Another thing I should note for all of you to think about is the nature of combat itself and how fake it is, which lends to the constant rat race in games for better equipment. Instead of ever increasing damage and hit points, perhaps games should deal with relatively minor increases and worry more about adding more unique combat directions in future expansions.
It all starts with questioning the idea of the 18-22 damage iron sword that has a delay of 2.3 seconds. It is silly, and instead should be replaced by a weapon that has no basis of damage, but rather how well it can pierce certain armors, how fast its actual swing animation is, how draining it might be on stamina, and best of all, what abilities can be performed with it.
My blog is a continuing story of what MMO's should be like.
And so they should. Aggro, while based on real life ideas, is an artificial and stupid system that forgets the idea of multiple AI attitudes in a world. Every monster lives by the same aggro arrangement. In reality, it would be different though, based on what you are fighting. The thing is, most monsters just feel like repetitive tests of will to fight. Gr. WANT new combat, a lot.
Originally posted by Xeronn
Allso...why do so many people insist on better and better NPC AI in mmorpgs? Especially if you need to fight said NPC more then once?Spare that for single player games , because in themepark mmo`s , nomatter how good or bad the ai is , by the time average joe gets to the tough instance , there are 1000 videos on how to do it on youtube...and he`ll probably do it 100 times to get some shiny
So...isnt the AI totally wasted there? nomatter how good you make it , all you end up with is making players learn longer and more complicated sequences of actions and just repeating those over and over and over
The only real challange AI NPC`ss can ever pose in a MMORPG is endurance and rezistance to grind and booredom
You two should read my thread, "Innovation, Adaptive Combat Mechanics." In that thread, I give an introduction to the combat mechanics I designed to compliment adaptive AI. In my opinion AI has to become adaptive in order to evolve PVE gameplay. When I say adaptive that means the AI or the player can adapt thier strategy on the fly. In order for the player to adapt, the combat mechanics must offer a vast array of different options and pathways to victory. A dozen warrior classes can tank many different ways but there is not one "correct" way to victory. I know some people complain about that when they read my design, but its the adventure getting their, not the destination. Taking that into a combat perspective. No more min and maxes. I understand that, on the programming part for AI to become adaptive will probably be a monumental tedious task.
Seems really interesting but I failed to find the link to that thread so do you have a link for that?
I really few the urge for some new combat mechanics, specially regarding tanking. I always play the tank and I love it, but time got me bored of how repetitive it can get with all the aggro rotations, taunting and all. Nothing new seems to ever come up, and I bet my soul it is still way more dynamic than dps hehe.
Cheers!
"You know, this place makes me wonder. Which would be worse, to live as a monster or to die as a good man?"
What I mean is if there are roles such as tanking, healing and dpsing it is better, therefore, to have a class system that enforces those role so they can be polished to a further extent. If the roles are necessary, the class-free argument is a lie on itself because players would be "creating" this classes with the mechanics provided by the game to do so. Then, it is far more productive for gameplay if the roles are adressed properly on the system so they are properly adressed. Main point is the so called freedom of classes is unreal. I believe, as such, that expanding and evolving the class system is far better than completely denying it. The development of a class free model brings up enormous issues that goes way beyond balancing classes. Personally, every single non class game I play have some issue with combat that instead of implementing diversity actually seem to portray a monotous and similar sort of fighting to all playstyles.
I see what you meant now and I agree.
If there are little to no limitations to skills and abilities, at worst there is just handful of builds that rule over others (tankmage anyone?) But because of these limitations the varying builds always outline something which can be interpreted as classes. The freedom of classes or the freedom of choice is actually the freedom to make mistakes when designing your build. This is what some people call illusion of choice. That you can make any build you want but only a handful of them are useful. This is especially apparent in games that have PvP.
However like I wrote earlier, the surrounding game and how it works has atleast as much impact on the emerging roles than character development system alone. So e.g. whether you have a warrior-class or merely skills that vaguely outline a warrior, there will be no tank class if players cannot manipulate mob aggro.
A few things - the tankmage example comes up a lot because it's the only example - one from almost 15 years ago - that people can use to support that argument. If that wasn't the case, they'd use examples from modern UO, EVE and other skillbased games.
You're also confusing class with role. Yes, Offense, defense and support are three common roles. In mainstream class-based games, these roles are also classes.... static classes. In skill-based MMOs these roles change and mutate to adapt to combat situations. That's why you'll find that players in skill-based games will have different sets of gear and skills to accommodate how they are going to use that role in the specific battle, where as in mst class based games, you dont use anything other than the One Suit to Rule Them All.
When was the last time you played a class based game and you actually changed up your routine based on what the other team was using? When was the last time you switched damage type on your gear or weapon in battle to more effectively counter your opponent? These scenarios are few and far between in mainstream MMOs because you know EXACTLY what each character in each class is wearing and doing.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Seems really interesting but I failed to find the link to that thread so do you have a link for that?
I really few the urge for some new combat mechanics, specially regarding tanking. I always play the tank and I love it, but time got me bored of how repetitive it can get with all the aggro rotations, taunting and all. Nothing new seems to ever come up, and I bet my soul it is still way more dynamic than dps hehe.
Cheers!
Motivation
Throughout the course of MMORPG’s, gameplay for melee combat has often been mundane and bland with the use of auto attack. There are two titles that had intentions of improving melee combat mechanics but their implementations did not deliver.
Age of Conan’s philosophy for melee combat is to immerse your self as a real swordsman by allowing the player to freely select any type of directional swing. While in swordplay each directional swing does not have form or structure as a well trained sword man would acquire. Essentially, it felt like the controls were all over the place and very uncomfortable for players.
