Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Teerlys

Testers
  • Posts

    69
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Guild
    OCC
  • Gender
    Male

Teerlys's Achievements

  1. And you didn't even post the orientation Dubs?
  2. You don't have to tell me that you're too inept at rational thought to recognize both the pros and cons of potential mechanics. You make that clear every time you post and insult the individual rather than debate the idea. But that's fine. Forum Warrioring was as much part of Shadowbane as anything else, so I don't mind picking you apart while I have adult conversations happen with other people. All game mechanics are artificial. It's simply a question of whether they're more beneficial than harmful to the goals of a game. I didn't come in here declaring that this was the best idea ever and had to be implemented. It was an idea for a mechanic that does have some pros to it, even if it may not be enough to warrant implementation. The same way that downed state has some pros to it even if, imo, they're not right for this game. You don't seem to be interested in having a conversation though, which makes your value here dubious.
  3. Shadowbane, from live through the emulator afterward, so... about 7-8 years? Guild Wars 2. Archeage. I could throw in pretty much every game I've played since PvP MMO's are my genre of choice, but given recent topics on the forums those are the most relevant three. Really though, the Shadowbane experience is the most relevant one here. Two sided server wars were the predecessor to many servers shutting down and a lot of player burnout. They weren't as fun as the guild vs guild fights of give or take similar numbers. However, I wasn't looking to prevent large guilds from forming or even stop a double sided server war. Some of my stronger memories from Shadowbane are leading those giant half a sever forces, and that can be fun too. Especially when the server will for sure end at some point. I was just looking at dropping another mechanic to consider when organizing a horde that large that would allow for a smaller force to still feel like they have a chance against them. Slow the middle and rear of a 150 person ball o' fun, and a 40 person force could hit, fall back, and mostly only have 40 or so people right on their heels. The rest of the force would be there quickly enough, but it would enhance the kiting game that a small force needs to do to play with a bigger force.
  4. I didn't see you offering anything to counter the logic used there. You just seem to vomit your emotions and feelings all over a topic which is... well, you just keep being you princess.
  5. 1: Because at a certain point you're running with so many people that they might as well not be people anymore. You can't get to know them all, or coach them all, or organize them to a more than basic level. In my experience that starts to happen around the 80ish marker. Could be more or less depending on the guild, but it definitely happens well before say... 200. 2: I did list numbers up there.
  6. That depends on the moisture of the road. Wetter ground can become more muddy which was kind of my thinking. I'm not fully sold on its implementation myself, but liked the thought of it dissuading the "Ball up in as big a clump as possible and CHARGE!" tactic.
  7. Alright... so let me start off by saying that I'm not sure if the coding to make something like this happen would be too intensive or not. If not though, then I think that this would be a way to encourage larger guilds to not clump together as much. What if, for every section of ground an individual walked over, it was tracked in a sort of broad sense. Like invisible footprints, but over a wider area of ground. If one person walks over that path that's fine. Hell, maybe nothing happens if 30 people from the same guild walk over that spot. But once a force of say... 50 of the same guild cover that same ground, maybe the ground starts to deteriorate a bit, and you get a 5% movement speed debuff over that location. If it's a hundred people going over the same spot maybe it's 15%. then 20%, maybe capping out at 25% for say... 200 people or so? The goal being to either encourage the mega guilds to split their forces into different locations, to spread out more which would allow for combat to happen at various points along a line, and maybe allow for a smaller force to hit a much larger force and then fall back with only the front liner's of the enemy's force being able to keep up. This effect could of course fade off relatively quickly, I'd say a minute or less. That way the server would need to keep track of less information. It could also be scaled up or down dependent on what the Devs felt the appropriate guild size was for a given point in the game cycle. If getting large forces from point A to point B becoming too problematic was a concern, a potential buff could be introduced to bypass the ground deterioration (Light Feet?) that could come with a large combat effectiveness debuff for 60 seconds or so after coming out of it (-50% stats seems about right). That way long map travel wouldn't be a pain, but it couldn't be used in combat.
