Goblin Squad Member
|
Recently I have heard that the developers are thinking on implementing bonuses for being in a formation in pathfinder online.
This has got me imagining all sorts of situations from a small formation in a dungeon to regimental blocks in battles between player kingdoms.
However I find a big issue which is average player low discipline and fun factor maybe decreased due to being forced to stick in a position.
I think it is actually one of the design goals to decrease the amount of players running around in a battlefield like crazy.
---------My suggestion--------
I have been very influenced by the videogame "Mount & Blade" and amongst other great mechanics (like it´s combat) the important part for this thread is where you can marshal a small group of troops and give basic orders to up to 10 regiments.
There is a feat in D&D called "Leadership" that lets you handle roughly the same amount of troops.
Well, my suggestion is to let a player be the sergeant of a small group of NPCs, being able to give basic orders like in this game, and as long as he is within the regiments, also gives and gets some bonuses.
---Pros---
1.- Potentially great battles since every player can bring to the table an additional amount of NPCs to leader in-game.
2.- Fun factor of being in a formation won´t be diminished, as everyone will want to ensure that their hardly earned soldiers do their part correctly and will have fun ordering them around.
---Cons---
1.- Every moving NPC gives an additional input to strain the system, which might be difficult to implement (or maybe not...).
---------- Other uses ------------
In a game with player kingdoms I see it essential to have all sorts of NPCs that can be ordered to do stuff, from chopping wood, to run your shop, to patrol your town, to fight your battles.
---------- ---------- ----------
I already messaged the devs about this before, but I thought it would be interesting to know what other people think about this, if there is interest about it.
Hope you liked the idea and if not, feel free to discuss :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In a game with player kingdoms I see it essential to have all sorts of NPCs that can be ordered to do stuff, from chopping wood, to run your shop, to patrol your town, to fight your battles.
This is how the game works as we know so far, minus them fighting our battles. There is a invisable presence of NPC labor forces, you don't go to a resource node and sit there with a pickaxe, you find a resource node then set up a harvesting camp and get to protect and feed the workers. You also get NPC guards that defend your territory from minor attacks
I already messaged the devs about this before, but I thought it would be interesting to know what other people think about this, if there is interest about it....
Messaging the devs with suggestions isn't really necessary, give your ideas here and others can add to them, or tell you why they won't work with the current system.
I suggest reading the blog entries I list here
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well honestly for me I would dislike the NPC idea.
So the challenge is getting a group of PCs working well enough to fight a battle in as a unit and not a mob. in addition to that its having someone spend their training on the soldier training path to provide bonuses and options for the unit, instead of straight training their own fighting path.
to me this is exactly what needs to be done. Fighting as a unit should be POWERFUL. However the big downside is, can you do it? Can you get a group of people together, train them, and have them work together in the heat of battle? Have them change formations or move together when ordered? Have them not chase after that broken mob thus breaking formation. This way a small but well disciplined and coordinated group can take on a larger mob and hopefully win.
That should be the downside of this. it takes coordination and discipline to actually pull it off. it gives people a benefit to doing it, but its not just something you can do willy nilly.
I think the formation idea can be expanding to be great. for example a high level career soldier who has invested huge amount of training to formation fighting can have many different options. So you can do a normal phalanx, have an archery unit, cavalry unit, mage unit. Change your formation to raise shields to block arrows from an archery unit, special unlocks to include a mage or cleric in your formation...etc.
However i dont think these things should done with NPC, but only be possible for PCs who work for it.
I would love to see teamwork feats and in the soldier career path feats that are not just about commanding the unit but allow someone in the unit to do better while in it. So a soldier could get the skill shield wall that would give some AC to the two players next to him. Or give him bonuses based on what type of unit/formation he is in.
To make unit combat more fun, there needs to be an easy way for a player to know they are maintaining their position in the shield wall, or phalanx or whatever.
I'm leaning toward some in game visible icon that lets players know when they are 'in position' but also let's them know when they are moving out of position as well.
What do you think of this idea? Trying to keep combat fun for everyone and interesting.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
i think something like that would be good, a formation outline shows on the ground for the other players. each player would see their spot in the formation. Skill would come from being able to move and change formations without bumping into everyone and causing it to take a long time.
So if you move as a formation but someone isnt in the correct spot the formation bonus gets lowered or some such.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
I already messaged the devs about this before, but I thought it would be interesting to know what other people think about this, if there is interest about it....
I think what Val was saying above is true: the developers have plainly shown they are reading our posts avidly to get a better grasp of what we want to see and how we think things should work.
So posting t your ideas here also gives opportunity to brainstorm with the rest of us, and then when the devs start reading it we should have overcome most of the problems that will spring to mind.
These boards have been very positive from the community as well: please share with us too!