Sword of the New World provoked a wide array of different stances. I am a believer of allowing the player to have access to many different options. This mechanic peak my interest. However, the stances are nothing more than a deterrent for alternating weapons types in combat. Mainly for aesthetic purposes, these stances compartmentalized the use of different abilities for a saved hot-bar set to the weapon you wanted to use.
Solution
I thought merging the stance design with the directional swings to create new melee mechanics would enhance a fun, diverse and challenging experience for players. Researching real swordsmanship would be the key to offer a unique distinct flavor of melee combat.
Swordsmanship is an element of many different options that could be translated into game design for melee combat. The core of swordsmanship is guards (stances). A guard is the offensive and defensive postures and ready positions from which to deliver all manner of blows to the target.
The Guard System combat is based around the use of guards to simulate an immersive experience of real swordsmanship in gameplay. Guards allow a large array of options for the player to experience multiple ways to win a fight. This mechanic also allows the players to adapt freely in battle to offset the opposition. Unlike Age of Conan with directional swings, Guards allow fluidity and organization while in the heat of the battle.
Importance of the Guard System
The Guard System is translated from European Swordsmanship into gameplay. Think about real swordsmanship. Each swing of the blade is crucial as well as parries and ripostes. You have to change your guard countless times to offset the opponent to perform damage. The Guard system allows the player to become a tactician and to know how each guard works in different situational scenarios. These guards allow the player to strategize before and while in combat to have a chance at victory. Guard system allows players to have a distinct player skill level which complements better playability.
The Guard system is the essential mechanic that opens a window for players to react and adapt to the opponent in real time. This system is not strictly for one way of playability but focuses on freely choosing multiple play styles. The players can adapt freely in the heat of the battle to attempt to control the fight by selecting a guard to strike or defend.
Gameplay is not linear as opposed to other combat designs. There are dozens of different paths a player can fight to determine victory. This design still somewhat focuses on the player to still react with the AI by selecting abilities. However, the Guards are a median of the adaptability of a player to the AI interaction.
NPC AI
AI is another aspect to enhance the versatile adaptability in combat. AI is crucial because it has to complement the complexities of the Guard system to give the player a sense of immersed realism. NPC AI will have limitations upon guard use depending on their intellect and/or militaristic training. For an example, a kobold would be limited to the three basic guards whereas an orc may have a wider access of guards dependent on their training.
All NPC’s will have an intellectual hierarchy of many conditions based on their training of the use of guards. The intellectual hierarchy is a deterrent of how well the NPC will adapt in combat with the use of Guard play.
NPC will block and counter spam attacks. Spam is the same attacks that a player uses over and over to win a battle. The Guard system allows a diverse selection of guards to prevent spam.
Pace of Combat
There are many different technical aspects to gauge the pace of combat. However, there are two attributes that I feel would best show the pace of combat for the Guard system: frequency of player input and the duration of battle.
Frequency of player input with using guards is not fast pace because it negates spamming abilities. Reaction time may seem fast in combat, yet the animation plus server lag increases the time delay between button presses. The guard combat system is not turn-based, which is frequently considered a slower paced combat system.
In theory I would consider the pace of combat for the Guard system to be medium pace. Medium pace of combat represents a slower frequency of player input. A slower pace of combat is crucial for the player to see the types of guards, strikes and defensive techniques that the opponent is using. Depending on player strategy determines how fast or slow the duration of battle may consist.
A few things - the tankmage example comes up a lot because it's the only example - one from almost 15 years ago - that people can use to support that argument. If that wasn't the case, they'd use examples from modern UO, EVE and other skillbased games.
You're also confusing class with role. Yes, Offense, defense and support are three common roles. In mainstream class-based games, these roles are also classes.... static classes. In skill-based MMOs these roles change and mutate to adapt to combat situations. That's why you'll find that players in skill-based games will have different sets of gear and skills to accommodate how they are going to use that role in the specific battle, where as in mst class based games, you dont use anything other than the One Suit to Rule Them All.
When was the last time you played a class based game and you actually changed up your routine based on what the other team was using? When was the last time you switched damage type on your gear or weapon in battle to more effectively counter your opponent? These scenarios are few and far between in mainstream MMOs because you know EXACTLY what each character in each class is wearing and doing.
I am not confusing classes with roles. Classes = roles in oldschool games, but nowadays those two are completely separate. The tankmage is a great example of a game where few limitations cause one set of skills to rule over others. It is crude and old, but it proves my point. If games like Skyrim had PvP in them, you'd see similar sets of skills arise that are clearly more effective than others.
D&D has a very flexible class system but the balance is poor to say the least. In DDO the most optimal build to complete the games content was to have 6 characters all Warforged (construct race not so different from golems), 1lvl rogue/Xlvl wizard and 5 sorcerers. The thing was that...
the one level of rogue ensured that the wizard had all needed rogue skills such as lockpicking as class skills, and as a high intelligence character he could then use his skill points to easily keep himself at a level of a master rogue in those skills. -> made conventional rogues more or less useless.
Then as wizards and sorcerers are arcane magic users they can repair constructs, which works as healing for the entire party. -> makes conventional healing useless. Plus the warforged race was immune to poison and disease so there was fewer things to worry.
And last but not least, arcane magic is very powerful in D&D so with the entire party full of magic-users they rip through enemies like nobody's business. They had a way of engaging any encounter, even those that were immune to magic (summon waves upon waves of minions or cast tenser's transformation and transform into a berserker). -> no need for tanks or any other damage dealer for that matter
D&D is a good example of a game where roles are separate from classes and where one build completely overshadows others. Classless games are definitely not immune to this.
Eve is hardly a modern game. it is 8 years old and some of the mechanics reflect that very much. But, Eve actually has classes - they're more or less equivalent to ships. Some classes fit some roles better than others. Battleship is poor in a tackle role for example. Eve's balance is a mess, CCP admits this and have only recently taken proper notice. Only a handful of the ships are useful and only a handful of possible fits in those ships are useful. And its not like many of the ships fullfil different roles or anything. There's plenty of instances where one ship is good for one role, other is better and third is best. Its like in Lineage 2 and AoC I could choose between Fireballs I, II and III. If you see it clearly you have no choice at all.
