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

First Look: Confessor Powers - Official discussion thread

Recommended Posts

To be quite contextual, those are responses to people who have discarded logic...

 

I know fairly well how logic works, otherwise I wouldn't be doing the job I do. What are you using here is not logic, at all.

 

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

 

You haven't defined anything properly here, your statement has no weight.

And out of courtesy, I'll even prove it without making wall of texts.

 

1. You are implying a higher ceiling for mechanical skills compared to strategic ones;

2. You are implying that mechanical skills should be measured equally to strategic ones, which doesn't make sense if anything because superior strategy could require more players working together (or viceversa). Which means you can't sum potatoes to onions, strategic skills are usually more efficient in large scale fights.

 

Literally speaking, mechanical skills tend to be more limited by lag, stutter, movement freedom, abilities, and game mechanisms in general.

 

Previous games with "high mechanical skills" prove this. A professional CS player will hardly win alone against 5 medium players.

In Darkfall (which is for sure more twitchy than CF will ever be), the very best could hardly win against 4 players with equal abilities.

 

In a Game (of Thrones) where there is supposed to be 100vs100 fights, it hardly matters how powerful a single entity has become.

And, by the way, it's not written anywhere that having more expert players isn't a strategic skill by itself.

Edited by Fenris DDevil

y9tj8G5.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me jump back in and add a bit of context to the statement about aim assist -- though, really, it's a larger truth about game development, in general.

 

We didn't say we were ditching our current design, or that we were changing it.  We are just giving you a heads up that this is an area that has been particularly challenging to get right, and for technical reasons, we might have to revisit the plan if (and ONLY if) we simply can't get it to work in our architecture  We are trying to do something that hasn't been done before -- a server-authoritative MMO architecture with full physics simulation -- and that can make some areas of development extremely challenging.  Especially when you have to keep in mind things like network latency, cheat protection and keeping clients in perfect sync.

 

Not one person on these forums would find it acceptable to ship the game with archetypes that are fundamentally broken.  If you were sitting in the room with us, playing a ranged class, and you knew within moments of playing it that it was fundamentally broken -- just didn't work at all -- this wouldn't be a debate. No one would say "sure, it's broken, but the other targeting options are completely unacceptable, so let's leave it broken."

 

You would be right there with us, saying, "yeah, this doesn't work at all!  how do we address it?"

 

The answer is: you keep working on Plan A until you exhaust all options.  Then you start looking at Plan A.1 or Plan A.2.

If those don't work, you go to Plan B... Plan C, then Plan D, etc.  You iterate until you find the best working solution you can.

 

We're still on Plan A, and our intent is to keep working on Plan A until we have exhausted every approach we can think of / reasonably implement. Targeting right now works OK... on our local network.  Once we start testing it externally, with our servers running in a cloud somewhere, we have concerns that it might not work.  If it doesn't, we'll do the best we can to fix it, for as long as we can afford to iterate.  

 

But, if Plan A proves to be unworkable, then of course we'll have to look for other solutions.  We can't just leave these classes broken.  

 

In that eventuality, we would always start with the options that would get us as close to Plan A as technically possible, because Plan A is still our goal.

 

We said from the beginning that we would be open with you, and that includes the ugly parts of development -- when things don't work out as plan, and you have to make tough choices.  There will be times when we have to make compromises due to limited resources or technical limitations -- that's a part of any game development process.  

 

Hopefully, this particular situation won't be one of those.  But, even if it isn't, you guys need to get comfortable with the fact that  some compromises will be made at some point, if not on this feature than on another feature that you feel very strongly about.  

 

Compromise always happens, in every game project, ever.

 

and if you think it sucks for you, let me assure you that it sucks much, much worse for us.

 

Todd

ACE


J Todd Coleman

ArtCraft Entertainment, Inc.

Follow us on Twitter @CrowfallGame | Like us on Facebook

[Rules of Conduct]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me jump back in and add a bit of context to the statement about aim assist -- though, really, it's a larger truth about game development, in general.

