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

First Look: Knight powers and UI - Official discussion thread

Recommended Posts

I don't think that's accurate.  

 

To steal a page from David Sirlin (one of the game designers that I respect the most), the key to mastering a system isn't just optimizing your character and play style.  The real mastery is in YOMI, which is a japanese word for "reading" -- being able to read into the mind of your opponent and predict his move, ideally before he has even decided what move he will make.  You can design a Level-3 YOMI system in as little as 4 moves.  

 

A master-skill player would know each archetype, promotion and discipline class tree intimately, be able to gauge ALL of his opponent's available options in a moment, and intuit how he (the player behind the keyboard -- not the archetype) is most likely to react to any move or counter.

 

I believe that the model we are using could be the best of both worlds: it gives the breadth of options, but provides enough information to allow a master player will be able to predict their opponent's moves, before they even make them.  

 

I could be wrong, of course...  I guess we'll find out!

 

Todd

ACE

 

 

Will we be able to count on indicators of the enemy's health, mana, stamina and other resources? Or will we have to just guess? The whole subject opens up the possibility of playing with player perception. Displaying false health/stam/mana indicators as part of an ability or combo could mislead an enemy into making the wrong decision.


Shadowbane - House Avari/Hy'shen
"Gimp elves get good elves killed." - Belina

Avari Discord - https://discord.gg/Bch24PV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably, we are closer in mind than we may have first appeared. :)

My main thing here is to argue against a design philosophy that arbitrarily limits the base ability set to a number that appears too small to effectively deal with the sort of intricate combat dynamics I'm hoping Crowfall will have. I don't know if the answer is 13.5, 20 or whatever.

Ten just seems... confined. And I hope the devs consider that to be a starting point, not a hard end goal for each archetype.

 

But it's not just 10. It's...

 

10 hot bar buttons + L/R mouse + C + retaliate + sprint + 5 or more combo abilities...

 

While actually having to aim, account for mass/ physics, friendly fire (all of which most tab target mmos don't factor in)

 

L mouse is a 3 part chain that snares

R mouse is a block reducing damage for you and those behind and a reflect and a possible knock down and adds mass

 

Not to mention the huge strategy involved with the combo system, when to complete a combo or interrupt it, do you recognize your opponents combo, and discipline choices, when to time your interrupt vs their combo chain, how it reacts to the force of others around you

 

Etc etc etc etc etc

Edited by Ziz

MOkvLlm.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've played MMO's with 30+ abilities (WOW), and I've played MMOs with limited slots (Guild wars and Wildstar). In WoW, you had 3 or 4 abilities you would use 99% of the time. Then you would have 30+ extremely situational abilities you would hardly ever use. Because there was no limit, Blizzard could not make every ability as useful as the required 3-4. You'd be like Super Saiyan Goku. It would be impossible to design and balance

 

In Wildstar, you had 30 abilities with a design philosophy that all of them were extremely good and useful. They could do this because they limited you to 8 skills on your bar at any given time. This created a ton of customization and theorycrafting.

 

From a game play and design stand point, managing 8-10 very useful skills is a much more enjoyable experience than 3 or 4 good abilities with 30+ "meh" ones

 

Heck.. I played both WoW and Wildstar.. so yeah.. I know exactly what you mean.. which is why I have been arguing that Im ok with a 10 hotkey bar for skills... especially considering that you could possibly multiply that to 50 skills (hope it doesnt go past 20 though) adn thats not even counting the mouse buttons that potentially add another 20. (total of 70 right there.. )

 

If you look at my earlier posts you`ll see I even suggested the following set up:

 

4 attack openers (up to a potential 20 attacks)

6 defense/block skills (that could potentially open up counter combos)

1mouse attack

1 mouse block

 

Crazy physics

Environment hazards

Mages pooping their pants

Massive catapults heat coming at you

Remembering none of the block skills actually block that...

Double tap D to get the hell OUT OF THE WAY!!!!!!!!

