I thought the stream was simply fantastic. The only real downside is that I agree animations need work. that being said we are in Prealpha and this zone at least looks nearly release ready.
I loved seeing: GCD, UAS6, LAS8, non linear quests, flagging conversation, evolution of greyboxxing, the ligntning strikes functional, and many other aspects.
As to the LAS, I think the key is to create decisions before combat begins, and then once you're in combat figuring out how to accomplish what you need with what you got. There is a joy in realizing a different way of overcoming an obstacle because the optimal method is not availabe. Perhaps if no one has stun up, you find yourself using LoS to stop spells from landing? In other MMOs the question is always "what is the optimal thing to use next?" This is what leads to single button "I WIN" macros. In a LAS the question changes slightly to "what is the optimal thing for our group?" If paladins and clerics are normally the stunners and you don't have any, maybe you put a silence on your bar you usually ignore.
The problem with adding additional un-fun limits (aside from being out of combat) to switching instantly, is this significantly limits encounter design.
Which is fine, if that's your design goal. But deeply consider the consequences here.
Many of the classes only generate their class combat resources while in combat.
Many of the classes only generate (some of) their class combat resources while out of combat.
Some of the classes only generate their only combat resource while out of combat.
If you add-in negative consequences, and it is selectively more or less puntive, by class, due to the entire mechanic that makes that class unique? You're gonna have a bad day. EVERYONE is gonna have a bad day.
Forcing players into the Limited Action Set of 12 or 14 or whatever number it ends up being abilities, per encounter, already significantly limits how encounters can be designed.
Logic dictates you can't force a customer into failure and expect them to be happy and continue to pay you.
If you (to Iksars point) limit a class to a subset of their total damage types, and then intentionally design the encounter that requires them to use exactly one more damage type than what they can have on a full LAS action bar? You've intentionally, with malice, designed the encounter so they will fail. Not cool. Not fun. Not financially responsible design.
In other words:
If you want dynamic combat? You need to have dynamic action bars, in combat.
If you want no dynamic action bars, in combat? You get no dynamic combat/encounters.
Any other mixing and matching simply leads to rage-quit scenarios and extremely unhappy customers.
Keno Monster said:I have yet to hear a compelling argument for a severely limited action set. I would love to hear VR chime in and defend this decision with actual data on why they think it's necessary. This is a real time MMO, not a turn based strategy game. If the desire is to require meaningful decision making in combat, how does limiting the action set so drastically promote that? There is no logic in stating decisions will be more difficult or more important to make when you have so many fewer options. Is the argument now that preparation out of combat is more important than decision making in combat? That is extremely weak.
This was extremely disappointing news with seemingly no justification other than "EQ did it". I might be the biggest EQ can do no wrong fan boi around, and that argument holds no water, even with me. This is an archaic design that harkens back to the single player turn based games that influenced MMOs 20+ years ago. If the game doesn't spam bloated skills and abilities at players, there is no sound reason to restrict gameplay like this. It is tedious, and simply does not feel good as a player to be restricted in such a manner, again, for seemingly no good reason. A LAS like this does not promote strategy, it restricts it.
We're 5+ years in to development. VR should be able to make strong logical arguments for why certain mechanics are, or are not, being used. Instead of "we feel" or "we think" or "we plan", tell us what the exact reasoning is behind this decision and how the game will be better for it. This is potentially a gameplay defining decision, and VR should be able to defend it. What type of things is VR going to pair with a LAS to make it anything other than a tedious, arbitrary restriction?
I love transparency and I love accountability, and I believe both are necessary and very helpful for our team, both now and ongoing.
Don't ever stop pushing us to do better as a Development Team, both in the quality of our work and the quality of our communication.
- Joppa 02/16/15
If you need it explained, you probably wouldnt get it no matter how many times its explained... But I'll give it a go none-the-less.