I would like to see warfare handled more as an RTS. In my mind large scale battles will never work with just players, there aren't enough players that want to be 'soldiers', most players want to be officers, or spec-ops.
I think if this were introduced in Wow, it would flop for just this reason. But GW wants this to be a game with coordinated, large scale battles. Once people can see the benefit to formations from the losing side of a phalanx, well they will come around pretty quick. Or get real used to packing up and retreating! <grin>
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
well honestly if it flops or not depends. For example take a company of say 20 folks. most people dont drill so they dont do very well in formation as a result they just mob. what happens if just a couple companies of 20 folks get together and field 5 20 man formations and destroy those mobs?
Eventually either they will take over since they just plain beat everyone or other folks start doing it too.
But i think thats part of the beauty of this. it rewards people who are willing to learn how to do it, it rewards people who are willing to learn how to use formations, it rewards people who are willing to be in the formation as a soldier.
Those who want to mob can still do so, but those who want to learn and perfect this can get rewarded for doing so.
well honestly if it flops or not depends. For example take a company of say 20 folks. most people dont drill so they dont do very well in formation as a result they just mob. what happens if just a couple companies of 20 folks get together and field 5 20 man formations and destroy those mobs?
Eventually either they will take over since they just plain beat everyone or other folks start doing it too.
But i think thats part of the beauty of this. it rewards people who are willing to learn how to do it, it rewards people who are willing to learn how to use formations, it rewards people who are willing to be in the formation as a soldier.
Those who want to mob can still do so, but those who want to learn and perfect this can get rewarded for doing so.
Yea, that's why I think a visible formation indicator would really help, not only players by letting the, know their place within the formation, but also the leaders because they can see who's just not getting the whole formation thing and needs to be moved over to the player mob ie. cannon fodder group :p.
I like your idea about formation bonuses changing depending on how many aren't in formation etc.. It would allow for slippage without being a all or nothing thing. This too is important for player enjoyment. Nothing worse then getting no benefit to a formation because one player is totally new to the idea and hasn't mastered how to fight and move in formation yet.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
I already messaged the devs about this before, but I thought it would be interesting to know what other people think about this, if there is interest about it....I think what Val was saying above is true: the developers have plainly shown they are reading our posts avidly to get a better grasp of what we want to see and how we think things should work.
So posting t your ideas here also gives opportunity to brainstorm with the rest of us, and then when the devs start reading it we should have overcome most of the problems that will spring to mind.
These boards have been very positive from the community as well: please share with us too!
Not that I didn´t want to share, it just occurred to me later that I could sign up to the forum after sending the message ;)
I hope there will be sound tactics related to combat and leadership. For instance, if you kill the leader of a pack you will decrease morale and leadership of tactical combat.
Not sure how this will work, but I like the idea. We don't know yet if they plan on making each formation have a leader. If so, then killing them should result in the formation breaking until another leader remakes it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It sounds like Sunwader is proposing that the enemy might break from low morale if your unit killed their leader. That would work effectively on NPCs, and I think it has been mentioned by the developers in one of the blogs (the part about escalating monster populations), but it would be hard to make it stick with other players.
Reminds me of the old Avalon Hill military simulation tabletop games like squad leader.
It sounds like Sunwader is proposing that the enemy might break from low morale if your unit killed their leader. That would work effectively on NPCs, and I think it has been mentioned by the developers in one of the blogs (the part about escalating monster populations), but it would be hard to make it stick with other players.
Reminds me of the old Avalon Hill military simulation tabletop games like squad leader.
Yea, I'm envisioning something like Warhammer Mark of Chaos has with NPC units who's morale can be broken, causing the unit to flee or dissolve. This wouldn't work in PvP battles but would be easily done in PvE.
In PvP, slaying the units leader could disband the unit until its leader can be raised, or another leader step in. Each unit could be like individual groups in a raid. A new leader (someone with the required skills) could either step into the leader spot, or be appointed to that spot. They could choose the formation, and a formation box would appear in everyone's screen with the leader in a certain position within that formation. Then the members could just go stand in a spot and when enough people are in place, maybe the color of the formation outline could change, or flash indicating that the formation was actively formed and giving bonuses.
The only thing that bothers me, is when a formation moves, it will surely "break", unless the positioning slots are fairly loose, allowing for a good bit of leeway. But how does a player know which way to move? Using commands might work, but they need to be easy for the leader or whomever to access. The F keys will likely already be taken up, as will hotkey slots. So perhaps a menu that appears on the leaders screen? I don't know.
I'm also pondering how the commanders can observe their army, and direct the battle. If being in the commanders spot, or one of his designated subs, were to cause the formation icons to also be shown on their screens, they could see where and what each unit was doing, which way it is facing etc.
