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

Combat: I've been spoiled by BDO

Recommended Posts

it really sounds like if there was only extremely great awesomely skilled players and bad players.

i agree, that if there are only those two types, where the one knows how to play their class and the other is not even able to use its combos if there are combos... then, player skill can make a big difference.

In most games, there are bad players, average players, good players and very good players, where from average on everyone knows their skills and what they do (and if most skills and combos are so complicated, that most players dont understand them, its not a high skill-ceiling, its a bad game).

As long as most players know their skills, there is no way, that higher playerskills win without enough tools to use them against a much bigger crowd.

And you may repeat your elitism as often as you want, its still wrong. the best players are not always the best players in all types of gameplay and the best players do not always win.

If a game has a high skill-ceiling and a proper exponential skill curve then average players should stand no chance against great players.  This counteracts the zerg mentality completely as great players don't really gravitate towards zerg tactics so the zerg generally has a pretty mediocre quality of player.

 

You can call it elitism if you want but it's really just how things pan out when you have high skill-ceiling games. 

 

And no, sorry, it's not just about understanding the complexity of combos, it is about being able to execute them in a real time environment, and in that regard most people are not very good.  (Generally less than 1% of a player population can actually play well in a high skill-ceiling game)  This does not make for a bad game, it's actually the golden formula that makes the most competitive games so popular. 

 

Knowing your skills has nothing to do with properly using them in real time. 

 

The best players are best in all types of gameplay, anything else that you would consider best is just an incomplete player.  The issue here is where the bar is being set.

 

If ACE designs this combat for people that were only good at games 10 years ago they aren't really going to succeed as a PvP game coming out 10 years after that.  They need to design the game with the current standards for skill, not the antiquated ones.


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't really change the subject, your posting just seems to be getting quite hostile for no reason.

 

I think you need more well-rounded pvp experiences.  I suggested smite because it has that kind of action combat feel, but if you want to see a higher level of player skill and team mechanics and fights I suggest maybe trying to get to a high level of skill and experiencing a more competitive environment like dota2/LoL/CSGO.  These games don't really have that action combat design but I think they might be good for someone like you to get a better lay of the land on what player skill actually is and how easy to learn hard to master is a great formula that pretty much makes it so average players are rendered completely ineffective vs great players. 

 

Create a high enough skill-ceiling and zergs aren't very effective

 

 

 

I  think  you're just a delusional elitist  and a  condescending one  at that. I've had every pvp experience out there from  running in zergs, solo play, 8v8  in  daoc, small  battles,,,  LoL,  Dota2,,,,EvE, and pretty much  every mmo  to  be released (yea even that crap Darkfall). I understand skill  curve.  I  also understand rock,paper,scissors  which you  dont.

The very fact that you  compare Smite to an  MMO large scale  battle as if that Individual skill trumps  everything just  leaves me speechless. So  you  try  to  throw the comments like ": Go play Smite  "....  and I  have before and longer than you and at a competitive level,,,  you  can[t say sh-t,,  so now  it's go play League or Dota2,, which  I have,, probably before and longer than  you... What game you gonna throw at me now?

 

Even with  all  these game you throw out,, character design plays a part. Each champ in LoL,Dota2, or  god in Smite is rated on  a tier level for normal  play and competitive play. Why is that? Because tool kits and  character design matters  that  much. Do you  not remember the original Vulcan or Arachne?   Do you  not see  how Riot changes kits on  champions constantly,  or tweaks to items, masteries,  and the  jungle? These affect the games across the board even for the pro-level  players at the top of the 1%.

 

 

Individual skill  can only take you so far IN AN MMO  against a  zerg based on  game and  class  designs. If you  think  you're so skilled how about you  grab  a  lvl 56 character  in  BDO--- take off all  your  armor and weapons and  I'll keep my Musa with his 350+ Gearscore and we  duel. Then  you tell me  how skill was the determining outcome.

Edited by Orinturi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

snip

 

Don't know why I'm letting you drag me in to this nonsensical argument, but I'll bite  :P .

 

 

 

If a game has a high skill-ceiling and a proper exponential skill curve then average players should stand no chance against great players.  This counteracts the zerg mentality completely as great players don't really gravitate towards zerg tactics so the zerg generally has a pretty mediocre quality of player.

