Combat Redux

Discussion in 'Skills and Combat' started by Gypsy Lou, Apr 28, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. padreadamo

    padreadamo Avatar

    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA / USA
    "Well, I can't get my money back, so I'll just loiter until release, see how it goes." - Dewderonomy

    This is EXACTLY how my friends and I feel. You nailed it. However, I just felt like I couldn't sit by without at least trying to convey how I feel. My friends are not forum posters, but they do read these forums and we talk about it on a daily basis. They stopped with pledges and add-ons after Release 12. I stopped recently; should have stopped awhile ago. I am glad they understand that combat is bad; watched the postmortem. Hopefully the next three releases will be quite interesting in ways of combat.

    -Padre
     
    Freeman and Dewderonomy like this.
  2. Burzmali

    Burzmali Avatar

    Messages:
    1,290
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I haven't posted in a bit, but chalk me up as another user that logs in each release, plays around with combat for a bit, realizes that it still sucks, and then dashes through to collect the release exclusive. I had hoped to fiddle with crafting this time around, but the only targets I can find are 20XP for 50 needed for a single level, so with my harvest rate is %25 I'm noping right out on this release.

    For combat, there are deep problems that make meaningful improvements unlikely. Unless the devs are holding back a ton of server resources, they are already skimping pretty heavily on hit detection so a decent cover system isn't in the cards. What we are likely to get is key to enter "cover mode" when near objects projecting "cover zones" which will provide flat defensive bonuses against ranged attacks, adding a little "+20% vs. range" icon in your status bar and maybe filtering the screen. I wish I could hope for more, but true cover systems require both projectile collision detection and universal line of sight calculation and if decent hit detection is too much of a stretch, those are way off the table.
     
    Dewderonomy and padreadamo like this.
  3. Logain

    Logain Avatar

    Messages:
    1,004
    Likes Received:
    1,734
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Munich, Germany
    Just a friendly reminder that if you invest your starting points on the skill you intend to use, you'd instantly be at roughly 75-90% harvest rate on these nodes. If you're even willing to explore some scenes, I'm very positive that you'd find something that would yield you 200 experience a try. At least I had no issues there, but then again, I tried for more than 5 minutes ;)
     
  4. Gypsy Lou

    Gypsy Lou Avatar

    Messages:
    266
    Likes Received:
    565
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Guys, I'm getting concerned about the attitude around here. It's starting to feel personal. We are not the enemy, the only real enemies are apathy, complacency and time. It's worth reminding everyone that the community for this game is one of its strongest points. Utterly unique in the gaming world in my experience.

    As many have stated, we are not just "testers", responsible for providing feedback, we are investors, we are financial backers, many of us have poured far more money into this than any other game in our gaming history. We have not only the duty, but the right to question, to poke, to express strongly what we feel. And that's true if we spend days and hours playing or less than five minutes. There is no obligation here that we prove our validity by paying our dues in game time, we've paid our dues literally. And guess what. Upon release, the reviewers and the new players coming in to try this game will form opinions in less than five minutes, too.

    No need to take any of this personally, we all have the right to express ANY opinion we have. We paid for that right and the devs have been very acknowledging of that right. So I think we should be, too.

    That is all.
     
    Freeman and Dewderonomy like this.
  5. Ristra

    Ristra Avatar

    Messages:
    3,942
    Likes Received:
    5,442
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    Athens
    Not sure where the notion that they are not working on combat came from but it sounds to me like they are.
     
  6. TantX

    TantX Avatar

    Messages:
    731
    Likes Received:
    1,240
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA


    Right there.

    Edit: Okay, it isn't saving the time stamp. 4m 36s.
     
    Greyhaven and Freeman like this.
  7. Logain

    Logain Avatar

    Messages:
    1,004
    Likes Received:
    1,734
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Munich, Germany
    Wait what? Critics can claim that the developers are unprofessional, don't know their job since they have designed 'baby games' and are scamers out for our money, but should stand it since they are big boys. Yet when I give a friendly comment that, by simply applying some of the starting points in a skill one intends to use, the odds are going to be massively increased in an 'old school' (pre) alpha product with no finished 'tutorial/help', followed by a mild tongue in cheek comment, I'm getting personal?
    I'm sorry, I really didn't mean to sound offensive or rude.
    On the other hand, I am very well aware of first impression, but I am actually hoping that the game won't try to carter for everybody but stays slightly elitist to 'old school'-style play.
     
