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

Stealth: Camouflage

Recommended Posts

Some players enjoy the solo/outnumbered style of gameplay. If you have a class that has no escape and evasion, then your option when coming across 4 enemy players is to either beat them outright or die. Allowing the high risk/high reward style of game play with the escape and evasion options allows that highly skilled solo player a chance at victory in those circumstances by attacking and fading back. This is a game. The game is meant to be played for enjoyment. Lots of players enjoy this play style and it is a very common one in many games, one of those being a game that this one is heavily based off of. I don't really need to provide a great reason to include it because it is the standard. If you don't want it in, provide a good reason to exclude it.

Been there, done that, how about reading some threads before you make a claim, hate repeating myself. And like I said, all I hear is "I want to be able to kill 4 players solo, all by myself, screw skill and balance, i'm going to exploit this gimmick so that I can be super OP, don't nerf me bro." And i'm sorry, I didn't know the devs were making a game for your sole enjoyment, musta misinterpreted the part when they said "we're not making this game for everyone" that they meant just you. "Because it's the standard" is one of the reasons this game was first conceived.

 

The playstyle of the solo faceroll class is one of the biggest reasons players leave games or are the causes of massive balance changes, which is a telltale sign of (say it with me) bad game design. And saying "it's the standard" is why there are so many trash clones and why the game industry is constantly faulted for lack of innovation. ACE believed that players and crowfall deserved better than that. Creating innovations in how stealth is included (like BD's camouflage and crouch system or Dishonored's playstyle) has attracted a lot of attention as opposed to the infamous "invisibility toggle".

 

Yeah... that's useless rhetoric that gets trotted out with a lot of games. There's a difference between 'this game is designed around group play' and 'we're going to disallow a valuable solo experience'. The main difference being the no one has said the latter. Ever.

Says nearly everyone on every stealth thread in this forum (seriously, need to read)! The devs have said multiple times that they are gearing this game for group play and make it much harder to play solo to nurture cooperation and group play. And you have the nerve to say "i don't need to provide a reason because it's the standard" and then accuse someone of "useless rhetoric"?! Thanks for reinforcing the standard of the typical "stealth class" players: crying that they can't just one shot an army and calling foul when they aren't OP.

 

You need to pop invis and GTFO, bud.

Edited by RKNM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even full invisibility doesn't equate with the archetype being overpowered. JTodd said some archetypes would be really good in one area, and crappy in another. Invisibility can be balanced with a long cool down, poor defense, low non-stealth damage output or other drawbacks.

Can be, but often isn't, mostly cause the system you mention above would mean stealth classes would spend a lot of time "out of the action" between CD's (and then they'd complain, the dev's would cave, the balance is all screwed, the nerfbat comes out, endless rebalancing ensues, and then we're back to square one on the forums.

 

Stealth classes with full invisibility can be balanced, but I haven't seen a single game succeed at it. The closest I've seen is shadowbane, and this was mostly because of their emphasis on group play, counter-stealth, and having to balance stealth classes in areas other than invisibility.

 

Invisibility is almost impossible to balance simply because of the intrinsic advantage of being unseen by other players. It allows for scenarios of complete avoidance of combat, peerless positioning advantages, unparalleled control of engagement and disengagement...and we haven't even started to talk about combat!

 

Limiting to the intrinsic value invisibility through environmentally based stealth or camouflage is gaining a lot more attention and acclaim in the gaming community (such as dishonored, thief, balck desert, and more), or even it's exclusion entirely (again BD and TERA), as it takes out the inherent need to balance and rebalance based around a single gimmick. And when you're having to make excuses and fix mistakes based on a single isn't that know as bad game design? Wouldn't it be a lot easier and simpler (and cheaper) to leave it out entirely?

 

Now obviously we can't do this as the idea is stealth does appeal to a certain demographic of player (as teerlys represents). Most game engines can't support camouflage or environmentally based stealth, forcing devs to take the tried and misguided step of trying to balance invisibility toggles (like GW2 did...*shudder*). But adding conditions to stealth, such as where and when it can be used would go a long way in making it more viable and skill based for both stealthers and non-stealthers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Been there, done that, how about reading some threads before you make a claim, hate repeating myself. And like I said, all I hear is "I want to be able to kill 4 players solo, all by myself, screw skill and balance, i'm going to exploit this gimmick so that I can be super OP, don't nerf me bro." And i'm sorry, I didn't know the devs were making a game for your sole enjoyment, musta misinterpreted the part when they said "we're not making this game for everyone" that they meant just you. "Because it's the standard" is one of the reasons this game was first conceived.

