Deck Combat Adjustment

I don't really understand this obsession with combos, yea they were in mass effect and dragon age 2 too but so what

What this game really loses with this card system is the opotunity to make skills really unique, for instance a fireball may do huge damage to an area but it's slow to cast and therefore easily dogged so it works best in tight quarters like unground tunnels but you have to use it early because if the enemy closes then you risk killing your own companions with it. Magic missile (or arrows or whatever) on the other hand are rapid cast fast spell they can interrupt a spell caster and hit rapidly stopping dogging but they do low damage and are easily deflected by armour ect

You could make a fantastic combat system by putting real tactics into it, not "do I use this now or wait for this card so I can combo this to that" but actually reacting to the situation and enemy, using unique spells for the situation at hand. This would also mean real skill because spam fireball would just get you killed (especially if you come up against a fire elemental who fire would be healing). But you can't do this with this system because it's to specific, for a card system to work the card you get has to be viable no matter what it is so it means "different coloured particle effects" and nothing more. Give me real tactical choices, THAT'S what would make this game really interesting and worth playing

 

Don't see how that opposes combos. Every skill should be a tactical choice by itself, and combos being a way of bringing in additional tactical choices by the secuential application of two skills. If skills are dull by themselves, it's not combo fault, it's because of design/balance/whatever issues.

 

Because they limit options, each choice should be a decision base on the inimidiate tactics at the time, not based on ensuring that your going to pull off some great combo. Yes in mass effect 3 I tend to use ice ammo a lot and follow up with an incinerate because that causes frozen enemies to explode. It's pretty cool (pardon the pun) but it's repreditive, it's the same every time but in that game it works. Of course in that game there is still a huge variety caused by the enemy I am fighting. Do they have shield or barriers, then I need to use one of this set of abolish, now they are down to armour so switch to incinerate and fire and armour piercing and heavy weapons, now they are synethic so switch back to disruptor or use charm (forgotten the name of the power right now), no they are organic so let's use ice bullets. There is variety but in that game it's limited to about 5 different abilities per person but even so it's STILL highly tactical

In this its not what's my situation, enemy, environment, best options for this situation, it's what is the chance to get death Ray and magic arrow come up together so I can cast death arrow. That's not tactics, and it's not really that much fun, it's way to gammy. People keep saying "oh it's strategic" and maybe it is but that is a problem not an advantage. Battle should be tactical, it should be about what do I need to to right now, not what do I need to do next week for combat to be fun

To quote qui-gon jin "keep your focus here and now where it belongs"

For example if your tank is down to 1 HP you should be reacting "got to heal him or he's done for" not "well I could heal him now but if I wait then I mighg roll a ray spell and then I could use them together and get super healing Ray". That is no way anywhere NEAR realistic to real combat or real life, it's just completely gammy and cheap

 

Because a tactical choice implies it depends on whats happening in combat. Using an axe on zombies, or healing spells on ghosts, or fire on trolls. This is just me watching my bar highlight green and combining. I don't really even pay attention to what I'm combining or why.

Combos in dragon age gave me a sense of being smart, and having figured out something. Smashing someone turned to ice with a rock fist, or greasing the floor, the lighting it up isn't exactly mentally taxing, but I feel like "Yeah... that was my plan... didn't expect that, did ya?" Its much more satisfying than "hey another two boxes went green."

 

I was talking about my combo suggestion regarding this system. I agree with you that current implementation of combos is just a better choice than two separate skills that requires some buttonmashing to be achieved, and that's not tactical nor requires planification, just matter of "merge those two skills because they'll become something more powerful. But the statement you're quoting were made regarding combo implementation for this system, not regarding current combo implementation.

 

I see. The team has stated that combos are in desperate need of a buff as they are currently useless. The amount of time and coordination spent results in less effect concerning combos, particularly with Focus costs. A lot of people who like card combat cite combos as a reason why (although as we all know it doesn't require cards to do it, they just like using cards). Therefore, if combos were to become more powerful, the card would have to be spent for balance purposes.

So instead of allowing people to earn their victories (and their defeats, to learn from them and become better), you would rather a system that is luck-based at the core? So you're telling me your ideal system would be one where:

-any weapon, regardless of type (dagger, halberd, battle axe, pickaxe) does anywhere from, say, 1-200 damage randomly, regardless of skills?

-any armor, regardless of type (plate cuirass, leather helmet, cloth gloves) does anywhere from 1-100% damage resistance?