 

This isn't true at all. I know plenty of great players that are in zerg guilds, simply because they prefer easy victories over hard fought ones. First of all, it's hard to categorize a "zerg", since the rationality of this word changes from person to person, group to group. 20 players is a zerg to 5-10 man groups, just like 40 players is a zerg to a 10-20 man group. It's all highly subjective. If you dream of wrecking a 50 man death ball with your 5-10 man group in CF, you should keep on dreaming, especially with the way combat is being built. 

 

 

 

 

And no, sorry, it's not just about understanding the complexity of combos, it is about being able to execute them in a real time environment, and in that regard most people are not very good.  (Generally less than 1% of a player population can actually play well in a high skill-ceiling game)  This does not make for a bad game, it's actually the golden formula that makes the most competitive games so popular.

 

What do you believe the attributes of "skill" should be in crowfall? Twitch? Timing? Aiming? Decision Making? Mechanical Knowledge & Execution? Overall game knowledge? Most if not all these things are already exist in CF. The gap between a completely new player and an experienced player is not incredibly large, but it's noticeable. I don't operate under the belief the CF needs a ridiculously high skill ceiling to be a success, it's not trying to be "THAT" game. "Skill" in MMORPGS mostly resides largely on burden of knowledge, and I don't see it being much different in CF.

 

 

 

The best players are best in all types of gameplay, anything else that you would consider best is just an incomplete player.  The issue here is where the bar is being set.

 

The "best" players will be the ones that can lead their guild/alliance to victory and function well in a large scale pvp environment. Individual skill is great and all, but you can be a great individual player and a terrible teammate at the same time. CF is not CSGO, League of Legends, Halo 5, Call of Duty or Dota2. You'll never see bookoo dollar giveaways akin to The International. There won't be any Dorrito or Mountain Dew advertisements.

 

Tera, GW2, ESO and other games don't have absurdly high skill ceilings, but the combat was put together reasonably well, and it was ultimately fun. That's where CF should be going. I'll take a fun low-medium skill ceiling game over an obnoxious "trying to be ultra competitive supa serious mlg420noscope high skill cap" joyless non-fun game any day of the week.

 

Also, from what I've seen. The "loudest" and most abrasive players aren't usually all that special. The "best" don't need acknowledgement from anyone else, they simply know they are.

Edited by helix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I  think  you're just a delusional elitist  and a  condescending one  at that. I've had every pvp experience out there from  running in zergs, solo play, 8v8  in  daoc, small  battles,,,  LoL,  Dota2,,,,EvE, and pretty much  every mmo  to  be released (yea even that crap Darkfall). I understand skill  curve.  I  also understand rock,paper,scissors  which you  dont.

The very fact that you  compare Smite to an  MMO large scale  battle as if that Individual skill trumps  everything just  leaves me speechless. So  you  try  to  throw the comments like ": Go play Smite  "....  and I  have before and longer than you and at a competitive level,,,  you  can[t say sh-t,,  so now  it's go play League or Dota2,, which  I have,, probably before and longer than  you... What game you gonna throw at me now?

 

But have you been able to reach higher levels of competitive play?  Because you say you understand skill curve, but it doesn't sound like you actually do.  Let's be real here, I was giving you very tame and valid concepts and then YOU started with the condescension. 

 

Even with  all  these game you throw out,, character design plays a part. Each champ in LoL,Dota2, or  god in Smite is rated on  a tier level for normal  play and competitive play. Why is that? Because tool kits and  character design matters  that  much. Do you  not remember the original Vulcan or Arachne?   Do you  not see  how Riot changes kits on  champions constantly,  or tweaks to items, masteries,  and the  jungle? These affect the games across the board even for the pro-level  players at the top of the 1%.

 

Yea?  And what's your point here?  Crowfall will have balance changes to archetypes too.  It doesn't really change the fact that player skill > all. 

 

 

Individual skill  can only take you so far IN AN MMO  against a  zerg based on  game and  class  designs. If you  think  you're so skilled how about you  grab  a  lvl 56 character  in  BDO--- take off all  your  armor and weapons and  I'll keep my Musa with his 350+ Gearscore and we  duel. Then  you tell me  how skill was the determining outcome.

 

The most successful pvp guilds in MMORPGs have never had problems dealing with zergs.  Unless you are talking about low skill-ceiling games like EVE.  Almost as if higher skill-ceilings ruin the effectiveness of zergs.  Tada...