Players have freedom to choose poorly.
Now what was the last game I switched builds or playstyle on my class to better suit whatever I was doing... That would be nearly every game I've played (?). It is nowhere near as rare as you make it sound. I think your attitude affects your judgement.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
A few things - the tankmage example comes up a lot because it's the only example - one from almost 15 years ago - that people can use to support that argument. If that wasn't the case, they'd use examples from modern UO, EVE and other skillbased games.
You're also confusing class with role. Yes, Offense, defense and support are three common roles. In mainstream class-based games, these roles are also classes.... static classes. In skill-based MMOs these roles change and mutate to adapt to combat situations. That's why you'll find that players in skill-based games will have different sets of gear and skills to accommodate how they are going to use that role in the specific battle, where as in most class based games, you dont use anything other than the One Suit to Rule Them All.
When was the last time you played a class based game and you actually changed up your routine based on what the other team was using? When was the last time you switched damage type on your gear or weapon in battle to more effectively counter your opponent? These scenarios are few and far between in mainstream MMOs because you know EXACTLY what each character in each class is wearing and doing.
I am not confusing classes with roles. Classes = roles in oldschool games, but nowadays those two are completely separate. The tankmage is a great example of a game where few limitations cause one set of skills to rule over others. It is crude and old, but it proves my point. If games like Skyrim had PvP in them, you'd see similar sets of skills arise that are clearly more effective than others.
D&D has a very flexible class system but the balance is poor to say the least. In DDO the most optimal build to complete the games content was to have 6 characters all Warforged (construct race not so different from golems), 1lvl rogue/Xlvl wizard and 5 sorcerers. The thing was that...
the one level of rogue ensured that the wizard had all needed rogue skills such as lockpicking as class skills, and as a high intelligence character he could then use his skill points to easily keep himself at a level of a master rogue in those skills. -> made conventional rogues more or less useless.
Then as wizards and sorcerers are arcane magic users they can repair constructs, which works as healing for the entire party. -> makes conventional healing useless. Plus the warforged race was immune to poison and disease so there was fewer things to worry.
And last but not least, arcane magic is very powerful in D&D so with the entire party full of magic-users they rip through enemies like nobody's business. They had a way of engaging any encounter, even those that were immune to magic (summon waves upon waves of minions or cast tenser's transformation and transform into a berserker). -> no need for tanks or any other damage dealer for that matter
D&D is a good example of a game where roles are separate from classes and where one build completely overshadows others. Classless games are definitely not immune to this.
Eve is hardly a modern game. it is 8 years old and some of the mechanics reflect that very much. But, Eve actually has classes - they're more or less equivalent to ships. Some classes fit some roles better than others. Battleship is poor in a tackle role for example. Eve's balance is a mess, CCP admits this and have only recently taken proper notice. Only a handful of the ships are useful and only a handful of possible fits in those ships are useful. And its not like many of the ships fullfil different roles or anything. There's plenty of instances where one ship is good for one role, other is better and third is best. Its like in Lineage 2 and AoC I could choose between Fireballs I, II and III. If you see it clearly you have no choice at all.
Players have freedom to choose poorly.
Now what was the last game I switched builds or playstyle on my class to better suit whatever I was doing... That would be nearly every game I've played (?). It is nowhere near as rare as you make it sound. I think your attitude affects your judgement.
Very odd response. We're talking about MMOs, so if DnD, a PnP game, is your only example of flexible class system, then I think you prove my point.
"EVE us hardly a modern game"
No one said it wasn't.
"Eve actually has classes - they're more or less equivalent to ships. Some classes fit some roles better than others. Battleship is poor in a tackle role for example. "
The ship is a tool, not the character. That's like saying a person is only a mechanic because he has a spark plug in his hand at this moment.
"Eve's balance is a mess, CCP admits this and have only recently taken proper notice. Only a handful of the ships are useful and only a handful of possible fits in those ships are useful."
That 'handful still comes out to 'several hundred' which is a far cry from your archaic tankmage example. So, yes, I agree with you that there are a couple thousand or maybe even only several hundred ways players are fitting ships... but this supports your One Build theory, how? Whatever the case, you once again confuse a player and his gear here. For example...
"There's plenty of instances where one ship is good for one role, other is better and third is best."
No one has questioned that. You use light armor for stealthing, blunt weapins on skeletons, fire on ice golems, etc. You either are confusing not only class and role but also a character with their gear, or you have played mainstream MMOs so long that anything outside them is foreign to you.
"Now what was the last game I switched builds or playstyle on my class to better suit whatever I was doing... That would be nearly every game I've played (?). "
Serious question - in WOW, where do you keep all that stuff?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I don't really see the need to have one of the classes to be freely built by the player. There should be enough classes to fill all the roles to not need it. More freedom would be better attained by having each class with a larger set of equally benefitial skills and abilities that the player would pick and choose to fit their playstyle but still be within that role.
I dunno, just having templates and let anyone who wants create their own class have advantages as well. It makes balancing harder but far from impossible.
Classes do have their advantages, mainly that they are easier to balance and makes simpler to know what to expect from a certain person in PvP but freedom is important as well.
So as I see it have both systems good and bad stuff, what is important is that you make the system good and flexible in any case. If you use templates that anyone can pick who doesn't want to customize their character you take away the classless systems worst flaw while still keeping the advantages and it would work in most games.
What is bad uis static systems where all players of the same class plays in a certain way and have the same skills, it makes a game boring and predictable, but if you can't see any advatages with classless systems I think you are looking on a bad classless system instead of a good one.
