Zones are fine, without zones how can we have the EQ classic "Train to the Zone" .
Mobs in Pantheon will leash just like in Vanguard. Zones are too big in Pantheon for mobs to chase you all the way to zone lines.
So no Train to Zone in Pantheon
Our mobs don't leash currently and I have not heard of any plans to start making them leash, so I am not sure where you got this information from.
really? I guess griefing is back on the menu boys!
Nothing like taking end game open world bosses and bringing them to noob areas for the lulz!
Heck even EQ1 had leashing for some bosses to prevent major griefing - so I am shocked that no mobs in Pantheon leash currently.
I used to grab like half the zone worth of mobs in EQ1 with my bard - and not even kill them - just run them in circles and lol at the chat "where are all the spawns" - good times
Was especially fun in North Ro
This is probably the best news ever - as with the amount of trolling in games, no recent game has had the balls to let mobs not leash.
I see epic things from no-leash alone - I wonder what happens when you grab 200+ mobs and bring them all to one place - this still causes severe lag in EQ1 today heh
I was speaking more specifically to trash/normal mobs.
These are all things we have considered and there are many ways to stop that happening to named mobs/raid targets/important npcs etc. and we may implement something for certain mobs/areas if we see it becoming a problem but this, along with many other things, will be worked on in much greater detail once we get into testing.
For now, though, you can see us have fun with no leashing in some of our streams
So you do have leashing for bosses and special NPCs.
Oh well - i guess we can still mass swarm trash, which is better than nothing.
No, as I said, currently no leashing for any mob, they all run the same speed as you and cannot be kited properly or leashed (the system is still a WIP and by no means finished) but I was brief in my reply and meant that we had no plans for making trash/normal mobs leash, named mobs/important quest npcs/guards etc. are a different story and may have abilities or AI behaviours to stop them being dragged around but we will have to wait and see what data testing provides us with as we have a few other tricks up our sleeve too.
Even changing the speed of some mobs like wolves, stops kiting and dragging mobs into other areas as you would be dead or in serious need of help before you got that far if you were not able to kill it yourself.
Implementing a mix of no leash, summon (for some named/raid mobs), AI behaviour, different speeds and abilities will help mix the game up and still allow a lot of freedom without letting important mobs get abused.
Ok so it's a work in progress - currently there is no leashing, but the possibility still remains down the road.
I'll tell you from my experience how making "kiting not possible" still enables players to grief anyway.
A group of high level players in high AC gear can still drag a group of mid-low level wolves to a noob area even while getting hit, due to high AC/mitigation and defense in general.
Example level 50 player in end game gear, dragging level 10-15 aggro mobs to a level 1-5 area to grief noobs. The fact that a level 50 is getting hit for some minimal damage won't matter much - especially if there is a group working together to heal whoever is holding the aggro and dragging a swarm to noob area.
Another options is to get a group of monks who chain mobs by coordianted FD - old mechanic from EQ1 to do "impossible" group splits - can also be used to drag 100s of mobs from one end of the world to the other.
So speeding up mobs, and everyone running at same speed won't help in the example I provided - also SoW type of spell will be in game, correct? I mean removing kiting from Pantheon is removing a beloved game play style by many veterans, not a good move IMO.
Having named mobs/bosses summon you is IMO a cheap mechanic, once EQ1 introduced mob that summoned (as anti-kiting) it felt really lame to me. Was never a fan of summoning mechanic by bosses.
Also boss summoning is effectively very much "leashing" except it's players that get leashed - but the end result is the same, as it's prevents dragging the mobs around. But either way - I think preventing bosses from being dragged all over the map is a good idea, I just hope it's done via AI and not summoning. I get WHY it was done, I just hope in Pantheon you can come up with a better method that's not so cheap
Last hope is your AI behavior system, can't wait to see how that turns out.
Again, we have climates, magical forces as demonstrated in our streams, AI behaviour, Scouts and Alpha mobs that can call others for help plus abilities to stun, root, slow, bleed, know out, summon etc. that can stop, hinder or kill players who try to grief, failing that, we will have GMs with clear instructions on how to handle such people who ruin the enjoyment of the game for other paying customers.
But enough on that, I can't explain it anymore or I will give things away that are still secret, you will just have to wait and test it out for yourself
Zones are fine, without zones how can we have the EQ classic "Train to the Zone" .
