros just ruin games
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
The macros I believe Gruff to be talking about is situational abilities in combat dependant on certain actions being strung together in one button so all you have to do is hit that button.
<a> situational
<b> a high power CD attack ability
<c> normal attackmacro would be something like this
/cast <a>
/cast <b>
/cast <c>if the first two aren't available, it does <c>. this just takes all thought out of it.
or some thing like this
/cast [targethealth≤25%;greater heal] flash heal
These types of macros just ruin games
I don't know... making someone else's inflexible system of macros not work sounds like a lot of fun to me...
In this case, I would develop coordination macros for the entire allied group to use. Enemies would be brought down to no less than 28% health, and then every member would target the same enemy at once to take that person out before the heal could happen.
The problem I think you see is that macros can be used instead of decision making; the solution I want is for decision making to be important, and for every tactic to have a counter.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
These types of macros just ruin games
I really don't understand this sentiment.
I've used macros like this myself (quelle horreur!) and I can tell you from my own experience, it wasn't so I could avoid making a decision, it's so I could save space on my UI. I knew, before I pushed the button, what was going to happen, and I did it on purpose because that was the effect I wanted.
Wanting the game to require me to have to hit each button separately, and train my fingers to hit a different button on cooldown for the longer-cooldown ability, is what I refer to as "twitch". It rewards young people for having better reflexes and better ability to take in more information more quickly, while making it harder for older gamers like me (I was born in 1970) to compete.
Forgive me if I'm not thrilled that you want the game to cater to your own strengths to the exclusion of mine.
Personally, I would be thrilled if the game supported both types of play. Let a player choose "Character-based" play, and make the Character automatically fight at roughly 90% effectiveness based on thir Skills. Let another player choose "Twitch-based" play, and let the Player's skill matter, with an upper bounds of 110% effectiveness, but at the cost of losing some automatic defenses.
I went and posted an opinion regarding control interface and macro systems before I ran across this thread, so instead of just copying and pasting, here's the post:
http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz5fxw?The-Importance-of-the-Customizable-Control
What some people see as "face rolling" is for me the ability to sit back in a comfortable position and use an input device that doesn't cramp my hands. I put a great deal of thought into developing attack chains that make best use of DPS, Endurance Usage, and Recharge time, and allow me to trigger up to 4 powers with the press and subsequent release of a button, the next press potentially being the same sequence or an entirely different one. I use "downtime" that I am not actively playing the game to write the files that support these keybinds (and used a great deal of it to learn the commands and format) so that my character, a highly skilled and powerful entity, can actually use its abilities without being crippled by my own lack of coordination and talent, which clearly lies somewhere other than WASDland.
All in all, in my experience, none of this provides me with a significant performance advantage, especially in PvP (which is the context in which I hear the most griping about it), just an improvement in personal comfort. If anything I get a mild disadvantage in PvP since my attack chain is somewhat static (Not completely of course, I have at least 6 buttons to bind different chains to, plus others that are used for activating toggles or other utilities).
If I'm arrogant, it's not because I use macros extensively... It's because I've learned that arrogance helps to overcompensate for lifelong self esteem issues that have been around for much longer than any MMORPG I know of.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My only real issue with macros is the way that, in many theme-parks, a sufficiently-advanced macro can play an entire character for you. I know a friend who, while back in college and vanilla WoW, had 5 WoW accounts, made a different class on each one, found and modified macros for each, and used them to auto-run 5-man dungeons. He could just push one button on his keyboard, and the macros would take care of the rest; moving, attacking, casting, looting, the works. He'd go off to class or do homework, and check back about an hour later to see what loot they'd collected. Bank loot, repair gear, push the button again, repeat.
That's my issue with macros; not when it's a substitute for having each button on your keyboard mapped to a skill, it's when they're used as a substitute for actually playing the game.
Now, that could be fixed, or at least helped, by having a combat system complex enough so that it's not just "If this one character's health is less than 50%, cast this spell; if not, target his target and cast this other spell". Removing aggro, especially, would at the very least force those autopilot macros to become much more complex and unwieldy, if not impossible to code, while simpler macros, like the space-saving ones or 1-2-3 combos described above, would still work great. (The fact that, to my knowledge, LOTRO doesn't have macros is greatly annoying. I've now pushed the same 3 buttons on my Captain so many times, and the skills have to be used in the same specific order every time... why can't I just link them together and be done with it?)