I don't really see the need to have one of the classes to be freely built by the player. There should be enough classes to fill all the roles to not need it. More freedom would be better attained by having each class with a larger set of equally benefitial skills and abilities that the player would pick and choose to fit their playstyle but still be within that role.
I dunno, just having templates and let anyone who wants create their own class have advantages as well. It makes balancing harder but far from impossible.
Classes do have their advantages, mainly that they are easier to balance and makes simpler to know what to expect from a certain person in PvP but freedom is important as well.
So as I see it have both systems good and bad stuff, what is important is that you make the system good and flexible in any case. If you use templates that anyone can pick who doesn't want to customize their character you take away the classless systems worst flaw while still keeping the advantages and it would work in most games.
What is bad uis static systems where all players of the same class plays in a certain way and have the same skills, it makes a game boring and predictable, but if you can't see any advatages with classless systems I think you are looking on a bad classless system instead of a good one.
I agree that although it has its pros and cons, there is merit in trying such an idea. UO and AC have both taken the same route but from the other side of the spectrum - using class templates that people can build from initially even though they are primarily skill-based games.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Very odd response. We're talking about MMOs, so if DnD, a PnP game, is your only example of flexible class system, then I think you prove my point.
DDO uses the D&D ruleset adjusted to MMOs. I did mention DDO.
"EVE us hardly a modern game"
No one said it wasn't.
"Eve actually has classes - they're more or less equivalent to ships. Some classes fit some roles better than others. Battleship is poor in a tackle role for example. "
The ship is a tool, not the character. That's like saying a person is only a mechanic because he has a spark plug in his hand at this moment.
Class/character/ship is a tool. I see little difference. Indeed, on a battlefield soldier needs his gun to be a soldier - without it he'd be a victim/casualty.
The ship uses a sub-set of skills from all the skills piloting character has. It is set of skills, strenghts and weaknesses, just like a class does. The character's skills determine what ships he/she can fly and how well. You do not bring all your skills into play with any one ship. Essentially when that character squeezes itself into a ship, it chooses a class and when he/she fits the ship, he/she customizes that class.
"Eve's balance is a mess, CCP admits this and have only recently taken proper notice. Only a handful of the ships are useful and only a handful of possible fits in those ships are useful."
That 'handful still comes out to 'several hundred' which is a far cry from your archaic tankmage example. So, yes, I agree with you that there are a couple thousand or maybe even only several hundred ways players are fitting ships... but this supports your One Build theory, how? Whatever the case, you once again confuse a player and his gear here. For example...
"There's plenty of instances where one ship is good for one role, other is better and third is best."
No one has questioned that. You use light armor for stealthing, blunt weapins on skeletons, fire on ice golems, etc. You either are confusing not only class and role but also a character with their gear, or you have played mainstream MMOs so long that anything outside them is foreign to you.
You missed the key part "And its not like many of the ships fullfil different roles or anything.". There is no blunt weapons against skeletons and fire against trolls - its just one is better than the other. For example
there's a tank class that is useless in other roles,
then there's a better class for tanking but equally useless in other roles,
and then there's the best class for tanking which is yet again just as useless in other roles.
Now which class would you choose for tanking, hmm? Its not a matter of using a different tool for different purposes but that some tools are outright better than others. Like the Fireball I, II, III example.
"Now what was the last game I switched builds or playstyle on my class to better suit whatever I was doing... That would be nearly every game I've played (?). "
Serious question - in WOW, where do you keep all that stuff?
Sorry, I haven't played WoW since the beta and don't remember much about it. Did you just try to profile me into a WoW player? -Because god forbid I must be "WoW fanboi" if I think like this.
Replies in green.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
"Eve's balance is a mess, CCP admits this and have only recently taken proper notice. Only a handful of the ships are useful and only a handful of possible fits in those ships are useful."
That 'handful still comes out to 'several hundred' which is a far cry from your archaic tankmage example. So, yes, I agree with you that there are a couple thousand or maybe even only several hundred ways players are fitting ships... but this supports your One Build theory, how? Whatever the case, you once again confuse a player and his gear here. For example...
"There's plenty of instances where one ship is good for one role, other is better and third is best."
No one has questioned that. You use light armor for stealthing, blunt weapins on skeletons, fire on ice golems, etc. You either are confusing not only class and role but also a character with their gear, or you have played mainstream MMOs so long that anything outside them is foreign to you.
You missed the key part "And its not like many of the ships fullfil different roles or anything.". There is no blunt weapons against skeletons and fire against trolls - its just one is better than the other. For example
there's a tank class that is useless in other roles,
then there's a better class for tanking but equally useless in other roles,
and then there's the best class for tanking which is yet again just as useless in other roles.
Now which class would you choose for tanking, hmm? Its not a matter of using a different tool for different purposes but that some tools are outright better than others. Like the Fireball I, II, III example.
See, that's where you're getting stuck. In EVE or UO, I'd use the gear that best suits the scenario. My character is not restricted to a class, but is able to take up multiple roles.
"Now what was the last game I switched builds or playstyle on my class to better suit whatever I was doing... That would be nearly every game I've played (?). "
Serious question - in WOW, where do you keep all that stuff?
Sorry, I haven't played WoW since the beta and don't remember much about it. Did you just try to profile me into a WoW player? -Because god forbid I must be "WoW fanboi" if I think like this.
I'm well aware that you didn't care for it long term or that you didn't care for the raiding endgame, but that seemed to indicate to me that you did play it. I asked about WOW because I played it, most people have played it at some point, you seemed to indicate you've played it and it was a question I've had on my mind for a while. It was a genuine question for more information as it would help better understnad how you were even doing that in a game that seems to be designed to work against any level of versatility. How did you get 'profiling' or 'WOW fanboi' from that question?
replies in yellow
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I'm a strict defender of the class system. The specialization system, as far as combat goes, started in the Ancient Armies and since then we have the division of "Infantary, Cavalary and Archery - now Artillary". Also, the ability to pick a class accounts for a major choice in your playstyle and how you see your character to start with.