Mobs in Pantheon will leash just like in Vanguard. Zones are too big in Pantheon for mobs to chase you all the way to zone lines.
So no Train to Zone in Pantheon
Our mobs don't leash currently and I have not heard of any plans to start making them leash, so I am not sure where you got this information from.
really? I guess griefing is back on the menu boys!
Nothing like taking end game open world bosses and bringing them to noob areas for the lulz!
Heck even EQ1 had leashing for some bosses to prevent major griefing - so I am shocked that no mobs in Pantheon leash currently.
I used to grab like half the zone worth of mobs in EQ1 with my bard - and not even kill them - just run them in circles and lol at the chat "where are all the spawns" - good times
Was especially fun in North Ro
This is probably the best news ever - as with the amount of trolling in games, no recent game has had the balls to let mobs not leash.
I see epic things from no-leash alone - I wonder what happens when you grab 200+ mobs and bring them all to one place - this still causes severe lag in EQ1 today heh
I was speaking more specifically to trash/normal mobs.
These are all things we have considered and there are many ways to stop that happening to named mobs/raid targets/important npcs etc. and we may implement something for certain mobs/areas if we see it becoming a problem but this, along with many other things, will be worked on in much greater detail once we get into testing.
For now, though, you can see us have fun with no leashing in some of our streams
So you do have leashing for bosses and special NPCs.
Oh well - i guess we can still mass swarm trash, which is better than nothing.
No, as I said, currently no leashing for any mob, they all run the same speed as you and cannot be kited properly or leashed (the system is still a WIP and by no means finished) but I was brief in my reply and meant that we had no plans for making trash/normal mobs leash, named mobs/important quest npcs/guards etc. are a different story and may have abilities or AI behaviours to stop them being dragged around but we will have to wait and see what data testing provides us with as we have a few other tricks up our sleeve too.
Even changing the speed of some mobs like wolves, stops kiting and dragging mobs into other areas as you would be dead or in serious need of help before you got that far if you were not able to kill it yourself.
Implementing a mix of no leash, summon (for some named/raid mobs), AI behaviour, different speeds and abilities will help mix the game up and still allow a lot of freedom without letting important mobs get abused.
Ok so it's a work in progress - currently there is no leashing, but the possibility still remains down the road.
I'll tell you from my experience how making "kiting not possible" still enables players to grief anyway.
A group of high level players in high AC gear can still drag a group of mid-low level wolves to a noob area even while getting hit, due to high AC/mitigation and defense in general.
Example level 50 player in end game gear, dragging level 10-15 aggro mobs to a level 1-5 area to grief noobs. The fact that a level 50 is getting hit for some minimal damage won't matter much - especially if there is a group working together to heal whoever is holding the aggro and dragging a swarm to noob area.
Another options is to get a group of monks who chain mobs by coordianted FD - old mechanic from EQ1 to do "impossible" group splits - can also be used to drag 100s of mobs from one end of the world to the other.
So speeding up mobs, and everyone running at same speed won't help in the example I provided - also SoW type of spell will be in game, correct? I mean removing kiting from Pantheon is removing a beloved game play style by many veterans, not a good move IMO.
Having named mobs/bosses summon you is IMO a cheap mechanic, once EQ1 introduced mob that summoned (as anti-kiting) it felt really lame to me. Was never a fan of summoning mechanic by bosses.
Also boss summoning is effectively very much "leashing" except it's players that get leashed - but the end result is the same, as it's prevents dragging the mobs around. But either way - I think preventing bosses from being dragged all over the map is a good idea, I just hope it's done via AI and not summoning. I get WHY it was done, I just hope in Pantheon you can come up with a better method that's not so cheap
Last hope is your AI behavior system, can't wait to see how that turns out.
Again, we have climates, magical forces as demonstrated in our streams, AI behaviour, Scouts and Alpha mobs that can call others for help plus abilities to stun, root, slow, bleed, know out, summon etc. that can stop, hinder or kill players who try to grief, failing that, we will have GMs with clear instructions on how to handle such people who ruin the enjoyment of the game for other paying customers.
But enough on that, I can't explain it anymore or I will give things away that are still secret, you will just have to wait and test it out for yourself
AI behavior
It's been so long since we had this is almost revolutionary all over again !
With everyone talking about EQ1, it's really getting me excited because I love situational combat. The closes I came was in Vanguard.