 

 

Yeah... pretty sure you're going to be proven wrong when it's still in the game. Solo PvP is absolutely a part of PvP. Sounds like your panties are in a twist because you never learned how to handle it. 

 

 

The playstyle of the solo faceroll class is one of the biggest reasons players leave games or are the causes of massive balance changes, which is a telltale sign of (say it with me) bad game design. And saying "it's the standard" is why there are so many trash clones and why the game industry is constantly faulted for lack of innovation. ACE believed that players and crowfall deserved better than that. Creating innovations in how stealth is included (like BD's camouflage and crouch system or Dishonored's playstyle) has attracted a lot of attention as opposed to the infamous "invisibility toggle".

 

Says nearly everyone on every stealth thread in this forum (seriously, need to read)! The devs have said multiple times that they are gearing this game for group play and make it much harder to play solo to nurture cooperation and group play. And you have the nerve to say "i don't need to provide a reason because it's the standard" and then accuse someone of "useless rhetoric"?! Thanks for reinforcing the standard of the typical "stealth class" players: crying that they can't just one shot an army and calling foul when they aren't OP.

 

You need to pop invis and GTFO, bud.

 

 

They're modeling this game largely off of Shadowbane. A game also designed for group, and even large group play. A game which still included robust small scale and solo game play. Poor game design would be to enforce constant group gameplay. Sounds like you just don't have the requisite experience to form a valid opinion.


pKWaYh4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The devs already said that the game will be balanced around group play and not 1v1.

 

Best advice I can give is to try to avoid situations that you would be at a clear disadvantage because of class. I actually like this.


9e58b2ae2f9ac9f2904b5d4c33b609bb92d1a174


"Sharp alone, deadly together."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The devs already said that the game will be balanced around group play and not 1v1.

 

Not really relevant in whether or not stealth has a part to play in the game. All not balancing for 1v1 means is that not every class needs to be able to fight every other class individually. That was a core tenet of Shadowbane which included characters that excelled at very different parts of the game. Certain classes will be better for an in-your-face fight. Others will excel at dealing damage to large groups from a distance. Some will be better and worse depending on the scale of fighting and the tactics used. And in that mix are going to be some that are good at being sneaky and getting around to behind enemy lines and assassinating key targets but who probably can't take too much abuse. Those toons will lend themselves well to solo game play without the game being balanced around 1v1.


pKWaYh4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stealth groups provide valuable tactical and strategic options both in small scale and large scale gameplay.  Typically the trade off is firepower/staying power vs the ability to engage an enemy at an opportunity of your choosing, and having skills that allow stealth focused characters a chance break off and evade/escape if/when needed.  It can be difficult to balance, but certainly isn't impossible, and the ACE staff aren't shying away from difficult to balance mechanics from what we've seen thus far.  Considering the different types of combat we've seen trotted out so far, sieging, caravan ambushes, combat where terrain type and visibility will matter, it would be a shame to see the stealth style of gameplay not included.  


X88mIYV.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah... pretty sure you're going to be proven wrong when it's still in the game. Solo PvP is absolutely a part of PvP. Sounds like your panties are in a twist because you never learned how to handle it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

They're modeling this game largely off of Shadowbane. A game also designed for group, and even large group play. A game which still included robust small scale and solo game play. Poor game design would be to enforce constant group gameplay. Sounds like you just don't have the requisite experience to form a valid opinion.

Speaking of useless rhetoric and invalid opinions, are you still lurking here?...