This kind of division makes it possible to enhance each class individually so it gets to the best of its gameplay, on a particular role or playstyle. Furthermore, the holy trinity is instituitionalized for a particular reason: The major aspects of combat in MMOs are: 1) Dealing Damage; 2) Taking Damage; 3) Healing or Avoiding Damage; 4) Controlling Mobs. Unless we invent something such as air combat or marines, I can't see any other big variables coming.
It is true that games such as GW2 are aiming for a remarkable change at this system, but still the paradigm is that in order to grow better in one of those variables you need to lose on the other ones. Therefore, if you're a better damage dealer, you're probably going to be a worse tank, if you're a better healer, you're probably going to be a worse damage dealer than you could be. So that's the central aspect of the class system.
On the other hand, I see a lot of posts about "Freedom in gameplay" and being able to perform sandbox roles such as Crafting in a main way and not simply as some kind of mini-game. So what about introducing some kind of "Sandbox" class? A class that does not stand out in-combat, but rather has its focus on other aspects of the game.
Too bad you didn't played the first renewed mmo called Uo, and you would understand your thinking line isn't very valid, especially because a good sandbox system won't reduce the ability to have class, but in fact would have enhanced it.
In any case, you can have a skill based system and still have class, the thing is the class are choosen by the player, and can be a lot more varied for that reason. As an example you could be a tamer (pet class in Uo), but you could be a pure tamer, or a warrior/tamer, tamer/mage, tamer/bard, and many other variables, which obviously a hard coded class system won't let you have, since a tamer would just be a tamer with their own skill tree. They were a lot of class that wasn't even though as class by the developers but were used in the game by the players, for example you had a class called by the player "treasure hunters", which came from the fact those character would pick skill to open and find chests and treasure maps, as well as bard skill that would let you deal with big number of mobs spawning when you dug those chests. This class wasn't a class the dev team used. Because during the character creation you would have the most usual classes like magic user or warrior, and they would just have a premade choice of skill for you, but in no way you were forced to follow this path. A good sandbox skill system will enhance your class system even though your class aren't hard coded into the game, a bad system will probably have the opposite effect thought.
And last Uo had no trinity, you don't need dps/healer/tank to work as a trinity to make your rpg work, i'm sorry, maybe its hard for you to graps, but this is a fact. Trinity refer to a very specific combat model where tank/healer/dps are working as a trinity to achieve very specific goals like promoting group play in mmorpg. They are many kind of combat working without this system, be it in the real world or in rpg or any kind of computer games. Does the chess board game use the trinity? yet it simulate a fight between 2 kingdom right? So just to give you a pretty stupid example. I think its very hard to grasp for modern mmorpg player because all their mmorpg have combat based on the trinity, so they kind of cannot understand this system is just a single system among many. But they are mmo that don't use this system and they worked very well indeed. Uo combat system is renewed as one of the best by a lot of people even today, and is pointed as a non trinity combat system, believe or not.
if anyone feels like sitting through this vid , i think this is a pretty good view on eve pvp , with a focus on a certain role/class/ship , and good cometary on it
now i`ll admit my ignorance on the way new theme parks work out the details in classes and roles , i cant get past the ideea of instances at all so i cant get in those games...so just throwing this here
It is amazing that the lot of you are still fiddling with classes and roles and not admitting that combat and the overall games are the problem. So long as games continue to pump out mediocre combat, game AI, and worlds that are combat-only, the class and role systems have to stay as they are.
My blog is a continuing story of what MMO's should be like.
It is amazing that the lot of you are still fiddling with classes and roles and not admitting that combat and the overall games are the problem. So long as games continue to pump out mediocre combat, game AI, and worlds that are combat-only, the class and role systems have to stay as they are.
Like I posted before, I have a solution for it. It's adaptive combat mechanics and adaptive AI. That is the only solution I can think of. Unless you have your own? You can still have a class system with adaptive combat and AI.
I don't really see the need to have one of the classes to be freely built by the player. There should be enough classes to fill all the roles to not need it. More freedom would be better attained by having each class with a larger set of equally benefitial skills and abilities that the player would pick and choose to fit their playstyle but still be within that role.
I dunno, just having templates and let anyone who wants create their own class have advantages as well. It makes balancing harder but far from impossible.
Classes do have their advantages, mainly that they are easier to balance and makes simpler to know what to expect from a certain person in PvP but freedom is important as well.
So as I see it have both systems good and bad stuff, what is important is that you make the system good and flexible in any case. If you use templates that anyone can pick who doesn't want to customize their character you take away the classless systems worst flaw while still keeping the advantages and it would work in most games.
What is bad uis static systems where all players of the same class plays in a certain way and have the same skills, it makes a game boring and predictable, but if you can't see any advatages with classless systems I think you are looking on a bad classless system instead of a good one.
I agree with you but my comment was relating to adding more player decisions with their character instead of requiring you to create another character just for that.
Take TOR for example, a class based system. From level 10 through 50 you get 1 skill tree point per level which means throughout progressing your character you only make 41 decisions how you want to advance. What more unique decisions? Go level an alt to 50, and another, keep doing that.
I suggest having more decisions as well as even more choices for class based systems. Rift did rather well with this. A skill based system seems to always have more of both.
Eh, not having templates isn't a significant con to me. Especially since players will end up making their own and sharing them. You are right though, I have seen plenty of bad classless systems but I don't disregard all of them because of that. A reoccurring flaw I see is the stripping down of every item's stats and assigning a skill that improves that stat. Skill based progression can be much more fun and structured than stat collecting. Package skills with more than just one attribute. Allow them to be swapped in or out (Planetside certs). Most of all, don't force a player to reroll for a new experience just when they start to get attached to it.
