PVP

I tried playing melee and hybrid characters that could use the stances and I couldn't find other viable reasons to use them. The only thing I felt reckless and berserker stances would be good for was if you were up (in the DPS war) against your opponent and you wanted to finish the battle quickly while risking taking more damage yourself. The game is just too twitchy for the stances to be shuffled around with any real meaning.

What I'd like to see out of the stances is very similar to what I want from "magic shields". I think a defensive stance should BLOCK ALL melee weapons. You heard me right. Afterall, you're now using your sword to block incoming attacks. The draw back is that you no longer can attack your opponent. But what's great about it is that you can slow the fight down some and not just get hacked apart by someone spamming DPS at you.

I posted this in R12, but here it is again...the concept of BLOCKING and COUNTERING....

 

PvP should require skill...not some tab based everyone stand still thing. That would be lame and boring.

 

Drocis, well what did you think about my thread on the subject? Basically, as a toggle rather than a skill. I kind of understand why they'd be hesitant to do it that way, because it would introduce more interface elements, but it kind of makes more sense to me. I don't think defensive stance should have a 100% chance of nullifying all attacks, that would presume expert skill in parrying. An average bladesman wouldn't be able to parry every attack thrown at him. It would naturally be boosted by having a shield, which is much easier to defend with.

 

I already commented on that thread.

 

I do agree wholeheartedly about block and counter. But too many theme park and video games have contributed to this culture of I did more than you did. The deck system at least confronts this with the necessity of decisions instead of rotations. Perhaps when Chris returns and explains some of the numbers we will gain better insight into where all this is going. I am a little leary though if slugs are removed.

 

Nice very nice.

 

I wouldn't mind blocking and countering but I fear it is too much of a technical hurdle to ensure that latency is never an issue.

 

Some machines would be at a distinct advantage over many. My PC being one of them. Living near the backbone between Austin and Dallas would also be in my favor. Maybe milliseconds but still an advantage. Stack enough hardware advantages and you could always be milliseconds in front. If they decided to institute a turn based system - block and counter could work; but, I fear no one would play without an adrenaline rush of some sort.

 

Good point...I'd love to hear what Chris has to say about that.

I'm not technical enough to debate anything Chris says regarding the realities of networking. But I do know that I played MUD's for years where there was a 3 to 5 second round time that allowed for players to select what they were doing. This wasn't perfect, but it was far less prone to latency than what we have today.

I fear (read: I'm greatly concerned) that at the end of the day what is seen by some as "fun" will trump "fair and competitive". Seriously, I have a GREAT computer and a GREAT connection, and I live in the states. There's no real reason that I shouldn't have the best experience playing this game that I possibly can. Yet in PVP I get the feeling that I'm not as bad as my horrible record would suggest and many of my royal thumpings are due in large part to latency by other people's computers. So who's that fun for? People that just happen to win the latency lottery?

My point is, I don't buy into the idea that twitch equals fun. I think it serves the purposes of a particular playing style that probably isn't largely interested in Shroud of the Avatar anyway.

 

I'm really not advocating for "turn-based"...but I wouldn't mind seeing some turn based elements.

 

I didn't think you were. The pulse (heartbeat or tick) might be able to accomplish it since it seems to be at 1 second anyway. Only people on really poor machines or at a severe number of hops would be in the toilet so to say.

 

Seems like PvP is NOT your thing really and you should just stop it or find another game that caters to your style of turn-based PvP...which is far and few between.

 

For all you know, there may be a mass audience who prefers the style Drocis wants but can't find a game that does it. A lot of the players of the old school Ultima games probably like tactical combat over action based games.

There's no reason why people can't have differing views on what PvP should be like in the game, the systems aren't done yet.

 

The discussion hinges on how to make the game more challenging and balanced not turn based. The technicalities behind the scene are simple. In most online games all combat is turn based whether it is perceived or not. One DB record gets in ahead of another and the results happen in that order based on the pulse or heartbeat of the game. That is true of almost all MMO's. It is also the reason for the dreaded lag monster. Whether the results are applied at the same time is another issue. Without access to the actual engine we may never know. His suggestions are ones that force tactical thinking over maximizing DPS. The idea being a player may choose to do something offensive or defensive in any pulse and those two are compared with a tactical outcome being applied. The current model seems to only compare overall DPS vs overall Defense and then applies the result. So the only real issue facing a player becomes one of clicking the highest damage card currently available. Especially since the current defensive cards do not mitigate damage much at all.
I believe the OP is pointing out those issues and attempting to generate discussion on how to balance all characters in a competitive manner vs. 100,000 fighters swinging weapons all day long.


However Drocis has made a ton of important suggestions and contributions to this game in many areas.

 

The game is already TAB-TARGETABLE, how much easier do you expect it to be for PvP? There has to be an element of Skill involved.

 

I'm not a fan of tab targeting. But I'm not a fan of useless moving and senseless spamming of the same combination of moves either.

This is first and foremost a Roleplaying Game. That should mean something even when it comes to PVP and combat. No one's going to be forced to roleplay. But when you have a subsection of the game that almost makes it impossible, that's when new ideas are needed. In my opinion, that's where we are right now with this combat system. If the average person can't enjoy pvp, what good is it? And by average I don't mean that they are casual fans that lack "skillz", I mean that they're the type of person that enjoys a challenge, but if they wanted to play an FPS then they'd already be doing that in another game.

 

I don't like tab targeting this either. As for challenging. Currently the game had boiled down to only a select few builds that are capable of winning consistently in PVP. That is a problem. I play one of those builds not because I win; but, because I have always played that type of character for enjoyment. It has become very boring because I win consistently. So, lately I have turned off PVP and dueling just to test other issues in the game.

I very much agree with your Role Playing statement. Otherwise the game should be a MMDD (massive multiplayer damage dealing). Ultima started with roleplaying not with ultima online.

I personally would like to see some serious changes in the combat systems. If a new system can be developed without the feel of turn based combat it will be an enjoyable and a fresh change. The deck system is a good start. The problem is there are no attack, counter attack, or block moves involved. All combat involves these elements and no plan survives the first moment of contact. The OP's ideas can and will bring about this melding. I truely believe this would increase the challenge factor in the game and end the idea of SotA as a theme park game (which it currently feels like). I believe, it would offer a new style of thinking through your combat (which the deck has introduced). For these reasons it can and will come closer to melding the two ideas of MMO and RPG together. Now if we could just get the sandbox portion from Life is Feudal....

 

What the hell does Roleplay have anything to do with PvP?

I mean, I guess you COULD Roleplay out some rules with other people for PvP, maybe Roleplay a war between peoples...but, otherwise, two completely different sides of the coin.

 

That's like saying what the hell does PVP have to do with roleplay. Both questions are a problem for a roleplaying game, wouldn't you agree?

 

Sure, it's always going to have a flavor of the month build, as balance is implemented, builds get nerfed, making others come to the front. Confusion is ridiculous right now though. There should be a way to have diminishing returns for spells like that. Increased chance to resist a second/third confusion. Because Confusion Chaining is the thing.

What system do you want for combat? I don't get it. This is pre-alpha still. Many of the systems aren't in place as of it. As far as counter attacking, that would put the people across the Atlantic at a disadvantage because of the latency issues. I just think that sufficient resistances need to be put in place and diminishing returns. Also, increasing HP gains from Str/Healthy.

SotA is far from a Theme Park game