The best way to test combat.

that is true @KuBaTRiZeS - currently the majority of defensive mechanics are mitigation based. good eye. but that's just one layer of the defensive mechanics, and the Devs tend to look at it layer by layer while keeping one eye on the big picture. doesn't mean that they're focusing on DPS in the long term, but that they're also taking that single system into consideration, within the whole ecology of the systems for combat. from what i've seen since joining the backer team, Portalarium is VERY good at compartmentalizing this process while simultaneously keeping the focus necessary for maintaining forward momentum.

one of the first things i'd heard about this game, is how all systems are intertwined together, to create as close to a 'living world' as possible. that is a HUGE undertaking by such a small team, with an amazingly complex vision. knowing the teams history in gaming, those that has been here from the start, and even the newer members that keep coming in share the same vision, i feel it is likely they will accomplish the task at hand.

something i've grown to respect more and more as the time goes on in this project - is the openness approachability and transparency in everything they do here. they know this game is for us. and by us, because they are not just devs, they are a part of the community as well. without our input they can't make the game they want, one that will last for generations, while also empowering the community itself to help maintain the longevity we all seem to crave. the blending of dev and gamer philosophies and viewpoints has been something the gaming industry has not embraced well enough. not until this project, really. yeah, some devs are also gamers, but there's this switch in their heads where they must change perspectives when they 'get to work'... the creativity and passion is somewhat blocked when the firewall is placed between the two philosophies, and i think that may be one of many goals with this project - bring back the love and joy to the gaming industry. personally, i think it is working, seeing all the indie publishers coming out of the woodworks.

back to point though - seeing a combat system look at DPS is a no brainer. but it is only one of many layers out there. like a batch of onions really. not only does it have the layers, but some of the more raw ones we see right now, bring tears to our eyes, while we are preparing them.. once the layers are prepared and wrapped together in the ecology they want to have, it'll be seamless and i have no doubt that it'll work together, making one of the the best sammiches gaming has seen for some time.

 

I share your enthusiasm @ThurisazSheol, i really do! as i said before, they proved they work taking us in consideration, and i love how it feels. I don't care if other people complains about Devs not hearing or Devs absent... to me they're just being narrow minded and not taking in consideration the high amount of work they're facing as a small team (they said so many times every portalarium member has many hats i came to imagine them as Team Fortress Veterans). I'm not one of them.

But even with all their awesomeness i can't acknowledge them for what they are not doing. For me that's not wrong, i can reason and defend all i want about Hit and Counter systems... but if they deem it unrealizable for whatever reason it's ok, that's why i put my trust (and my money on them). Because i don't expect to make the game of my dreams, just to make a game i enjoy in the same way i enjoyed Ultima Online or Ultima VII. It doesn't need to be exactly the same, it just needs to give the same vibe... and SotA already does that from my point of view.

You speak truth about layers and systems intertwined, they really worry about everything falling into place when the time comes, and i bet my pledge it will (and that's a fact lol) because i'm confident they're a great team, working with enthusiasm while they mingle and listen to the players. But the way layers are treated allow us to bring in some conclusions... for WrathPhoenix the inclusion of free attack mode means some counter mechanics may come into place... for me, treating defense as mitigation only means we're stuck to DPS (for now). I don't try to disrespect them, i value their work a lot... but why i'm expressing this its just a conclusion of how this thread developed; i jumped in because i didn't think a DPS model was broken, but then people started pointing out counters at the end of the tunnel... and honestly i can't feel how we're currently moving towards implementing some Counter mechanics and a turn based feeling.

Wrapping up... i'm not personally worried about the final status of the game; i can settle with a DPS combat system even when i think a hit and counter system would be more awesome. I just can't help talking about the game i'd like to have (aren't we all here for that?) and i'm deeply sorry but i can't find solid evidence of that happening. And as i said before... Who knows what will happen in the future? only time will tell, but for now, this is my opinion, and i don't see any compelling argument to make me change it.

 

Nah @KuBaTRiZeS i dont see anything you see as hostile and/or trying to 'prove me wrong', and honestly wouldnt care if you were =p I shared my thoughts, and my observations. I also wanted to share a bit of WHAT the combat scrum is without going into inner workings too deeply and/or get into things we cannot talk about. That was mostly because I see a TON of misunderstandings or misconceptions about what it is, should be etc.

 

Good @WrathPhoenix! i just didn't want to start a discussion regarding what may or may not happen... That's an everyday in forums, so that's why i emphasized (maybe a bit much) the personal nature of my post. For what is worth, I must say your point of view raises my hopes a little since it's a fact you're close to the designing process and knows stuff i don't

In the last minute i don't care if we have DPS or Hit & Counter as long as we have a system that give us the feel we're expecting. It's interesting to see how much members of the community can differ in how we'd do something regarding the game... but i get the feeling that the desired outcome is quite similar.

 

It is hard to see the point of leveling over and over and over and over just to test combat yet again and get wiped yet again. Given that, I am all for awarding alpha testers max skill points to try different builds and attempt to break them, right out of the box, without the repititious leveling grind. However, to the point of this thread, I'd offer that there are different levels of testing: testing performance of entry level builds, mid level builds, and high level builds. I'd assume that some value comes from the data mined over time as combat progresses through these ranges. Take away the grind, and perhaps something is lost in the testing.

 

I totally agree. But the scrum is made up of a small amount of people. If you remove the devs, it's just a handful of players. If you remove the lurkers, and the people that just don't have the time for it, it's really just the same people that have maxed out their characters to high levels (hence my argument of siloed feedback) and the reason for the OP.

I don't think having the same small group of high level characters provide design feedback has been helpful. There's certainly a benefit to some of the people hashing out "what is working as intended", and I think they've done that very well. But if the core mechanics are bad (and I think they are) then what's the point? Not trying to rehash the OP, just trying to add to your comments.

 

according to chris in his use based skill thread that won't be the case, really, anymore. he confirmed that it will be 95% skills (replace current level system) and 5% enhance (using internally, a player level, in the maths).

that tells me, when they continue the scrums after this changeover, the silo effect you speak of can't exist...as long as they use the whole enchilada, the range of skill levels, for the testing. which again, isn't a silo effect.

 

Yes, that's going to be an improvement.

I'd like a greater sample size too. I think statistically you'd want about 100 people at minimum. I know that's probably outside the scope of a "scrum", but otherwise "group think" will be hard to combat (pun intended).

 

you are correct, thats not quite a scrum - but i do see your point in getting a broader base target.

i'd love to get a mass message from the devs on the forums asking for us to do X Y and Z after r21 rolls, so they can collect all that data - then use that data in the next scrum. - if they aren't already collecting that data, that is. (i bet they are, to a degree)