 

Plenty of oportunity for fun right there! :D

Except when mages cry..  

Then nobody has fun...


Lf6MJUL.png

http://www.legend-gaming.net

Pingu - Member

---------------------------"Winter is coming"---------------------------

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

What happens when you read your enemy, but you don't have the right tool set to react to your opponent?

 

Interesting question.  Let's flip it around; should every player have the right tool to react to every opponent in every situation?

 

Todd

I think the "tool" to react should not always be with the player.
Sometimes the best reaction to a situation might be seeking out renforcement(s).After all,if it is a game to play together,its ok if we cant always react alone..its even desirable perhaps..
In severe situations where you are outnumbered by an army of the other faction,you could try to cause a snowslide in the winter to bury the enemy army in.
When you don't have the strength alone,the environment could be your friend..
 
And the tools we get to react to an opponent could have different outcomes according to season for example.
I think the harder it is to read into the enemy ,the more exciting it becomes.
Predictability is boring after all.
Edited by Tipsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 13 archetypes right now. If each Archetype had 20-30 abilities, you'd be looking at close to 300 abilities that would need to be designed, created, implemented, balanced and given its own unique animation. From a game design perspective alone, that would be an almost impossible feat for a company the size of ACE.

I prefer games with 20 abilities or so per class. Make it so you can use 5 of them damn often, a few "oh crap" buttons, and a few situationals. People seem to hate situational abilities yet I love them. The whole point of them is to give you options in certain situations, and the GOOD player will force those situations upon the enemy to make use of them. The BAD players whine that it is a situational skill they can't use at will. 


"Lawful Good does not always mean Lawful Nice."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

In severe situations where you are outnumbered by an army of the other faction,you could try to cause a snowslide in the winter to bury the enemy army in.
When you don't have the strength alone,the environment could be your friend..

 

That's an interesting idea to consider : to what extent a single player could impact on the outcome of a battle?

 

Usually in MMO (or First person shooter, RTS), if a player faces other players of equivalent strength, his contribution rarely is extraordinary.

 

In Crowfall, from what I've understood, we can control in some ways the environment and use it to our advantage : as you wrote, we could cause a snowslide, use character mass to push other players off the cliff, make walls fall on enemies, dig tunnels to trap players inside, make a building collapse...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CONFESSSSSSSSSSSSSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOR...........

 

WHHHHHHHHHHEEEEEEEEEEEEENNNNN????

 

OT: Wow got too bloated. Since they are copying Tera so much, I think Tera had a nice ability count for the most part. Some classes had a ton of abilites, i.e. warrior, sorcerer, and some not much, i.e. zerker, lancer.

Edited by Sciocco

gCWxS8u.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's an interesting idea to consider : to what extent a single player could impact on the outcome of a battle?

 

Usually in MMO (or First person shooter, RTS), if a player faces other players of equivalent strength, his contribution rarely is extraordinary.

 

In Crowfall, from what I've understood, we can control in some ways the environment and use it to our advantage : as you wrote, we could cause a snowslide, use character mass to push other players off the cliff, make walls fall on enemies, dig tunnels to trap players inside, make a building collapse...

Thats also an interesting question..
I think a single player should be able to pose a threat.
Maybe the impact a single player should have over the outcome of battle depends on position/location and what is usable in the environment?
What they could mean also depends on their talents ofcourse,and other things i'm probably forgetting..
 
There have been games where they regard a single enemy harmless,but in games like age of empires it could have a lot of consequence if you let a few enemy builders escape.
If they ignore an enemy player that might give enough time to go cut the rope on the hill to let some boulders loose
Overseeing an enemy just because he/she is alone deserves punishment i think
 
Also for the player that is regarded as useless to the enemy,
it pretty exciting I bet to get to those that initially ignored you,gives a sense of accomplishment
That you can still mean something solo.
Edited by Tipsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting question.  Let's flip it around; should every player should have the right tool to react to every opponent in every situation?