The thing that really gets me is how people on this site think the newer generation can't handle it. The newer generation is lazy....who invents this crap?... And why does everyone run with it?
The thing that really gets me is how people on this site think the newer generation can't handle it. The newer generation is lazy....who invents this crap?... And why does everyone run with it?
I've been arguing about this so many times, but still I don't understand why people think that the new generation won't like this game because they have no time or patience for this type of game.
That's a load of BS. Today teenagers and young people in general spend more time on their computer than ever. And when they play games they are as hardcore as we were 10 years ago, nothing really changed. What changed is that we got older, we have a family, a career and other commitments that teenagers and young people in general don't have. So why wouldn't they love a game that requires time and commitment like Pantheon?
The thing that really gets me is how people on this site think the newer generation can't handle it. The newer generation is lazy....who invents this crap?... And why does everyone run with it?
I've been arguing about this so many times, but still I don't understand why people think that the new generation won't like this game because they have no time or patience for this type of game.
That's a load of BS. Today teenagers and young people in general spend more time on their computer than ever. And when they play games they are as hardcore as we were 10 years ago, nothing really changed. What changed is that we got older, we have a family, a career and other commitments that teenagers and young people in general don't have. So why wouldn't they love a game that requires time and commitment like Pantheon?
Because we don't want them to, we like to think that we are the only serious and dedicated people
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Zones are fine, without zones how can we have the EQ classic "Train to the Zone" .
Mobs in Pantheon will leash just like in Vanguard. Zones are too big in Pantheon for mobs to chase you all the way to zone lines.
So no Train to Zone in Pantheon
Our mobs don't leash currently and I have not heard of any plans to start making them leash, so I am not sure where you got this information from.
really? I guess griefing is back on the menu boys!
Nothing like taking end game open world bosses and bringing them to noob areas for the lulz!
Heck even EQ1 had leashing for some bosses to prevent major griefing - so I am shocked that no mobs in Pantheon leash currently.
I used to grab like half the zone worth of mobs in EQ1 with my bard - and not even kill them - just run them in circles and lol at the chat "where are all the spawns" - good times
Was especially fun in North Ro
This is probably the best news ever - as with the amount of trolling in games, no recent game has had the balls to let mobs not leash.
I see epic things from no-leash alone - I wonder what happens when you grab 200+ mobs and bring them all to one place - this still causes severe lag in EQ1 today heh
I was speaking more specifically to trash/normal mobs.
These are all things we have considered and there are many ways to stop that happening to named mobs/raid targets/important npcs etc. and we may implement something for certain mobs/areas if we see it becoming a problem but this, along with many other things, will be worked on in much greater detail once we get into testing.
For now, though, you can see us have fun with no leashing in some of our streams
So you do have leashing for bosses and special NPCs.
Oh well - i guess we can still mass swarm trash, which is better than nothing.
No, as I said, currently no leashing for any mob, they all run the same speed as you and cannot be kited properly or leashed (the system is still a WIP and by no means finished) but I was brief in my reply and meant that we had no plans for making trash/normal mobs leash, named mobs/important quest npcs/guards etc. are a different story and may have abilities or AI behaviours to stop them being dragged around but we will have to wait and see what data testing provides us with as we have a few other tricks up our sleeve too.
Even changing the speed of some mobs like wolves, stops kiting and dragging mobs into other areas as you would be dead or in serious need of help before you got that far if you were not able to kill it yourself.
Implementing a mix of no leash, summon (for some named/raid mobs), AI behaviour, different speeds and abilities will help mix the game up and still allow a lot of freedom without letting important mobs get abused.
Ok so it's a work in progress - currently there is no leashing, but the possibility still remains down the road.
I'll tell you from my experience how making "kiting not possible" still enables players to grief anyway.
A group of high level players in high AC gear can still drag a group of mid-low level wolves to a noob area even while getting hit, due to high AC/mitigation and defense in general.
Example level 50 player in end game gear, dragging level 10-15 aggro mobs to a level 1-5 area to grief noobs. The fact that a level 50 is getting hit for some minimal damage won't matter much - especially if there is a group working together to heal whoever is holding the aggro and dragging a swarm to noob area.
Another options is to get a group of monks who chain mobs by coordianted FD - old mechanic from EQ1 to do "impossible" group splits - can also be used to drag 100s of mobs from one end of the world to the other.