LAS helps facilitate long term decision making into game play. It forces you to spend a few moments to prepare for what is ahead and not just run ahead facerolling a 100 different slotted hotbar keys. Having fewer active abilities makes your decisions have consequences. Limiting abilities in combat literally forces you to prepare ahead of time and communicate with group members about what you are going to do, instead of everyone jumping into a group and not communicating and just face rolling their hot bars while following the tank.
I've yet to hear a plausible argument to why having your full set of abilities at the ready at any given moment is necessary in a game that intentionally has a slower pace. There are literally dozens of MMO options out there that let you slot a hundred abilities at once.
vjek said:The problem with adding additional un-fun limits (aside from being out of combat) to switching instantly, is this significantly limits encounter design.
Which is fine, if that's your design goal. But deeply consider the consequences here.
Many of the classes only generate their class combat resources while in combat.
Many of the classes only generate (some of) their class combat resources while out of combat.
Some of the classes only generate their only combat resource while out of combat.
If you add-in negative consequences, and it is selectively more or less puntive, by class, due to the entire mechanic that makes that class unique? You're gonna have a bad day. EVERYONE is gonna have a bad day.
Forcing players into the Limited Action Set of 12 or 14 or whatever number it ends up being abilities, per encounter, already significantly limits how encounters can be designed.
Logic dictates you can't force a customer into failure and expect them to be happy and continue to pay you.
If you (to Iksars point) limit a class to a subset of their total damage types, and then intentionally design the encounter that requires them to use exactly one more damage type than what they can have on a full LAS action bar? You've intentionally, with malice, designed the encounter so they will fail. Not cool. Not fun. Not financially responsible design.
In other words:
If you want dynamic combat? You need to have dynamic action bars, in combat.
If you want no dynamic action bars, in combat? You get no dynamic combat/encounters.
Any other mixing and matching simply leads to rage-quit scenarios and extremely unhappy customers.
las is like skyrim(except skyrim has las2 when casting spells) XD bring up menu, change spells, oh wrong spells, bring up menu change spells oh new monster comes, bring up menu change spells, oh spell duration ran out, bring up menu change spells.
that spell swapping was so disruptive to play.
it wasn't until the modding community came in to essentially open up the 2 hands to 24 where it make magic gameplay not so tedious to play.
arazons said:I've yet to hear a plausible argument to why having your full set of abilities at the ready at any given moment is necessary in a game that intentionally has a slower pace. ...Because it allows encounters to be completely dynamic, and turns reacting to dynamic combat into a player skill.
vjek said:arazons said:I've yet to hear a plausible argument to why having your full set of abilities at the ready at any given moment is necessary in a game that intentionally has a slower pace. ...Because it allows encounters to be completely dynamic, and turns reacting to dynamic combat into a player skill.
Which has nothing to do with pace, and everything to do with encounter design and content longevity/replay.
If it's the same every time because you can't make it dynamic, you do it once, and it's done. I mean sure, you can repeat it, but the challenge of the encounter is static.
If it's slightly different every time, because the player can react, then each time, the challenge varies, and the longevity of that content is extended.
The amount to which the designers are willing to make the content dynamic has a direct impact on the desire of players to replay that content. Static? Yawn/No. Dynamic... Maybe/Yes.
I appreciate your attempt, but to me its a weak argument. We have yet to see the scope at which a mob will dynamically react and even with that, it will still be limited to reacting in a set number of ways. I suspect it will be limited to scripted encounters ala bosses/raids. Planning is a skill too. (And Stellar yes plans can go awry, but that is the nature of the beast.)
If you are unhappy with the amount of hotbar slots available (even though its been advertised that way from the beginning) why fight it? There are a ton of games out there that fit that play style...
I personally DO want downtime between fights. I want to sit and talk with people I am grouped with. I can swap out spells as needed during that downtime. Yes just like EQ1 was in its hey day. What I dont want is another steamroll hack-n-slash that disregards the nature of competent planning and interaction between players.