  8. Ristra

    Ristra Avatar

    Messages:
    3,942
    Likes Received:
    5,442
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    Athens
    Very well, now, at the time of the making this public knowledge, how long have they been working on combat?

    What you did there was along the lines of "don't lawyer me bro" You took their words and tried to use it against them. They can't work on everything all at once. They have areas of focus. Combat was not the focus for a few months. By the time they made that statement, how long have the been back to focusing on combat? You statements in this thread imply (or at least I had me inferring such) that they are still not focusing on combat.

    Pretty quick to throw in the towel for them. The development ride is far from over, little faith is in order. Any other team and I'd probably be right there with you though. I gave up on following games during development due to watching so many fall flat.

    I could be overly faithful but this team repeatedly keeps my faith going. Because they are very consistent.

    Do not think they will drop their plan for combat, only small course corrections.
     
    Myrcello likes this.
  9. TantX

    TantX Avatar

    Messages:
    731
    Likes Received:
    1,240
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    ...Really? You're playing that card? Richard Garriott said 3-6 months. That's a long time. I'm taking him at his word, and any work they were doing was obviously not for long enough to be consequential.
     
    Myrcello likes this.
  10. Ristra

    Ristra Avatar

    Messages:
    3,942
    Likes Received:
    5,442
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    Athens
    I raise you one more, the work they have done is not long enough to be consequential, across the board. For all aspects of the game.

    Everything needs a lot more time to solidify into the release product.

    Picking apart the current state of anything is pretty easy right now. So yes, I am playing that card. Combat was not the focus for a few releases. It is again.
     
    Logain likes this.
  11. argyle

    argyle Avatar

    Messages:
    74
    Likes Received:
    157
    Trophy Points:
    20
    Gender:
    Male
    I hate to derail combat discussion in the thread, but I think the funding question relates to it and the above quoted post is both unfairly dismissive to dewd's statements (*insert your choice of facepalm pic here*) and factually incorrect.

    There have been indications of decline. In the first 8 months, SotA brought in 26,362 backers and $2,933,801 (3295 new backers per month and $366,725 per month). The next twelve months (all of 2014) SotA brought in 20,249 at $2532893 (1687 new backers per month and $211,074 per month). This year over 5 months, SotA has brought in 6,867 backers and $960,447 (1373 new backers per month and $192,089 per month). That is a 47% decrease in per month income between average income in the first 8 months of the project and the average income of the last 5 months. There is a 58% decrease in the per month new backers between the average new backers in the first 8 months of the project and the average new backers in the last 5 months.

    Maybe that's unfair though. Maybe we should consider the same period from last year. Let us evaluate their comp #s. For the period of January 1 - May 23 of 2015, we have the statistics from above 6,867 new backers and $960,447 (1373 new backers per month and $192,089 per month). For the period of January 1 - May 23 of 2014, we have the following statistics, 8,679 new backers and $1,178,350 (1735 new backers per month and $235,670 per month). Lets run those %s now. That's a 26% decrease in new backers over the same period from the previous year, its also a 22% decrease in money over the same period from the previous year.

    All of this has been happening as the community has stated that the game has improved over time, substantially some may say! There certainly have been things added to the game over that period of time. Yet the funding pace has declined.

    The total dollars per pledge has increased though! From $111 per pledge at the close of 2013, to $117 per pledge at the close of 2014, to $120 per pledge now! Sounds great. However, what you are looking at here is either new backers all coming in and backing at a fairly substantial rate or new backers coming in and backing at low rates and average pledge donations increasing by high dollar backers infusing more money into the system. If the latter is the case you might think that's awesome! I do too! It indicates something bad though underneath. New backers are new sources of money. Getting new people in and spending is an infinite resource. Those who are already heavily invested will become less and less willing to contribute more and more money (on the whole, not everyone!). New players are a chance for new people to infuse lots of new money into that system and feed the game. If new players aren't coming in and spending lots, then the game isn't actually growing at a rate that can multiply the potential finances of the game (see Star Citizen).