So speeding up mobs, and everyone running at same speed won't help in the example I provided - also SoW type of spell will be in game, correct? I mean removing kiting from Pantheon is removing a beloved game play style by many veterans, not a good move IMO.
Having named mobs/bosses summon you is IMO a cheap mechanic, once EQ1 introduced mob that summoned (as anti-kiting) it felt really lame to me. Was never a fan of summoning mechanic by bosses.
Also boss summoning is effectively very much "leashing" except it's players that get leashed - but the end result is the same, as it's prevents dragging the mobs around. But either way - I think preventing bosses from being dragged all over the map is a good idea, I just hope it's done via AI and not summoning. I get WHY it was done, I just hope in Pantheon you can come up with a better method that's not so cheap
Last hope is your AI behavior system, can't wait to see how that turns out.
Again, we have climates, magical forces as demonstrated in our streams, AI behaviour, Scouts and Alpha mobs that can call others for help plus abilities to stun, root, slow, bleed, know out, summon etc. that can stop, hinder or kill players who try to grief, failing that, we will have GMs with clear instructions on how to handle such people who ruin the enjoyment of the game for other paying customers.
But enough on that, I can't explain it anymore or I will give things away that are still secret, you will just have to wait and test it out for yourself
I was thinking all through Kanos post having GMs who will ban players exhibiting undesired behaviors would be much less trouble
Tell you what, I'll pay double ($30/m), for a heavily moderated, ass hat free server.
Let me be a moderator...I'll give you $50 a month.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
EQ had loading zones. Pantheon will not have loading zones at launch. Dungeons will have loading zones. They say the map is going to be big. Whatever that means.
Yeah, the ass of my neighbour is *big* too.
It's all relative..big for them could mean, small for most of us.
Just look for whatever shard Brotherhood of the Spider plays on
Yeah I certainly look for a shard without the Bots. They once tried to train my group in SolB in early EQ with a monk but it did not turn out very well for them. Guess they didn't understand they you never ever train a bard unless you are stupid and want to die. Anyway I think having GMs respond to players or guilds that are griefing with bans and other such punishment is probably the best solution as some people will always find ways to do such.
I really hope Pantheon will have the ability to split pull in groups / raids like EQ1 and Vanguard did. My best memories in EQ1 / Vanguard split pulling with my monk during raids.
Yep or multiple monks - chaining FD to split the "splits" into even smaller groups.
Once Fading Memories AA was given to bards - EQ1 pulling was never the same as Bards became kings of it.
Fading Memories was quite literally the first AA my bard had - if I remember right it was 6 points
Bard was the most fun I ever had in a MMO. Of course I admit to rose-colored glasses, but it was a complex class to play to the full potential. I can't count how many times that I received /tells after leaving a group from members of said group that all of a sudden were having more problems with their camp...
A bard was not necessary for a group, but everything went smoother. I could write a much longer post, however:
TDLR: I don't think that original feeling can ever be recaptured. I would love to be proven wrong, though.
Meh, seemless zones/world is an overrated waste of resources. Focus on what matters the most, gameplay. The people who are vocal about not playing a game strictly because of immersion are a smaller band of people even then the top raiders in a community and honestly aren't there to actually PLAY the game anyway if that's the utmost priority.
Zones are fine, without zones how can we have the EQ classic "Train to the Zone" .
Mobs in Pantheon will leash just like in Vanguard. Zones are too big in Pantheon for mobs to chase you all the way to zone lines.
So no Train to Zone in Pantheon
Our mobs don't leash currently and I have not heard of any plans to start making them leash, so I am not sure where you got this information from.
really? I guess griefing is back on the menu boys!
Nothing like taking end game open world bosses and bringing them to noob areas for the lulz!
Heck even EQ1 had leashing for some bosses to prevent major griefing - so I am shocked that no mobs in Pantheon leash currently.
I used to grab like half the zone worth of mobs in EQ1 with my bard - and not even kill them - just run them in circles and lol at the chat "where are all the spawns" - good times
Was especially fun in North Ro
This is probably the best news ever - as with the amount of trolling in games, no recent game has had the balls to let mobs not leash.
I see epic things from no-leash alone - I wonder what happens when you grab 200+ mobs and bring them all to one place - this still causes severe lag in EQ1 today heh
I was speaking more specifically to trash/normal mobs.
