Let's settle this once and for all. Card combat, Good or Bad

But in all honesty I never claimed it was the best approach or the most "real." I simply was pointing out what I enjoy and respect about it - it puts strategy in a place it hasn't typically existed and levels some of the typical playing fields - and painting a perspective I felt hadn't been illustrated.

Again, I think we can find a common ground by how you mentioned that as you progress further along the randomness slows. That's the nature of the idea I proposed.

 

Ok, I must have misread this then:

This system is very, very gamey. It doesn't really hold any realism in it at all. If that's still fun for you, that's cool. That's really all that need be said for you. But in the context of a game designer known for his simulationist tendencies, I prefer a little less game in my virtual world. Not none (since that would be impossible). But less.

Balancing the playing fields, is done through balance of the numbers. This system could be just as off balance for a large level gap as any other, and they typical system could be more balanced with a few minor tweaks. Take one of the biggest examples: Hit points.

If you start with 10 hit points, and get 10 more each level you see a huge gap appear rapidly. On the other hand if you only added 1 hit point per level, that gap doesn't show up as fast, but you also don't notice the progression as much either. Or you could keep the 10, and start players at 50, or 100 hit points. Or only give them more hit points every other level (see: Hackmaster for an example of this).

This system still needs all the balancing, and tweaking any other system would need to make that happen. It just seems more balanced because none of us know what we're doing yet. Once players learn to exploit the advantages given by level, that level field will tip more and more.

As for randomness slowing over time. The randomness tends to stay the same, it's just pointed in a different area. For example if I stand a 50/50 shot of hitting a white belt, as I get better, those odds will go up for me. But in truth, I've just moved my 50/50 chance to a blue belt, and the curve of accuracy has now slid up the scale. This is another case of tweaking balance. How steep of a curve that is depends entirely on your designers. You could make every level have a sizable jump in accuracy... or you could flatten it out.

In most systems the power difference between levels is exponential because there are multiple systems going up incrementally. How often those bumps overlap is what speeds or slows the power gap.

How often you get to use your skills is something that would make that more even, but making them random only means that the system, and not the player, is being given more control of the outcome. As a player, that's a trend I'd like to fight.

 

To go slightly meta with it, I do in fact agree with you (two). But I wouldn't be much help to advancing the topic being agreeable. The two of you are incredibly passionate and well spoken, yet any time you look for a true debate, the person simply replies "don't play then." Or "I just like it." Or they think you are trolling. You deserve more than that.

I simply stated it's on it way to being analogous; which doesn't mean that it's the best analogy, or that there even needs to be an analogy. But I can see the analogy. With some tweaking, it would be easy to ensure no two players play the same, and that all variables have a say in battle.

 

Do not underestimate being agreeable. One of the biggest pushback see get is that we are some sort of vocal minority.

It is fun sparring though. Good to keep us on our game.

 

why not look at each post individually instead of what "a crowd" is saying. Then it isn't a majority or minority issue it is one opinion at a time.

 

On many levels I agree with that. At the end of the day, however, this is a business for them. While the content of the posts need to stand on their own, the volume of them helps determine where their bottom dollar lies.

 

I'm glad you're liking the system but have to strongly disagree that the system is analogous to the true nature of a combat experience. As someone who gets into physical encounters on a near daily basis (law enforcement), I can tell you that the skills learned through training kick-in instinctively. Those real life skills aren't randomized in my head and don't appear and disappear during a fight. So, card combat is actually the antithesis of the true nature of a combat experience..which is both immersion-breaking and inconsistant with the rest of the game.

 

Not to be symantical, but I said this system can be analogous. I mentioned that the next step would be for the "randomness" to wane through growth.

I would argue that when caught off guard, only the abilities that are most deeply ingrained come out. In our scenario, if one can prepare for battle, all of their skills are present and available as the game stands today.

I have to say that you are all correct, but have also stated yourselves as well-trained/masters. Even at this state, not every thing you have learned is instinctive. I too have a personal source and can attest to exactly what you argue. As a national and world champion wrestler, I can tell you I was above the battle. One step ahead, with every drop of my training always at full ready. But again, this is exactly why I was the national champion. I also trained other wrestlers. I don't know how many times I would teach a behavior or move - for a year - and continue to watch it not performed as taught come go time. The instinctive nature is reserved for the truly seasoned and well trained, and dare I say the masters. So take that as a compliment, you are all masters at your trade, by my definition.

So again, there are steps to be taken for the analogy to come to fruition. I will now start spitballing, but perhaps an element of this comes naturally with level; starts to kick in around 15-20 and slopes off at 50. And perhaps this process can be continued through specific training?

In a perfect world I would love to see the glyphs divided into three categories for this exact purpose. Instinctive, conscious, and reflexive. Instinctive would be neutral focus use and always ready. conscious would be higher focus and just a pinch more erraticly available, although nearly always - maybe just longer cooldowns. And reflexive would be the lowest focus cost but only available for a very short time based off of what your opponent does.

I already stated what I think the card system is aiming to accomplish, and the analogy that can be in it, pending some more work.

 

This is so well stated and exactly how I see the system as well. There is a whole tree about affecting the deck which is like training involved to become a master at trade. Those that don't train those skills will have less control and instinct in the thick of it.

Obviously the system needs work and the devs admit that. However, all you guys have had some great feedback so I am hoping for the best.

 

As you clearly know, you do have to train train train for a skill to be instinctive and at the ready. In SotA, this is just not so. They're never at the ready unless you resort to the standard locked hotbar which no one was asking for when this project began.

I do like your idea better than what we have though. So, keep up the brainstorming, Strumshot! You may be on to something.

