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

First Look: Confessor Powers - Official discussion thread

Recommended Posts

Another thing to consider is projectile size. From the art we've seen, it looks like confessor projectile abilities will be somewhat large, judging by the concept art and info they're provided, to include the explosion radius of the ability upon termination. So in this case, a larger projectile, will be more forgiving if they are slightly off topic, but for rangers and stalkers, who will be dealing with the smaller animation sizes of the arrows? They may have more at stake when it comes to projectile size and the necessity of proper aiming. Another consideration is the size of the target. For example, Centaurs are probably going to be arrow magnets, but guineceans could be a nightmare for ranged to target, unless they plan to introduce ranged damage mechanics exclusive to the Guineceans.

 

If any skills might require or even justify auto-aiming, I could see bow users needing it the most, given the size of their projectiles and how much aiming and precision would play in their mechanics and DPS. Also, instant damage abilities are much easier to calculate and process for servers from a development perspective. Essentially, the server calculates the positions of both players, the angle of the reticle and uses those to instantly calculate damage dealt without factoring in travel time, weight, dip, dodges, etc. It's essentially cheating, but hey, it works, and is very effective in reducing server lag for many online shooters. (BY NO MEANS am I advocating for soft/tab/assisted targeting, I'm free/manual targeting all the way. Just saying this could be an option the devs may pursue)

 

The next question for targeting besides projectile and target sizes is projectile speed, which we'll just have to find out in game to really judge it's effectiveness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I'm FINALLY getting to the class discussions (not that anyone has missed my walls of text, I'm sure). Haven't been able to weigh in till now, and have SOOOOOO much forum catching up to do. Anyhow, DISCLAIMER, I'm most likely going to repeat things stated earlier on in the forums; for that I apologize (that's what you get for coming late to the party XP). (For your convenience in reading/brutally criticizing, I'll be breaking my walls of feedback into sections. So fire(heh :P) away)

 

Okay, my thoughts on the confessors abilities:

 

As the DOT-centric ranged caster, looks like a solid setup

 

You don't usually expect to find unique-DOT specific classes so early in a game's . What I mean by unique-DOT is how the confessors abilities revolve "Sin." Usually debuffs are a bit of a blanket term of conditions applied by an enemy that fall under general categories (Poison, freezing, burning, movement-impediment, etc.). However, the Confessor is making use of a debuff specific to their class with their own unique mechanics, which is unusual for an "at-launch" class (kind of like Kalista's spears in LoL, or the Frost DK's Frost Fever effects in WoW back in WotLK).

 

Through the Sin mechanic, this really establishes the Confessor as a ranged DOT caster, as their damage comes from landing this condition through their primary attacks and then manipulating Sin through their abilities for even more damage/utility. It forces the player to carefully and skillfully consider stacking the ability at range or to focus on manipulating the condition at lower stacks due to urgency or pressure, allowing you to recognize good confessors by how well they can stack their abilities before executing their effects. It'll also allow skill to be recognized in players fighting confessors through their ability to dodge their attacks or mitigate Sin stacks applied to them.

 

That said, Sin (at this point, maybe/probably it'll change in the future) is only really impacted by 2 abilities, both times acting as little more than a damage multiplier. I'd like to see "Sin" play more of a role in the classes mechanics, either through more DOT manipulation, maybe as a promotion class or in other ability mechanics.

 

(Also, not a huge fan of the name. I get that the Confessor has a bit of an inquisitorial vibe, but to "inflict sin" seems pretty harsh and outright aggressive for (admittedly militant) "holy men/women". Would prefer to see it renamed to something that implies self-reflection, as opposed to imposed-reflection, like "Penance" or "Guilt." That way, the Confessor is inciting atonement by having their victims "consumed with guilt/penance/penitent/remorse," just as they would be "consumed with fire," keeping the holy-person and fire themes).

