Goblin Squad Member
|
| 18 people marked this as a favorite. |
This isn't my first go around on the fantasy sandbox MMO wagon but for many of you it is. As someone who has been there and done that I urge you to listen to me on this one. There are many features that are good or even essential in a theme-park that are not needed or even harmful in a sandbox. Mounts early after game release is one of them.
1. This game is not quest driven. "Good day adventurer! Could you please deliver to this to my brother in the next town, who wants you to see our cousin across the map, who will send you back to me." Yeah... that is not PFO. This game is player interaction driven which means...
2. Most people won't travel frequently. Aside from explorers who likely won't be able to see much if blazing by on horse-back and traders, who need wagons and mules more badly, few people will travel on a regular basis. Because of things like localized banking and player owned structures most players will probably spend 80-90% of their time in a single hex and the surrounding area. This is the case in EVE, Darkfall, Mortal, Wurm, Xsyon... every sandbox I have ever played.
1. It makes a small map smaller. In many ways it doesn't matter how large a map is. The size of a map is how long it takes you to cross it. People get more out of travel and exploration if the world is revealed to them gradually, rather than handed to them quickly/easily as they gallop through it. Mounts become nessecary as the world grows. Before that they are un-needed and allow people to access content FAR too easily.
2. Fast travel ruins wars. Evil dudes are fighting justice dudes in the far corner of the map. TEO lives in the opposite corner. We show up and win the battle for justice dudes, and are home in time for lunch because fast travel allows us to quickly cross the map while doing something in another window. Had we all had to run half an hour, and then run all the way back, we wouldn't have come. This is a good thing. It means it is difficult for one faction to hold much sway over the entire map. That TEO or any other massive faction can't determine the outcome of every war.
3. It means it won't be released at the same time as mounted combat. Lee Hammock has stated as much. This means the same immersion breaking crap as every theme-park. Dismount to fight.
1. Pack mules and donkeys aren't mounts. So they are pets. These are what traders are going to need early in the game. Not fast mounts that can't carry much, and not expensive carts and wagons that carry far more than needed. Even it we want carts we can have mules pull them though.
2. Ranger/Druid companions and familiars are all pets. This is as stated by Lee Hammock. These are iconic class features.
3. Pets will logically come with a breeding system. That means when the time IS right for mounts, that they will be easier to implement.
Mounts will be harmful to this game early on. It would be logical to argue against their immediate implementation even if the resources were already developed.
Pets are more than just fluff. They are meaningful class features, and an integral part of a good trade system. Honestly I feel they have more practicle utility than mounts.
Please if you voted for mounts think this over and consider a change. Show this to your friends as well. Spread the word.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I dont agree.
Mounts give a system for draft animals so you can do farming/caravans. This would include mounts, war horses, war dogs, pack mules/donkeys, mounts for farming, mounts for pulling caravans, mounts for carriages.
No reason why pets will come with a breeding system but mounts wouldnt
Ranger/Druid companions i dont consider these to be part of the pet system, they are core to the classes.
I dont think allowing people to travel faster is too much of a detriment, it encourages people to travel around and explore.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I came to similar conclusions.
I disagree on the first few though.
Quests are in the form of objectives.
"We found a dungeon! Hurry! Come here before someone else clears it or it despawns!!"
"Mithril deposit! Summon the miners quickly!"
"Enemy raiders seen at our mine!"
"We're meeting at thorn keep" "oh, I don't have time to get there"
Apart from the gist of those, I agree, and voted for pets.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ranger/Druid companions i dont consider these to be part of the pet system, they are core to the classes.
It doesn't matter if you do or not. Lee Hammock has directly stated companions and familiars are part of the pet system. And mounts only encompasses things you ride and fast travel. So that is what we are voting on. Not what you consider mounts and pets.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I came to similar conclusions.
I disagree on the first few though.
Quests are in the form of objectives.
"We found a dungeon! Hurry! Come here before someone else clears it or it despawns!!"
"Mithril deposit! Summon the miners quickly!"
"Enemy raiders seen at our mine!"
"We're meeting at thorn keep" "oh, I don't have time to get there"Apart from the gist of those, I agree, and voted for pets.
Everything you stated is likely to generally happen in local areas. People won't go searching for dungeons and resource deposits for people that are hexes away. If there is a high enough concentration of dungeons and resources per hex most people are likely to spend most their time no farther than a hex or two from their home or settlement.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Everything you stated is likely to generally happen in local areas. People won't go searching for dungeons and resource deposits for people that are hexes away. If there is a high enough concentration of dungeons and resources per hex most people are likely to spend most their time no farther than a hex or two from their home or settlement.I came to similar conclusions.