 

 

Don't know why I'm letting you drag me in to this nonsensical argument, but I'll bite  :P .

 

 

 

 

This isn't true at all. I know plenty of great players that are in zerg guilds, simply because they prefer easy victories over hard fought ones. First of all, it's hard to categorize a "zerg", since the rationality of this word changes from person to person, group to group. 20 players is a zerg to 5-10 man groups, just like 40 players is a zerg to a 10-20 man group. It's all highly subjective. If you dream of wrecking a 50 man death ball with your 5-10 man group in CF, you should keep on dreaming, especially with the way combat is being built. 

 

Just a matter of standards, great to me is top 1% and usually actually top .5%.  Those types of players are pretty much NEVER in zerg guilds because that's boring to them/us.  Zerg isn't relative to me like that.  A zerg has to be like 40+ people. 

 

 

What do you believe the attributes of "skill" should be in crowfall? Twitch? Timing? Aiming? Decision Making? Mechanical Knowledge & Execution? Overall game knowledge? Most if not all these things are already exist in CF. The gap between a completely new player and an experienced player is not incredibly large, but it's noticeable. I don't operate under the belief the CF needs a ridiculously high skill ceiling to be a success, it's not trying to be "THAT" game. "Skill" in MMORPGS mostly resides largely on burden of knowledge, and I don't see it being much different in CF.

 

Mechanical skill, and the ability to make complex decisions at a rapid pace.  It's not just about them existing, it's about them existing in a manner that is skillful.  Knowledge only feeds into decision making, it's not really a separate entity as good pvpers absorb all the knowledge rapidly and naturally anyway. 

 

 

The "best" players will be the ones that can lead their guild/alliance to victory and function well in a large scale pvp environment. Individual skill is great and all, but you can be a great individual player and a terrible teammate at the same time. CF is not CSGO, League of Legends, Halo 5, Call of Duty or Dota2. You'll never see bookoo dollar giveaways akin to The International. There won't be any Dorrito or Mountain Dew advertisements.

 

It's not really about the money, it's about the standard for skill.  We are already seeing players in the tests with more competitive based backgrounds dominating everything. 

 

Tera, GW2, ESO and other games don't have absurdly high skill ceilings, but the combat was put together reasonably well, and it was ultimately fun. That's where CF should be going. I'll take a fun low-medium skill ceiling game over an obnoxious "trying to be ultra competitive supa serious mlg420noscope high skill cap" joyless non-fun game any day of the week.

 

I'll take a game with high skill-ceiling in a pvp mmo setting over a low skill-ceiling one any day of the week. 

 

Also, from what I've seen. The "loudest" and most abrasive players aren't usually all that special. The "best" don't need acknowledgement from anyone else, they simply know they are.

 

This is true but in the context of what orinturi was saying it's a slightly different situation.  The best don't really need validation from newbies this is true.  But they also are quite capable of handling the modern gaming environment and dealing with what many would call "toxicity"... If you can't really handle some youngster on voice chat blaring some meme song and you can't battle through the ranks to become a top player in a game that is all well and good.  It just gets boring when people with such a middling constitution try to blame that stuff and then turn around and somehow believe they COULD have gotten to the top.


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh,,,last post for me on this because I think Viking is just that one guy on a game forum that argues in circles and ignores any facts.

 

Player skill makes all the difference when all other things are equal. Stats,,mirrored class,level,,etc. ,,but in an mmo all rings are never equal.

 

Every game you've named requires proper team comps,, and champs that are the proper tier. Some comps are better than others and some champs are better than others. Player skill can make the difference but it isn't > all..because the plan going into those matches with bans,,comps,,,team styles makes a greater impact.

 

Don't care how great your skill is with a LB or a Lux,, you aren't jungling with them and that is based off game design. A players skill can maximize the individual avatars effectiveness only within the kit it has. The same is true of game design for pvp on a larger scale.

Player skill is highly important but also as important is the design of the game,character, the situational aspects of the fight, gears,stats,level, rock,paper,scissors, and the game knowledge the player has about all,

Really looking forward to seeing your skill...been patching smite today.

Edited by Orinturi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh,,,last post for me on this because I think Viking is just that one guy on a game forum that argues in circles and ignores any facts.

 

Player skill makes all the difference when all other things are equal. Stats,,mirrored class,level,,etc. ,,but in an mmo all rings are never equal.

