Early Public Access Schedule: Release 7 and Q3 Update

Combat won't be finished until R9. I believe R10 will be another quarterly polish release, and DarkStarr said that PvP will be implemented in R11.

I updated my FAQ with that info.

 

I was hoping is was like an extra curricular activity. I GUESS it can be linked to PVP. I would be happy with, maybe, a Johnny Cage emote until then.

 

everyone is born right handed but only the best shall overcome!

 

YAY! 64bit! thank you!

 

It's been an entire week so I thought I'd ask if PVP was pushed back again (note the lack of a question mark). It's a sarcastic question, but a relevant one nonetheless.

I thought I'd ask that...but then I realized that you might take that the wrong way, and instead of inwardly thinking about the impact delaying PVP will have on the competitive balance of the game, you'd think I was just being a jerk or being insensitive, or some combination of the two. Whereas I would only be attempting to communicate with you the only way that I can. There's not really a better way to voice my frustration. Afterall, if the last three months of forum posts are any indication, making a new PVP thread would doubtfully get any attention from anyone on the dev team - wouldn't you agree?

So I decided instead to share with you that per your recommendation to the community I've been reading Ready Player 1. It's a good book, I'm 85% done with it and I'm really glad I started reading it. I also really hope that there are rare and powerful artifacts in SOTA as I think the book does a great job showcasing why that would be fun and interesting. Especially if you consider that many of the most powerful items seem to have limitations like only using them once per month.

Thanks again for recommending that book. It's a fun read.

 

I know many people have said this already to you. I'll see if I can explain it so you can finally understand what we are trying to get at. PvP is simple to implement. Parts that take a lot of time are balancing abilities and creating fun scenarios and areas for pvp and giving them a purpose. Implementing pvp for R7 would be pretty easy. However, what would we get from that? The armor system still isn't implemented. So wearing full plate armor has none of the negatives yet, so everyone will be wearing full plate. (In the future, once the negatives are built in we'll see more cloth/leather/chain). In R5 magic was the most powerful ability. in R6 combat skills are the most powerful. You can see how they can quickly/easily swing those by just changing the amount of focus cost and amount of damage abilities do. So what would we gain by implementing pvp right now? We aren't ready for balance yet, as most of the skills aren't even in yet. We can't balance pve combat yet, let alone pvp combat. Once all(or majority) of the skills are in, once the positive/negatives of the armor are fully in we can then consider adding pvp into the mix of combat to see how it works. Implementing it now would yield the same results we see in pve combat, the only way to go is with full plate armor and combat skills - or possibly the root+knockback and archery. - yet this still wont be like how combat is supposed to be, because we wont have those roots+knockback available to us all the time once the deck combat is in (unless we have locked skills in place, and those might cost more focus, have reduced duration or effect)... If the feedback is fixed around how unbalanced plate armor and certain abilities are now, it wont help the developers because the next update will have new abilities that might be better/counter those other abilities. If they put in Pvp abilities that reduce root duration (mostly melee fighters would want it) then maybe roots wont matter in the future, but if we go through 3 releases before those abilities are put in, and people are complaining about roots inbalance, it really doesn't help. It could even be damaging to the reputation if people claim the pvp is unbalanced and the devs aren't doing anything about it for 3 months, yet, that is because the abilities simply aren't in yet that will counter those unbalanced seeming abilities.

And we even have more combat things to consider, consumable items, potions, scrolls... I'm guessing we are getting pvp before we get those though.

It isn't just pvp getting pushed back, it's combat and other things too... likely quite common in game development and why games never get released early, but frequently get released later than their original release dates.

 

@Mishri - If you know all that's been said to me. And you know that I still disagree. Why would you say it again? I disagree, get over it.

It would be great if 6 to 12 months from now you'd be able to say "see this is great, I was so right about PVP development and you were so wrong." I'd really be happy to be wrong in this instance. However, I have 30 years of history on my side, the same 30 years of history you're claiming is the reason we should continue to do the same thing - slap on PVP at the end of a system that wasn't designed for it.

It would be like if we were creating a 6 player war simulation board game and we had limited time and money to design, develop, and test. I'll give you two options of how we can go about doing that...

Option #1: You get a working version of "Connect Four" as the baseline of the game, but you only have 2 months before we ship! Make sure this is a really great war simulation for 6 players to battle it out. Oh yeah, we spent 90% of our budget already.

Option #2: You create it from the ground floor up.