Originally posted by lifesbrink
It is amazing that the lot of you are still fiddling with classes and roles and not admitting that combat and the overall games are the problem. So long as games continue to pump out mediocre combat, game AI, and worlds that are combat-only, the class and role systems have to stay as they are.
Just because we don't complain about it as much as you do doesn't mean we don't recognize the potential for something better. I know what I want but I also know how unrealistic it is right now.
It is amazing that the lot of you are still fiddling with classes and roles and not admitting that combat and the overall games are the problem. So long as games continue to pump out mediocre combat, game AI, and worlds that are combat-only, the class and role systems have to stay as they are.
Like I posted before, I have a solution for it. It's adaptive combat mechanics and adaptive AI. That is the only solution I can think of. Unless you have your own? You can still have a class system with adaptive combat and AI.
I do have a solution, several, in fact. Better AI, both in and out of battle, that simulates more reactive abilities based on more active combat, similar to your own. This means the combat system needs to be more active, and avoid button rotations. Active blocking and dodging are more or less necessary. Of course, this doesn't count the issue outside of combat...
Environment. Poses no challenge whatsoever. Bleh. Again, this is where we run into issues due to no one apparently caring. Climbing, traps, natural dangers, all of these things are ignored. Hence we have a boring world with combat only to negotiate. Hell, even crafting is lazy, and tends to be largely ignored as well, usually only in to please people who want to do it.
So a more open world, better combat, better AI, better NPC interaction, MORE stuff to do other than murder, and there you go, we have a better MMO to play in. A virtual world, yet a game. These are steps that can be taken as of now, and are doable, yet are not done. Although, MMOs do seem to take baby steps here and there. I hear GW2 has dodging.
Originally posted by mmoguy43
Just because we don't complain about it as much as you do doesn't mean we don't recognize the potential for something better. I know what I want but I also know how unrealistic it is right now.
It is not unrealistic, MMOguy, it is merely ignored. Developers keep catering to the same stuff, because that is all everyone seems to act like they want, until they play the games, and realize it is BORING. If everyone on these forums and others talks about combat and gaming in the same ways, devs have no reason to innovate.
My blog is a continuing story of what MMO's should be like.
Comments
Another thing I should note for all of you to think about is the nature of combat itself and how fake it is, which lends to the constant rat race in games for better equipment. Instead of ever increasing damage and hit points, perhaps games should deal with relatively minor increases and worry more about adding more unique combat directions in future expansions.
It all starts with questioning the idea of the 18-22 damage iron sword that has a delay of 2.3 seconds. It is silly, and instead should be replaced by a weapon that has no basis of damage, but rather how well it can pierce certain armors, how fast its actual swing animation is, how draining it might be on stamina, and best of all, what abilities can be performed with it.
My blog is a continuing story of what MMO's should be like.
Seems really interesting but I failed to find the link to that thread so do you have a link for that?
I really few the urge for some new combat mechanics, specially regarding tanking. I always play the tank and I love it, but time got me bored of how repetitive it can get with all the aggro rotations, taunting and all. Nothing new seems to ever come up, and I bet my soul it is still way more dynamic than dps hehe.
Cheers!
"You know, this place makes me wonder. Which would be worse, to live as a monster or to die as a good man?"
A few things - the tankmage example comes up a lot because it's the only example - one from almost 15 years ago - that people can use to support that argument. If that wasn't the case, they'd use examples from modern UO, EVE and other skillbased games.
You're also confusing class with role. Yes, Offense, defense and support are three common roles. In mainstream class-based games, these roles are also classes.... static classes. In skill-based MMOs these roles change and mutate to adapt to combat situations. That's why you'll find that players in skill-based games will have different sets of gear and skills to accommodate how they are going to use that role in the specific battle, where as in mst class based games, you dont use anything other than the One Suit to Rule Them All.
When was the last time you played a class based game and you actually changed up your routine based on what the other team was using? When was the last time you switched damage type on your gear or weapon in battle to more effectively counter your opponent? These scenarios are few and far between in mainstream MMOs because you know EXACTLY what each character in each class is wearing and doing.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Motivation
Throughout the course of MMORPG’s, gameplay for melee combat has often been mundane and bland with the use of auto attack. There are two titles that had intentions of improving melee combat mechanics but their implementations did not deliver.
Age of Conan’s philosophy for melee combat is to immerse your self as a real swordsman by allowing the player to freely select any type of directional swing. While in swordplay each directional swing does not have form or structure as a well trained sword man would acquire. Essentially, it felt like the controls were all over the place and very uncomfortable for players.
Sword of the New World provoked a wide array of different stances. I am a believer of allowing the player to have access to many different options. This mechanic peak my interest. However, the stances are nothing more than a deterrent for alternating weapons types in combat. Mainly for aesthetic purposes, these stances compartmentalized the use of different abilities for a saved hot-bar set to the weapon you wanted to use.
Solution
I thought merging the stance design with the directional swings to create new melee mechanics would enhance a fun, diverse and challenging experience for players. Researching real swordsmanship would be the key to offer a unique distinct flavor of melee combat.
Swordsmanship is an element of many different options that could be translated into game design for melee combat. The core of swordsmanship is guards (stances). A guard is the offensive and defensive postures and ready positions from which to deliver all manner of blows to the target.
The Guard System combat is based around the use of guards to simulate an immersive experience of real swordsmanship in gameplay. Guards allow a large array of options for the player to experience multiple ways to win a fight. This mechanic also allows the players to adapt freely in battle to offset the opposition. Unlike Age of Conan with directional swings, Guards allow fluidity and organization while in the heat of the battle.
