Constructive Criticism of 6 month demo Combat Card System

Actually, thats EXACTLY what i want. Lots of option and then i decide what im going to use on a regular basis and I bind my keys to how I want to play. The more binded keys I have the better.

 

I know people have voiced some opinion about the combat system already but you may be jumping the gun a bit. This is just Alpha stage and they haven't even gone through one iteration of the system yet. This is different than the display of graphics and character movement as player involvement is a key performance metric here. We shouldn't dismiss the deck concept until we have enough data to prove it is not working out.

 

Data that paints it in a good light is slim. If it exists, they should show it off now so we can get on board.

 

What data? Doesn't sound like it has been tested at all yet. Thats what the community is here to help with.

 

Does anyone have an idea outside of the proposed system that would help to make combat more active? The only thing I can really think of are visual cues on the opponent that give advantages like bonus damage or chance to hit, disabled limbs, disarm, or higher chance of critical strike.

I guess I feel kinda like building your skillset is already like building your deck, so it feels redundant so far, and somewhat unnecessary. What if the casting mechanism of the game was connected to some objects, that would correspond to the 'cards' and thereby give a concrete reason for spells to come up this way? That doesn't really explain skills though I guess. Hmm.. wracking my brain wrapping it around this one.

 

The problem is, it is actually the concept of it that is causing the huge issue for PvPers. It wont matter what they do with the UI, what they do over speed etc.....it is still a random number generator dictating to the player what he/she can and cant do.

Ive said it before, I currently play UO with 80 spells binded to various key combinations, all of which I am free to use......I as the player creates the randomness of how I play and what I cast and how often, other players are equally as random. Why would I want to go from that to 'X' (probably 10) number of spell 'slots' that give me random choices of what I can do?

Im not approaching this from the combat system you get in WoW and GW2 that most people here seem to be used to.....im approaching it from a true combat system that gives choice (UO); this is a game that people play 15+ years on since launch (despite the poor graphics by todays standards) just to PvP because it is THAT good.

 

It's been defined in the forums and hangout videos for months. We know they've been testing it in-house. The six month video essentially looked like the definition. From what we know and have seen, it doesn't seem fun and the goal of reducing the UI hasn't been met. It seems like it's nearly 'done' as defined, but I think it needs to be redefined. And according to the alpha schedule, we won't even get a chance to play around with it until March. Why wait so long? It seems like they might also think they need to redefine it.

 

Seeing and actually testing a concept are different so I have to give support more to the developers original idea before reverting to an already used system.

We don't know exactly how the ability slots are filled yet. If its random or there is actually some algorithm behind it. We should let the developers take the first step and then we can begin crafting the experience from there else it might become exactly like Ultima Online. I have never played Ultima Online but original ideas are what the developers would like to implement with this game. At least thats what I have gathered thus far.

 

I don't have time to keep up with every thread and post. Can you direct me to where dev team members actually say it is not working out?

 

Not sure if you are Dev+, but we've seen a little more than the non-Dev+ forums. Since the combat sysyem has been pushed by Richard since the beginning, I think he's going to ride it until it can't possibly be fixed. Starr has stated that there is room in the production schedule to switch to a new system. As I have said, I think they are aware it is not ready as it is, and they are delaying any 'try it yourself' until they can come up with a new twist on it that makes it fun and reduces how much it relies on randomness, which should swing the pendulum back to personal skill.

 

I have to hand it to the Dev team for coming up with a workable alternative to the average mmo slice of pie attack schemes. I think it would be nice to have a choice of which ability hits on which button so that we aren't constantly looking down at the draw the entire time waiting for our favorite spell to come across. Also, wouldn't it be possible to only get 1 ability for a whole hour so-to-speak?

 

Yeah, I'm Dev+. I wouldn't be against them making a back up system in tangent with this one if they have stated to the community that they feel that the current implementation is weak. Given the time for the production schedule that Starr has stated if they do it it should be soon since the release date is supposedly Fall 2014. If both the team and stakeholders have stated the system is bad, I would expect Lord British to bend. Seems the reason why this it a community project. We will see.

 

Ok, so what is your POINT?

 

Go back and read my posts.

 

I DID, dude. You argue that an AI could be written. So what? The Portalarium dev team could all get taken hostage by Islamic Fundamentalists who demand suped up characters that cannot be beaten. What do you want the community or the devs to DO about it? What is your POINT?

 

I'm not saying they should do anything about it. Someone said it could not be done. I disagreed. End of story.

 

Throwing this idea here too to stimulate constructive discussion:

Since having your useable skills be totally random is turning off a lot of people, why not give the player a little control over how 'skill cards' are 'drawn'? Allow the player to select the types of skills that are selected in each skill slot, e.g. sword skills, healing magic, or what have you. It could keep combat feeling random but still give players opportunity to have more control over the play of their character.

 

On tekka's idea of avoiding randomness, a key issue with the card combat system I see is that it stifles development of competetive skill (for the record however, I support the endeavor until we see that it is unworthy directly). In UO, when you fought a mage, you could identify the player by their playstyle. There was enough freedom that, by simply observing how your opponent fought, you could determine who they were. Everyone was different - one player may use weak stat-debuffs as interrupts (such as weaken and clumsy) and then follow up with combos, whereas another player might prefer to fizzle their opponent with magic arrows and then try and pressure them with bleed, poison, and quick interrupting spells.

This level of depth needs to be preserved for a competetive scene to develop.

 

They have talked about building out decks and stacking them however you like (more of the same "card" in a given "deck" means that skill shows up more often). Sounds like you are proposing to regulate placment of skill icons based on player preference. This has been brought up before and people have liked the idea of having some control over the random icon placement.

Just remember these are 2 different things, one is the whole card/deck/skill system and the other is how the output of that system is provided to players. Both have room to be tweaked and I look forward to the Alpha to help with this.

 

This. Excellent observation M. We want to be sure not to create defacto classes through this system by limiting player choice, or reducing their desire to experiment.

Another alternative idea: What if there are common stances or skills or whatever that limit the effect of otherwise powerful spells / skills? In the martial arts there are stances and guards created to prevent most generic attacks easily, and an opponent who doesn't know how to bridge the defense will be at a loss, even using what would otherwise be a devastating attack. Likewise, in MTG a simple "Fog" or "Circle of Protection" can prevent all damage from a source. These are common cards that can easily counter the effects of extremely powerful rares. This arrangement injects a lot of strategy into the game, making it so the outcome depends less on what you have than how you play it.

Some defenses are designed specifically to provide protection against certain attacks and to create a false opportunity that lures the opponent in for a counterstrike. My thought here is that allowing easy ways to prevent strong damage sources will change the "higher dps always wins" rule, and will force attackers to change their offense in response to a defender's actions.

This is one of the reasons I like a memorization / spell-slot system - you know in battle that you have for example 1 blind spell, 2 fireballs, and 3 magic missiles. So you know what cards you have up your sleeve and can bet on them working if played at the right time, but you also can't cast them repeatedly based on mana cost. You can go re-mem after the battle, but you are limited during combat. Having mana regen slower during combat has a similar effect, though different.