    Now, lets address Steam. Yes, we do not know what the sales are on Steam. We could get an indication though from their top sales charts! SotA is currently unranked. That means it is currently ranked 645th or lower in steam's overall sales charts. If you look at RPGs, its ranked 216th or lower. The next comparably priced, ranked, RPG is a $40 DLC for Marvel Heroes 2015. A piece of $40 DLC is outselling SotA at the moment. Now, these charts track daily, so certainly that can fluctuate. However, being the 645th or worse selling game on Steam isn't a sign of them reaping in substantial money from the platform. We could also look at steamcharts.com, which tracks gameplay statistics over time. Am I right in guessing that all 53,478 backers have access to Steam keys? If so, there's always the potential those users may use Steam! Maybe not, but its certainly reasonable to think that some may. Its also probably reasonable to think that those who purchased SotA through Steam play through Steam as well. SotA hasn't been lighting up the steamcharts ... charts either. Despite moving from R10 through to R18 and all the various improvements that have gone along with that, steamcharts shows an 18% decline in average players playing from November to the past 30 days.

    The long and short of this is, yes, dewd is correct. The funding has declined, unquestionably, as I laid out pretty plain above. That may be related to a poor reception of combat, but we don't know! Its worth guessing though. Despite the availability on Steam (whose impact is in question), we can't tell. We can only tell that the game hasn't kept up with its previous pace. Ask any business owner, those % declines are concerning. Its not an indication of a grass roots spreading of the word or message of this game. As the customer base grows, as availability of the game grows, as the game itself grows, so too should the donations and play time of the playerbase. Based on what you read above, that is not the case. Its important to identify why that isn't the case. Is it combat, is it marketing, why isn't it showing growth?

    Feel free to check my maths. I've been known to make errors.
     
    Moonshadow and Dewderonomy like this.
  12. TantX

    TantX Avatar

    Messages:
    731
    Likes Received:
    1,240
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    [​IMG]
     
  13. majoria70

    majoria70 Avatar

    Messages:
    10,347
    Likes Received:
    24,869
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    United States
    Ok so I have to respond again. Hearing the comments about SOTAs financing and comparing and analyzing it like it is a finished game. Some are disappointed to buy a game that is so not finished, others have no clue about any of the history of the making of this game, what has gone on so far, what will go on in the future, nothing, and the real fact 'nothing' is finished, not one tiny thing is hard for some to hear. We can only go forward from release to release as the game goes to a completed stage. Whatever happens at this point is Episode 1 is funded. People can come here and sweat it or be disappointed, or whatever happens more money, less money, watch the graphs go up and down, topsy turvy, whatever, and the game is still going to continue being created step by step, piece by piece, bit by bit, blood sweat and tears etc. I know some think this conversation is making a difference in some way. I can think of other conversations that would help, but they are not happening on this thread.
     
  14. argyle

    argyle Avatar

    Messages:
    74
    Likes Received:
    157
    Trophy Points:
    20
    Gender:
    Male
    No, it is funded when it is complete. Expenses continue for a game that hasn't been released and thus this is its only source of income. The kickstarter was funded, but if you think the kickstarter was even close to the amount of money they need to make this game, even before all the backer requested features and switch to Unity, you are sadly mistaken. Though our financial conversation seems offputting to you, you may find this article from polygon which goes into how crowdfunded games like this one damage smaller indies by intentionally deflating their costs in order to get backed in the hopes they will bring in additional money later, as well as the budgeting numbers for game development projects. It also estimates costs of roughly $10,000 per employee per month. The writer of the article was a tech lead (Chris's job), she's worked for Microsoft and EA, she's got a kickstarter for her current game. The $10,000 figure they use for budgeting, it accounts not just for the salary and benefits of that employee, but wider costs like legal fees, office supplies, its factoring in all expenses, which grow as the team grows. So, with a team of 23, using these (very rough) budgeting guidelines, you are talking about burning through nearly a million dollars every 4.5 months. Financing is always an issue. They may be a year from releasing, how much money is that? This game isn't done until its out the door. Financing is always always an issue.