 

Every game you've named requires proper team comps,, and champs that are the proper tier. Some comps are better than others and some champs are better than others. Player skill can make the difference but it isn't > all..because the plan going into those matches with bans,,comps,,,team styles makes a greater impact.

 

Don't care how great your skill is with a LB or a Lux,, you aren't jungling with them and that is based off game design. A players skill can maximize the individual avatars effectiveness only within the kit it has. The same is true of game design for pvp on a larger scale.

Player skill is highly important but also as important is the design of the game,character, the situational aspects of the fight, gears,stats,level, rock,paper,scissors, and the game knowledge the player has about all,

Really looking forward to seeing your skill...been patching smite today.

I think perhaps you focus too much on the little details and not enough on the big ones.  All of these things you list are easy for great players to learn/adapt to/master.  Great players in games like mobas for example, do not just know how to play one character well.  They are well-rounded so that element of game design doesn't really factor in as much. 

 

Player skill does matter most though, this is why at professional level play you will always see teams that would much rather recruit someone with a lot of individual skill and work them into the team, they do not remain content with a good "team" player that has middling individual skill.  It's an arm's race in games with high skill-ceilings... You can only be as good as your weakest link, so the best teams make sure all of their links are individually strong, as well as strong as a unit.

 

I think the biggest fact that you yourself are ignoring, is how things shake out in these games.  You take a professional player and he can pretty much carry games individually up to a pretty high rank because player skill matters enough to where if his opponents are much worse individually the curve is so unforgiving that generally their teamwork isn't going to prevail. 

 

This is what crowfall should aspire to, where zergs must maintain a certain level of player skill to be effective.  Anytime you try to argue about abilities and classes and all that jazz when addressing the zerg issue it is pointless, because all of those tools you want the small group to have, are the same tools a zerg can have... the only advantage a small group can ever truly have is that it is easier to maintain a higher average skill in a small group than a zerg group, and zerg groups don't really attract skillful players to join them in general. 


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, you got into a discussion with VN, with his myopic pseudo elitism, poor guy.

 

I doubt we'll be getting that quality strategy with damage splitting throttling mass targeting, and cavalry being assigned to healing, and vapor mechanisms like friendly fire.

 

Beyond that, you'll want to skip any discussions with Viking Nail, Helix or Pang, there's no point it mingling reason with terrible chauvinism. Smite, skill, rofl.

 

I'll go back to my tea now, Pann will be here shortly to defend bigots from criticism.

Edited by bahamutkaiser

a52d4a0d-044f-44ff-8a10-ccc31bfa2d87.jpg          Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes... Than if they're upset, they'll be a mile away, and barefoot :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll go back to my tea now, Pann will be here shortly to defend bigots from criticism.

 

Bruh, you just described yourself.

Edited by helix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 The "loudest" and most abrasive players aren't usually all that special. The "best" don't need acknowledgement from anyone else, they simply know they are.

 

Exactly.

 

While I'm not an esport pro gamer fanboi, I've never really seen any "good" players spend hours upon hours saying how good they are on forums or while actually playing. For the most part they seem to do what they are good at .... play games .... and act decent to others.

 

If you need to promote your own ego and "skill" online...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Player skill does matter most though, this is why at professional level play you will always see teams that would much rather recruit someone with a lot of individual skill and work them into the team, they do not remain content with a good "team" player that has middling individual skill.  It's an arm's race in games with high skill-ceilings... You can only be as good as your weakest link, so the best teams make sure all of their links are individually strong, as well as strong as a unit.

 

How does this apply to mmos?

 

Who are the "pro" mmorpg players/teams out there and what games do they play?

 

That is, open world unbalanced game play, not WoW arenas or whatever you've played.

 

I agree that individual skill is huge in high end comp play, but CF will never be that from simply looking at what they've done/said so far. It's great to want XYZ, but at some point it should be obvious that it isn't happening.

 

If you've tried the combat so far, no idea how you think it will allow for a high ceiling now or in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does this apply to mmos?

 

Who are the "pro" mmorpg players/teams out there and what games do they play?

 

Well it applies to MMOs because MMOs don't only have strictly MMORPG players.  For example I myself an ex-professional current coach from RTS/FPS genre, and my guildies have similar backgrounds.  We bring that same level of perfectionism to other genres because we always strive to be the best. 

 

That is, open world unbalanced game play, not WoW arenas or whatever you've played.