But that involves discussing combat mechanics, and there's already another thread or two for that. So I'll stick with UI discussions here.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I understand and share the distaste for botting like that, but not all macro use amounts to botting.
Macros are a useful tool. As such, some unscrupulous people will use that tool for nefarious purposes. That doesn't mean the tool should be denied to those who were using it virtuously.
Keep in mind, if you ban macros, then only the cheaters will have macros.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My only real issue with macros is the way that, in many theme-parks, a sufficiently-advanced macro can play an entire character for you. I know a friend who, while back in college and vanilla WoW, had 5 WoW accounts, made a different class on each one, found and modified macros for each, and used them to auto-run 5-man dungeons. He could just push one button on his keyboard, and the macros would take care of the rest; moving, attacking, casting, looting, the works. He'd go off to class or do homework, and check back about an hour later to see what loot they'd collected. Bank loot, repair gear, push the button again, repeat.
That's my issue with macros; not when it's a substitute for having each button on your keyboard mapped to a skill, it's when they're used as a substitute for actually playing the game.
Now, that could be fixed, or at least helped, by having a combat system complex enough so that it's not just "If this one character's health is less than 50%, cast this spell; if not, target his target and cast this other spell". Removing aggro, especially, would at the very least force those autopilot macros to become much more complex and unwieldy, if not impossible to code, while simpler macros, like the space-saving ones or 1-2-3 combos described above, would still work great. (The fact that, to my knowledge, LOTRO doesn't have macros is greatly annoying. I've now pushed the same 3 buttons on my Captain so many times, and the skills have to be used in the same specific order every time... why can't I just link them together and be done with it?)
But that involves discussing combat mechanics, and there's already another thread or two for that. So I'll stick with UI discussions here.
Your issue isn't that the macros are powerful enough to automate an entire 5-man. Your issue is that 5-man dungeons are so repeatable that macros can be used to run them.
When competing against other players, your macro is only as effective as the assumptions it uses- and those assumptions are based in part on enemy behavior. I would prefer a system of macros entirely integrated into the game, but that revealed every line that triggered to the enemy. I don't think that is practical, but there can at least be detailed combat logs available to all players indicating what abilities their character observed used, with timestamps. (Perhaps with a character skill/ability which effects how much was observed?) Reconstructing the enemy plan after the fact should be both straightforward and challenging. Developing the plan which counters it, and also determining what plan the enemy will use next time, should be nontrival.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Your issue isn't that the macros are powerful enough to automate an entire 5-man. Your issue is that 5-man dungeons are so repeatable that macros can be used to run them.
When competing against other players, your macro is only as effective as the assumptions it uses- and those assumptions are based in part on enemy behavior. I would prefer a system of macros entirely integrated into the game, but that revealed every line that triggered to the enemy. I don't think that is practical, but there can at least be detailed combat logs available to all players indicating what abilities their character observed used, with timestamps. (Perhaps with a character skill/ability which effects how much was observed?) Reconstructing the enemy plan after the fact should be both straightforward and challenging. Developing the plan which counters it, and also determining what plan the enemy will use next time, should be nontrival.
100% agreed. I think the best combating of people botting mindless activities, is to not have combat being so mindless that it can be botted. I also note this dosn't have to be twitch, it could very well be strategy etc... Enemies can have variations, and the sandbox does not overall encorage running the same instance 300 times. I think the issue is that theme parks have a huge tendency to make, "Area X has 50 wolves, all wolves attack every 2 seconds with X attack, and then use X ability every 15 seconds, all wolves have 350 HP and 20 armor" etc...
But if you make area X sometimes have wolves, mixed in with bears, badgers, occasional wandering griffons or whatever. And not all wolves are the same, attack patterns may vary etc... Also tap in some persistance, if you stay in area X killing wolves, you eliminate the population of wolves in area X, they might not migrate back for some time.
Bottom line is I like variation in opponents, the same for PVP, Using skill X followed by Y followed by Z, Might be effective on person X, but if person X used skill A after you used skill X, then Y might not be wise to use. I think the flaw with macro's and botting isn't so much that people have and do use them, it's that games are so oversimplified that we turn our brains completely off. IMO the fact that hitting 1, 2, 3, 4 in the same order works in 99% of situations is a bigger conceptual flaw then the fact that someone can use a single button to do 1, 2, 3, 4. The only game where hitting the same buttons at the right timing the same way every time works for to me, is dance dance revolution.