These are all things we have considered and there are many ways to stop that happening to named mobs/raid targets/important npcs etc. and we may implement something for certain mobs/areas if we see it becoming a problem but this, along with many other things, will be worked on in much greater detail once we get into testing.
For now, though, you can see us have fun with no leashing in some of our streams
So you do have leashing for bosses and special NPCs.
Oh well - i guess we can still mass swarm trash, which is better than nothing.
No, as I said, currently no leashing for any mob, they all run the same speed as you and cannot be kited properly or leashed (the system is still a WIP and by no means finished) but I was brief in my reply and meant that we had no plans for making trash/normal mobs leash, named mobs/important quest npcs/guards etc. are a different story and may have abilities or AI behaviours to stop them being dragged around but we will have to wait and see what data testing provides us with as we have a few other tricks up our sleeve too.
Even changing the speed of some mobs like wolves, stops kiting and dragging mobs into other areas as you would be dead or in serious need of help before you got that far if you were not able to kill it yourself.
Implementing a mix of no leash, summon (for some named/raid mobs), AI behaviour, different speeds and abilities will help mix the game up and still allow a lot of freedom without letting important mobs get abused.
Ok so it's a work in progress - currently there is no leashing, but the possibility still remains down the road.
I'll tell you from my experience how making "kiting not possible" still enables players to grief anyway.
A group of high level players in high AC gear can still drag a group of mid-low level wolves to a noob area even while getting hit, due to high AC/mitigation and defense in general.
Example level 50 player in end game gear, dragging level 10-15 aggro mobs to a level 1-5 area to grief noobs. The fact that a level 50 is getting hit for some minimal damage won't matter much - especially if there is a group working together to heal whoever is holding the aggro and dragging a swarm to noob area.
Another options is to get a group of monks who chain mobs by coordianted FD - old mechanic from EQ1 to do "impossible" group splits - can also be used to drag 100s of mobs from one end of the world to the other.
So speeding up mobs, and everyone running at same speed won't help in the example I provided - also SoW type of spell will be in game, correct? I mean removing kiting from Pantheon is removing a beloved game play style by many veterans, not a good move IMO.
Having named mobs/bosses summon you is IMO a cheap mechanic, once EQ1 introduced mob that summoned (as anti-kiting) it felt really lame to me. Was never a fan of summoning mechanic by bosses.
Also boss summoning is effectively very much "leashing" except it's players that get leashed - but the end result is the same, as it's prevents dragging the mobs around. But either way - I think preventing bosses from being dragged all over the map is a good idea, I just hope it's done via AI and not summoning. I get WHY it was done, I just hope in Pantheon you can come up with a better method that's not so cheap
Last hope is your AI behavior system, can't wait to see how that turns out.
Again, we have climates, magical forces as demonstrated in our streams, AI behaviour, Scouts and Alpha mobs that can call others for help plus abilities to stun, root, slow, bleed, know out, summon etc. that can stop, hinder or kill players who try to grief, failing that, we will have GMs with clear instructions on how to handle such people who ruin the enjoyment of the game for other paying customers.
But enough on that, I can't explain it anymore or I will give things away that are still secret, you will just have to wait and test it out for yourself
I was thinking all through Kanos post having GMs who will ban players exhibiting undesired behaviors would be much less trouble
Tell you what, I'll pay double ($30/m), for a heavily moderated, ass hat free server.
Let me be a moderator...I'll give you $50 a month.
Bet I'm not the only one.
Its amazing to me that as such a hardcore EvE player you seem to have such thin skin for asshattery in games.
GM warnings and bans happen in games and Ive been temp banned in EQ1 quite a few times.
It never stopped me, as training and other "in-game" violations never carried a perm ban as did hacking and other serious abuse.
Actually made good friends with GMs being reported so many times after a while, so it turned out great.
Rumors of everyone being a griefing ass hat in EVE are highly exaggerated.
It's OK, I can't understand the motivation to continue activities which draw you a ban past the first one.
If I ran these games the bans would not be temporary once evidence of an inability to comply became apparent
Three strikes and you are out seems about right for minor offenses, one and done for major infractions.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
1. They had loading times - crossing a border still took time
2. Mobs wouldnt follow you across zone borders
Zones IMHO should be implemented as such:
- Zones are small - The zone you're in is loaded as well as all zones bordering to your zone, plus some recent zones - When you cross a border to a zone, the zones are updated so all zones bordering to the new zone are in memory as well; however the old set is still kept in memory in case you return, thus avoiding constant swapping if you constantly cross a certain zone border forth and back.