 

CC durations sound ridiculously long

 

I saw the dev-post concerning CC numbers/specifics, so not going to harp on the damage a 15 second slow or even a 3 second stun could cause (spoiler: a lot). But going to weigh in on what this implies for combat. The only way to justify having CC timers like that is if the devs expect combat to last a long time (ie, minutes), which really don't want to see. In Wildstar duels and pvp, the fights could last for minutes at a time, especially among the healer classes. This was an agonizing period of hand cramps, endless cycles of ability rotations until you could sort-of see an indicator of who was pulling ahead, too much jumping around to kite, and making tiny mouse and camera adjustments to position your character AND the camera the way you needed them for the reticle to line-up. PLEASE don't put me through that again

 

If combat with a confessor takes 30 seconds, that seems reasonable, if on the long side. Enough time for a player to decide if they want to retreat, but still enough time to trade damage and determine skill level while allowing for kill opportunities. Would prefer to see combat in general be somewhat decided within 15-20 seconds, especially if we’re involving ourselves in large-scale GvG battles or sieges, where quickly dispatching foes is critical to the tide of battle/length of a siege.

 

Also, with mention of CC’s comes the question of CC immunity/Diminishing returns. Personally, I absolutely LOATHE situations in which my abilities don’t operate as they are described. If it says an ability should stun a character, it had better apply a stun in some form. That said, I equally loathe situations in which I lose control of my character to stun lock. So while I think there should be some CC mitigation from having them repeatedly applied to you, I don’t think they should be mitigated entirely by diminishing returns. For example: the 1st time a player is stunned, they suffer the full stun of (hypothetically) 3 seconds. The 2nd time, they are stunned for 2 seconds, the 3rd time, they are stunned for 1 second. Every time they are hit by a subsequent stun, it is applied for 1 second until enough time has passed between CC effects to reset the timer, or death. This way, by at least retaining 33% of the of CC’s effectiveness, attacking players are still satisfied that their ability worked as intended, and stun locks wouldn’t be as prominent without at least team involvement.


ABILITIES HAVE SO MUCH ABILITY!!

 

This is the thing that struck me most about the confessor. Compared to the knight, the confessor just has so many gimmicks and utilities crammed into their abilities and skills. And honestly, I’d like to see many of these chained abilities broken up into their own stand-alone abilities.

 

Seriously, just having a fiery damage shield would have been enough for one skill button; detonating the shield for a DPS boost aura/wave made logical sense in the confessors skill lineup, as a ranged archetype would want to quick detonation in case the shield wasn’t enough to deter pesky melee characters; but DETONATING YOUR DETONATION INTO EITHER A REACTIVE WALL OF EXPLOSIVES OR FOUR PYRONIC TORNADOES OF FIERY GRAVITY is frankly RIDICULOUS!!! It also makes no sense, how did you go from having a fiery ring which you detonated into a DPS aura suddenly find the energy to turn into a ruinous fiery red-hole of pyrotechnic blasphemy?!

 

Compare that to the Knights chained skill: Hit, Hit, oh wow a Knockdown…second chain, hit, hit, Bleed #zomg…I know were not talking about balance, but give me a break!! Compared to any other skill on the Confessor, the Knights “big chained attack” is so oppressively underwhelming that even the confessor basic attack sounds more exhilarating than anything the knight could cook up with his fancy shield moves.

 

So 2 takeaways: maybe break up with confessors already overwhelming ability list and break them up to maybe allow for deckbuilding customization, promotion class specialization, and for the gods sakes, make the knight sound a little appealing when standing next to this spitfire of an archetype (a challenge, I know, but please, try)

 

Where are the weapons in all of this?

 

We’ve seen the Confessor wield a brand (which I’m assuming may be more generally categorized as a wand) and a tome, while the knight has his sword and shield. Yet, the devs have told us that weapons will be interchangeable to some extent, both in their inclusion of different types of damage and JTC stating outright that we should be able to equip different items to use different effects (mentioning using a bow and arrow with the knight and using it for ranged damage). You can even see in the demo footage back where the game was in its kickstarter phase (those days seems so long ago) where a Frostweaver was shooting arrows. So where is all this, I wonder?

 

 

OK, it isn't clear from the screenshot, so let me jump in and clarify a bit.

 

- After selection of archetype, the system opens up in terms of appearance and customization: advantages / disadvantages, promotion classes and other specializations (some of which we haven't talked about yet.)

 

- No, the weapon choices are not locked to the archetype.  If you pick up a sword, and you have the pre-reqs, you can use it.  Want to use a bow?  Equip that, instead.  A few weapons are specific to particular base or promotion class (like the Icecleaver, above) but that's the exception, not the norm.

 

More of this will make sense once we release more detailed information about character advancement.  Runes are just the first piece of the puzzle.

 

Todd

ACE

 

Are these going to be included on the hotbar? Will they be involved in skills (on the knight, we see a lot of mention of the shield, same with the Confessor and the tome) or are they just going to be skins and stat distributors on our characters? Or will each weapon bring their own set of skills after all?