 

Todd

 

Armor meta + Skill tree meta + archtype meta + strategic consumables + group balance = maximum flexibility in a group pvp game. 1 vs 1 and a billion skills on a billion hot keys breaks this meta. 

 

I am an MMO and MOBA fan, and you don't need 24+ skill slots with multiple skill bars to make an exciting and strategical game. 

 

Here's my rule....

 

bavo7IX.jpg

 

If you need 4 hands to play Crowfall to mash all the skill buttons, its probably not going to work out well!

Edited by hades-lotd

rSHxVEY.gif

Guildmaster, LotD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a troll. But,

  • There WILL be unbalance between the archetypes, promotion classes, and disciplines.
  • You WILL cry. I WILL love the tears.
  • They WILL patch it.
  • I WILL cry. Enjoy.

Hopefully after all is said and done the balance needle will land on slightly imbalanced to allow for smart choices and smart gameplay to tip the scale.


KRIPTIKserratedv3_zps4ptlmh6o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting question.  Let's flip it around; should every player should have the right tool to react to every opponent in every situation?

 

Todd

I want to try and answer this.

Yes and no.

 

I think you should always be able to react to any given situation, but by react I don't mean you can always win.

People tend to think binary about combat as if winning and losing are your only options, they aren't.

You can delay, you can go for a stalemate, you can retreat.

As long as you can avoid always losing and you have some measure of recourse, it's fine if your not always able to win.

 

I don't think that's accurate.  

 

To steal a page from David Sirlin (one of the game designers that I respect the most), the key to mastering a system isn't just optimizing your character and play style.  The real mastery is in YOMI, which is a japanese word for "reading" -- being able to read into the mind of your opponent and predict his move, ideally before he has even decided what move he will make.  You can design a Level-3 YOMI system in as little as 4 moves.  

 

A master-skill player would know each archetype, promotion and discipline class tree intimately, be able to gauge ALL of his opponent's available options in a moment, and intuit how he (the player behind the keyboard -- not the archetype) is most likely to react to any move or counter.

 

I believe that the model we are using could be the best of both worlds: it gives the breadth of options, but provides enough information to allow a master player will be able to predict their opponent's moves, before they even make them.  

 

I could be wrong, of course...  I guess we'll find out!

 

Todd

ACE

 

Now as to how you can do that, and read your opponent I have a few examples of how you can do it well, and an example of YOMI done poorly.

 

Example 1

Dark Souls take is using a common base for all characters.  Everyone has the set of attacks, can dodge, block, backstab and parry.  In addition to the same set of animations and visuals as it relates to weapons and armor.

Extending from that is the weapon classes, where all of a given type function in mostly the same way, with a few weapons being outliers.

Same is true of armor, bigger and bulkier the armor > the heavier it is > the slower you move/dodge.

 

This way you can tell about 90% of what somebody can do just by looking at them, and even more once they start moving.

Before they've thrown there first attack, you can tell how fast it will be, how far it will reach, how much damage it is likely to do, etc.

They can get away with this largely because ascetically there are no cosmetics to obfuscate.

 

 

A classic example is when a lighter character, esp if they are using either daggers or thrusting swords is attempting to strafing around you without attacking, they are "backstab fishing".  A common tactic.

And this tactic while effective against the unprepared, is easily countered if you know how to move against it.  It has little to nothing to do with your weapons or armor, but entirely how you move in relation to it.

 

 

Example 2

MOBA's are also a decent example of how YOMI is applied effectively, thou differently.

While again there is a common kit, in this case of items, map layout and spawn position, goals, animations and general move speed.

However it achieves a lot of it's readability from set characters.  Each having it's own unique, but set in stone kit.  

So by looking at any given character, you can tell exactly what is can and cannot do, even with cosmetics since you can tell on silhouette alone who they are.

 

And even if you are not familiar with a given characters kit, because the kits are only about 4 skills, with only 3 being used with any regularity when compared to the duration of the match, you can easily figure out operational limits to that character relatively easily.