That customizable actions thing from Ryzom looked interesting, a lot like the spellcrafting system from Elder Scrolls games (and similar to something I'm incorporating for a homebrew system).
I like to have options in in what my options accomplish just as much as I like to have options in how I implement my options!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Onishi, it will always be possible for determined people to automate something they're doing on a computer. It would be extremely difficult to develop a game that couldn't be botted. Any information the player can get while actively playing, he can automate getting and program decisions based on that information.
The best we can hope for is to have a sophisticated, ever-evolving system of detecting bots and banning them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Once again, I never intended to state that if someone perfers to use highly automated macros they are automatically an arrogant player. I tried to clarify my observations in that regard, but if my point didn't get through, so be it.
That being said, the discussion on macros has brought out something in a deep line of thought for me. While I personally dislike them (particularly the ability to string combos together), as long as the macro-user doesn't have a significant mechanical advantage in gameplay, who am I to say they can't play the way they find enjoyable. Therein lies the real challenge for the developers. To find a spot where customizing action sequence is both easy to understand and accessible, but not set up as a proxy for actually playing the game.
The epiphany this thread has inspired is that I would really like to see a game that allows the broadest appeal, and as many niches of gameplay as possible, so we can effectively all get our geek on. If that means Starhammer and Nihimon can dial in some reasonable macros, and I have a UI customizable enough to put all my buttons in a sort of organization I'm used to, I'm sure we can all call that a win.
As an aside to all that; I think Onishi makes an excellent point concerning the ability to require variation in play (and thusly choice, and thusly "fun" imo) by having a varied and dynamically generated hunk of content. This is also hinted at in the various blog posts.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I completely agree that a customize able UI is a must, and that the ability to port the newly customized settings across characters is highly desirable.
I also agree that macros are something I very much dislike and do not want to see in the game. Not because of the sorts of players who like them (I'm sure they're all lovely people who like fluffy puppies), but because they reward the full-time player and penalize the casual player without the time to develop, find or use them.
They're exactly the reason I've always avoided WoW. A game like LOTRO, which disallows macros, is far more appealing to me as a casual gamer because it doesn't feel as if the full-time players don't have some cliquish advantage that will always separate their characters from mine, particularly in a PvP game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... I very much dislike [macros]... because they reward the full-time player and penalize the casual player without the time to develop, find or use them.
A game like LOTRO, which disallows macros, is far more appealing to me...
Actually, LOTRO has macros. They're just very arcane and difficult to use. It seems to me that would make you dislike them in LOTRO even more, since they're even more limited just to the hard-core players who choose to delve into their use enough to make them worthwhile.
Guide to the alias and shortcut commands
Or are you conflating macros with scripts? Because LOTRO "aliases" are 100% the same thing as "macros".
I completely agree that a customize able UI is a must, and that the ability to port the newly customized settings across characters is highly desirable.
I also agree that macros are something I very much dislike and do not want to see in the game. Not because of the sorts of players who like them (I'm sure they're all lovely people who like fluffy puppies), but because they reward the full-time player and penalize the casual player without the time to develop, find or use them.
They're exactly the reason I've always avoided WoW. A game like LOTRO, which disallows macros, is far more appealing to me as a casual gamer because it doesn't feel as if the full-time players don't have some cliquish advantage that will always separate their characters from mine, particularly in a PvP game.
I don't consider myself to be at all a lovely person, though I am somewhat fond of fluffy puppies... in moderation.
First off, How is it bad that people who play are rewarded for playing? People who have lives outside of the games they play are rewarded for living those lives. It sounds more as if you want to make sure that people who have nothing better to do than play games all day are punished for doing so in some effort to reveal how they're wasting their time.
As for me, it's all a matter of accessibility. If I cannot customize my control interface sufficiently to play in a manner that I find comfortable, I just won't bother with the game. There's other ones out there that are capable of suiting my desires in that regard. I'd like this game to be better than them, but if it can't manage my minimum requirements, then it holds no value to me no matter what else it ends up doing right.
I'm sure you think your post is just about standing up against bots or something... that would be great. But when I read it, I'm seeing someone who wants to restrict or exclude my participation unless I'm willing to conform to your playstyle and personal values.