 

It doesn't really matter open world or not, arenas make people better at open world pvp as well, but world pvp does not always make people better at arena. 

 

I agree that individual skill is huge in high end comp play, but CF will never be that from simply looking at what they've done/said so far. It's great to want XYZ, but at some point it should be obvious that it isn't happening.

 

If you've tried the combat so far, no idea how you think it will allow for a high ceiling now or in the future.

 

We don't know where crowfall will end, we do know it has a lot of room for improvement, but I also know that if you truly want to mitigate just how impactful a zerg is, you need a high skill-ceiling.  That way the zerg is required to have more skillful players to be effective, and just mindlessly getting a bunch of people together isn't as great because they aren't able to utilize their characters nearly as proficiently in a game with a high skill-ceiling + good skill curve.


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We don't know where crowfall will end, we do know it has a lot of room for improvement, but I also know that if you truly want to mitigate just how impactful a zerg is, you need a high skill-ceiling.  That way the zerg is required to have more skillful players to be effective, and just mindlessly getting a bunch of people together isn't as great because they aren't able to utilize their characters nearly as proficiently in a game with a high skill-ceiling + good skill curve.

 

Just for theorycrafting, you have 20 amazing players and the enemy has 50 not so amazing. You pretty much always win. Why would those 50 keep playing? What if they increase to 100-150 and still lose, what keeps them coming back?

 

There is a reason eSport type games have rules, rankings, tournaments, and other artificial mechanics to separate players.Also a reason that ACE focused on the Uncle Bob problem from the start. Losing and even Winning forever are good ways to run folks off.

 

If you believe you are in the top X% of gamers, awesome, not sure how you think a game catering to you so that you can win vs those below your level, without challenge, is entertaining.

 

If there are no none pure skill related options beyond bring 10x the number and hope that is good enough, seems like it would quickly take the fun away. Guess it's just Git Gud for the other side?

 

There's always been smaller, organized, and likely higher skilled groups in all PVP mmos. However, what they did well at typically wasn't the big picture.

 

Not sure how they can build the non-combat related mechanics/features to accommodate both the little and big guy, regardless of how quickly you can kill others.

 

Resource gathering, crafting, chicken ticker, warmth, etc are all mechanics that allow the focus to be more about the team and less the individual. Hence the whole Throne War, not Jaime Lannister slogan.

 

These mechanics can reward a organized larger force while punishing a mindless zerg. 

 

Even believe they said something about smaller groups having to join forces over time as the world and resources would be limited and facing off vs larger groups would be difficult.

 

At some point, I assume math outweighs skill. If you need X number of swords but can only make Y number a day, whomever can do this more efficiently will have the upper hand. Not just who can use them better. 50 geared out meh players vs 10 pros with wooden clubs might be funny, but seems less likely to go to the club pack.

 

Obviously this is all just theory as they could dumb down combat and the game for the LCD, but I hope not. However, some how designing a large scale team based mmo to be dominated by individual skill seems backwards and highly unlikely.

 

Probably why you can't give an example from other games. Isn't exactly common place for a reason.

 

CF might be empty and a campaign might only have 200 people. I could see a small force doing well, but I'm assuming the game actually attracts a few people and a world isn't totally void of action.

 

Overall, looking to SMITE or whatever game and up scaling it without factoring in all the other variables seems silly to me. What works for one doesn't make it work for another.

 

Smaller groups always have a chance, but it should be working with what everyone has available, not the system handing them victory because they can click faster or know the magical super combo team comp that takes 60 hrs a week to practice and years to master.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for theorycrafting, you have 20 amazing players and the enemy has 50 not so amazing. You pretty much always win. Why would those 50 keep playing? What if they increase to 100-150 and still lose, what keeps them coming back?

 

There is a reason eSport type games have rules, rankings, tournaments, and other artificial mechanics to separate players.Also a reason that ACE focused on the Uncle Bob problem from the start. Losing and even Winning forever are good ways to run folks off.

 

If you believe you are in the top X% of gamers, awesome, not sure how you think a game catering to you so that you can win vs those below your level, without challenge, is entertaining.

 

If there are no none pure skill related options beyond bring 10x the number and hope that is good enough, seems like it would quickly take the fun away. Guess it's just Git Gud for the other side?