 

And trust me, lack of experience with pvp stealth is not the issue, lol. But even playing as a rogue/thief class, i noticed a certain lack of skill or difficulty playing in stealth, even in battegrounds and world PvP. It's the same for every game: pick a target, pop stealth, wait 10 seconds for an opening, go ham on your rotation, collect and find new target. Any interruptions, pop disengage, watch them blow healing spells/items, rinse and repeat. I didn't feel stealth, skill was DEFINITELY no object in gameplay, just gear, level, and initiation. Also, I noticed a certain type of person mained these classes, typically the incredibly self-entitled trolling elitists who think they are incredible at a game for mastering a 1-dimensional gimmick (have I hit too close to home here?)

 

Any opportunities or innovate, restrict, limit, or punish invis stealth is more than welcome. And frankly having the "scout-esque" stealth countergame like SB did have a positive effect in reining in the inherent advantages of invisibility, but also pigeinholed roles and was a gimmick in of itself (invented to counter the mistakes of another gimmick mechanic).

Edited by RKNM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And trust me, lack of experience with pvp stealth is not the issue, lol. But even playing as a rogue/thief class, i noticed a certain lack of skill or difficulty playing in stealth, even in battegrounds and world PvP. It's the same for every game: pick a target, pop stealth, wait 10 seconds for an opening, go ham on your rotation, collect and find new target. Any interruptions, pop disengage, watch them blow healing spells/items, rinse and repeat. I didn't feel stealth, skill was DEFINITELY no object in gameplay, just gear, level, and initiation. Also, I noticed a certain type of person mained these classes, typically the incredibly self-entitled trolling elitists who think they are incredible at a game for mastering a 1-dimensional gimmick (have I hit too close to home here?)

 

Apparently lack of experience in a game purely designed around PvP where the only allies you have are your guildies is the issue. You can't compare the two very equitably because one of them has major PvE constraints to character design. To be fair, relatively few people have extensive experience in that kind of game because there just haven't been that many, and the ones that did exist have been out for a while. 

 

Any opportunities or innovate, restrict, limit, or punish invis stealth is more than welcome. And frankly having the "scout-esque" stealth countergame like SB did have a positive effect in reining in the inherent advantages of invisibility, but also pigeinholed roles and was a gimmick in of itself (invented to counter the mistakes of another gimmick mechanic).

You keep using this word gimmick for stealth. But any mechanic could be called a gimmick. That 'blocking' gimmick. That 'self healing' gimmick. That 'dodge' gimmick. These are not gimmicks. These are mechanics. Mechanics that have a place in competitive gameplay. Any one of them can be unbalanced due to poor game design, as may have been the case in... was it WoW you were referring to up there? But solid game design includes mechanics for enjoyment of both the attacker and defender. 

 

As an example for group vs group based gameplay, you like playing an assassin and sneaking into enemy back lines to gank their support while the rest of your team engages in the front. If there is a significant enough threat to my group from that then we'll task an anti stealther to hang back and keep an eye out for you. You still want to get in though, so you maybe bring your own anti stealther with you to distract mine, freeing you up to still get into range to do your thing. I then have to assign some one with decent CC and DPS to back my anti-stealth player. This is called counterplay. It happens in umpteen different ways from mechanic to mechanic... or as you like to phrase it, gimmick to gimmick.


pKWaYh4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently lack of experience in a game purely designed around PvP where the only allies you have are your guildies is the issue. You can't compare the two very equitably because one of them has major PvE constraints to character design. To be fair, relatively few people have extensive experience in that kind of game because there just haven't been that many, and the ones that did exist have been out for a while.

 

 

 

 

You keep using this word gimmick for stealth. But any mechanic could be called a gimmick. That 'blocking' gimmick. That 'self healing' gimmick. That 'dodge' gimmick. These are not gimmicks. These are mechanics. Mechanics that have a place in competitive gameplay. Any one of them can be unbalanced due to poor game design, as may have been the case in... was it WoW you were referring to up there? But solid game design includes mechanics for enjoyment of both the attacker and defender.

 

As an example for group vs group based gameplay, you like playing an assassin and sneaking into enemy back lines to gank their support while the rest of your team engages in the front. If there is a significant enough threat to my group from that then we'll task an anti stealther to hang back and keep an eye out for you. You still want to get in though, so you maybe bring your own anti stealther with you to distract mine, freeing you up to still get into range to do your thing. I then have to assign some one with decent CC and DPS to back my anti-stealth player. This is called

. It happens in umpteen different ways from mechanic to mechanic... or as you like to phrase it, gimmick to gimmick.
Pot, kettle. Have you met?