-any skill has random chances of success (fizzle, accuracy, paralyze longevity, poison DoT strength), from 1-100%, again regardless of input, circumstance or skill?

Because that's not a game.

 

I sort of agree with treehoofer's point. The combat system does make combat so much a matter of chance and removes you so far out and away from caring about your avatar that you can just mash numbers while you are making a pizza and hope for the best while watching television and talking to your bro on the phone.

It's like, all chance and no caring!

When you are tired of thinking, lack skill at playing, (or just don't feel like being a part of anything that involves striving), the combat system in Shroud is indeed hard to beat!!!

This current random chance approach to deck combat may be right, the more I think about it. Lot's of folks will have the opportunity to be competitive without even paying attention at all- and how many games can you name that offer this feature? One hardly has to be here at all. If more RPGs required no thought and more of a slot machine like-chance approach, perhaps countless millions of average people who never have or would touch a thinking, creative, intelligent Role Playing Game with a ten foot red plastic Walmart backscratcher could be enticed into trying Shroud.

I mean, who doesn't like Vegas, right?

Right?

An alternate game title, like you find in variable comics covers to the same issue, might help draw in the masses more suited to a broader game of this type. "Shout of the American Avatar" or "Song of the Avatar Idol" might bring in more purchasers. More is better.

Perhaps a very small chance, say 1/2 of 1/2 of 1/2 percent of the time that you "win" a battle, you could be awarded with a gift certificate for an enticing and skimpy article of underwear for your character. Then the game masters can hold beauty pageants each Tuesday. Please those egg-headed dresser-uppers still wanting something to do. They are a whiny lot and will rebel if left with their minds wandering.

In any case, oh yes, the combat deck system is really growing on me.

 

I like to think of SotA's skills as a giant pool. One end will be the deep end. That is where crafting takes place. You earn your skills. You put your skills to use making exactly what you want and when you want. It will take a bit of concentration to do everything in the correct order with the right necessities to get your end product. It's in depth. On the other side of the pool is the shallow end. This is where you pick combat skills. Now if you don't pick the right skills for the deck, it doesn't matter how shallow the water is. You will drown. But for the most part, you can just get something everyone else has or a build someone else has posted on the internet and have a decent chance of fighting without actually having to learn how to use those skills in any kind of sequence. You can basically "button mash" as they say. I don't like to think of it like that but for all intents and purposes, it works. As of now, that's what I do. I run up to monster and just keep hitting 1, 2,3, 4. All at the same time basically. I have 5 locked down as my heal. I don't even have to look at my hot bar like everyone is always complaining about. I still win most of my fights. It's great. And I didn't have to spend this time dueling to be viable. Now the pool has a shallow and deep end. That's exactly the kind of pool I like.

 

I think your analogy is quite accurate, and describes the differences between the housing/crafting and the deck combat sections of the game succinctly. Well put.

 

Literally every proponent of the card combat system says its main strength lies in that it isn't button-mashing and requires thinking. You're saying it is button-mashing, almost 100% random and requires little to no skill to be proficient at it.

Anyway, thanks for at least chiming in, regardless of where you stand on it, it's more than some others are doing. I would argue, however, that such a system is not appealing to PvPers and many (if not most) PvMers. That means less people playing, less community, less longevity - the snowball gets bigger on this one quick. It may be what you, as an individual, would want, but if it isn't commercially successful it won't matter.

 

Deck system drawbacks:

* Two levels of randomness, random cards in random slots. (Partially reduced with R18 changes)​

* Combo mechanics needing too much attention and involvement from player making it so distracting.(hopefully solved in R19)​

* Reduced number of available skill slots. I suppose this is intended in order to reduce skill combinations freedom, in combination with skill tree requirements.​

(No real classless game)​

I would like to share a more detailed personal vision of what I think would be a FUN Deck system.
No intention here to change things in game just want to share my vision.

So, can we have the best of 2 different worlds? Can we play cards in a 3D action RPG?

In my humble opinion all Deck system drawbacks would be solved:

1).- Removing auto discard. You get random draws until Deck is full. Use your cards or discard unwanted cards,​

you get new cards only when you have empty slots.​

​

2).-Allow assigning hotkeys to all skills, no matter which position is your card in Deck.​

​

3).- Skill tree requirements based only on character level.​

​

4).-Using sequence based combos. Chain cards to trigger combo effects.​

​

The random aspect is still there as you get random draws, so yes luck would be part of the game.

You would create your Deck selecting cards using your XP points, higher level cards require higher character levels.

