Automatic Levelscaling

Yes, it is and I can say it from my own experience too. However, one cannot please everyone. I do agree, that big part of the game should be playable for casual gamers, but somethings have to stay difficult and only achievable by those players who put effort for it (either in time or money).

I don't like grinding (and I dont have time for it), but I find a place where "everyone is a winner" quite repulsive thought...

 

i Think you can maintain skills so that XP is removed from your pool rather than the skill. And decay (if its still even active sicne i havent heard any rants about it lately) was supposed to hit the powerfully high end people alot harder than the casual folks. Making death mroe painful for them, makign it mroe tedious for them to maintain their skills, etc

 

I think thier current compromise is fair, i can live with it. I have not had to "grind levels" in this game, and manage to obtain a sufficient level of power to play any way i want in a very reasonable ammount of time.

and when i score a hit agaisnt someone who far outdamages me and has more health, and still manage to reduce thier health by 20% with a single hit, i dont feel like this person who is 50 levels higher than me with far better equipment is TOO much stronger than i am. Just strong enough to get the job done.

 

It is not that everyone is a winner but that everyone does have equal chances and everyone can do what he wants directly from the beginning of the game.
In The Elder Scrolls Online most people are very happy with this approach.

As for grinding: In order to survive Necropolis simply by following the story, I have to grind. Either I have to do some side quests first or I have to fight for some time. But I would rather explore Necropolis but can't... turns me off...

 

This is what I'm saying. "Everyone is a winner" is not the concept being discussed here - you'll have to use your skills wisely and overcome the opponents with strategy not just overwhelm them because you are a higher level. The opponent will always be scaled to be a challenge. A Boss will always be very difficult to take down until you figure out how to counter it's attacks and use your skills effectively.

As it stands right now there is a "everyone is a winner" solution to every scene - go grind somewhere else until you are more capable than the scene and you win.

I'm asking for a solution that is no grind and more strategy.

 

Hmm well that certainly wasn't my intent so thanks for setting it straight.

I think skill decay will always suffer from that perception.. but remember also that it's capped at 3 days. and that it applies whether you're playing or not. It would just (in theory) be more noticeable to the casual player. Another way to look at it.. is that someone who plays every day never has that decay capped over time because the timer is refreshed every time they use a skill. So a hardcore player who plays every would get 7 days worth of decay in a week.. where as a casual player who played once a week would never suffer more than 3 days worth in the week.

I understand it wouldn't feel that way.. the hardcore player would likely never notice at all where as the casual player might see it all in one shot. But as Chris sometimes points out now that it's in.. is anyone even noticing it at all now? The ones it should hit the most are the ones who have the most skill to decay.

Seems a bit silly doesn't it? But you can of course always lock those skills from progressing. It's the achievers and those that are highly competitive who value even that 1% difference that it's going to matter to.

Fair enough.

 

For sure wise use of skills and strategy should be crucial! Especially if it provides a chance for unexpected outcomes (David vs. Goliath). However, I doubt that we can ever avoid skill or item based leveling.

 

Nice explanation. Seems a bit "fairer" than before I read it. Like you said the casual gamer is more likely to notice. In my opinion this may put them off as well. Yes, as a power gamer I'd be a bit miffed to lose a larger percentage but that is how it rolls for now. I am most interested to see how it works once we have persistence. Right now I think few people notice because there is no real reason to care until the full wipes are behind us.

I am curious how they are going to handle this in the offline game. Kind of makes no sense to have skill decay when using a save game, except of course on death and only because you died - not because of lack of use. Will we all be skill level 200+ in everything fiends offline? LOL

 

I don't know if I've ever heard a dev say for sure but I'm pretty certain offline won't have decay. There'd be no reason for it as it's an multiplayer balancing mechanism. It could be used to make death hurt a little but there are other ways to do that too.. but making death painful offline isn't really Richard's usual style. Normally you "die" and end up rescued somehow.. it wouldn't surprise me to see that mechanic appear in offline. Richard is.. after all.. using more than a few of his old tricks.

 

Why are MOBAs or Hero Shooters so popular right now? Because every gamer can jump right in and participate in everything. Everyone does have equal chances. It basically doesn't matter if you play for a longer time as you can't get any advantage for your ingame-characters. Of course you yourself can pratice and get better but this is something everyone has to live with.
Which MMO with a focus on PvP using the old mechanics of character progression is as successful as MOBAs? Which game in which high level gamers can kill low level Gamers with the blink of an eye and even make a sport out of it is successful?
Such gameplay elements cater to very few players. Can they support a MMORPG for a long time?