For example if the zones are square, as they have been in Vanguard, they would have to be designed that you can keep 16 zones in memory since you might keep crossing into 4 zones when being at the spot at which these 4 zones meet.
Another idea would be to make the zones hexagon, in a honeycomb pattern. Then at most 3 zones would meet in any place and would have to be managed this way to avoid constant zone swapping, and instead of 8 zones with a square zone one would only have 6 zones bordering to a honeycomb zones, thus only 12 zones in total would have to be kept in memory at any time to avoid zone swapping in case a player keeps crossing into 3 consecutive zones.
- Finally, of course mobs shouldnt care about zone crossing; they would transparently follow you until they lost interest for a reason.
In the above system, you don't really need "zones" at that point. You could basically just have one seamless world where you simply load whatever area is around the player up to a certain distance in every direction.
That was actually how VG was supposed to work. Invisible chunk lines, and the client already had the new chunk loaded in memory before you even crossed it. But it didnt work. I think they underestimated how much memory each chunk would take and had to adjust the strategy just before launch.
This is interesting to me. I'm obviously the minority when it comes to zones. I don't undesrtand why it bothers people so much to wait 20-30 seconds to enter a zone if it means a game will have a vast increase in amount of zones/details and ability to individually code zones for events, weather etc. The capabilities zones have as opposed to open-world just makes it seem moot to me. I guess this comment isreally just to acknowledge I'm shocked how many people care about the freedom of moving for an extra 30 seconds at the cost of a much, much less immersive/dynamic environment. Zones are also huge huge, like EQ zones took more than 10 minutes by foot to get through sometimes (this is without any aggro). It feels immersive. Plus if you have someone in group with a hampster wheel computer, you always get those built-in 3 minute water/snack breaks heh heh
I strongly doubt Vanguard was ever meant to have preload. As I explained, assuming square chunks, that strategy would require 16 chunks in memory at all times. The chunks of Vanguard have been massive, thus a preload strategy wasnt feasible.
I am very amused that there are people out there who think waiting a friggin half a minute during a chunk change would be tolerable at all. That would be perfectly enough to cause me to /ragequit. A chunk change isnt a change between areas, its crossing a more or less invisible line in the game world. It can happen multiple times in short sequence. Waiting a friggin half minute every time would be completely intolerable.
Chunk changes in Vanguard took about five seconds and that was by far long enough already. Its five friggin seconds every single time you cross that damn border, after all.
You do not lose any features by having invisible chunk loading. Yes the programming of some features might get a bit more complicated with this. But none get impossible.
I strongly doubt Vanguard was ever meant to have preload. As I explained, assuming square chunks, that strategy would require 16 chunks in memory at all times.
No, it would have required 9 chunks in memory. The one you are in and the 8 chunks surrounding it. Not sure how you got 16. I dont think your explanation really made sense. xxx xxx xxx
And why I believe it was intended to be preload is that they stated that there would be no pause as you cross chunk lines. I think that implies it, since you cant have instant loading of chunk without preload. But we know that there was chunkline pause, so clearly that didnt work out.
I strongly doubt Vanguard was ever meant to have preload. As I
explained, assuming square chunks, that strategy would require 16 chunks
in memory at all times.
No, it would have required 9 chunks in memory. The one you are in and
the 8 chunks surrounding it. Not sure how you got 16. I dont think
your explanation really made sense. xxx xxx xxx
And why I
believe it was intended to be preload is that they stated that there
would be no pause as you cross chunk lines. I think that implies it,
since you cant have instant loading of chunk without preload. But we
know that there was chunkline pause, so clearly that didnt work out.
Err ... just because you dont understand something doesnt mean its wrong.
Its very easy to explain why you need 16 chunks. I explained it above, but let me try again.
As you already figured out, if you have square chunks, any chunk has 8 adjacent chunks.
The critical situation in this scenario is when you're at the border of four chunks. With square chunks, this is easily possible; you are simply at one of the edges of a chunk and can then quickly switch to any of the three other chunks that are directly bordering.
So you can very quickly switch between these four chunks.