 

We didn't say we were ditching our current design, or that we were changing it.  We are just giving you a heads up that this is an area that has been particularly challenging to get right, and for technical reasons, we might have to revisit the plan if (and ONLY if) we simply can't get it to work in our architecture  We are trying to do something that hasn't been done before -- a server-authoritative MMO architecture with full physics simulation -- and that can make some areas of development extremely challenging.  Especially when you have to keep in mind things like network latency, cheat protection and keeping clients in perfect sync.

 

Not one person on these forums would find it acceptable to ship the game with archetypes that are fundamentally broken.  If you were sitting in the room with us, playing a ranged class, and you knew within moments of playing it that it was fundamentally broken -- just didn't work at all -- this wouldn't be a debate. No one would say "sure, it's broken, but the other targeting options are completely unacceptable, so let's leave it broken."

 

You would be right there with us, saying, "yeah, this doesn't work at all!  how do we address it?"

 

The answer is: you keep working on Plan A until you exhaust all options.  Then you start looking at Plan A.1 or Plan A.2.

If those don't work, you go to Plan B... Plan C, then Plan D, etc.  You iterate until you find the best working solution you can.

 

We're still on Plan A, and our intent is to keep working on Plan A until we have exhausted every approach we can think of / reasonably implement. Targeting right now works OK... on our local network.  Once we start testing it externally, with our servers running in a cloud somewhere, we have concerns that it might not work.  If it doesn't, we'll do the best we can to fix it, for as long as we can afford to iterate.  

 

But, if Plan A proves to be unworkable, then of course we'll have to look for other solutions.  We can't just leave these classes broken.  

 

In that eventuality, we would always start with the options that would get us as close to Plan A as technically possible, because Plan A is still our goal.

 

We said from the beginning that we would be open with you, and that includes the ugly parts of development -- when things don't work out as plan, and you have to make tough choices.  There will be times when we have to make compromises due to limited resources or technical limitations -- that's a part of any game development process.  

 

Hopefully, this particular situation won't be one of those.  But, even if it isn't, you guys need to get comfortable with the fact that  some compromises will be made at some point, if not on this feature than on another feature that you feel very strongly about.  

 

Compromise always happens, in every game project, ever.

 

and if you think it sucks for you, let me assure you that it sucks much, much worse for us.

 

Todd

ACE

Thanks JTC, appreciate the added thoughts on such things...


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had already planned on playing Confessor, but the ideas make me really look forward to it from a concept standpoint.

 

From what I'm gathering people want:

 

1. No ranged assist in a game with physics.

2. No meaningful CC in a game where everyone is going to be running around, not standing still.

3. Pure point and fire, with you better be an expert FPS player in a game where 1-2 shots will NOT kill your opponent.

4. All the while having friendly fire in effect.

 

Hahaha... get real people. People would be burning mana and a) missing a lot, B) hitting friendlies a lot or c) have to play in melee range to actually land anything. And then what's the point of playing a range character?

 

There will almost undoubtedly be some kind of system of assistance. You would need to have bullet speed projectiles (which can't be dodged and defeat the purpose of that mechanic) or some. Of course, since I've never played the game unlike so many here apparently. This is all supposition.

Edited by Navystylz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Especially when you have to keep in mind things like network latency, cheat protection and keeping clients in perfect sync.

Todd

ACE

This is what I have been saying since the beginning.  They have to make a game that is fun for the masses and the masses include people from around the world.  Just because we have sub 50 ping here (USA), it does not mean everyone else does.  I say try to keep game as action combat oriented as possible while keeping in mind the things you listed.  I commend you guys for making the hard decisions.  I am 100% sure I won't ever like all the decision you make, BUT, that is what I signed in for.  I want to be part of this development cycle through the good times and the bad.

 

Keep up the good work and thank-you...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3/10: too much reasonableness and sense-making, not enough irrational outrage. Do you even forums, bro?


Official "Bad Person" of Crowfall

"I think 1/3rd of my postcount is telling people that we aren't turning into a PvE / casual / broad audience game." -

Tully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is how sausage is made. It's going to be awesome but nothing ever is EXACTLY the same from design to develop to launch.

 

We love your passion and share it. We want CF to the best it can within the reality and scope of our budget just like all of you want too.