 

wrote much words many thoughts and insights... revised... deleted... condensed..

i dont like the idea of level scaling. i dont like the idea of level cap.

end...

 

Last I checked, what works for one game doesn't automatically mean it will work for a completely different type of game. And what is popular now isn't necessarily going to be popular 10 years down the road. I'd rather not have design decisions based on the latest fad but rather what works well for this game.

 

For those who are against level-scaling, consider this: If you play D&D, does your DM asks that you go grind some more, does he keep quiet and watch your party get butchered or does he craft a campaign setting that fits your party's level?

"breaks immersion" HA! Do you know what breaks immersion? Having to respawn or reload because the game decided that you weren't supposed to go where you wanted to go... without giving you any incentive to turn around before destroying your face.

There are proper ways to do level-scaling. To claim that it doesn't belong in an open-world game is ludicrous as this is exactly the type of game were those kind of systems are designed for.

Now, should SotA have level scaling? "meh" The way @Chris is describing how combat is going to play out, I don't think it's going to be such a big deal... so long as there's plenty to do in the starter/low level areas.

 

I consider it the player's responsibility not to be reckless. I typically solo play and have absolutely NO problem getting away from things that are almost sure to kill me. It's not the game deciding you shouldn't be there.. it's the player rushing in without paying attention to their surroundings.

Now consider this.. DMs may create adventures for certain levels.. that doesn't mean they have no adventures that you can't handle. They simply do not allow you to do them until you've reached a certain level.

Also, I'd wager most DMs don't run the same party through the same campaign over and over again, nevermind after you've outgrown it.

 

Except you can't know until it's too late so I consider it the Designer's responsibility to... design properly. You can still be carefully exploring an area and get your face melted the instant you encounter an enemy... so recklessness has nothing to do with it.

Level-scaling doesn't automatically mean "easy", "predictable" or "stale" though (if it happens in a game, it's doing it wrong)... all it does is guarantee that the player has SOME chance of coming up on top.
Heck, it doesn't necessarily even guarantee that either. If you're level 5, it may as well just mean that you'd be encountering level 15 monsters instead of level 100... allowing you to run away instead of getting instantly one-shotted.

 

Hence the issue with the Love quest series. So off I go to grind-grind-grind. The end-all-be-all solution for games of this genre.

 

Hopefully that's just because of (current) lack of content...

 

???
A good DM would have the world also populated with dangers way above the party's capabilities and make the appropriate hints/clues which warns the players what could happen if they chose the wrong path. Steering the players towards the planned adventures where they could indeed make a difference. But still leave the too-difficult stuff in there for some genius suggestion/plan from the players.
You completely remove the sense of adventure and excitement in RPGs if everything you meet is set to be defeatable. Just like if your DM always saves all the players from dying all the time.

The most memorable moments comes from defeating something which 'on paper' looked like you shouldn't be able to, and preferably where someone had to heroically sacrifice themself for the rest to triumph.

Otherwise one is better of playing it like a wargame and do a traditional dungeon crawl with all the fun which could be got from that.

 

As someone who always seems to know well before it's too late.. I have to disagree with the situation. And incidentally, I rarely die because I am constantly assessing the situation and my condition.. I don't wait until I've been killed to decide it's time to bug out. On that note I have NO healing or anything other aide to help keep myself alive. Just my own judgement.

You are aware that nearly every seen does have a difficulty indicator yes? You are able to see mobs well before you enter agro range.. If you're level 5 and you see a spike with 5 skulls on it.. and you go wandering around anyway.. that's reckless. The only enemies that have every killed me so fast as you describe.. is the phoenix and a dragon.. and let me tell you the phoenix you really have to go looking for. So again.. having to disagree by virtue of experience. If you put yourself in a situation despite the signs cause you weren't paying attention or because you ignored those signs.. (ie 5 skulls).. you're being reckless.

Bosses aside.. I've never had an encounter I couldn't run away from.. without ANY kind of skill use involved. Not a single one. I've never had an encounter where I didn't have time to assess the situation I was in. And yes I've played quite a bit over the last couple years. Never seen evidence of this problem you speak of. And let me tell you something.. if it's one thing I absolutely HATE in a game it's a kobiashi maru scenario I can't get away from and have no chance to avoid. It seriously puts me off and I remember them well.

 

But that is part of the problem. Best example is Necropolis. A five skull area you cannreach very early in the game. If I just want to do the story then I have a big problem. In order to continue with doing what I want, namely following the story, I am forced to do things I don't want to do - grinding and doing side quests. Is this what SotA is about? Forcing players to do things that they don't want to do?