With your suggestion of keeping only 9 chunks in memory, every time you switch chunks, the game has to load 5 new chunks now adjacent to the new chunk but not adjacent to the old chunk. This would cause massive load lag very quickly if you repeat that all the time.
And since, in our system, the player isnt supposed to experience the chunk borders at all, this situation would be very common. The player would, as a result, see massive lag in some situations and none in others, for no good reason at all.
Thus, to avoid that, the last 16 chunks have to be kept in memory. You can still switch between four chunks very quickly, but all adjacent chunks of all four chunks will be already in memory, avoiding any load lag aside from the initial, unavoidable one.
One could also have all kinds of other position logic, be sensitive to where the player in the chunk is currently positioned, instead. But thats another debate.
I strongly doubt Vanguard was ever meant to have preload. As I
explained, assuming square chunks, that strategy would require 16 chunks
in memory at all times.
No, it would have required 9 chunks in memory. The one you are in and
the 8 chunks surrounding it. Not sure how you got 16. I dont think
your explanation really made sense. xxx xxx xxx
And why I
believe it was intended to be preload is that they stated that there
would be no pause as you cross chunk lines. I think that implies it,
since you cant have instant loading of chunk without preload. But we
know that there was chunkline pause, so clearly that didnt work out.
Err ... just because you dont understand something doesnt mean its wrong.
Its very easy to explain why you need 16 chunks. I explained it above, but let me try again.
As you already figured out, if you have square chunks, any chunk has 8 adjacent chunks.
The critical situation in this scenario is when you're at the border of four chunks. With square chunks, this is easily possible; you are simply at one of the edges of a chunk and can then quickly switch to any of the three other chunks that are directly bordering.
So you can very quickly switch between these four chunks.
I'm sorry, but this makes absolutely no sense. Assuming each area is sizeable, there would be no time you would need anything more than your current location and the 8 adjacent (totaling 9).
Either way, I think the best way to do it would be a distance around your character in every direction. Especially if zones are as big as they are in Pantheon, I don't think you could load 9 with anything short of a supercomputer.
Zones are so large and filled with so much content you could spend days in one area and never have the need to zone. Its not like those MMOs on rails that has you going to a new zone every 20 min to progress a linear story.
Actually its very simple. I dont know why you're unable to grasp such a trivial thing. And unfortunately I have no idea how to explain it an even simpler way for you.
Zones are so large and filled with so much content you could
spend days in one area and never have the need to zone. Its not like
those MMOs on rails that has you going to a new zone every 20 min to
progress a linear story.
If computer memory is unlimited, sure. In reality it never is.
And, as a general rule, with games you are always at the limits of your current hardware.
And as I pointed out, with the strategy to keep chunks small and to keep adjacent chunks preloaded its easy to completely hide the player from the fact there are any zones at all - no matter how large the game world is.
Actually its very simple. I dont know why you're unable to grasp such a trivial thing. And unfortunately I have no idea how to explain it an even simpler way for you.
So 1+1=3, but you can't explain why.
Got it.
Unless you're in a zone that is something of a hub and connects to 15 other zones, you would never need to load 16 zones. It's that simple.
Comments
But enough on that, I can't explain it anymore or I will give things away that are still secret, you will just have to wait and test it out for yourself
AI behavior
It's been so long since we had this is almost revolutionary all over again !
With everyone talking about EQ1, it's really getting me excited because I love situational combat. The closes I came was in Vanguard.
The thing that really gets me is how people on this site think the newer generation can't handle it. The newer generation is lazy....who invents this crap?... And why does everyone run with it?
That's a load of BS.
Today teenagers and young people in general spend more time on their computer than ever.
And when they play games they are as hardcore as we were 10 years ago, nothing really changed.
What changed is that we got older, we have a family, a career and other commitments that teenagers and young people in general don't have.
So why wouldn't they love a game that requires time and commitment like Pantheon?
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Tell you what, I'll pay double ($30/m), for a heavily moderated, ass hat free server.
Let me be a moderator...I'll give you $50 a month.
Bet I'm not the only one.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Yeah, the ass of my neighbour is *big* too.
It's all relative..big for them could mean, small for most of us.
Anyway I think having GMs respond to players or guilds that are griefing with bans and other such punishment is probably the best solution as some people will always find ways to do such.