This could enable them to direct units, like "shieldwall, turn to your right and move forward 5 paces" , or "phalanx charge the archers!" I don't think this would be too difficult for the game to be made to do, nor maintain. And I don't think it's too taxing on a players system resulting in a slideshow.
Thoughts?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The only thing that bothers me, is when a formation moves, it will surely "break", unless the positioning slots are fairly loose, allowing for a good bit of leeway. But how does a player know which way to move? Using commands might work, but they need to be easy for the leader or whomever to access. The F keys will likely already be taken up, as will hotkey slots. So perhaps a menu that appears on the leaders screen? I don't know.
I'm sure they won't be super strict on the actual positioning as long as you're pretty close. Players will know which way to move because they'll be communicating. Usually via something like Teamspeak or Vent. You could use the text chat to do it too. Coordination is something you have to practice; it's part of what makes some sports teams extremely good.
Edit:
Maybe there will be a good reason to drill, eh?
Who woulda thunk it?
Oy. Reminds me of Boot Camp. We spent a lot of time doing marching drills.
honestly for say seeing on the map where your company/settlement/nation's formations are and what enemy formations can be seen by them should be a very high level soldier skill.
Other than that i think folks will have to do it the old fashion way but reporting and such.
What would you think about a graduated system, where the higher the skill level, the more detail they could see? It could start out with little info, maybe a vague outline of a unit. Growing with the skill level showing more info like player position, direction, maybe even effectiveness of the formation at the upper skill levels.
Would that be better?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
that would be good. The ability to properly coordinate large forces (in game, for say a nation as a general) should require massive investment similar to a capstone for a normal class. But doing it the way you suggest is logical it shows a slow progression from a lowly unit leader to eventually a warlord capable of coordinating an entire army.
that would be good. The ability to properly coordinate large forces (in game, for say a nation as a general) should require massive investment similar to a capstone for a normal class. But doing it the way you suggest is logical it shows a slow progression from a lowly unit leader to eventually a warlord capable of coordinating an entire army.
I agree :) it also gives those training for the leadership skills a carrot. Something to prove that the time isn't wasted. They will be better then someone with no leadership skills at commanding forces in battle. Not that a skill less person can't command a battle, but someone with leadership skills will have an easier time doing it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For any adventure, challenge, enemy group I hope we will see a lot of different group dynamics. There are so many factors deciding how a group will work, be lead, and operate as a team. Everything from alignment, race/monsterstype, social structure, motivation, goals. I guess we could see everything from a tight group of soldiers in formation with a strong leader (the movie 300 comes to mind) to a more dynamic group of adventures having their roles, have found their niche in the group. Others might do more guerilla fighting style. I guess it will depend on their goals, motivation for an attack or defence.
For any adventure, challenge, enemy group I hope we will see a lot of different group dynamics. There are so many factors deciding how a group will work, be lead, and operate as a team. Everything from alignment, race/monsterstype, social structure, motivation, goals. I guess we could see everything from a tight group of soldiers in formation with a strong leader (the movie 300 comes to mind) to a more dynamic group of adventures having their roles, have found their niche in the group. Others might do more guerilla fighting style. I guess it will depend on their goals, motivation for an attack or defence.
I've been focusing on large PvP battles. But your right, how a large band deals with a equally sized band of players, and how they deal with a group of giants should be quite different.
I'm hoping that there will be lots of different formations and tactic based styles to choose from. Maybe some tied to skill levels and unlocked as the leader gains skill points or finds ancient combat tomes that contain rare, sought after knowledge? They could even have different branches of unit combat skills to select from, this would ensure that not every leader is a clone of every other leader. It would make certain well trained leaders sought after as their notoriety spreads. This would work well in terms of Mercenary companies or individual soldiers of fortune.
Exciting stuff to ponder!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
As soon as I read the blog on formations I thought "this will never happen". Granted, I know diddly about programing but I think the technical challenges of implementing this is beyond the scope of PfO.
Tracking the real-time position of dozens of players and their relative position to each other in an MMO? Sounds difficult. The latency issues alone makes this improbable.
As soon as I read the blog on formations I thought "this will never happen". Granted, I know diddly about programing but I think the technical challenges of implementing this is beyond the scope of PfO.
Tracking the real-time position of dozens of players and their relative position to each other in an MMO? Sounds difficult. The latency issues alone makes this improbable.
While I'm no programmer, based on games coming out now it seems that with the right middleware this isn't that complex, as it would have been 10 years ago. The systems already tracking where everyone is at all times, or at least with each sync. Adding a few additional columns to the data stream wouldn't slide show you. I know the Archeage engine, unreal 3, is supposed to be able to handle 100 vs 100 battles with ease. No clue what engine they are leaning towards with PFO, but I'm sure it's comparable.