And while these games have a large number of characters and kits as a result, your only ever going up against at most 5 at a time.  

 

So there is never too much going on at once for you to not be able to figure out what is happening.

 

 

Example 3

And for my bad example, Guild Wars 2.

This game has a lot of problems, but readability is right up there.

 

For one, while almost every is an effective DPS of one strain or another, the game suffers horribly from obfuscation.

Where armor class is broken into types, they is a lot of skin design cross over so it's not always immediately apparent what armor class it is.

In addition to where a single armor class is shared by several classes.  Then you have cosmetic skins muddying the water further. 

But compounding that problem is how defense is largely disconnected to armor class, but is stat dependent instead.

 

Then you have weapons, which suffer from most of the same problems as armor.

While skills are largely tied to weapons, there is no uniformity between classes.  A dagger wield Thief might be backstabby stealth based, but a Elementalist is a short ranged high DPS caster instead.

So visually you can't look at a character and know either what class they are or what they might be capable of until well after they start attacking.  And then you have races to complicate matters further, as silhouettes vary wildly.

At best you can target them to know what class they are, but it often provides little information as to what they are actually doing.

 

 

But it gets even worse the that.  As the significant major of damage and defense is entirely under the hood stats and traits.

Something you cannot perceive at all from the outside.  And so you have literally no idea just how powerful somebody might be by looking at them.  You can have an high defense build and a high DPS build have the exact same gear/ cosmetics, and that is atrocious design.

You have to wait until they start hitting you to figure out which, and an the time to death can be very short indeed, so you may often not even get a chance to react accordingly.

 

But wait, there's more.  That's just the 1v1 situation, once you start adding in more players it goes to hell in a hand basket as these problems are compounded by the fast pacing, unrelenting attack focused spammy gameplay, visual overload, lack of body blocking/ character overlap, camera angle and utter lack of order and organization.

It turns mass combat into a complete cluster F**K.

 

It rapidly becomes impossible to decern anything more then the most basic of information, like don't stand in the dozens of glow red circles.

Making meaningful decisions requires you to be able to process information, and you can't do that when said information is incomprehensible and/or overloaded.

GW2 does both.

 

 

TL:DR

In short, if you want readability, keep it simple.

People need to know what their opponent can do at a glance, and as long as they have a basic common kit to work with, they should be able to react accordingly, even if victory is not an option.

 

Edit:

Also to add, keep the under the hood, passive and thus unperceptivable stuff to a minimum.

If your immune to poison, I'd really like to know that before engaging you with a poison build.  And if it's an elective passive that anybody can use, then it's a problem.

If however you have an Archtype that is straight up immune to poison, then that's fine, as you can know that in advance and work around it.

Readability requires you to be able to quickly understand what somebody can and cannot do either by sight, or in advance.

 

And you can't really do that when all the important stuff is hidden under the hood.

Edited by yoh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Armor meta + Skill tree meta + archtype meta + strategic consumables + group balance = maximum flexibility in a group pvp game. 1 vs 1 and a billion skills on a billion hot keys breaks this meta. 

 

I am an MMO and MOBA fan, and you don't need 24+ skill slots with multiple skill bars to make an exciting and strategical game. 

 

Here's my rule....

 

bavo7IX.jpg

 

If you need 4 hands to play Crowfall to mash all the skill buttons, its probably not going to work out well!

 

The fact that you are both left AND right handed.. REALLy freaks me out.. 


Lf6MJUL.png

http://www.legend-gaming.net

Pingu - Member

---------------------------"Winter is coming"---------------------------

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to try and answer this.

Yes and no.

 

I think you should always be able to react to any given situation, but by react I don't mean you can always win.

People tend to think binary about combat as if winning and losing are your only options, they aren't.

You can delay, you can go for a stalemate, you can retreat.

As long as you can avoid always losing and you have some measure of recourse, it's fine if your not always able to win.