  8. This argument is based on the assumption that (1) combat is static e.g. in one place It is not. It is based on the larger group controlling the point of combat. It does not need to be in a static location. In fact, it is very likely that the location would be on the move forward toward the smaller group, which would still be ground that the larger force would control. The only way this would not apply is if the force could be driven back. While it is not impossible for a smaller force to beat a larger one, it is rarely done by standing toe to toe with them and beating them back. (2) a very unskilled smalled group who is apparently dumb enough to run into a zerg full force and die off, at which point the down state does not matter This does not make sense in the context of the problem. While not being able to res their own people is a hinderance of course, larger is the problem that they cannot hit, whittle off a few enemy, and leave unscathed. If there is a downed state mechanic, the larger force that the smaller force cannot budge from their position in one strike can raise and reraise their dead, making... (3) lack of utter tactics. I could name other things but your given logic is circumstantial, not a general fact which applies to every situation or level of tactics. ...your unnamed tactics (which, let's be honest... it's hit and run) useless. The rest of your points fall under the same issue Jah's did. It's fine for there to be rewards for being the victor on the battlefield, even if it's by numbers. What is not ok is mechanically making being the large force always the best option. There are downsides to running a massive guild, and those usually come in the form of individual player skill and general organization. Smaller forces can beat larger ones by leveraging those typical pitfalls against them, but it's not done through just rushing into the middle of them and taking them on toe to toe. In order for the smaller force to have the chance to hit, kill, pull back, and hit again enough times to even the playing field, the people they kill need to stay dead and gone long enough for that tactic to have an effect. That will not happen if the people that die can just be picked right back up again so that the larger force is permanently at full strength.
  9. Do you have a link? I'm curious myself.
  10. Take a Nightstalker from Shadowbane. I knew what the classes spells and powers were, so when I approached him on my Thief I could have an idea of if that fight was winnable or not, but due to variations in builds (which this game is supposedly replicating) there was still a lot in the air. Were they a dex based/defensive Nightstalker that would require me to up my attack rating to be able to hit them? A dodge/resist build which meant that I needed to hit as fast as possible to get past their dodge and maybe kite out their active dodge? Were they unarmed, a blade master, or a crossbow wielder which would grossly change my approach. Did they use health drain procs so their health would drastically increase, or mentalist procs so that 40% of my health might disappear in an animation? Are they the kind of player that will spam their dispell debuff every time any debuff is up, so I can trick them into burning out their mana pool? If I was proccing, did they have a buff that prevented my health drain procs from working on them? Did they handle their weapon powers wisely? Did they stance dance, and if so what were their patterns so I could counter? Etc. So because of variations on the builds, you got enough knowledge of what the class could be to spend some time strategizing beforehand, but also enough mystery about each encounter that you still had to learn the other person's build and play style. And that's just in a 1-1 scenario. Looking at it from a position of reading an intel report on what the enemy group has class wise is a major fun factor in determining the strategies that you'd want to use in a particular fight. You guess at how they'll use their classes and plan counters ahead of time, but then the actual fight hits and tactics have to rapidly shift to react. You just don't get that kind of experience with a report of "Yup... there's about 30 of them." There's not much you can plan for there, therefore a lot less overall strategy.
  11. The cornerstone of my stance against them is that downed states inherently work at the point of combat. No matter what other limiting factors you surround them with, and I agree that they can be interesting, the only people getting rezzes will be the ones controlling the battlefield/point of combat. Those are the people that generally need them the least. Take that piece away and you get summoning in some fashion or form, which I'd enjoy if it's done well.
  12. They do this in MMO's sometimes. The "We're out of the box! We don't have any classes at all! If you want to wield an axe, just pick up an axe!" mantra. I guess it works for them, but to me there tends to be a lot more flavor and balance when the creators take the time to instill classes with weaknesses and strengths on their own and in relation to each other. It also helps out a lot for PvP games because you can look at a character and, after learning the game for a while, have an idea of their capabilities. It makes the later, more advanced fighting in the game a lot more strategic in my experience. I'm not saying it can't or doesn't work for certain games, just that I think it works better for PvE games than PvP.
  13. It will be proportionate since the point of re-entry is the summoner rather than the point of combat where it would be much more lopsided. Summoning is also more easily limited by other mechanics as it was in Shadowbane, like recast timer, interruptible cast, limited availability to the classes, and death shroud.
  14. It's not meant to. Unless it's an eSport, numerical disparities aren't going anywhere. You don't need to advantage them any more than the numbers they start out with do though, which is an excellent reason to not include something like downed state in a PvP game. Seriously, summoning is a much more even handed mechanic to achieve a similar result.
×
×
  • Create New...