SOTA's Target Audience is too broad.

Combat is already fairly long. 5 second cool-downs would make combat a truly boring chore.

I like strategy and tactics. Final Fantasy Tactics is one my favorite games. And largely I loved the turn-based combat in Fallout 1 and 2. But eventually you leveled up and low level mobs weren't a threat but combat still took forever because of how long it took to execute a single action with animations. I learned to truly dread combat after a while in Fallout if it wasn't a tough fight to truly challenge me.

 

That's odd. In my experience it's the other way around.. the person who is lagging is the one that doesn't have a chance. It's like a normal person getting into a fight with The Flash.

 

I hope you are correct and I think there is potential for much more. I think 100,000 total copies sold is fairly conservative with 47,500 sold right now.

 

If you increase the cycle time from 2 weeks to 6 weeks, and expand a bit on the 'throw out an idea' phase this is basically one of the agile approaches I've used. The minor differences being that the business team sought out ideas and feedback from customers, and aggregated feedback from all customers that was then used internally to help decide which ideas should be turned into requirements. At which point storyboarding and implementation took place, followed by finally going back to original idea with customers and beta version of software. Features were then wrapped into quarterly release cycles after QA.

Except when sh*t hits, like with the overland map, I don't see the community involved in design or development process. I think you pretty much point this out in your comment. It could just be a lack of communication thing, since clearly they read the forums, but to me it doesn't feel as interactive as it should.

 

I think it goes well beyond that actually. I think for example, the more INT you have the less susceptible you should be to mind control like Confusion and eventually other spells like it. The more STR you have the less susceptible you should be to Stun. The more DEX, the less that Root works against you.

But even then you should still have a way to block it. So if you just hate root, there should be a skill and a spell that will just take that arrow out of your opponents quiver. The skill or spell should be something that lasts for a long time too. Basically you should have an active defense of things you don't need to worry about. Keep getting hit with a crippling shot? There should be something that blocks that completely. There's really a number of ways to do it, but the concept is, if you can block one thing, someone can counter your block and you can counter their counter.

Right now it's just a best build fest and every release there's really one or two ways you have to play.

 

What is PVP supposed to look like in an RPG? Is it supposed to be a turn-based battle where each person gets to talk when it's their turn to strike? (Genuine question, no sarcasm intended!) Or are you suggesting that PVP should be removed from the game?

I don't understand the description of combat as being "twitchy", at least in PVE mode. SOTA is the first online game I have played, but the combat system immediately seemed familiar. Combat in SOTA is currently similar in difficulty to combat in other offline RPGs I have played (Gothic, Witcher, Two Worlds, Skyrim), although in SOTA you can't pause combat to drink potions, switch weapons, etc. How should it be made different?

Of course players have different interests. Some love to craft, some hate it. Some love to PK, some don't. Some will talk to every NPC in the game, others won't. But if the community continues to be so creative as it has been, there should be the ability for all types to participate in role-playing to some extent. I do think it would be nice to have some additional role-playing opportunities for PVPers who don't care for "traditional" role-playing, such as playing evil-doers who are able to extort gold from non-PVPers who might then hire other PVPers to take care of the problem.

 

I completely agree on this!

 

"twitchy" normally is intended to imply player reflexes.

 

Right now the game allows for a very high level of "lost packets", per Chris. And I think that's so more people can get in and test it, try it out.

I have a great connection and pc, but I get owned by lag more than anything. There are all kinds of videos you can watch that will show this. But it brings up a great point. If they tighten up the network code and random guy in an internet cafe half way across the world gets booted because of his horrible ping, now the people that win are the ones with great connections. That's not good either.

My argument is that turn based mechanics that force delays are the equalizer.

 

I've found there to be a lot of tactical elements to combat already if you're playing "underpowered" builds like light armor -- you have to really think about how you approach fights: Its not just twitch reflex... But then there's also a lot of pressure from players here to "balance" combat so thinking up tactics is less necessary. :/

I would like there to be a tiny bit less focus on balancing it and more thought on making it flexible, interesting. There are a lot more tactical elements that they could bring in.

 

I think a demphasis should be placed on the quickness of button combinations. That's key for me. I don't mind losing to people that out thought me. I mind losing to people that do the same thing really fast all the time and the other way I can win is if I do that.

No one says "I'm going to roleplay someone that stinks at combat". Ok, some people do, but the combat system we have doesn't give you that choice. The combat system we have says "if you're not running around and spamming the same thing as that guy, you're going to stink at combat".

So I'd like to see a pvp system that doesn't do that. It doesn't have to be turn based, but it probably needs to have turn based elements because of the technical realities of the internet.

BTW, Dark Souls 2 probably has the BEST twitchy combat, imo. But it suffers greatly from lag and it doesn't have anything to do with roleplaying.

 

I have a good Eye... let me peek into the Future for all of you!
Lets see if the game will succeed.

*Myrcello closes his eyes*

WTSlug!

I see Richard as the captain of the first civil occupied Space Ship... he is smiling. We just left earth gravity....
Darkstarr is sitting beside him not trying to throw up.
Rustic is Steward and serving his favorite meals to VIP Ultima Fans who got a ticket.

I see 20 more different Games that are released all with Selective Multiplayer

I see a Forbes Interview: How a Ultima Fan community made a fortune with the investment in virtual Housing?

I see Tracy Hickman signing Autographs with mass of Blade of the Avatar special Editions on his table.


The vision blurrs away.


*Myrcello opens his eyes*

I can´t promise this will happen all. The Future is ever changing.

 

It could be boring if implemented poorly. But MUD combat wasn't boring, not in the games I played. PVP rocked the house.

 

Where am I at, Myrcello?! Do you see me anywhere? (oh wait, of course I'll be here complaining about combat)

 

it'll never be perfect, but i am predicting that by release day it will be a choice of: the easy builds (for the casuals) or the expensive focus oriented builds (for the bored)

Part of the reason the skill tree is the way it is now (and the way it has been envisioned in the hangouts) is to offer something for everyone. So while right now 1v1 pvp maybe off, the devs are taking into consideration the skill balance for group pvp (parties and guilds) and PvE at the same time.

For example, you could be a bludgeoner with full plate and go solo, bashing things with only a few active skills to work with. Easy, no too fun but SAFE.
or you could become a Mage and have to go around getting regs and such dealing with arrows taking half your life, but every guild and party is going to want a mage, you will be high in demand even if all on your own, you will die a lot.

even if they could make every viable combat build "balanced" for 1v1 PvP, would we really want that? some people are going to want huge risk/ huge reward situations.

 

Well I'm just going to disagree on a turn based solution for reasons already stated here and in a past discussion we already had on the subject. We don't need to re-hash that here. I'm just going to restate I think an AI solution would be more effective.

My ideal combat system though could be described as a hybrid turn/AI system. But one of the things that would make it work is that you'd be more directing the character than controlling. It would be very much character skill plus player tactics. Nothing like "ok thrust.. now parry.. now fireball" like we have now or in traditional systems. Honestly I feel like whenever we enter combat our character's IQ drops 40 points.

 

Definitely we would want that. In fact, I asked the devs in a hang out if the goal was to achieve this and they said yes.

 

i hope they nail it!

 

Character IQ? I think my own person IQ drops 40 points (leaving me with zero).

 

I say we just take the randomness of deck system to its next state of glory. Remove all abilities and replace it with one attack button. Awesome cinematics follow for the next 3 minutes, then a victor is declared. Mobs of people rejoice.