 

Now as to how you can do that, and read your opponent I have a few examples of how you can do it well, and an example of YOMI done poorly.

 

Example 1

Dark Souls take is using a common base for all characters.  Everyone has the set of attacks, can dodge, block, backstab and parry.  In addition to the same set of animations and visuals as it relates to weapons and armor.

Extending from that is the weapon classes, where all of a given type function in mostly the same way, with a few weapons being outliers.

Same is true of armor, bigger and bulkier the armor > the heavier it is > the slower you move/dodge.

 

This way you can tell about 90% of what somebody can do just by looking at them, and even more once they start moving.

Before they've thrown there first attack, you can tell how fast it will be, how far it will reach, how much damage it is likely to do, etc.

They can get away with this largely because ascetically there are no cosmetics to obfuscate.

 

 

A classic example is when a lighter character, esp if they are using either daggers or thrusting swords is attempting to strafing around you without attacking, they are "backstab fishing".  A common tactic.

And this tactic while effective against the unprepared, is easily countered if you know how to move against it.  It has little to nothing to do with your weapons or armor, but entirely how you move in relation to it.

 

 

Example 2

MOBA's are also a decent example of how YOMI is applied effectively, thou differently.

While again there is a common kit, in this case of items, map layout and spawn position, goals, animations and general move speed.

However it achieves a lot of it's readability from set characters.  Each having it's own unique, but set in stone kit.  

So by looking at any given character, you can tell exactly what is can and cannot do, even with cosmetics since you can tell on silhouette alone who they are.

 

And even if you are not familiar with a given characters kit, because the kits are only about 4 skills, with only 3 being used with any regularity when compared to the duration of the match, you can easily figure out operational limits to that character relatively easily.

And while these games have a large number of characters and kits as a result, your only ever going up against at most 5 at a time.  

 

So there is never too much going on at once for you to not be able to figure out what is happening.

 

 

Example 3

And for my bad example, Guild Wars 2.

This game has a lot of problems, but readability is right up there.

 

For one, while almost every is an effective DPS of one strain or another, the game suffers horribly from obfuscation.

Where armor class is broken into types, they is a lot of skin design cross over so it's not always immediately apparent what armor class it is.

In addition to where a single armor class is shared by several classes.  Then you have cosmetic skins muddying the water further. 

But compounding that problem is how defense is largely disconnected to armor class, but is stat dependent instead.

 

Then you have weapons, which suffer from most of the same problems as armor.

While skills are largely tied to weapons, there is no uniformity between classes.  A dagger wield Thief might be backstabby stealth based, but a Elementalist is a short ranged high DPS caster instead.

So visually you can't look at a character and know either what class they are or what they might be capable of until well after they start attacking.  And then you have races to complicate matters further, as silhouettes vary wildly.

At best you can target them to know what class they are, but it often provides little information as to what they are actually doing.

 

 

But it gets even worse the that.  As the significant major of damage and defense is entirely under the hood stats and traits.

Something you cannot perceive at all from the outside.  And so you have literally no idea just how powerful somebody might be by looking at them.  You can have an high defense build and a high DPS build have the exact same gear/ cosmetics, and that is atrocious design.

You have to wait until they start hitting you to figure out which, and an the time to death can be very short indeed, so you may often not even get a chance to react accordingly.

 

But wait, there's more.  That's just the 1v1 situation, once you start adding in more players it goes to hell in a hand basket as these problems are compounded by the fast pacing, unrelenting attack focused spammy gameplay, visual overload, lack of body blocking/ character overlap, camera angle and utter lack of order and organization.

It turns mass combat into a complete cluster F**K.

 

It rapidly becomes impossible to decern anything more then the most basic of information, like don't stand in the dozens of glow red circles.

Making meaningful decisions requires you to be able to process information, and you can't do that when said information is incomprehensible and/or overloaded.

GW2 does both.

 

 

TL:DR

In short, if you want readability, keep it simple.