We're all entitled to our opinions, and while I disagree with yours I do respect your right to voice it. I just hope VR doesnt cave to it... Because once that happens they'll start caving on all sorts of core principles and this will quickly become the game I am NOT looking for.
The problem with what VR is creating is, it is working against itself.
I'll elaborate. The disposition system creates dynamic combat, which produces some limited value with LAS, if you can determine ahead of time how to prepare.
Currently, disposition type-names are known, so you can prepare and use your big customer brain to prepare, so you think you're clever.
Yet, they have strongly indicated (stated it outright) that multi-disposition encounters will be a thing, in Pantheon.
Which... ok, that's.. not really that great, then. Why not?
Because if you can't determinee, ahead of time, what the dispositions are, then how can you use LAS the way it's intended? What if it's two, or three, or four dispositions, yet, you're locked in combat the entire time? Or you can't change LAS bars due to other arbitrary limits or restrictions?
Isn't that more malice, and less fun? If I can't tell what damage types (or cures, resists, heals, more, etc) I need for the fight, and the fight will require more damage types (or cures, resists, heals, more, etc) than I can have, well, crap. I get to fail, guaranteed.
The complete implementation of a truly dynamic disposition system will ensure the ultimate failure of the LAS mechanic, or, if you prefer it stated this way: the LAS mechanic will guarantee (and force) customer failure at the exact moment the disposition system creates truly dynamic combat.
If you really want a brain twister? Consider this: Should non-magic/non-coated/non-proc-enhanced/non-enchanted damage dealers (melee, non-magic ranged) be able to switch weapons/ammo, and thusly, damage types, in combat, at any time? If not or if so, what about magic users and switching damage types? :)
It could be argued (successfully) that being able to switch weapons, and thus damage types, in combat, bypasses the intended use of the entire LAS mechanic.
vjek said:The problem with what VR is creating is, it is working against itself.
I'll elaborate. The disposition system creates dynamic combat, which produces some limited value with LAS, if you can determine ahead of time how to prepare.
Currently, disposition type-names are known, so you can prepare and use your big customer brain to prepare, so you think you're clever.
Yet, they have strongly indicated (stated it outright) that multi-disposition encounters will be a thing, in Pantheon.
Which... ok, that's.. not really that great, then. Why not?
Because if you can't determinee, ahead of time, what the dispositions are, then how can you use LAS the way it's intended? What if it's two, or three, or four dispositions, yet, you're locked in combat the entire time? Or you can't change LAS bars due to other arbitrary limits or restrictions?
Isn't that more malice, and less fun? If I can't tell what damage types (or cures, resists, heals, more, etc) I need for the fight, and the fight will require more damage types (or cures, resists, heals, more, etc) than I can have, well, crap. I get to fail, guaranteed.
The complete implementation of a truly dynamic disposition system will ensure the ultimate failure of the LAS mechanic, or, if you prefer it stated this way: the LAS mechanic will guarantee (and force) customer failure at the exact moment the disposition system creates truly dynamic combat.
If you really want a brain twister? Consider this: Should non-magic/non-coated/non-proc-enhanced/non-enchanted damage dealers (melee, non-magic ranged) be able to switch weapons/ammo, and thusly, damage types, in combat, at any time? If not or if so, what about magic users and switching damage types? :)
It could be argued (successfully) that being able to switch weapons, and thus damage types, in combat, bypasses the intended use of the entire LAS mechanic.
Again, I disagree. Thats a whole lot of "what ifs" you are throwing around.
I'll agree to disagree.
vjek said:If you really want a brain twister? Consider this: Should non-magic/non-coated/non-proc-enhanced/non-enchanted damage dealers (melee, non-magic ranged) be able to switch weapons/ammo, and thusly, damage types, in combat, at any time? If not or if so, what about magic users and switching damage types? :)
It could be argued (successfully) that being able to switch weapons, and thus damage types, in combat, bypasses the intended use of the entire LAS mechanic.