:sigh:

The whole argument that we need to make this game super complex before we achieve any type of balance SHOULD BE a huge red flag to any of the smarter people in the room. There's just never been a game that I've ever played that achieved balance that way. I dare say that nothing in the history of the world has achieved balance that way. You don't take a merchant scale and put a whale on one side and then look around your candy shop and say, ok what's the easiest way to balance this out? Gumballs or Mints? It's asinine to think that's going to be a quick way to balance anything.

 

Let's not confuse design with implementation. Perhaps they are designing combat with PvP in mind...who's to say? We don't have access to design docs and have only seen just what they're willing to tell us in Megaposts. Some of the more insightful thoughts around it have come from a few separate posts here and there but not in a consolidated document framework. And to complicate things, the incremental implementation of combat, PvP and death mechanics, which I agree is painfully slow...but yeah, priorities.

So development methodologies aside, the implementation is taking its sweet time and that's all we're privy to. Would love to be a fly on the wall for internal discussions but we'll have to wait for the Megareply post.

And most critically, PvP in R11 or R19 or R35 isn't as important as how much time is allocated after its implementation for proper play testing and balancing. Making up self-imposed deadlines of only "2 months" to squeeze in the implementation doesn't do us any good and only feeds our own fears. They haven't told us when the release date is, so it could be R349690321433455345354124234523 for all we know.

Perhaps we'll know more about the roadmap if the devs answer this week's Q&A regarding potential release timing (not exact date for timeframe). Then maybe we can grab the torches and pitchforks and scream that the sky is falling.

But I expect the answer to be "when the backer community says its's done".

 

All I've said is that they should add dueling post haste so that as combat progresses they get constant feedback and testing of PVP.

It doesn't do anyone any good to add PVP in "R349690321433455345354124234523 for all we know" because the system is inherently NOT balanced for PVP since it's had no feedback or testing.

You can't design balance on a white board and then several months later expect it to just work. That's exactly what they're doing. They've told us that's what they're doing. The release schedule draws us a map. It's not good. I have no idea why people are defending this. I love the devs as much as anyone but they're wrong about this approach.

If your goal is to build a house with a strong foundation, do you add part of that foundation a year after the rest of the house is built? No, you don't do that.

 

I've asked you repeatedly and you've never responded, so I will ask again.

What precisely is the benefit of adding in a placeholder system now that doesn't actually test balance since combat isn't fully implemented? You've said at the very least we need to be able to duel, except that does literally nothing. Armor penalties aren't in. Deck based combat isn't in. Skills aren't fully implemented. Magic isn't fully implemented. How are we to test balance before the underlying systems are implemented?

If there is zero benefit, and there is actual harm (putting off real systems by wasting time on useless placeholder systems) then what are you trying to accomplish?

I really sincerely want an answer on what you're looking for since you want to repeat these demands in multiple threads.

 

I still don't see the rationale that if we can't test pvp immediately, if not sooner, that it's going to fail. It's rare that players have access to a game at this stage of development. So players aren't testing it. It's rare that players even know what is being worked on any given time at this stage of development. Portalarium decided to keep us in the loop, and even let us access the game to test things as it goes along.

Normally, by the time players have any access to test a game in development, the majority of the features are all worked out and implemented, and players don't know which order things were done, nor care. Having access to pre-alpha is practically unheard of. And after reading these forums the last little while, I'm really beginning to see why game developers do it that way and keep it all under wraps.

I agree with those who are saying that it would be rather silly to put in placeholder pvp. How in the world can you balance pvp, when combat isn't even implemented? There's nothing there to balance.

 

Ok, let's take the ability to jump for a moment. You would agree with me that PVP is quite a bit more complex than jumping, correct?

So what's the benefit of having jumping in the game now verses 16 months from now? Yet jumping is in. Now I would argue that it's a good thing jumping is in now because the moment you add more complexity to the game, quests, barriers, the ability to bake a cake on top of a tesla tower...well then someone is going to try to do it while jumping!

Could jumping on top of a telsa tower while baking a cake crash the entire game and force a hard reboot of all the servers? We really won't know until someone does it, will we?

So the great thing about jumping is that it's in...and people can jump all day long doing whatever it is they want to do and the devs can track that, players can write bug reports about that, and the game can improve over time with that in mind.

So that ONE very important thing about having jumping in now. And don't forget, jumping is about 1000 times less complicated than PVP.

The second reason it's important to have PVP in now verses many months from now is that as you build your game, you're making it for a Non-PVP world. So you're balancing this non-pvp world full of NPC's that do what you want them to do and what you expect them to do (most of the time), but you're not thinking about or balancing anything for PVP.