    so leave it for threads you feel are more productive and a better use of your time. seems simple. we are conversing about combat, which lead to a discussion about financing. no one on this forum has any responsibility to ensure everything they post is a positive impression of the game or directly helpful to the team. the fact is, funding has slowed, not progressed. its not here and there, hither and dither. that's how businesses are run, and you fool yourself if you don't believe this is first and foremost a business. these people aren't making a game out of the goodness of their hearts. there is real money on the line. it came in before when the game barely existed in concept, it came in during R1, R2, R3. Why has its growth declined in R12, R13, R14. it is irrelevant whether things are finished or not they are becoming more finished, they are making real, tangible strides. by all accounts its 'getting better'. In fact, these numbers have gone down along with the ability to play the game full time. Maybe that's a coincidence, maybe its not. Still, its not getting better in funding. More people aren't coming in, in fact, fewer people are. these are things that are relevant to the game's health and long term success. these are things Portalarium looks at over time. this is how they budget, how they determine how much time they have to create the game, what they can incorporate, based on watching trends in the backing numbers. they care about their numbers and financing. As such, I care. I find it interesting. I'm sorry if that bothers you. If my conversation is unworthy of your time, kindly block me. Thanks. Don't come and indirectly reply and insinuate that what I'm discussing has no value. That's dismissive and offensive and its a huge problem with this community that is ever so prideful about their open mindedness and inclusiveness.

    Now, if you want to get serious, and you don't want to talk about finances, lets talk about interest in the game. This isn't a critique of how good or bad the game is. This is an observation. This is gauging what interest is like, not how many people are giving money to this game. This is, how many people are coming in and caring about the game. The game is getting closer to done all the time. What were the differences between R1, R2 etc. and R16, 17. I'd imagine you feel they are substantial and awesome! That's cool! I'm not going to tell you you are wrong. I'd imagine that you see such improvements that you would think someone who saw R4 would be less likely to back than someone who saw R18, because of the improvements. Lets use a metric to gauge interest. From Feb. 4 of 2014 to May 23 of 2014, we welcomed 41,470 New Britannians. We welcome them! From Feb. 4 of 2015 to May 23 of 2015, we welcomed 10,906 New Britannians. See, this is the thing, it ain't growing like it was. That's a 73% decline in New Britannians year over year. That's just people who want to register for the website! They don't even have to spend money! Can that be excused as people who simple aren't interested in a pre-alpha game? All they ahve to do is register for the website, and they aren't even doing that in near the same rates as last year.

    Month to month this year, its equally grim. New Britannians in: February 4th on 3109, March 3052, April 2939, and 23 days into May 1625 all of this year. That is not an insignificant decline. So, hey, why not look at This time period last month. We know the numbers were far higher of course, but were we growing then? Feb. 4th on 5940, March 13209, April 11483, May 13936. Last year, at this time, this game was growing, and fast. People were coming to the site and signing up regularly. Many many per day. In fact, Combining February, March, April and May's figures from this year, 2015, gives you 10,752, which is fewer than any single month of March, April, or May of last year. That's bad, that's very very bad. The game is not gaining word of mouth, not gaining new interest at the rate it once was, in fact not even close.

    That's worth discussing, whether you feel it is or not.
     
    Dewderonomy likes this.
  15. Strumshot

    Strumshot Avatar

    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Central US
    You have been awarded 25 producer experience for this post. There, see? Now it's officially a productive thread!
     
    Dewderonomy likes this.
  16. Freeman

    Freeman Avatar

    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    1,532
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Superior, WI.
    More on this later, but... I see that, and raise you this:

     
    cam2009, Dewderonomy and argyle like this.
  17. Gypsy Lou

    Gypsy Lou Avatar

    Messages:
    266
    Likes Received:
    565
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Crowd funding curves appear to be like ordinary revenue curves in that they often generate an initial spike coincident with the initial spike of interest and then, as the base grows, the % of growth becomes harder to raise over time and slows down. Annual GDP growth in China has slowed *dramatically* but no one thinks that the Chinese economy is growing slow. It just gets harder over time to keep up the initial pace.