 

Todd

ACE

There. Fixed it for the TL:DR crowd.

Edited by Keaggan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good you explained that Jtodd.

What you said was exactly what I took from the aim assist comment, things might need to be changed but obviously that's not option 1.

 

I'f a decision for soft locking, aim assist or whatever it may be gets made, I'm fine with it.  

At the end of the day it's still not tab targeting :D.


YannMLq.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3/10: too much reasonableness and sense-making, not enough irrational outrage. Do you even forums, bro?

 

I made a guide how to start discussions on the forum. It's a Work In Progress (WIP), so please be gentle. I can update this guide based on feedback. The process goes something like this:

  1. ACE posts an elaborate post to keep their promise of transparency
  2. Don't try to comprehend the entire article
  3. Extract (part of) a sentence to quote
  4. Focus on that alone and only that (important!)
  5. Start arguing and discussing about this in the original post first
  6. Ignore or flame those people that counter your argument with common sense
  7. Start a new thread about your made up problem when they get the upper hand
  8. Keep ignoring or flame these people that make sense
  9. Repeat steps 6 to 8 as many times possible
  10. ACE will post once more that says basically the same as those people you ignored
  11. Keep quiet and don't admit you were wrong
  12. Sit in a corner and weep silently

Rinse and repeat.


ZCcquVD.png

THE most active European Crowfall community. Join us now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because we have sub 50 ping here (USA), it does not mean everyone else does.

USA is actually really bad when it comes to quality of internet connections. It's not at all uncommon for you guys to have 130-150 ping west coast -> east coast or vice versa, which is why games often have servers in both places + the middle(typically Dallas/Texas) to avoid those high pings.


7ug90hM.png


 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really liking these ideas people are having about other forms of CC rather than your character unable to perform.

 

Like the fire/ice wall idea.

 

1.A fire wall could do tons of damage so that melee should go around it rather than through it to get at target, but leave range able to shoot through it. And heck, arrows could even be lit on fire to apply a dot on what it hits so it can be a double edged sword.

 

2. An ice wall would make all players need to go around it, or need to break it. Wouldn't do any damage, but would take time for players to either shatter it or go around it. Larger groups may opt to shatter it because the damage is easily there, while smaller groups would go around it.

 

Disorients over stuns. 

 

1. The difference being that a stun locks you out of actions to duration is over, while disorient will vanish after taking damage. Could even be a damage threshold than just 1 hit. I don't think there really are any cases where people NEED players to be completely locked out rather than they need to interrupt a cast, need to buy some time for cool downs or escapes to come, make players take more time to reach a goal.

 

Confusion over silence 

 

1. Traditionally confusion causes damage to player using an ability, or makes them attack friendlies. But in this case really just a way to say extends CDs of spells/abilities. Can even be certain ones. Or a way to shake off confusion.

 

Then you have other soft CC such as abilities that reduce a player's range. Abilities that reflect projectiles, Things that doesn't stop a player from being able to do anything, but reduces it, or makes you retarget or pause so as not to harm yourself or allies.

 

Roots

 

Instead of a root just locking you in place until duration is over, maybe have jumping X many times shake yourself free of the root. This way it keeps target in place, but longer or shorter depending on how fast they react to freeing themselves.

 

Also CC, in the literal sense, for people who want to stack up. Rather than it all just being AOE on the stack, which means aoes have to be a certain strength else be overpowered, you could have maybe a single target spell that does MUCH more damage, but after a moment can hop onto another nearby player to affect them as well. Could possibly even increase the damage as it hops so an unaware player could kill a friendly if they don't get away from stack.

 

Or even making 1 player into a time bomb. The damage can be much greater because it's on one player who can potentially break from group to spare it's members.

 

These kind of things make for much more strategic use of powers than. Sorry you can't perform an action. Sorry you're locked in place til dispell or end of duration. Would need less use of magical moments of sorry nothing can be used on you (CC immunities).