So now you have MONTHS or even YEARS of development of this non-pvp world, and you're going to add in PVP (something we've already decided is a complex beast in comparison to jumping at the least) and you're going to balance that how? Because now you're trying to balance MONTHS or YEARS of developed game against just the basics of PVP. It's not easy to do even when you do it every month...but what the devs (and you guys) are saying is that we're going to balance it for PVE and then add PVP. Well PVP doesn't care what PVE balance is like it's a totally different animal.

If you're going to balance PVP then you have to do it from the beginning. Otherwise you're just making more work for yourself and you're not going to balance both PVP and PVE ever.

 

You didn't remotely answer my question. What is this balance you're talking about? What are you balancing? How heavy armor works vs light armor for example? You do realize THOSE systems aren't in, and that is precisely the kind of stuff that has to go in before you can have meaningful PvP?

You said before you want dueling in, even if combat isn't working. Why? Literally this has no benefit, and delays real PvP to put in placeholder stuff.

What precisely is the benefit when you can't balance anything because real combat isn't in yet?

 

At the $2Mil point LB expressed his desire to intertwine PvP and PvM for a very long time, yet also stressing his desire that in order to achieve greatness, the player will be encouraged but not forced to enter into the PvP world of danger. He has said that, "Yes" you can be a crafter all your life and do OK no problem, yet in order to achieve the highest goals, the player will almost certainly be lured into a world of danger through the risks of PvP.

This game is and always will be a PvP focused game, which the player can opt-out on if they wish to stay safe and have a good time without PvP. PvP is not the accommodation after any fact, no, no, no, "It's the centerpiece for the entire banquet" which calls everyone to the table. Yes we do have all other things and in great detail to excitement, but the real dangers and the real "higher game" will have to be had through PvP.

With LB's centered mind on having PvP the highest achievements, there should be no doubt that combat will be and is centered on PvP and will also kill monsters. every LB game there has ever been online has always been about bloody player vs player battle and those that doubt it don't know LB or his games all that well, or have little faith in his history or his words.
Just because SotA has a "great way to play opting out of PvP", dose not mean that PvP is not the end focus of everything!
~Time Lord~

 

Do you even understand the complexity of the systems you're talking about? Do you think for a moment it's going to be easier to implement PVP when those systems are all polished and sparkly after months of development?

PVP is going to wreck those systems the moment you put it in. Players are going to laugh at how unbalanced the game is for PVP months from now. It's not even going to be close.

What you're imagining is that if you somehow make the best sand castle on the beach, that it's going to be easier to protect it after the players have already smashed it.

What I'm saying enderandrew is that putting Dueling in right now might be a place holder, but it's a placeholder for PVP. So that when you INCREMENTALLY put in parts of the combat system and the magic system and the crafting system and the housing system, PVP is right there ready to be tested and balanced each step of the way. So instead of making this HUGE sand castle that doesn't play nice with PVP...you're not wasting your time building that. You're making much smaller sand castles, testing them and making them fit with PVP as you INCREMENTALLY polish and add new elements to the game.

 

I understand complex PvP balance quite well and I've been playing MMOs for years. They constantly get balance tweaks.

I'm asking what the benefit is on putting in a placeholder system that doesn't even test balance because the underlying systems aren't in. You've never once answered that. You say you want to test balance, and I'm asking you to clarify specifically what you think can be tested from a balance perspective when the combat systems themselves aren't in. Let me know when you plan on answering the actual question I've asked repeatedly.

 

Baron Drocis, you're not listening to what people are telling you.
No one is saying that PvP shouldn't be tested, or shouldn't be tested sooner rather than later. Nor is anyone suggesting that PvP should be tested prior to combat being "polished and sparkly."
What they are saying is the a functional combat system that bears some significant semblance to the final product is necessary to gain any valid insight into the balance of PvP.

You're trying to, as they say, put the cart before the horse.

 

STOP! Stop right there! That's the problem. That's the ENTIRE PROBLEM. Stop please stop....

Look, PVP gets too many "balance tweaks". I know you guys think that's a normal thing. It's bad. It's very bad. It's a sign of poor design. Did you read that, POOR DESIGN. That's the whole reason I'm talking about this.

I don't want BAD PVP that needs constant "balance tweaks". Do you know why? Because that means the foundation of the game is BROKEN. IT's BROKEN you guys for the love of god. I know you guys have played a ton of games like this you're probably numb to it by now. But the ENTIRE REASON this happens is because developers slap on pvp after making a giant non-pvp world that was never designed for pvp!

What's the benefits? GOOD PVP

 

You guys are not listening to me because you think you know based on all the other games that have gotten it wrong.

 

Does the game Chess need balance tweaks?