 

There's always been smaller, organized, and likely higher skilled groups in all PVP mmos. However, what they did well at typically wasn't the big picture.

 

Not sure how they can build the non-combat related mechanics/features to accommodate both the little and big guy, regardless of how quickly you can kill others.

 

Resource gathering, crafting, chicken ticker, warmth, etc are all mechanics that allow the focus to be more about the team and less the individual. Hence the whole Throne War, not Jaime Lannister slogan.

 

These mechanics can reward a organized larger force while punishing a mindless zerg. 

 

Even believe they said something about smaller groups having to join forces over time as the world and resources would be limited and facing off vs larger groups would be difficult.

 

At some point, I assume math outweighs skill. If you need X number of swords but can only make Y number a day, whomever can do this more efficiently will have the upper hand. Not just who can use them better. 50 geared out meh players vs 10 pros with wooden clubs might be funny, but seems less likely to go to the club pack.

 

Obviously this is all just theory as they could dumb down combat and the game for the LCD, but I hope not. However, some how designing a large scale team based mmo to be dominated by individual skill seems backwards and highly unlikely.

 

Probably why you can't give an example from other games. Isn't exactly common place for a reason.

 

CF might be empty and a campaign might only have 200 people. I could see a small force doing well, but I'm assuming the game actually attracts a few people and a world isn't totally void of action.

 

Overall, looking to SMITE or whatever game and up scaling it without factoring in all the other variables seems silly to me. What works for one doesn't make it work for another.

 

Smaller groups always have a chance, but it should be working with what everyone has available, not the system handing them victory because they can click faster or know the magical super combo team comp that takes 60 hrs a week to practice and years to master.

You just (accidentally?) described how alliances and ultimately server wars started on most SB servers.

 

That's solid reasoning, but I'm not sure VN speaks that language man. My guess is that he'll just make some obscure reference to sitting at the table of champions and quitting right after SB launched because it was too easy or something equally rational.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You just (accidentally?) described how alliances and ultimately server wars started on most SB servers.

 

That's solid reasoning, but I'm not sure VN speaks that language man. My guess is that he'll just make some obscure reference to sitting at the table of champions and quitting right after SB launched because it was too easy or something equally rational.

 

Yep, I'm getting the idea that he and probably  a  couple of friends learn how to power through a game and get a nice jump  on gear/stats/levels,, win some fights,  kill people who are undergeared and lack knowledge of the game and quit immediately when the playerbase catches up to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You just (accidentally?) described how alliances and ultimately server wars started on most SB servers.

 

That's solid reasoning, but I'm not sure VN speaks that language man. My guess is that he'll just make some obscure reference to sitting at the table of champions and quitting right after SB launched because it was too easy or something equally rational.

 

Pretty much how it has worked in most PVP mmos from my experience (SB briefly).

 

I find him entertaining if nothing else, being able to keep the same circular discussions going for so long might be the only skill he has though. Try not to feed, but I can't resist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for theorycrafting, you have 20 amazing players and the enemy has 50 not so amazing. You pretty much always win. Why would those 50 keep playing? What if they increase to 100-150 and still lose, what keeps them coming back?

 

Well what keeps pvpers playing pvp games?  The desire to improve, to have something to strive for (easy to learn hard to master)... This isn't 2003 where grandpa joe gets upset he loses and quits forever.  It's 2016 where there are 100 people looking to compete in pvp for every grandpa joe there used to be. 

 

There is a reason eSport type games have rules, rankings, tournaments, and other artificial mechanics to separate players.Also a reason that ACE focused on the Uncle Bob problem from the start. Losing and even Winning forever are good ways to run folks off.

 

The only thing that would cause a player to lose forever is if they had no desire to improve, which really means they shouldn't be in any sort of competitive pvp game anyway?

 

If you believe you are in the top X% of gamers, awesome, not sure how you think a game catering to you so that you can win vs those below your level, without challenge, is entertaining.

 

I'm not asking them to cater the game to me, I am asking them to follow sound principles to make a good pvp game in 2016.  If they catered to me there would only be hardcore rulesets and the principles would be much less forgiving. 

 

If there are no none pure skill related options beyond bring 10x the number and hope that is good enough, seems like it would quickly take the fun away. Guess it's just Git Gud for the other side?

 

Uh yea?  In any competitive game you should goad the players into getting good?  You shouldn't reward bad play?