Where is it stated that gear will be swappable in combat? I would put money on it only being swappable out of combat.
I would be curious to learn the age groups of the two different sides of this debate. I might be wrong in this but feel you might have split older gamers like myself preferring the LAS for the simple planning and strategizing aspects. Then you would have the younger crowd the anti-LAS players that grew up on the more twitchy games.
One major boon to LAS that is not mentioned much is having LAS allows for more freedom in having two of the same class in a group. You have two Shamans friends playing not a problem you load these spells I load these other spells. In a non-LAS game having two Shamans is just redundant as they will be trying to cast the same spells as each other.
LAS does not make combat less dynamic. All combat is a script with options a,b,c,d but only after a is cast. With LAS it will be the same but removes the go to this website and we will tell you the dance moves to beat this encounter. Yes, they can still fo that but now need to take class combination and LAS combination into effect. I was in an EQ1 guild during SoV prime, most guilds ran 50+ member raid teams. We ran a 20 member raid team. Always 2nd or 3rd on the server to down mobs. Why cause we studied the mobs and found weakness others didn't. We did things our way, not the norm. Walked Norrath with great respects by all others guilds do to it.
vjek said:The problem with what VR is creating is, it is working against itself.
I'll elaborate. The disposition system creates dynamic combat, which produces some limited value with LAS, if you can determine ahead of time how to prepare.
Currently, disposition type-names are known, so you can prepare and use your big customer brain to prepare, so you think you're clever.
Yet, they have strongly indicated (stated it outright) that multi-disposition encounters will be a thing, in Pantheon.
I mentioned it before, but the 'planning ahead' part really only works when you're first approaching some content. Once you're into respawns, you won't know ahead of time what disposition might appear on which NPC at which spawn point. You might not have time to see the respawn, identify the disposition and then make whatever adjustments to your spells/abilities especially if said mob spawns right on top of you, or aggros you as it spawns nearby. The apparent need to pause before you attack any NPC to first make sure you fully understand its class, level, possible disposition(s) will make the already slower paced combat even slower.
The results, then, is that TTK for any given spawn increases, decreasing the amount of spawn points a group can reasonably engage within the spawntimer for that zone/area and decreasing the XP/hour. The 'accomplish things in 2 hours' mindset of VR is then reduced as you'll actually be accomplishing less.
arazons said:Keno Monster said:I have yet to hear a compelling argument for a severely limited action set. I would love to hear VR chime in and defend this decision with actual data on why they think it's necessary. This is a real time MMO, not a turn based strategy game. If the desire is to require meaningful decision making in combat, how does limiting the action set so drastically promote that? There is no logic in stating decisions will be more difficult or more important to make when you have so many fewer options. Is the argument now that preparation out of combat is more important than decision making in combat? That is extremely weak.
This was extremely disappointing news with seemingly no justification other than "EQ did it". I might be the biggest EQ can do no wrong fan boi around, and that argument holds no water, even with me. This is an archaic design that harkens back to the single player turn based games that influenced MMOs 20+ years ago. If the game doesn't spam bloated skills and abilities at players, there is no sound reason to restrict gameplay like this. It is tedious, and simply does not feel good as a player to be restricted in such a manner, again, for seemingly no good reason. A LAS like this does not promote strategy, it restricts it.
We're 5+ years in to development. VR should be able to make strong logical arguments for why certain mechanics are, or are not, being used. Instead of "we feel" or "we think" or "we plan", tell us what the exact reasoning is behind this decision and how the game will be better for it. This is potentially a gameplay defining decision, and VR should be able to defend it. What type of things is VR going to pair with a LAS to make it anything other than a tedious, arbitrary restriction?
I love transparency and I love accountability, and I believe both are necessary and very helpful for our team, both now and ongoing.
Don't ever stop pushing us to do better as a Development Team, both in the quality of our work and the quality of our communication.
- Joppa 02/16/15
If you need it explained, you probably wouldnt get it no matter how many times its explained... But I'll give it a go none-the-less.