 

I totally agree, the total locking should just go away. It should be something you train for. Already I can see no two players building the same build + deck, which is interesting, and you have to pay attention in battle; most games you dont. But I would love to see deeper training into an instinctive nature to the deck. It would be a choice, a sacrifice/gain, further customisation, and more immersive. R18 is much more playable than 17 though, they just need not rest yet. I really do agree with all of the combat haters, but no one is arguing intelligently against them, and we won't learn anything from this experiment unless we have smart debates.

 

In the beginning you only know a few things well. How much 'random' can there be?

But not locked away entirely. If my healer drops, and I have a healing skill, I don't sit there thinking... ugh.. if only I had agreed to use that skill back at the tavern. Guess he's going to die, because I totally don't remember how to cast that spell.

If the system was context based, you'd have some argument as well. When surprised, all skills get a random cool down right off the bat. You need time to set up for each of them, and then they're at the ready because you've become accustomed to the battle at hand, and are ready to go.

Again, that's the RNG of "to hit" and "accuracy" they were still trying to get the move to go off. Just failing.

On the few instances that they were simply failing to pull it together and remember their training, let me point out that the player sitting at the keyboard would be making the same mistakes. We don't need code to handle what the player is already doing themselves naturally. It's just doubling the problem, introducing other problems, and not holding together the rest. It's why "Player skill" matters in a game. If you're trying to take that away, then why am I playing?

So, training in the skills isn't enough. I have to train on how I train to use the skills I spent points training on?

 

These are some pretty good points. I especially like your last note, that's a comedic perspective. I personally look at it as teaching vs training. I wouldn't mind seeing that idea accentuated. For example, each ability has exp. The more exp you have, the less random it is. This would solve speed respecs! Want to respec? OK, so you know the skill, but you aren't practiced with it, so it will deal randomly. Go grind for a couple levels and it becomes second nature!

 

I actually want to see skills get points put in different places. You can train your fireball for range, casting time, damage, accuracy, and penetration. Everyone would have a completly different way of casting that fireball based on their own play style.

Like twitch? Bump casting time, you'll do less damage each cast, but hey, spam away. Slower player? You're not penalized for that if you put your points into damage and accuracy.

 

I would also worry about release with this system, even if polished. Right now we're all very split on this combat system. If critics respond to the game in the same manor, it would be devastating for SOTA's future. The gaming industry is one place where the difference between a rating of 7 or 8 is a HUGE deal.

They have to make a system we can all be on board with, or at least most of us. This one simply has us far to divided to keep around imo.

 

It reminds me of World of World of Warcraft. I'm playing myself playing a character. "Oh, c'mon, Brandon, why did you make him swing for the head when he needed to block! YOU SUCK, ME!"

 

That's why they will have a polling mechanism in the game itself. Now we are freer in the forums to just shoot around ideas and brainstorm instead of fight about stuff. Don't get me wrong I love freedom of speech.

We've all seen what it is like to be argumentative. I'm interested in seeing how things go from a different perspective.

There are other forms of persuasion other than argumentation and debate. Debating focuses too much about building up a strong case and trying to out-think the opponent's argument. The result is both sides argue and neither change their minds.

I'm just trying to think a different way since my former thinking was proven unproductive.

 

Once the game is out, it's too late. In fact, it's already too late. The money coming in relates to how well people are receiving the game. This topic is dividing the community and causing people to cease pledging and leave. While there are other ways, there are not other ways that produce results as quickly.

Having a view you believe in, and can defend, is not a bad thing. Wanting to defend it, is not a bad thing. If you weren't making progress with your view... I'm sorry? But I would be interested in what you think will change peoples minds if you don't state your point of view, and defend why you think it's the right one. Specifically... how will they know what it is?

 

My problem with this is twofold. One, it doesn't actually make a good, competitive combat system. From scratch, with decades of gaming genius behind it, it's extraordinarily mediocre. Mixing a card combat game into a real-time 3D environment is like cooking during gymnastics - it's messy and clumsy. Some may find it exhilarating and breaking up the mundane, but for many who enjoy both separately, it doesn't work. Some people love pralines and cream ice cream in a big warm bowl of tomato soup, but you'll likely not find it on any menus at successful restaurants because it isn't profitable - for a reason. I love a lot of card games (not TCGs so much as boxed games, like En Garde! or Munchkin, for example), but if I had to play Skyrim with cards, I wouldn't have invested over 270 hours with vanilla Skyrim.

Second, it introduces players to a system that is factually and metaphysically bad and punishes them through poor gameplay until they level up. "Your character is a newbie imbecile so they don't remember training or anything else for that matter." That's rough, especially when they lack innates and any other skills to boot. So while I understand it and why it's representative, isn't the lack of skills, skill strengths/upgrades, stats to support such skills, etc. penalty enough for a newb? Do they also have to suffer a card mini-game?

 

I read the Google doc and have you heard of a game called Ryzom? I think it allows you to add skills/features to attacks. The combat system is flawed in that I can double click my most powerful attack and it becomes my auto attack. Like what?

I do think your combat system would be interesting to try out. I'm not sure it could work with the current system of enemies running at me from far away but other than that, it does feel like a system that could work to keep me engaged even though it keeps auto attack with a locked hotbar.

Having said that HP regeneration is ridiculous even in it's current combat system. They are trying to make health potions viable but they are impractical in the heat of the battle and useless when I leave combat mode since I can just wait until I recover. So I use the weak healing spells to give me a small health boost when fighting.

But I'd be open to using healing potions if I didn't regenerate. I do feel like unless you spend points, you shouldn't be able to use healing spells outside of combat.