 

There's always been smaller, organized, and likely higher skilled groups in all PVP mmos. However, what they did well at typically wasn't the big picture.

 

Well in shadowbane my guild was begged by pretty much every big nation to roll on their server and play for them.  That itself gave us a lot of clout for manipulating certain situations.  PvP means player vs player, the best players should win. 

 

Not sure how they can build the non-combat related mechanics/features to accommodate both the little and big guy, regardless of how quickly you can kill others.

 

All you have to do is follow a simple principle, make player skill matter more than anything else.  The rest will settle itself out, if the little guy wants to be little he can be little, if he wants to improve he can improve. 

 

Resource gathering, crafting, chicken ticker, warmth, etc are all mechanics that allow the focus to be more about the team and less the individual. Hence the whole Throne War, not Jaime Lannister slogan.

 

Sure, but none of these things make or break the game, and none of them are some sorta mind boggling concept that great players won't be able to juggle effortlessly anyway. 

 

These mechanics can reward a organized larger force while punishing a mindless zerg. 

 

They can, but most likely they won't.  ACE is not going to make things too grindy, they seem very casual oriented with the primary systems they've introduced. 

 

Even believe they said something about smaller groups having to join forces over time as the world and resources would be limited and facing off vs larger groups would be difficult.

 

They sure did, player politics and decisions will matter, but player skill should still be the most important thing.

 

At some point, I assume math outweighs skill. If you need X number of swords but can only make Y number a day, whomever can do this more efficiently will have the upper hand. Not just who can use them better. 50 geared out meh players vs 10 pros with wooden clubs might be funny, but seems less likely to go to the club pack.

 

Sure but the skill curve needs to be pretty favorable for skilled players or the game won't interest them.  If a game doesn't allow your superior skill to shine it has failed as a competitive game. 

 

Obviously this is all just theory as they could dumb down combat and the game for the LCD, but I hope not. However, some how designing a large scale team based mmo to be dominated by individual skill seems backwards and highly unlikely.

 

The game isn't just for large scale though, it just also allows for large scale, they've talked about how smaller groups can still impact campaigns and compete with the larger groups.  And most of the time spent is also in smaller scale activities.  Also one should note that with the systems they propose like voxels, action combat, etc... the chance of them having truly large scale combat and it functioning well isn't all that likely. 

 

Probably why you can't give an example from other games. Isn't exactly common place for a reason.

 

CF might be empty and a campaign might only have 200 people. I could see a small force doing well, but I'm assuming the game actually attracts a few people and a world isn't totally void of action.

 

The game will attract a lot of people, if player skill matters, just like the popular survival game genres and other pvp genres are doing right now.

 

Overall, looking to SMITE or whatever game and up scaling it without factoring in all the other variables seems silly to me. What works for one doesn't make it work for another.

 

Smaller groups always have a chance, but it should be working with what everyone has available, not the system handing them victory because they can click faster or know the magical super combo team comp that takes 60 hrs a week to practice and years to master.

 

Handing them victory?  They earn it through superior play and superior skill.  It's kind of silly to act like skill shouldn't be rewarded. 

 

 

 

Pretty much how it has worked in most PVP mmos from my experience (SB briefly).

 

I find him entertaining if nothing else, being able to keep the same circular discussions going for so long might be the only skill he has though. Try not to feed, but I can't resist.

It's pretty easy to keep a discussion going when you use common sense. 

 

WoW doesn't make tons of money, high skill or your game will fail!

WoW PvP has one of the highest skill-ceilings of any mmorpg pvp.  It was a very popular esport for that reason.  But in this case WoW wouldn't be a great example anyway, because WoW itself is not focused on pvp primarily.  But your snark is funny, because it's just completely wrong either way. 

 

 

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, I'm getting the idea that he and probably  a  couple of friends learn how to power through a game and get a nice jump  on gear/stats/levels,, win some fights,  kill people who are undergeared and lack knowledge of the game and quit immediately when the playerbase catches up to them.

 

Regardless he is living the dream, pro-gamer, coach, best at every game ever created and yet has time to type away on forums about games that don't even exist.

 

Probably a pro sports player and doctor on the side when bored.

Edited by APE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll go back to my tea now, Pann will be here shortly to defend bigots from criticism.

 

Close, but no. I'm only here to remind everyone to avoid personal attacks. And to share your tea. 


Valerie "Pann" Massey, Director of Community
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...