Importance of the Guard System
The Guard System is translated from European Swordsmanship into gameplay. Think about real swordsmanship. Each swing of the blade is crucial as well as parries and ripostes. You have to change your guard countless times to offset the opponent to perform damage. The Guard system allows the player to become a tactician and to know how each guard works in different situational scenarios. These guards allow the player to strategize before and while in combat to have a chance at victory. Guard system allows players to have a distinct player skill level which complements better playability.
The Guard system is the essential mechanic that opens a window for players to react and adapt to the opponent in real time. This system is not strictly for one way of playability but focuses on freely choosing multiple play styles. The players can adapt freely in the heat of the battle to attempt to control the fight by selecting a guard to strike or defend.
Gameplay is not linear as opposed to other combat designs. There are dozens of different paths a player can fight to determine victory. This design still somewhat focuses on the player to still react with the AI by selecting abilities. However, the Guards are a median of the adaptability of a player to the AI interaction.
NPC AI
AI is another aspect to enhance the versatile adaptability in combat. AI is crucial because it has to complement the complexities of the Guard system to give the player a sense of immersed realism. NPC AI will have limitations upon guard use depending on their intellect and/or militaristic training. For an example, a kobold would be limited to the three basic guards whereas an orc may have a wider access of guards dependent on their training.
All NPC’s will have an intellectual hierarchy of many conditions based on their training of the use of guards. The intellectual hierarchy is a deterrent of how well the NPC will adapt in combat with the use of Guard play.
NPC will block and counter spam attacks. Spam is the same attacks that a player uses over and over to win a battle. The Guard system allows a diverse selection of guards to prevent spam.
Pace of Combat
There are many different technical aspects to gauge the pace of combat. However, there are two attributes that I feel would best show the pace of combat for the Guard system: frequency of player input and the duration of battle.
Frequency of player input with using guards is not fast pace because it negates spamming abilities. Reaction time may seem fast in combat, yet the animation plus server lag increases the time delay between button presses. The guard combat system is not turn-based, which is frequently considered a slower paced combat system.
In theory I would consider the pace of combat for the Guard system to be medium pace. Medium pace of combat represents a slower frequency of player input. A slower pace of combat is crucial for the player to see the types of guards, strikes and defensive techniques that the opponent is using. Depending on player strategy determines how fast or slow the duration of battle may consist.
I am not confusing classes with roles. Classes = roles in oldschool games, but nowadays those two are completely separate. The tankmage is a great example of a game where few limitations cause one set of skills to rule over others. It is crude and old, but it proves my point. If games like Skyrim had PvP in them, you'd see similar sets of skills arise that are clearly more effective than others.
D&D has a very flexible class system but the balance is poor to say the least. In DDO the most optimal build to complete the games content was to have 6 characters all Warforged (construct race not so different from golems), 1lvl rogue/Xlvl wizard and 5 sorcerers. The thing was that...
the one level of rogue ensured that the wizard had all needed rogue skills such as lockpicking as class skills, and as a high intelligence character he could then use his skill points to easily keep himself at a level of a master rogue in those skills. -> made conventional rogues more or less useless.
Then as wizards and sorcerers are arcane magic users they can repair constructs, which works as healing for the entire party. -> makes conventional healing useless. Plus the warforged race was immune to poison and disease so there was fewer things to worry.
And last but not least, arcane magic is very powerful in D&D so with the entire party full of magic-users they rip through enemies like nobody's business. They had a way of engaging any encounter, even those that were immune to magic (summon waves upon waves of minions or cast tenser's transformation and transform into a berserker). -> no need for tanks or any other damage dealer for that matter
D&D is a good example of a game where roles are separate from classes and where one build completely overshadows others. Classless games are definitely not immune to this.
Eve is hardly a modern game. it is 8 years old and some of the mechanics reflect that very much. But, Eve actually has classes - they're more or less equivalent to ships. Some classes fit some roles better than others. Battleship is poor in a tackle role for example. Eve's balance is a mess, CCP admits this and have only recently taken proper notice. Only a handful of the ships are useful and only a handful of possible fits in those ships are useful. And its not like many of the ships fullfil different roles or anything. There's plenty of instances where one ship is good for one role, other is better and third is best. Its like in Lineage 2 and AoC I could choose between Fireballs I, II and III. If you see it clearly you have no choice at all.
Players have freedom to choose poorly.
Now what was the last game I switched builds or playstyle on my class to better suit whatever I was doing... That would be nearly every game I've played (?). It is nowhere near as rare as you make it sound. I think your attitude affects your judgement.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Very odd response. We're talking about MMOs, so if DnD, a PnP game, is your only example of flexible class system, then I think you prove my point.
"EVE us hardly a modern game"
No one said it wasn't.
"Eve actually has classes - they're more or less equivalent to ships. Some classes fit some roles better than others. Battleship is poor in a tackle role for example. "
The ship is a tool, not the character. That's like saying a person is only a mechanic because he has a spark plug in his hand at this moment.
"Eve's balance is a mess, CCP admits this and have only recently taken proper notice. Only a handful of the ships are useful and only a handful of possible fits in those ships are useful."
That 'handful still comes out to 'several hundred' which is a far cry from your archaic tankmage example. So, yes, I agree with you that there are a couple thousand or maybe even only several hundred ways players are fitting ships... but this supports your One Build theory, how? Whatever the case, you once again confuse a player and his gear here. For example...
"There's plenty of instances where one ship is good for one role, other is better and third is best."
No one has questioned that. You use light armor for stealthing, blunt weapins on skeletons, fire on ice golems, etc. You either are confusing not only class and role but also a character with their gear, or you have played mainstream MMOs so long that anything outside them is foreign to you.