 

This is really called pigeonholing. Like the scout in SB was for one purpose and one purpose only: popping stealthers. It's like the old days of EQ or vanilla wow, where everyone had one job and one job only, and doing these jobs guaranteed success. That's not counterplay, that's basic team comp. That might be great for an RTS, but RPGs have more factors than that. And frankly, scout gameplay was hardly thrilling for me, mostly cause I knew what I was and why I was there, and there was nothing I could do about it from a build or gameplay perspective (sure I could build to be a little better at something else, but let's face it, scouts were most valuable doing what SB had decided scouts were best at).

Edited by RKNM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is really called pigeonholing. Like the scout in SB was for one purpose and one purpose only: popping stealthers. It's like the old days of EQ or vanilla wow, where everyone had one job and one job only, and doing these jobs guaranteed success. That's not counterplay, that's basic team comp. That might be great for an RTS, but RPGs have more factors than that. And frankly, scout gameplay was hardly thrilling for me, mostly cause I knew what I was and why I was there, and there was nothing I could do about it from a build or gameplay perspective (sure I could build to be a little better at something else, but let's face it, scouts were most valuable doing what SB had decided scouts were best at).

You either didn't play Shadowbane or didn't play it well enough to be good at it. I ran with two of the all time best scouts. Their scouting changed the course of fights and banes for us. Reporting on enemy movements, activities, composition, location, etc. They would defense cut high D toons, ground fliers, chase down runners. They would be the ones to give the call on when we should move into the enemy to hit them because they were close enough to give the details. There was a massive game of intel and intel-denial that got played on the small scale basis around major group events. They were the escorts for small mission critical ops like treb dispelling when that was in the game. They were very nearly a critical part of a group's success outside of their ability to see invisibility. The same could be said of all of the other stealthing classes.

 

Hell, even Thieves, the quintessential loners, had their roles in GvG. Can't bash a tower with a siege hammer if you're worried about your primary weapon being stolen. Getting into an enemy stack to expose a target to piercing for an archer spec was a common use. Backstabbing a healer with a poison and the healing dagger debuff to nerf their healing output. 

 

You can't argue that it can't be done and have a ton of value to the game because it has already been done. And done by the people making this game. Just because you either didn't take or have the time to see all of the levels the stealth game worked on when done well doesn't mean they weren't there. 


pKWaYh4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of my best times have been on a thief or a scout, and to note if you think a scout was only useful for popping a stealth class you sir are surly wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of my best times have been on a thief or a scout, and to note if you think a scout was only useful for popping a stealth class you sir are surly wrong

Only: Of course not. Mainly: Yes.

 

And scout gameplay really didn't appeal to me because frankly, all the things you just mentioned, other classes could do either better, as a side mechanic, or simply have the abilities and power to back it up. I played it, sure, but scouts were weak, and designed weak for a reason: that was their job and their balance to perma-stealth and stealth detecting. They were great at the intel stuff, sure, but that's cause it was their role (and again, it wasn't like the other classes were completely without).

 

They may include carebear invis toggle as their big "stealth mechanic" (which they pretty much already have, seriously, go read 9_9) And I would still say that it would be a big mistake if they dom't include restrictions and limiters for all the reasons and evidence I've already provided for balancing purposes and realism. You'll probably continue to cry "it's standard" like it's a valid argument, while discounting everyone who says otherwise (despite successes where invisibility toggle was not included). Just cause it was included in another game doesn't mean it should be included.

Edited by RKNM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate invisible rogues. They're a complete pain it the backside. They add a huge range of choices in how to engage and disengage groups from combat. It really expands the depth and breadth of game play beyond the capabilities of the merely average player. The situational awareness needed to deal with them places the unwary at a deep disadvantage. They're completely unfair in many respects. If it weren't for them we could just blunder around the battlefield with no chance for the smaller force to survive any encounter. They're just a crutch for the skilled and the devious. We don't need those sorts of people playing this game. It would completely undermine the vital supremacy of numbers over coordination and expertise. We really need for everything to be warriors too. No class should be able to kite and attack from so far away where other players can't respond without moving. One dimensional game play is so much more enjoyable we should really do away with terrain and other vision restrictions entirely. The larger less agile force should always dominate.