LAS helps facilitate long term decision making into game play. It forces you to spend a few moments to prepare for what is ahead and not just run ahead facerolling a 100 different slotted hotbar keys. Having fewer active abilities makes your decisions have consequences. Limiting abilities in combat literally forces you to prepare ahead of time and communicate with group members about what you are going to do, instead of everyone jumping into a group and not communicating and just face rolling their hot bars while following the tank.
I've yet to hear a plausible argument to why having your full set of abilities at the ready at any given moment is necessary in a game that intentionally has a slower pace. There are literally dozens of MMO options out there that let you slot a hundred abilities at once.
So the answer is I'm stupid and should go play a different game. You speak in sweeping absolutes and then condescend to others? Perhaps you should try reading what was written before climbing up there on that horse. If the game has 100 abilities everyone wants to have up all the time, that is a game design flaw, not a reason to have LAS. LAS is treating a symptom, the cure is for VR to not have bloated, watered down abilities spammed at players. Suggesting that not having a LAS will lead directly to "face rolling" is a massive logical fallacy, which appears to be the foundation of your argument. You clearly do not understand that the LAS requires VR to make content *easier*.
If you have a root, mez, and fear loaded up at once, please explain to me how it will require less thinking and cooperation with your teammates than if each of you only have one of those? If three of you each have loaded one of those abilities beforehand, what kind of communication will need to take place during the encounter? You're effectively saying it's better gameplay to know *ahead of time* exactly what you need to do, as opposed to having the ability to react to different situations on the fly. Again, how is it "stategic" to know that the boss spawns adds that are cold immune and mez immune before the fight even starts? That's 30 year old gameplay, and straight up cheese. People would complain about EQ being a game where nobody would engage in a fight unless the outcome was already decided. That's exactly what you get with content design restricted by a LAS. If the mobs the boss spawns can be immune to a random element, and a random CC type, that forces groups to actually make quick decisions and work as a team. Basically everything you're saying about the positives of a LAS are false, if not straight up backwards.
I admit I was prepared for all manner of discussion arising from the stream, but you surprised us all by focusing on action bars.
I'M TOTALLY IN FOR THIS!
I have played so many MMOGs that I have forgotten some of them. In each case, I found myself simply adapting to the design in terms of action bars.
In some cases, one hotbar, so that I had to carefully choose my abilities before traveling to adventure (or craft). I actually liked the decisionmaking process, or having to pause to catch my breath and switch things up as needed.
In others I had so many hotbars that every ability, macro and action was at my behest, but... at the cost of lessening the real beauty of the game by covering it with interface. To be honest I might have actively used one and a half of the eight hotbars on a regular basis, so not even sure why I had them all.
Which do I prefer? Honestly, the game design seemed suited to the action bar offerings, so either way is fine by me. As we move into Alpha and Beta, the functionality of the UI will definitely be put through its paces and we'll be able to see what really works best.
I love this thread, and the team is reading it too, so I want to personally thank you all for your thoughtful input and opinions.
Brasse
Vandraad said:I mentioned it before, but the 'planning ahead' part really only works when you're first approaching some content. Once you're into respawns, you won't know ahead of time what disposition might appear on which NPC at which spawn point. You might not have time to see the respawn, identify the disposition and then make whatever adjustments to your spells/abilities especially if said mob spawns right on top of you, or aggros you as it spawns nearby. The apparent need to pause before you attack any NPC to first make sure you fully understand its class, level, possible disposition(s) will make the already slower paced combat even slower.Yeah, you've nailed it. I also see, given the above, (and the rest of the issues in the thread) the emergent behavior of grinding greens, so reduce or eliminate the risk of dispositions to the point where it doesn't matter, or doesn't matter as much.The results, then, is that TTK for any given spawn increases, decreasing the amount of spawn points a group can reasonably engage within the spawntimer for that zone/area and decreasing the XP/hour. The 'accomplish things in 2 hours' mindset of VR is then reduced as you'll actually be accomplishing less.