I disagree on the first few though.
Quests are in the form of objectives.
"We found a dungeon! Hurry! Come here before someone else clears it or it despawns!!"
"Mithril deposit! Summon the miners quickly!"
"Enemy raiders seen at our mine!"
"We're meeting at thorn keep" "oh, I don't have time to get there"Apart from the gist of those, I agree, and voted for pets.
Well I know how to exploit YOUR empire then. :P
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
As someone who had five different mounts in a previous game (even though I used only two, one for ground and one for flight.), a lot of those don't seem to be an issue.
Early on mounts:
1. Mounts or horses have almost always been convenience creatures. 95% of what I used a mount for never involved quests, it was just getting from place to place.
2. I'm pretty sure EVERYONE benefits from horses. I bet traders may go from settlement to settlement to find goods, explorers can cover more ground, adventurers can carry more stuff and beat others to dungeons, bandits will be able to harass better . All this aside, I don't know the starting size, but if it takes about 4 minutes to cross a hex, then crossing 5 hexes would take about 20 minutes. Say with a mount it only takes 3 minutes to travel. Then it's 15 minutes of travel, which is 5 minutes to do something else.
How it hurts us.
1. That seems to be an issue if the map is large as well: makes it smaller. With the small starting area, I think it would be a bit harder to get to places considering bandits may not be as spread around, and there's still the possibility of terrain slowing you.
2. Fast Travel may be a lot more complicated. I would suspect it won't be easy to send a large amount of troops (I'm thinking there may be NPC soldiers as well as PC soldiers), and not to mention if you find out your neighbor is allowing fast travel between them and your nemesis, you are probably going to go talk to them about it... If they still are, if I was running a settlement, if there was a way, I would not let warring factions use my wizards for fast travel as they please.
3. Priorities. I believe the Territorial war aspect won't be in for awhile either, so point 2 could be moot.
Benefits:
Generally in agreement. I'd like to see skills for breeders (and hopefully, not see those stupid breeding system in other games where you have to pay cash to do so, do a ridiculous quest because the reward Super Duper Rare, or be a super rare drop from monster x.) The only thing it sounds like I don't like is it sounds like you said mounts =/= pets. For some people, that might be ok. For others (like the paladin's holy mount, cavaliers, or just a guy who loves his horse), they will probably think of it as a pet (I know I do in real life.)
Also, sorry if I sound like a jerk. I sometimes get vocal about things I don't like.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Andius I first love the guild that you guys started and its purpose. I love that you bought a tavern also as a group. That's full of win.
I respectfully disagree with you though. I think your guild more than others benefit from having mounts. You can respond to crisis much faster like police being called to an emergency. Also it was my understanding that the tiles in this game are going to be BIG. No?
I understand the fast travel thing and completely agree with the concern. I do agree with fast travel if it's handled like DDO where it's tied to magic or divine reasons for the fast travel. Rather than everyone can fast travel because it's cool and convenient.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Only slightly related... I wouldn't mind an original UO style moongate system, where they actually were tied to the phases of the moons, so where the moons were determined where the gate would take you. That would be kinda cool, but I have no idea if such a system could sit in the lore or not.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As someone who had five different mounts in a previous game (even though I used only two, one for ground and one for flight.), a lot of those don't seem to be an issue.
Little of what you learned in that game is relevant to this discussion. Sandboxes are an entirely new ballpark. With localized banking and player controlled territory everything you know about player migration is about to change. Try Wurm Online, Mortal Online, Xsyon, or EVE for a comparable system.
You will quickly find the most efficient way to run things is establish a base of operations, and you will rarely leave that area except for trade and occasional adventures. You change bases sometimes but always you have a HQ you live from.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Andius, you're so ORGANIZED, with your bolded categories and lists. Yay you.
Also, I agree.
You have 10 seconds to catch someone's interest. Bolded points are the difference between a wall of text and something that draws the reader in enough to read the full statement.
So I like to make sure my main points are bolded points on lists. ;)
Anyway, thanks.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My quick viewpoint (considering both features will be added):
No horses: Slower movement -> seemingly bigger world.
No 'pets': Some archetypes (which many love) miss a core feature and wind up gimped.