People need to know what their opponent can do at a glance, and as long as they have a basic common kit to work with, they should be able to react accordingly, even if victory is not an option.

 

Ok.. I cant take it anymore..

What the HELL is a YOMI?????

 

And yeah.. I think reading the animations of the characters in the battlefield.. their hand movement.. positioning.. environment.. etc.. to decide on strategy to apply brings us so much closer to a real simulation of childhood play time fantasy of warfare... 

 

I think its possible.. I think CW is going to crack the code.. IM A BELIEVER!!!!!

ALLELUIA MY BROTHER!


Lf6MJUL.png

http://www.legend-gaming.net

Pingu - Member

---------------------------"Winter is coming"---------------------------

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok.. I cant take it anymore..

What the HELL is a YOMI?????

 

And yeah.. I think reading the animations of the characters in the battlefield.. their hand movement.. positioning.. environment.. etc.. to decide on strategy to apply brings us so much closer to a real simulation of childhood play time fantasy of warfare... 

 

I think its possible.. I think CW is going to crack the code.. IM A BELIEVER!!!!!

ALLELUIA MY BROTHER!

I think it has something to do with the land of the dead, and the denizen's within.

But don't quote me...... no seriously don't quote me, my walls of texts are choking up this thread.  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Example 2

MOBA's are also a decent example of how YOMI is applied effectively, thou differently.

While again there is a common kit, in this case of items, map layout and spawn position, goals, animations and general move speed.

However it achieves a lot of it's readability from set characters.  Each having it's own unique, but set in stone kit.  

So by looking at any given character, you can tell exactly what is can and cannot do, even with cosmetics since you can tell on silhouette alone who they are.

 

You can get a general idea of what a character can do, which is a far cry from mastering how to play with or against such a character... understanding a kit and playing correctly with regards to it are two entirely different things. 

 

And even if you are not familiar with a given characters kit, because the kits are only about 4 skills, with only 3 being used with any regularity when compared to the duration of the match, you can easily figure out operational limits to that character relatively easily.

 

The better you are at the game, the quicker you learn the limits of a character, but most people take hundreds or thousands of games on a champ to become decent at it, let alone good or great. 

 

And while these games have a large number of characters and kits as a result, your only ever going up against at most 5 at a time.  

 

So there is never too much going on at once for you to not be able to figure out what is happening.

 

League of Legends is the most watched esport/game in the world, even in slow motion replay with casters explaining the most important aspects of a teamfight (they don't have time to cover it all) most of the people barely understand what happened... let alone in realtime, and furthermore while actually playing.  5v5's are chaos, if they were easy to understand you would see more people excelling at those games... but that's part of the skill involved, being able to read and factor in more variables as they happen in real time, more than the opponent. 

 

TL:DR

In short, if you want readability, keep it simple.

People need to know what their opponent can do at a glance, and as long as they have a basic common kit to work with, they should be able to react accordingly, even if victory is not an option.

 

Experienced players should be able to read what an opponent can do much better than a newer player, if the majority of new players could easily understand what others can do, then the game would most likely be too easy. 

 

Edit:

Also to add, keep the under the hood, passive and thus unperceptivable stuff to a minimum.

If your immune to poison, I'd really like to know that before engaging you with a poison build.  And if it's an elective passive that anybody can use, then it's a problem.

 

Shouldn't you have to figure that out on your own?  Learn through experience, and figure out your own system for reading enemies?  The game should not gift you with all the answers. 

 

If however you have an Archtype that is straight up immune to poison, then that's fine, as you can know that in advance and work around it.

 

Readability requires you to be able to quickly understand what somebody can and cannot do either by sight, or in advance.

 

No, it requires there be a way to learn to read people, it doesn't require that it be easy. 

 

And you can't really do that when all the important stuff is hidden under the hood.


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess. I'm just scared of another Archeage-like situation where some classes were super hard counters and could easily win against some classes, despite being completely terrible players.

 

Please never mention ArcheAge again. The combat was hideously flawed from the beginning 

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...