Keno Monster said:arazons said:Keno Monster said:I have yet to hear a compelling argument for a severely limited action set. I would love to hear VR chime in and defend this decision with actual data on why they think it's necessary. This is a real time MMO, not a turn based strategy game. If the desire is to require meaningful decision making in combat, how does limiting the action set so drastically promote that? There is no logic in stating decisions will be more difficult or more important to make when you have so many fewer options. Is the argument now that preparation out of combat is more important than decision making in combat? That is extremely weak.
This was extremely disappointing news with seemingly no justification other than "EQ did it". I might be the biggest EQ can do no wrong fan boi around, and that argument holds no water, even with me. This is an archaic design that harkens back to the single player turn based games that influenced MMOs 20+ years ago. If the game doesn't spam bloated skills and abilities at players, there is no sound reason to restrict gameplay like this. It is tedious, and simply does not feel good as a player to be restricted in such a manner, again, for seemingly no good reason. A LAS like this does not promote strategy, it restricts it.
We're 5+ years in to development. VR should be able to make strong logical arguments for why certain mechanics are, or are not, being used. Instead of "we feel" or "we think" or "we plan", tell us what the exact reasoning is behind this decision and how the game will be better for it. This is potentially a gameplay defining decision, and VR should be able to defend it. What type of things is VR going to pair with a LAS to make it anything other than a tedious, arbitrary restriction?
I love transparency and I love accountability, and I believe both are necessary and very helpful for our team, both now and ongoing.
Don't ever stop pushing us to do better as a Development Team, both in the quality of our work and the quality of our communication.
- Joppa 02/16/15
If you need it explained, you probably wouldnt get it no matter how many times its explained... But I'll give it a go none-the-less.
LAS helps facilitate long term decision making into game play. It forces you to spend a few moments to prepare for what is ahead and not just run ahead facerolling a 100 different slotted hotbar keys. Having fewer active abilities makes your decisions have consequences. Limiting abilities in combat literally forces you to prepare ahead of time and communicate with group members about what you are going to do, instead of everyone jumping into a group and not communicating and just face rolling their hot bars while following the tank.
I've yet to hear a plausible argument to why having your full set of abilities at the ready at any given moment is necessary in a game that intentionally has a slower pace. There are literally dozens of MMO options out there that let you slot a hundred abilities at once.
So the answer is I'm stupid and should go play a different game. You speak in sweeping absolutes and then condescend to others? Perhaps you should try reading what was written before climbing up there on that horse. If the game has 100 abilities everyone wants to have up all the time, that is a game design flaw, not a reason to have LAS. LAS is treating a symptom, the cure is for VR to not have bloated, watered down abilities spammed at players. Suggesting that not having a LAS will lead directly to "face rolling" is a massive logical fallacy, which appears to be the foundation of your argument. You clearly do not understand that the LAS requires VR to make content *easier*.
If you have a root, mez, and fear loaded up at once, please explain to me how it will require less thinking and cooperation with your teammates than if each of you only have one of those? If three of you each have loaded one of those abilities beforehand, what kind of communication will need to take place during the encounter? You're effectively saying it's better gameplay to know *ahead of time* exactly what you need to do, as opposed to having the ability to react to different situations on the fly. Again, how is it "stategic" to know that the boss spawns adds that are cold immune and mez immune before the fight even starts? That's 30 year old gameplay, and straight up cheese. People would complain about EQ being a game where nobody would engage in a fight unless the outcome was already decided. That's exactly what you get with content design restricted by a LAS. If the mobs the boss spawns can be immune to a random element, and a random CC type, that forces groups to actually make quick decisions and work as a team. Basically everything you're saying about the positives of a LAS are false, if not straight up backwards.