(I did have a larger write-up but it turned into an obscure heap of chaos. Don't do sleep deprivation.)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I agree with the OP... That being said I think while developing these things the longevity of the game should be specifically addressed... I'm not one to speak ill of something without adding how to fix it so... My idea would be to put the TRAVEL PATHS very far apart that way it would be meaningful to walk/explore as you go but usefull for when your trying to cross the country... Now if your talking player controlled mounts you could easily make them move at a rate (obviously more than a run) slower than the predetermined TRAVEL PATHS.
TRAVEL PATHS defined as: I pay to ride a wagon/monster/bus/etc. get on the bus at point A and sit back and enjoy the ride/scenery until I get to point B.
Another side not for the player controled mounts (if that will be an option) I think it would speak volumes to include this as well as every other possible aspect by taking into account REALISM... How many games out there have u feed a mount? (full belly means they move faster) Put horseshoes on a mount?(maybe you go X% faster if u have horsehoes)... If your not on a road you have a <1% chance for your horse to break a leg or lose a horseshoe... This would ultimately require more investment on the part of the player and increase the games longeveity.
Oh and one more thing... Maybe let us customize our mounts like wearing a black harness, or a gold one, like skins in so many other games. Heck let us do this with pets too so that everyone is not running around with the same thing... Maybe let me put an eyepatch on my pet dog/cat/cow/etc.
-My 2 Cents :)
Customize, Customize, Customize = Win Win
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I agree, mostly. As long as there is an alternate travel for vast distances between fixed points. I don't always have enough time to trek an hour across the globe, although it would be fun and the trip is most of the adventure. Think how boring Lord of The Rings would have been in Gandalf had summoned the eagles and just flown close....
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I agree that mounts will not be beneficial early on. Why effectively reduce the size of the world at launch. Mounts support a 'global' economy/'global' military model. From what I understand gw is trying to create/ support local economies/politics. Everyone gets a mount in the end so the advantage of a mount is lost along with the local economy/social dynamics. Message ends.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This post made me change my previous vote. Not in the fact that mounts or fast travel will hurt the game. I just agree that pets are much more needed at launch for some professions.
I intend to play a druid and while I don't want to play it as a pet class, I think that not having that option available will hurt the profession. Less people will play it or the Ranger and therefore less support from the Devs. Creating a cycle that I would rather avoid.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For those who missed it in the other topic...
...Mounts and Fast Travel - Players will be able to train and buy/sell mounts they can ride around the world wherever they want. They most likely will not be used in combat initially; long term they will but mounted combat is a whole new animation set that basically doubles the animation work for combat. Players will also be able to book passage to another settlement via a fast travel service (if the settlements on both ends are friendly and both have the fast travel upgrades) that is cheaper than owning a mount, but only takes the player on a predefined path between settlements. This may be a horse, a wagon, whatever. Players are still attackable while using fast travel. Even without combat there are a lot of animations involved in riding...
...Pets - Pets are primarily animal companions for rangers and druids. It will also allow familiars and random guard dogs or other such animals to follow the players along, but those are not primary features of a class so they'll be less useful. The tech involved is all the AI for pets pathing with you plus combat AI, plus all the mechanics work balancing them and all the animations. This also makes things like hiring mercenaries or hirelings to follow you around possible since its basically the same system. Also vanity pets so you can have a random pet animal that follows you around....
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You see, while none of the reasons you provided are factually incorrect I don't think mounts will have the negative effects you described.
I think mounts and fast travel will have a similar increase in travel speed as warping in eve not as mounts in WoW where the map is very small to begin with.
IIRC it would take an hour to travel from on side of a hex to another so with double speed it would still take 30 minutes. This still represents a considerable amount of time and is not as harmful as described above.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@papaver
I agree with you that i do not think andius is correct that mounts will hurt the game.
However, the problem is not fast travel and mounts. The problem is that GW picked a horrible horrible name for pet system.
What GW is asking for isnt a pet system. its Druid/ranger animal companions, its wizard familiars, its summon monster spells...etc.
All of those is why i changed by vote. I think that animal companions and familiars should be put in before extra stuff like mounts.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
To be perfectly clear I operate under the assumption that the vote decides what order those things will be put in during Alpha.
I think having only one of those things available in what is a product people pay for regardless of if they call it beta or not would be nonsensical. As I think a main component of a class like pets for rangers and druids is very important to have in game as is a logistical component like mounts or fast travel.
So the only thing I actually disagree on is the statement that mounts and fast travel are harmful.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@leperkhaun
Sure it might not be the most fitting name, but it is also more or less the industry standard for AI controlled game objects that a player own on either temporal or non-temporal basis and is able to issue some set of commands to.