With their low budget model I don't see GW doing anything ground breaking from a technical aspect. I think this will be a feature that comes way after release. Maybe when they nail down their middleware they can do another tech demo that would change my mind.
I believe they have nailed down their middleware. There's a blogpost (I think) that discusses this. I know they decided on a number of titles to go with, although the post didn't list which they choose. Pretty sure a lot of its being used now, or at least it's being installed.
I'm willing to give them leeway though by not taking the tech demo as the sum total of their capabilities. Sure it could have been better. Companies like Blizzard have always done well driving attention with their teaser videos. GW, being a new company, won't kick out such high quality material so soon. But I have faith that it'll come with time.
Perhaps that's what differentiates us?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So we know a leadership skill won't actually give you anything; no skill will. But after you've trained the skill, you have to get your badge to unlock the bonus. Will we be required to actually lead a group of 5 people in proper formation against a group of enemies (PvE or PvP) to unlock it? I hope so.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Money doesn't drive invention so much as invention drives money.Sounds naive. Wish it was true though.
I don't mean to be a negative Nancy. Maybe I'm subconsciously managing my expectations.
More likely you bought into the same rhetorical hogwash that factors an unrealized margin over customer preference, or packaging over product.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What I am guessing we will see is something like the leadership skills in Eve Online.
You had skills to boost your squad / wingmates with different boosts (extra speed, extra armor, extra repairs etc). It wouldn't surprise that you would see things like:
- Extra range for ranged attacks
- Extra speed for running
etc.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How about you reward the people that work together and they run through those that don't?
This is very much a co-op MMO. If players have to stay in formation and they don't the only thing a leadership ability could reasonably do is lessen the blow.
If you are in formation and your line gets penetrated, at that point of intrusion the enemy forces would gain some sort of flanking bonus. Leadership would lesson that bonus as the commander of the force would be compensating some how... changing the focus of the spell casters or ranged folks, shifting personnel that aren't yet involved in combat, transitioning ranged units to melee.
Now if someone outright just breaks ranks to flee, well that should have a bit more significant impact on the force that person was a part of.
The reason formations have histories dating back to over 4,000 years is because they worked and continue to work... albeit on a much larger scale see Maneuver Warfare. If kingdoms are going to go to war... it needs to be war, it needs to look like war, feel like war, and function like war. Not a clusterfied gank-fest that from afar could be mistaken for an disturbed pile of ants with special effects.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How about you reward the people that work together and they run through those that don't?
This is very much a co-op MMO. If players have to stay in formation and they don't the only thing a leadership ability could reasonably do is lessen the blow.
If you are in formation and your line gets penetrated, at that point of intrusion the enemy forces would gain some sort of flanking bonus. Leadership would lesson that bonus as the commander of the force would be compensating some how... changing the focus of the spell casters or ranged folks, shifting personnel that aren't yet involved in combat, transitioning ranged units to melee.
Now if someone outright just breaks ranks to flee, well that should have a bit more significant impact on the force that person was a part of.
The reason formations have histories dating back to over 4,000 years is because they worked and continue to work... albeit on a much larger scale see Maneuver Warfare. If kingdoms are going to go to war... it needs to be war, it needs to look like war, feel like war, and function like war. Not a clusterfied gank-fest that from afar could be mistaken for an disturbed pile of ants with special effects.
I agree. I personally hope consideration like high ground and fortifications have a real (non superficial) impact as well. It would be nice for there to be different tactics and variables depending on the conditions of the battle. A siege should look different than a match in an open terrain. High ground and guerrilla tactics should also have advantages and drawbacks that become a planning consideration.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And I still don't see how it's useful in PFO.Why are they in combat? That's ridiculous. They're making profit or running your keep.That was my point. Leadership doesn't need to be tied to combat.
Do you mean to tell me you do not understand that six swords swung by six arms on the same opponent will reduce the enemy's offensive strength faster than six swords swung by six arms at six different enemies?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Do you mean to tell me you do not understand that six swords swung by six arms on the same opponent will reduce the enemy's offensive strength faster than six swords swung by six arms at six different enemies?And I still don't see how it's useful in PFO.Why are they in combat? That's ridiculous. They're making profit or running your keep.That was my point. Leadership doesn't need to be tied to combat.
We're saying that Leadership in Pathfinder has nothing to do with leading others in combat.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We're saying that Leadership in Pathfinder has nothing to do with leading others in combat.Do you mean to tell me you do not understand that six swords swung by six arms on the same opponent will reduce the enemy's offensive strength faster than six swords swung by six arms at six different enemies?And I still don't see how it's useful in PFO.Why are they in combat? That's ridiculous. They're making profit or running your keep.That was my point. Leadership doesn't need to be tied to combat.
Then how do you propose that those six swords should be directed to focus down one opponent simultaneously?