 

Wouldn't need CC immunities if dispells and allowable player actions to break/reduce durations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it applies pretty well to mechanics within any type of game.  And I loved that part as well; the reason I brought this video up is because making a punishing game is probably the worst of the two evils possible (too easy vs. too punishing).  Too easy at least creates for a large audience even if the experience as a whole is less fun.  Where as punishing is unplayable for any audience.

 

From what I've understood, the narrator explains that one of the reasons why developers created punishing games rather than difficult ones, originally, is because they had an interest to limit the duration of the play sessions : we had to put money if we wanted to continue to play. When he mentions "beat the game", I also think it refers more to single players game, as well as "punishing", where it's more related to developers purposely trying to make the players fail at some point : the game is so hard that players are not able to go further than a certain point, or that it takes a lot of time to achieve it, for the purpose of increasing the playtime without adding more content. Punishing mechanics exist in MMORPGs too, but it seemed like the video was discussing mainly singe players games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

don't choke guys

Grow up man. Seriously. Snide little comments like this don't help anything.

 

One doesn't have to be negative and critical all the time. Nothing wrong with appreciating some honesty and transparency from the Dev who's making the game we have a vested interest in. 12 pages and other threads as well I think we've all voiced our concerns and opinions on this topic, so a little appreciation isn't going to hurt anything.

Edited by pang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 2 different kinds of compromises though:

 

a. Cutting off a game feature because it isn't appreciated by the large audience;

b. Cutting off a game feature because it ruins something else, like the number of people supported by the engine during a siege**;

 

I can stand the second, but not the first one. This game has already a good audience and you shouldn't be afraid to push boundaries at this point.

Not saying you are, but that's a fair interpretation of your last news (regarding free aim).

 

 

**by the way, I would suggest cutting off first the number of hitboxes..

Edited by Fenris DDevil

y9tj8G5.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go play three classes in Tera and compare projectiles.

 

Gunner. Medium speed, explosive shell (Small radius) medium size hitbox. (About the size of a footbal).

Archer. Fast speed. Single target arrow, faster shot rate. 2-3 per gunner shell, small hit box.

Priest/Mystic Slower speed, single target, gets dodged a great deal. About the same hitbox as gunner.

 

Gunner is really quite simply overpowered. but god it is fun. Archer feels solid, fun and engaging, good skill requirements, good movement.Priest/mystic shots are filler, fairly boring. Almost never used except as solo which is painful.

 

Reinventing the wheel is always alive in game development.  Make that damn wheel spin dagnabit!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love that quote courant thanks for sharing it.

 

The thing that really matters when looking and considering that statement though, is which gamers the devs are looking at.  In CF there is the most diverse group of "gamers"  that probably has ever been enmassed.  Everything from no mechanical skill at all ( turn based combat, I KNOW you have seen goatload!)  to and extremely high level of skill.   They have to figure out where exactly they want to place the bar of 'difficult"   Because too difficult for some maybe ridiculously easy for others.  The only thing I can hope for is that in testing there is a good "mix"  of ppl that paid for Alpha testing and that it isn't slanted one way or the other.  

 

Yea, hopefully they find ways to make the combat hard enough to please the DF / FPS crowd, while allowing some archetypes to be effective in battle even if the players controlling them do not have extraordinary mechanical skills.

 

If they reduce the skill ceiling of every archetypes because that 70% of the players would be enable to land an arrow on a moving target, that might be an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just so sick and tied of people rallying behind posts, acting like it's a revelation, never seen before.

 

The white-knighting is getting old.

Form your own opinion and stand behind it, instead of acting like a flag in the wind.

I'm not the one who has some growing up to do. I know my place in this world.

Edited by freeze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just so sick and tied of people rallying behind posts, acting like it's a revelation, never seen before.

 

The white-knightning is getting old.

Form your own opinion and stand behind it, instead of acting like a flag in the wind.

I'm not the one who has some growing up to do. I know my place in this world.

 

My opinion has not changed......I want what is best for the game and game play.  If it means action combat, bring it on, if it means tab target bring it on, if it means some combination of anything or everything bring it on.

 

I prefer the bolded und​er lined portion of my statement but seriously, I want what is best for gameplay, ping and sync issues between clients as close to action combat as we can get.

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...