    Now, that said, Star Citizen seems to defy this logic. But on close inspection it does not. The game remains the highest draw in the history of Kickstarter and got off to a whopping start. And even though they continue to raise obscene amounts of cash, the % growth per annum has slowed dramatically there, too. I don't hear anyone complaining about waning interest over there. So I'm not sure how good a measure of interest/excitement financial backing is.

    A better indicator, in my view, is how many people are actively logging in. Harder to get more than anecdotal data from our perspective but if you've tried either SC or SotA, it's easy to tell that SC is more alive and active. Other than player events with RP'ers singing, giving away gifts and dancing on tables, I don't see many players running around whenever I do log in and the lack of general chat makes it feel really dead. This may just be my own experience because I'm not in a guild, but I'm not in any SC guild, either. And I wasn't in any ArcheAge guild, either, but I still had to wait in long queues to log in to the alpha servers.

    At the end of the day, I think you can draw a direct line between the combat system in this game (so far) and the level of interest and happiness in the forums, even if you can't relate it to financing. I don't know how much longer the "It's still early alpha" explanation is going to hold up if they are serious about a 2015 release date, and I hope that they actually just throw that release date away and continue to improve the game. It's a very tough call as a development team to have to decide whether to start over and delay release further, or try to work with what they have. Actually, in most cases that's a no-brainer, work with what you have. But in this case the decision is hard because of how unsatisfying the combat is, how unhappy the base is, and the annoying but lingering question as to the source of that unhappiness: is it card combat itself, or just the current implementation? R18 will shed more light on that.

    Until then, I keep an eye out here and keep hoping. They're smart guys, they *should* be able to shed their development pride and sense of efficiency, and understand that the outpouring of our wallets into crowd funding was based on our agreement with them to give them all those millions in exchange for their commitment to give less emphasis to those efficiency concerns and more emphasis on "getting it right". It's all on them now.
     
    argyle, Dewderonomy and Freeman like this.
  18. Ristra

    Ristra Avatar

    Messages:
    3,942
    Likes Received:
    5,442
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    Athens
    Hmm maybe we can get this to Chris and he can learn something...
     
  19. argyle

    argyle Avatar

    Messages:
    74
    Likes Received:
    157
    Trophy Points:
    20
    Gender:
    Male
    My response about the finances was a direct response to someone, who i quoted, incorrectly stating that there was no dip in contributions and that it had seen increases in growth over time. It has not. That's it. I can't make any broad generalizations about the cause of it or whether it directly correlates to combat or the overland map or emotes or whether interest can be gauged by a decrease in funds or backers without guessing. Maybe it is an indication, but the market is bigger than me and I don't purport to understand it all. If I did do that, I apologize. Growth has decreased counter to what Spoon stated. My intent was to correct it.

    edit again - i actually don't like what i wrote so i'll just leave this here. i agree with most of what wanderlust said to one degree or another. i do think that an overall lack of expanding interest in the game can have an impact on funding. a number of my friends who would ordinarily be interested in a game like this simply aren't because of the combat, overland map, etc. also, i think there's a big difference between Star Citizen, which is a niche game that has to be near its saturation point thus greatly impacting growth increases and SotA a game in a much less niche genre though with more competition.
     
    Freeman likes this.
  20. majoria70

    majoria70 Avatar

    Messages:
    10,347
    Likes Received:
    24,869
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    United States
    Caring about the success of the game is wonderful. I was not even saying that. We have no control over some things well so many things. For those of us who have backed this program we are in for a ride of ups and downs. Whether our friends join us or not either we are here or not. Each release just brings us closer to completion. Two years on the ride is trying for anyone if they let it. It is one day at a time together as a community or to walk away. I am here for the ride and to give my feedback. Whatever I say when I stand for the game is not directed at someone or their character, it is of course standing for the game, and for being a cheerleader for the game, as I know we all do that in our own ways. :)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.