Kinda off-topic: If anyone has player Dragon Age, I kinda liked the logical expression system they used so that player was able to define NPC party-member behavior. If they had something like that with existing presets, pets could be quite nice. But then, I am just too sleepy to think about server-side evaluation implications and all those things.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
To be perfectly clear I operate under the assumption that the vote decides what order those things will be put in during Alpha.
--
Then again, I would make the assumption that 'crowdforging' an answer to a question would affect the crowdforging phase.
Mounts and pets are relatively small issues when worrying about whether or not server manages persistence with perfection.EDIT: Not trying to step on your toes here. Just my best guess.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That should cover it. :)
And in general, alphas are meant to be fairly closed affairs as the application (whichever kind it is) is still more than bare bones - it might be missing a few joints and whatnot. Need to get those seamlessly together before fancier stuff like meat can be put on :)
Time to sleep.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This isn't my first go around on the fantasy sandbox MMO wagon but for many of you it is. As someone who has been there and done that I urge you to listen to me on this one. There are many features that are good or even essential in a theme-park that are not needed or even harmful in a sandbox. Mounts early after game release is one of them.
Agree with you completely here. I've never seen a game do fast travel well. Fast travel is something that, by it's very design, is made to allow you to skip large chunks of land and content within a game. It makes worlds feel smaller, and gives way too much safety when crossing the land. In Golarion, only higher level casters can really fast travel. Having it open to everyone just seems wrong. Even if they keep it so you're attackable while using fast travel, then fast travel just becomes a farming tool for the unsavory within a game. Get a small group of people sitting on one of those pre-defined paths between settlements. Fast travel is effectively shut down.
I think the simplest way that I can view it all is like this. Pets help you in your adventure. They travel with you, fight with you, or die with you. Mounts help you move faster and skip dangers, thus skipping content.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The Fast Travel and Mounts will allow for prettier travel between settlements.
I am under the impression that fast travel is already supposed to be in the game as it has been mentioned in at least one blog already and that the Mounts option is only to make the fast travel prettier (vanity fast travel option).
In your example, Andius, I guess that anyone wanting to prevent reinforcements from arriving quickly through unclaimed hexes needs to set up an ambush that will pull anyone out of fast travel until they can cope with the ambushers.
Nevertheless I go with Pets which are stated to have mechanical benefits as opposed to seemingly vanity only Mounts.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@provos
thats the thing. When you say "Pet System" you dont automatically think animal companions and familiars. You think minor combat buff and collectable pets....possibly maybe additional options for the summon spells or animate spells.
Its kinda misleading since those are core parts of several classes, so you wouldnt think that GW wouldnt make those, you would suppose that those are already in the game.
honestly they need to delete the poll and use this:
Druid/ranger/wizard animal companion/familiar
Fast travel and mount
Dieties (domains, clothes..etc)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The term "pet" definitely implies a roleplay item that is not useful to the game mechanic.
Considering how often Animal Companions are accused of being overpowered it is a poor choice of wording.
I dont understand where this thinking comes from. Pets in everquest for example were definitely not a roleplay mechanic, they were integral class mechanics.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Lee Hammock has directly stated companions and familiars are part of the pet system. And mounts only encompasses things you ride and fast travel. So that is what we are voting on. Not what you consider mounts and pets.
Unfortunately that was (and still is?) not completely clear to us when the vote came up.
in my mind there are several different shades between pet and mount
-cosmetic pets (fluff only)
-wizard familiars (some abilities affecting combat)
-ranger/druid animal companions, trained war dogs etc (combat abilities)
-summoned creatures and raised undead (combat abilities)
-mules, donkeys, pack horses (inventory)
-riding mounts (fast travel)
-warhorses and paladin mounts (fast travel, mounted combat)
I voted similar to leperkhaun, functional horses before pretty parrots (and mounted knights before druid menageries).
Now you are saying that i have voted for cosmetics (prettier fast travel) before game functionality. You are also claiming the pet system is more important that the mounts for developing mounted combat. Not so happy if that is correct.
Can we have some official clarification what the options entail (subject to change etc etc)?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well as Lee Hammock stated in this post:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p5pu&page=2?Poll-Pathfinder-Online-Crowdfo rging-Vote-2#59
and has been stated a couple of times in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrRxjudWTzQ
by the pet system they mean ALL the pets ranging from druid pets/ranger pets/ wizzard familiars that are useful in combat to vanity pets that have no mechanical influence on combat and such.