Bard was the most fun I ever had in a MMO. Of course I admit to rose-colored glasses, but it was a complex class to play to the full potential. I can't count how many times that I received /tells after leaving a group from members of said group that all of a sudden were having more problems with their camp...
A bard was not necessary for a group, but everything went smoother. I could write a much longer post, however:
TDLR: I don't think that original feeling can ever be recaptured. I would love to be proven wrong, though.
It's OK, I can't understand the motivation to continue activities which draw you a ban past the first one.
If I ran these games the bans would not be temporary once evidence of an inability to comply became apparent
Three strikes and you are out seems about right for minor offenses, one and done for major infractions.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
That scratching of claws on your front door is a mob you thought you had escaped by logging out.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
1. They had loading times - crossing a border still took time
2. Mobs wouldnt follow you across zone borders
Zones IMHO should be implemented as such:
- Zones are small
- The zone you're in is loaded as well as all zones bordering to your zone, plus some recent zones
- When you cross a border to a zone, the zones are updated so all zones bordering to the new zone are in memory as well; however the old set is still kept in memory in case you return, thus avoiding constant swapping if you constantly cross a certain zone border forth and back.
For example if the zones are square, as they have been in Vanguard, they would have to be designed that you can keep 16 zones in memory since you might keep crossing into 4 zones when being at the spot at which these 4 zones meet.
Another idea would be to make the zones hexagon, in a honeycomb pattern. Then at most 3 zones would meet in any place and would have to be managed this way to avoid constant zone swapping, and instead of 8 zones with a square zone one would only have 6 zones bordering to a honeycomb zones, thus only 12 zones in total would have to be kept in memory at any time to avoid zone swapping in case a player keeps crossing into 3 consecutive zones.
- Finally, of course mobs shouldnt care about zone crossing; they would transparently follow you until they lost interest for a reason.
I am very amused that there are people out there who think waiting a friggin half a minute during a chunk change would be tolerable at all. That would be perfectly enough to cause me to /ragequit. A chunk change isnt a change between areas, its crossing a more or less invisible line in the game world. It can happen multiple times in short sequence. Waiting a friggin half minute every time would be completely intolerable.
Chunk changes in Vanguard took about five seconds and that was by far long enough already. Its five friggin seconds every single time you cross that damn border, after all.
You do not lose any features by having invisible chunk loading. Yes the programming of some features might get a bit more complicated with this. But none get impossible.
xxx
xxx
xxx
And why I believe it was intended to be preload is that they stated that there would be no pause as you cross chunk lines. I think that implies it, since you cant have instant loading of chunk without preload. But we know that there was chunkline pause, so clearly that didnt work out.
Err ... just because you dont understand something doesnt mean its wrong.
Its very easy to explain why you need 16 chunks. I explained it above, but let me try again.
As you already figured out, if you have square chunks, any chunk has 8 adjacent chunks.
The critical situation in this scenario is when you're at the border of four chunks. With square chunks, this is easily possible; you are simply at one of the edges of a chunk and can then quickly switch to any of the three other chunks that are directly bordering.
So you can very quickly switch between these four chunks.
With your suggestion of keeping only 9 chunks in memory, every time you switch chunks, the game has to load 5 new chunks now adjacent to the new chunk but not adjacent to the old chunk. This would cause massive load lag very quickly if you repeat that all the time.
And since, in our system, the player isnt supposed to experience the chunk borders at all, this situation would be very common. The player would, as a result, see massive lag in some situations and none in others, for no good reason at all.
Thus, to avoid that, the last 16 chunks have to be kept in memory. You can still switch between four chunks very quickly, but all adjacent chunks of all four chunks will be already in memory, avoiding any load lag aside from the initial, unavoidable one.
One could also have all kinds of other position logic, be sensitive to where the player in the chunk is currently positioned, instead. But thats another debate.
Either way, I think the best way to do it would be a distance around your character in every direction. Especially if zones are as big as they are in Pantheon, I don't think you could load 9 with anything short of a supercomputer.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
If computer memory is unlimited, sure. In reality it never is.
And, as a general rule, with games you are always at the limits of your current hardware.
And as I pointed out, with the strategy to keep chunks small and to keep adjacent chunks preloaded its easy to completely hide the player from the fact there are any zones at all - no matter how large the game world is.
Unless you're in a zone that is something of a hub and connects to 15 other zones, you would never need to load 16 zones. It's that simple.