 

What I really want to see is a weapon discussion similar to their discussion on armor. With all the speculation and discussion on archetype abilities, would like to see how weapons fit into the mix.

Edited by RKNM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is true.

 

It's also boring.

 

Tactical play has a low skill cap. It's not hard to reach a level of gaming intelligence where you know that the mechanically optimal tactical play is in the vast majority of combat scenarios, and many players on both sides of any conflict will reach that level. That means that challenging play takes place at the strategic layer (arranging situations where the opponent has no available tactics which will lead to victory) or at the execution layer.

 

If we then get rid of the execution layer, we're left with a game where strategy alone determines outcomes. That's fun for 1 or 2 people on each side, and isn't viscerally engaging for anyone.

 

More eloquently put than most, this is still a binary observation which grossly exaggerates and simplifies several elements.

 

Tactical play is reduced directly with increased manual skill because it introduces situations where power players can subvert proper strategy with master play. It in some ways adds new strategy of effectively utilizing super players which can alter the battlefield independently, but the quality of practical strategies are directly replaced in exchange.

 

Furthermore, reducing operational demand does not unilaterally remove all skill from the game, it tunes its impact down to a specific extent, it's not manual targeting or tab targeting, soft lock and homing projectiles, or movement prediction are not a sudden leap to hard targeting. How much assistance and manual aiming instituted can be uniquely crafted. But beyond aiming challenges, there are several other variations of operational challenges outside of aiming that produce challenge, pretending like aiming is the one and essential knob to adjust for skill is oblivious.

 

Lastly, tactical play does not boil down to two players in a tactic rich game. This is not Starcraft, in a multiplayer game, each player has to communicate and respond to coordination, observe their perspective of the battle and adapt accordingly, and try to come up with an effective response if unforseen circumstances arise.

 

The lack of tactical and strategic depth in most games exist because of the limitation of the system itself and the amount of emergent behaviors which can arise to confuse a plan. You can argue that there won't be enough surprises, options and methods for the tactics to be uncertain, but that's circumstantial, there aren't, until there is.

 

There are dozens of variations of operational and situational factors which can be adjusted to alter the quality of operational and forecasting challenge. Just because you don't recognize, respect, or realize them, doesn't mean they can't matter.

 

And there are many practical exclusions which may prevent manual aiming from practically operating at all, the use of animation locking, friendly fire, projectile behavior and thousands of other factors have to be acknowledged along with the aiming method in order to develop a system that not only works, but works reasonably along with other features, system restraints, and target demographics.

 

Promote your interst as you like, you'll have to escape binary generalizations in order to make an impactful argument.

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

  Tactical play is reduced directly with increased manual skill because it introduces situations where power players can subvert proper strategy with master play.

This has been proven completely false by the most competitive esports around.  It has also been proven that increasing the mechanical skill ceiling can increase the kinds of tactics players can utilize, increasing tactical play. 


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how many people who are posting against target assist/soft lock for ranged attacks plan to actually play a ranged class.

 

I only play range or support (I will sooner not play a game than play as melee), confessor is my most likely pick as it will have glass cannon opportunities. I'm completely against target assist/soft lock. Projectile is hard to land? Good. Projectile is really, really, really hard to land? Change your playstyle. All but impossible to land? Maybe the devs speed it up a bit.

 

Missing is important for the combat, misses are good.


gCWxS8u.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been proven completely false by the most competitive esports around. It has also been proven that increasing the mechanical skill ceiling can increase the kinds of tactics players can utilize, increasing tactical play.

 

You should look up the definition of circular logic, authentication. Just because you say it is so three times and reference something intangible doesn't prove anything. That's why I just roll over half of your statements without even acknowledging them.

 

On a side note, I'd like to raise one of the significant contexts directly tied to the challenge of aiming, movement. How fast, slow, erratic and complex movement is directly coincides with aiming to determine difficulty. I'm tired of the unidimensionality of this discussion.

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

You know, I've been a real negative nancy, and I shouldn't be so much, I did expect the developers to make awful design decisions anyway and we got it with them looking into soft-targeting/aim assist. It happens, because people suck at games, nothing new.

 

Anyways, I'm neutral on the CC as CC is to me more of a balance thing. If stuns are OP than make cleansing stuns OP too. If any of confessor/druid/frostweaver(or really their promotions) have a AoE cleanse I will likely have one with the ability in my top 3 most played characters (most likely second).