CF_Osgyth.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate invisible rogues. They're a complete pain it the backside. They add a huge range of choices in how to engage and disengage groups from combat. It really expands the depth and breadth of game play beyond the capabilities of the merely average player. The situational awareness needed to deal with them places the unwary at a deep disadvantage. They're completely unfair in many respects. If it weren't for them we could just blunder around the battlefield with no chance for the smaller force to survive any encounter. They're just a crutch for the skilled and the devious. We don't need those sorts of people playing this game. It would completely undermine the vital supremacy of numbers over coordination and expertise. We really need for everything to be warriors too. No class should be able to kite and attack from so far away where other players can't respond without moving. One dimensional game play is so much more enjoyable we should really do away with terrain and other vision restrictions entirely. The larger less agile force should always dominate.

 

I like the way you think, and totally agree!


9e58b2ae2f9ac9f2904b5d4c33b609bb92d1a174


"Sharp alone, deadly together."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at Black Desert, all classes have a crouch and crawl stance, which allows them to interact to hide behind objects or in tall grass (affected by the profile, which is contingent upon their armor choices and natural character/polygon shape). You can actually watch players pull this off in PvP to great effect, allowing them to actually use stealth using the environment to hide and camouflage their position with NO INVISIBILITY TOGGLE (this was before their new ninja classes, so not sure what's going on there, stopped following BD when they started to "streamline" the experience (like every other MMO))

 

Maybe crowfall can do something similar in that stealth characters can only enter "invisibility mode" when they are crouched next to certain objects, or are crawling in tall grass. That way their stealth is based on environment instead of "the invisibilty toggle"

 

I support the idea of being able to crouch/crawl. It takes away a lot of coding as well, since if you were to add invisibility you'd have to make a counter for it as well, also considering making it balanced in game-play to prevent it from being overpowered or not useful enough to want to use. 

 

Not only would it be simpler to add into game (Maybe a little tricky for the Legion), but would add more fun for people who want to use it while in their dimensions or visiting others to play... I don't know, maybe hide and seek? Or maybe they want to crawl on a new carpet that their friend placed to be funny.

 

10/10 Supporting Crowfall add Crouch and Crawl. Please, this would add a great addition to the game.


Crossiki~

"Masked and swift like wind."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

people who want to use it while in their dimensions or visiting others to play... I don't know, maybe hide and seek? Or maybe they want to crawl on a new carpet that their friend placed to be funny.

 

I would totally play hide and seek when I need to kill a bit of time in my EK. Maybe while deciding on what campaign to go into. I fully support this.


SR8DSig_Infynis.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can be, but often isn't, mostly cause the system you mention above would mean stealth classes would spend a lot of time "out of the action" between CD's (and then they'd complain, the dev's would cave, the balance is all screwed, the nerfbat comes out, endless rebalancing ensues, and then we're back to square one on the forums.

 

Stealth classes with full invisibility can be balanced, but I haven't seen a single game succeed at it.

Guess we'll have to wait for a little bit and see what they've done with it. I'm my, albeit non-encyclopedic, experience, companies tend design the stealth class to be "poof I'm invisible, and you're dead!" from the beginning. They may nerf the power a bit or tack on a half-thought-out anti-stealth mechanic when non-stealth players complain, but people enjoy being OP stealth assassins so that's what companies deliver. I don't think ACE is such a company, but we'll find out soon enough. Edited by ZaphodBeeblebrox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is really called pigeonholing. Like the scout in SB was for one purpose and one purpose only: popping stealthers.

I'm not going to rehash the entirety of this thread, but the above opinion shows that your knowledge regarding the particular game and profession combination you are referring to is lacking to the point of bordering on the statement being libelous.

 

Scouts were the premiere skirmishers in the game, period. While not being the fastest, or the hardest hitting, or the deadliest, they were near enough to the top of each that when combined with their stealth and anti-stealth capabilities, they were flat out invaluable to a guild at war due to their ability to conduct recon and counter-recon work. 


CF_Van.png

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...