Skill trees would only have basic skills, for example bleeding would not be a skill anymore it would be an effect
triggered by a combo, the same way all CCs, DOTS, AOEs, etc.

Create combos on the fly by just chaining your cards to produce a specific effect. ( use card X then use card Y = combo trigger)

Combos could be learned by simple experience discovery (how fun would that be, testing different combinations to find the effect),
some combos would be level based, other would require a minimum Stat levels, some combos would only be obtained via completing quests.

Innate points would be earned by usage, the more you use fire spells the more innate fire XP points you get in order to invest in innate cards
that would extend the power of your fire spells. This would also work for the rest of magic and combat schools.

Basic character stats would be in a separate innate tree. Every action would gran stat XP points you can spend in your basic stats tree freely.

Potions would not be part of the Deck system and you can use them freely with the logical encumbrance and CD limits.

Fatigue concept would be introduced to reduce the impact of power gamers or macroers, as in real life we have a learning curve along the day,
we need to rest and recover every day. Fatigue would reduce XP gain over time at a point where no XP gain is obtained by simply grinding.

And finally some combo examples:


(Burn Out) Fire DOT.
Fire arrow (1) + Fire arrow (2) + Fire arrow (3)


(Blindness) Character looses target for a short period of time.
Fire Ball + Searing ray

(Bleeding) Polearm Combo, DOT
Pull + Puncture

(Burning wounds) Fire+Blades combo, Target gets DOT damage.
Double slash + Fire arrow

As you can imagine the number of combinations would be almost endless.
This way we could have a endless variety of combos and a real classless game.

 

Most of this system seems to me to be an alternate set of draw rules. Each TCG made it's own rules, and the draw rules determine the experience. I believe that RG wanted the sense of urgency that forces one to use a card prior to its discard, likewise the consequence of overplaying your hand and finding that hand empty.

The sectionalized XP seems to be the biggest change here, and I'm kinda for it. Games like Elder Scrolls and UO let us see a world where practice was needed to develop in a skill, and I kinda like that. It's ultimately (hyuk hyuk) a question of game design, how does Portalarium WANT progression through the game to feel?

As for infinite combos, well, it sounds great. Where are you going to get the infinite programmer hours to code all those combos? The infinite quality control personnel to check them for bugs and errors?

 

The problem for me is that I didn't back this game to play Magic: The Gathering. When I have a TCG itch I play Hearthstone anyway. As for practicing to develop a skill, that's been handled many times by many games in the past. Usually done by letting you use it, but sometimes having it fail until your skill level grew enough to use it. Now if they wanted to find a different way of having a character learn a skill, that's fine. But this random popping of buttons kills the role playing aspect for me. If I make a Paladin style character, and I find someone dying to a monster and want to heal them, I don't want to have to shift through cards in order to pop my heal ability. That's just silly and they would probably die in the mean time.

As a side note. It would be cool if they took the idea from Vanguard of players learning moves from monsters. If I recall correctly, in that game if you had a high enough perception you could actually learn different attacks from various monsters around the world. For instance, say you come apon a bandit and he tries to back stab you. If you have a high enough perception you could learn backstab. It would be cool if some abilities were only learned by adventuring and fighting different creatures in the world.

 

This is exactly right austinjg. I play a game like Shroud to play an avatar. I want to believe in my house being real, I want to feel like I am chopping down trees and making stuff, and I want to imagine my avatar/me is fighting a deadly monster. That is why the monsters exist in the game and look "real".

The deck combat system works directly against all else that is happening in the game.

The theory behind the combat is badly flawed, thus, the overall principle behind the design needs, rather badly, to change.

Throwing more good money after the bad fixed nothing if the poor original concept remains in place.

There needs to be no having to look away from combat, for the system to work- whatever that system is.

Modern game designers know that this is the case in immersive, roleplaying games. It's not something I've invented, the idea isn't new- it existed and worked fine back when UO was popular.

There is no good reason not to feature combat that works the way housing and crafting does- which lets your character interact with stuff on the screen with a minimal amount of immersion shattering....nonsense.

 

I think the random deck system has (had?) potential, but i can't deny it works against the full sense of immersion this game pretends to achieve (or at least that's what i perceived). If they're going to focus in making combat playable, Devs should do it while taking immersion (fighting while enjoying the fight) in perspective. I personally like the concept of random dealt skills... but if there's no way of making it without being too distractive, better to forget about it and use the concepts developed in other ways (like the one in the OP, for example)