 

I like the skills so far, looking forward to seeing how this all gets morphed into promotions and promotion's skills, because the way I see it, I'm picking a promotions not an archetype.

Edited by Sciocco

gCWxS8u.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should look up the definition of circular logic, authentication. Just because you say it is so three times and reference something intangible doesn't prove anything. That's why I just roll over half of your statements without even acknowledging them.

 

On a side note, I'd like to raise one of the significant contexts directly tied to the challenge of aiming, movement. How fast, slow, erratic and complex movement is directly coincides with aiming to determine difficulty. I'm tired of the unidimensionality of this discussion.

You should look up popular games and play them.

 

Edit:  Competitive games aren't intangible, there are mountains of replays, the games themselves, tournaments, guides, etc out there for you to learn about the gaming climate and pvp.... it's on you to either be knowledgeable about what's out there or not. 

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should look up popular games and play them.

 

Edit: Competitive games aren't intangible, there are mountains of replays, the games themselves, tournaments, guides, etc out there for you to learn about the gaming climate and pvp.... it's on you to either be knowledgeable about what's out there or not.

In your hubris you actually imagine that I'm unaware of the most common references and that simply stating that they're popular and that they exist makes them significant validations.

 

Your probably thinking about Minecraft, World of Warcraft and League of Legends when you reference popular games, huh? LOL :P

 

Because there is a thriving competitive Esport for various shooters, RTS and MOBAs doesn't independently qualify that their more popular than their casual counterparts in totality or that their better games.

 

But I don't have an abundance of time to educate you, this response is not for your benefit. Feel free to reference the specific games you failed to identify initially and supporting articles qualifying their popularity and relevance, by the time your done you have only reached the step of subjective interest in the minority of competitive gaming which is dwarfed by the totality of casual games and players.

 

I wonder what the user and sales figures are for candy crush :-/


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

So I posted a lot when this thread first surfaced.  I vehemently defended against people who were complaining about CC/iFrame duration. And I might have even mentioned that "aim assist" was something that we as players do not, with any certainly, understand.  

 

But it seems that the conversion has at some point turned to pure manual aim is better because it requires more skill and more skill equate to more fun (correct me if I over simplified).  I'm a HUGE fan of the youtube channel Extra Credits and they did a video a while back in regards to difficulty and skill in games.

 

If you have 7 minutes and 43 second to spare it is really worth watching, I promise.

---> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ea6UuRTjkKs

 

"An awesome move that you understand but can't use consistently, might as well not even be in the game."  Games mechanics that are "too difficult" to consistently perform aren't fun.  Difficulty can be fun but punishing mechanics ostracize players.  

Edited by Siegnir

Screen_Shot_2015_09_13_at_3_04_43_PM.png

Check us out here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the old Chess vs. Quake debate.

 

Chess enthusiast:  "Games involving reflexes can't be strategic."

Quake enthusiast:  "Strategy-only games have a low skill cap."

 

Both are false.  Both are straw-man arguments.  Twitch-shooter games can still have amazing levels of strategy.  Pure strategy games can have an endless skill curve.

 

My argument is that I enjoy games where you aim and shoot.  In my opinion, removing the need to aim would make Crowfall less fun.  It's that simple.


Nazdar

Proud member of The Hunger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I posted a lot when this thread first surfaced.  I vehemently defended against people who were complaining about CC/iFrame duration. And I might have even mentioned that "aim assist" was something that we as players do not, with any certainly, understand.  

 

But it seems that the conversion has at some point turned to pure manual aim is better because it requires more skill and more skill equate to more fun (correct me if I over simplified).  I'm a HUGE fan of the youtube channel Extra Credits and they did a video a while back in regards to difficulty and skill in games.

 

If you have 7 minutes and 43 second to spare it is really worth watching, I promise.

---> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ea6UuRTjkKs

 

"An awesome move that you understand but can't use consistently, might as well not even be in the game."  Games mechanics that are "too difficult" to consistently perform aren't fun.  Difficulty can be fun but punishing mechanics ostracize players.  