Also as stated a couple of times in the above linked video at 17:57 the Vote is about what of the three options will be added first and all three options will be added into the game.
This concerns the Early Enrollment Beta, a period during which features will be added into the game. So at the beginning of the Early Enrollment Beta the game will not be feature complete and (presumably) at the end of it it will have all the features in it that are required to launch the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Mounts are fine, instant port to other areas of the map, not so fine. GW will make sure that travel time is meaningful in this game. You will not be able to respond to a war on the other side of the map instantly. You may even need days to plan out the movement if you want to respond to a war on the other side of the map. This all does not mean mounts are bad. An increased level of travel speed along with an array of skills to train and ride your mount only leads to more meaningful player interaction, not less of it. I think mounted travel will be very important to the trader-type players, which I think will be a very viable play style.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
While I agree that changing the name of pets into companions would have been better, I would rather have mounts.
Not so much the fast travel, I agree that it would make maps far to easier access like Wow is now.
I much prefer the mount option of the poll. I am an explorer, I like to ride far and wide, regardless on where my home base is. Seeing all that I can see. I did it in E.V.E. I took a 50 jump trip to see the first portal. A trip I thought well worth it.
I have ridden my horse to tops of peaks in Skyrim, just to see whats up there.
Mounts, will help traders, something I also think I might be doing.
In short, I would like mounts far more than having pets.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I voted for mounts based on the original post. Here are me reason
1. Anytime someone states in the beginning of the post, "I have been gaming since the eon of time and therefor you better listening to me" usually has not thought through all aspect of their statements.
2. Statements that appear to be fact are merely opinion such as "Most people will not travel frequently". There is no proof of that. The only thing I can thing is that the group you are with stays in one location, Where my group loves to travel, while another group seek to PVP.
3. Explores, like me, love our mounts. It allows us to get to locations we want to explore. We do not blaze through anything we take our time. But our time is important to us. We do not like traveling slowing through areas we have already seen. We want to get to the next unexplored region to explore it, Not just reveal it on our mini map. Some places are good from mount exploration while others you have to do on foot. Vanguard and Lord of the Rings Online (Lotro) where fine examples of mounts where I could go anywhere and explore. Also once we are done exploring we want to get back to our base location as quickly as we can and a mount helps explorers like me do that.
4. Map Size. "The size of a map is how long it takes you to cross it" This is just wrong. If this were true why not make us walk everywhere and have no jog or run. Size of the Map is the Size of the Map. How you decide to cross is and what you decide to get out of that travel should be entirely up to you. I know for me riding by on horseback Just shows me other areas I want to visit but I may not be able to as I may be on another errand, such as meeting a friend in a bar.
For me mounts allow me to enjoy the game better. I love moving constantly. In fact in games such a Star Wars Galaxy I built my home I visited it maybe once every other month just to make sure it was still there. The rest of the time was exploring and traveling. I knew people all over the place but my core group of friends were travelers like me. We never stayed in one place. I am sure there are group of players just the opposite where they stay in one place and know some travelers.
Good luck to all and I look forward to seeing you in game. If you need a scout or someone to deliver an item look me up I will do it even if I have to crawl to get it done.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You have 10 seconds to catch someone's interest. Bolded points are the difference between a wall of text and something that draws the reader in enough to read the full statement.
So I like to make sure my main points are bolded points on lists. ;)
This is a very important point. Trying to skim over every single thread on these forums for over a year now, I can attest to how easy it is to just skip posts if they're unorganized walls of text.
Also, Andius, you make a compelling case. I don't agree with every point, but you've convinced me to change my vote from Mounts to Pets.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If one of the gods to be added formed the antithesis to Nature, such as entropy, I would vote for gods. Otherwise I'll vote for familiars and creature companions for the Wizardly, Druidic, and Rangerly archetypes (and possibly Paladin, if his horse is more a companion than a conveyance).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@papaver
I agree with you that i do not think andius is correct that mounts will hurt the game.
However, the problem is not fast travel and mounts. The problem is that GW picked a horrible horrible name for pet system.
What GW is asking for isnt a pet system. its Druid/ranger animal companions, its wizard familiars, its summon monster spells...etc.
All of those is why i changed by vote. I think that animal companions and familiars should be put in before extra stuff like mounts.
Yeah something like AI Companions or pretty much everything other than pets would have helped. Former WoW players simply associate the therm with those tiny useless vanity creatures.