"Now what was the last game I switched builds or playstyle on my class to better suit whatever I was doing... That would be nearly every game I've played (?). "
Serious question - in WOW, where do you keep all that stuff?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I dunno, just having templates and let anyone who wants create their own class have advantages as well. It makes balancing harder but far from impossible.
Classes do have their advantages, mainly that they are easier to balance and makes simpler to know what to expect from a certain person in PvP but freedom is important as well.
So as I see it have both systems good and bad stuff, what is important is that you make the system good and flexible in any case. If you use templates that anyone can pick who doesn't want to customize their character you take away the classless systems worst flaw while still keeping the advantages and it would work in most games.
What is bad uis static systems where all players of the same class plays in a certain way and have the same skills, it makes a game boring and predictable, but if you can't see any advatages with classless systems I think you are looking on a bad classless system instead of a good one.
I agree that although it has its pros and cons, there is merit in trying such an idea. UO and AC have both taken the same route but from the other side of the spectrum - using class templates that people can build from initially even though they are primarily skill-based games.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Replies in green.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
replies in yellow
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Too bad you didn't played the first renewed mmo called Uo, and you would understand your thinking line isn't very valid, especially because a good sandbox system won't reduce the ability to have class, but in fact would have enhanced it.
In any case, you can have a skill based system and still have class, the thing is the class are choosen by the player, and can be a lot more varied for that reason. As an example you could be a tamer (pet class in Uo), but you could be a pure tamer, or a warrior/tamer, tamer/mage, tamer/bard, and many other variables, which obviously a hard coded class system won't let you have, since a tamer would just be a tamer with their own skill tree. They were a lot of class that wasn't even though as class by the developers but were used in the game by the players, for example you had a class called by the player "treasure hunters", which came from the fact those character would pick skill to open and find chests and treasure maps, as well as bard skill that would let you deal with big number of mobs spawning when you dug those chests. This class wasn't a class the dev team used. Because during the character creation you would have the most usual classes like magic user or warrior, and they would just have a premade choice of skill for you, but in no way you were forced to follow this path. A good sandbox skill system will enhance your class system even though your class aren't hard coded into the game, a bad system will probably have the opposite effect thought.
And last Uo had no trinity, you don't need dps/healer/tank to work as a trinity to make your rpg work, i'm sorry, maybe its hard for you to graps, but this is a fact. Trinity refer to a very specific combat model where tank/healer/dps are working as a trinity to achieve very specific goals like promoting group play in mmorpg. They are many kind of combat working without this system, be it in the real world or in rpg or any kind of computer games. Does the chess board game use the trinity? yet it simulate a fight between 2 kingdom right? So just to give you a pretty stupid example. I think its very hard to grasp for modern mmorpg player because all their mmorpg have combat based on the trinity, so they kind of cannot understand this system is just a single system among many. But they are mmo that don't use this system and they worked very well indeed. Uo combat system is renewed as one of the best by a lot of people even today, and is pointed as a non trinity combat system, believe or not.
if anyone feels like sitting through this vid , i think this is a pretty good view on eve pvp , with a focus on a certain role/class/ship , and good cometary on it
now i`ll admit my ignorance on the way new theme parks work out the details in classes and roles , i cant get past the ideea of instances at all so i cant get in those games...so just throwing this here
My blog is a continuing story of what MMO's should be like.
Like I posted before, I have a solution for it. It's adaptive combat mechanics and adaptive AI. That is the only solution I can think of. Unless you have your own? You can still have a class system with adaptive combat and AI.
I agree with you but my comment was relating to adding more player decisions with their character instead of requiring you to create another character just for that.
Take TOR for example, a class based system. From level 10 through 50 you get 1 skill tree point per level which means throughout progressing your character you only make 41 decisions how you want to advance. What more unique decisions? Go level an alt to 50, and another, keep doing that.
I suggest having more decisions as well as even more choices for class based systems. Rift did rather well with this. A skill based system seems to always have more of both.
Eh, not having templates isn't a significant con to me. Especially since players will end up making their own and sharing them. You are right though, I have seen plenty of bad classless systems but I don't disregard all of them because of that. A reoccurring flaw I see is the stripping down of every item's stats and assigning a skill that improves that stat. Skill based progression can be much more fun and structured than stat collecting. Package skills with more than just one attribute. Allow them to be swapped in or out (Planetside certs). Most of all, don't force a player to reroll for a new experience just when they start to get attached to it.
Just because we don't complain about it as much as you do doesn't mean we don't recognize the potential for something better. I know what I want but I also know how unrealistic it is right now.
I do have a solution, several, in fact. Better AI, both in and out of battle, that simulates more reactive abilities based on more active combat, similar to your own. This means the combat system needs to be more active, and avoid button rotations. Active blocking and dodging are more or less necessary. Of course, this doesn't count the issue outside of combat...
Environment. Poses no challenge whatsoever. Bleh. Again, this is where we run into issues due to no one apparently caring. Climbing, traps, natural dangers, all of these things are ignored. Hence we have a boring world with combat only to negotiate. Hell, even crafting is lazy, and tends to be largely ignored as well, usually only in to please people who want to do it.
So a more open world, better combat, better AI, better NPC interaction, MORE stuff to do other than murder, and there you go, we have a better MMO to play in. A virtual world, yet a game. These are steps that can be taken as of now, and are doable, yet are not done. Although, MMOs do seem to take baby steps here and there. I hear GW2 has dodging.
Originally posted by mmoguy43
Just because we don't complain about it as much as you do doesn't mean we don't recognize the potential for something better. I know what I want but I also know how unrealistic it is right now.
It is not unrealistic, MMOguy, it is merely ignored. Developers keep catering to the same stuff, because that is all everyone seems to act like they want, until they play the games, and realize it is BORING. If everyone on these forums and others talks about combat and gaming in the same ways, devs have no reason to innovate.
My blog is a continuing story of what MMO's should be like.