 

I'm not really looking for pure manual aim. What I read, based on how they worded it was, "Hey if the average gamer isn't able to consistently land a ranged attack, will make it super easy for them." Which is what aim assist and such does. I'm advocating for some difficulty (with varying difficulty based on different abilities!!) because missing is important. Elder scrolls online made ranged ability impossible to miss, wildstar was fairly forgiving as well. In tera, originally the archer class' two charged range attacks (high dps) were fairly difficult to land, but you could one shot someone or close to it (consumables, buffs, gear) when you land a back crit, then they introduced a patch they made landing shots a LOT easier and, well, basically no one ever misses unless someone times their iFrame very well.

Edited by Sciocco

gCWxS8u.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In your hubris you actually imagine that I'm unaware of the most common references and that simply stating that they're popular and that they exist makes them significant validations.

 

Your probably thinking about Minecraft, World of Warcraft and League of Legends when you reference popular games, huh? LOL :P

 

Because there is a thriving competitive Esport for various shooters, RTS and MOBAs doesn't independently qualify that their more popular than their casual counterparts in totality or that their better games.

 

But I don't have an abundance of time to educate you, this response is not for your benefit. Feel free to reference the specific games you failed to identify initially and supporting articles qualifying their popularity and relevance, by the time your done you have only reached the step of subjective interest in the minority of competitive gaming which is dwarfed by the totality of casual games and players.

 

I wonder what the user and sales figures are for candy crush :-/

The tens of millions of people playing the games qualify them as "popular" games. 

 

You ask for references, they've already been given, the problem is you have no frame of reference for what they mean.  I could talk to you about how things like mutalisk magic boxing impacted the meta in sc:bw... but you wouldn't understand the merit of it, because you've already made up your mind, and you also do not wish to become more well-versed in competitive gaming (you know the gaming that actually requires skill)

 

It's really quite simple, tactical and mechanical skill make for the most popular competitive games... short on one or the other and your game just doesn't reach a very good and longlasting competitive level...

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh no! Don't use education Siegnir!

 

I'm not really looking for pure manual aim. What I read, based on how they worded it was, "Hey if the average gamer isn't able to consistently land a ranged attack, will make it super easy for them." Which is what aim assist and such does. I'm advocating for some difficulty (with varying difficulty based on different abilities!!) because missing is important. Elder scrolls online made ranged ability impossible to miss, wildstar was fairly forgiving as well. In tera, originally the archer class' two charged range attacks (high dps) were fairly difficult to land, but you could one shot someone or close to it (consumables, buffs, gear) when you land a back crit, then they introduced a patch they made landing shots a LOT easier and, well, basically no one ever misses unless someone times their iFrame very well.

This is an understandable misunderstanding, but there are more targeting methods than the miniscule index of examples we can reference from MMOs.

 

Oh Vikingnail, here's another phrase to look up, "argument of authority". Claiming knowledge without even qualifying yourself instead of even being able to describe a subject isn't proof, it's evasion.


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

Oh no! Don't use education Siegnir!

 

 

This is an understandable misunderstanding, but there are more targeting methods than the miniscule index of examples we can reference from MMOs.

 

Oh Vikingnail, here's another phrase to look up, "argument of authority". Claiming knowledge without even qualifying yourself instead of even being able to describe a subject isn't proof, it's evasion.

Actually what you are asking for would be an appeal to authority fallacy... This is why when I discuss things with people, I don't want them to take my word, or anyone elses word, i'd rather they go out and get the know-how hands on experience, so that they know what they are talking about. 

 

This is what i'd like someone like you to do if you want to talk about the impact of certain systems on the game.  Have you played the more popular competitive games?  Have you played them to a proficient level?  Have you then used your understanding of these games and applied it to understanding how the players that play these games think?  Have you figured out what they like and dislike about the games?  What makes them stick around or leave?  I have...

 

Knowing the pockets of current gaming culture can give you a better idea of how games will perform based on what features they have chosen. 

 

Currently the average gamer, playing games like CSGO, or LoL, or Dota2, or SC2, or Crossfire or WoW or (insert asian action mmo here) etc etc have a certain level of expectation and familiarity for their pvp experiences.  A lot of players from those types of games that would be looking for a new pvp experience because they got bored of those games (for reasons that you gotta go out and experience to understand the culture) will want a game to provide certain levels of engagement, these are video games after all.  If you deliver on what turned people off from those games (dumbing down the mechanics so that more casual players could get into it) instead of delivering what generated pvp interest in those games (big competitive scenes with high skill ceilings to strive for) you are basically cherry picking bad cherries at that point. 


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

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...