Wasnt personal, for me this is about the developers not straying from the long proposed vision of the game. They have outlined a vision for a game for us fairly plainly for us to see since the beginning. I could care less if its 8, 12, 16 hotkeys but there is a limit for me, where having every possible ability up for any situation at once ruins it for me. LAS is one of the aspects of this game that drew me in. No game has done it quite like EQ1 had back in the day.
Simple fact of the matter is those design choices may not be ideal for some. I get it, but there are already plenty of games out there offering what it is people want. For some this is a critical point of contention (myself included). So the ball is in VR's court to either hold fast onto their original design (as I and many others have bought into) or waver and appease those who want to replicate the stuff that already is out there in other games.
Brasse said:I admit I was prepared for all manner of discussion arising from the stream, but you surprised us all by focusing on action bars.
I'M TOTALLY IN FOR THIS!
I have played so many MMOGs that I have forgotten some of them. In each case, I found myself simply adapting to the design in terms of action bars.
In some cases, one hotbar, so that I had to carefully choose my abilities before traveling to adventure (or craft). I actually liked the decisionmaking process, or having to pause to catch my breath and switch things up as needed.
In others I had so many hotbars that every ability, macro and action was at my behest, but... at the cost of lessening the real beauty of the game by covering it with interface. To be honest I might have actively used one and a half of the eight hotbars on a regular basis, so not even sure why I had them all.
Which do I prefer? Honestly, the game design seemed suited to the action bar offerings, so either way is fine by me. As we move into Alpha and Beta, the functionality of the UI will definitely be put through its paces and we'll be able to see what really works best.
I love this thread, and the team is reading it too, so I want to personally thank you all for your thoughtful input and opinions.
Brasse
What about the decision making process in combat? Again, the argument seems to boil down to people prefering knowing exactly what they need to do before they need to do it, and preparing accordingly, instead of being required to react to a dynamic situation when your life is actually on the line. This blows my mind. Carefully choosing what to do out of combat is better, more challenging, more strategic gameplay than carefully choosing what to do *in combat*? I don't see how that argument holds water.
What's preventing you from stopping and catching your breath without an LAS? Nothing.
And again we see the logical fallacy that no LAS or a less restrictive one will lead to ability bloat and UI clutter. Those things are up to VR to design and implement and have nothing to do with whether or not there is a limited action set. VR can choose to not drop 100 abilities on players.
arazons said:... LAS is one of the aspects of this game that drew me in. No game has done it quite like EQ1 had back in the day. ...But.. EQ1 doesn't have a LAS bar. You can have all your abilities on as many hot bars as you want, in or out of combat, and there's no limit. It has limited spell slots, sure, but it doesn't really matter. Why?
If you need re-mem a spell, you can, in combat. You can clear the spell slot, mem a new spell, and use it. I've done it many times, playing an EQ1 wizard, with damage, evac, or AoE root, as the situation demanded.
Changing spell damage types, in combat? No problem. Switch from Fire to Magic to Ice, AoE or single target, whatever. All possible, no problems whatsoever in EQ1.
The LAS being shown/demonstrated for Pantheon is entirely different. You cannot clear spells and re-mem them, while in combat.
It is an entirely new and different mechanic than EQ1, currently.
arazons said:Keno Monster said:arazons said:Keno Monster said:I have yet to hear a compelling argument for a severely limited action set. I would love to hear VR chime in and defend this decision with actual data on why they think it's necessary. This is a real time MMO, not a turn based strategy game. If the desire is to require meaningful decision making in combat, how does limiting the action set so drastically promote that? There is no logic in stating decisions will be more difficult or more important to make when you have so many fewer options. Is the argument now that preparation out of combat is more important than decision making in combat? That is extremely weak.
This was extremely disappointing news with seemingly no justification other than "EQ did it". I might be the biggest EQ can do no wrong fan boi around, and that argument holds no water, even with me. This is an archaic design that harkens back to the single player turn based games that influenced MMOs 20+ years ago. If the game doesn't spam bloated skills and abilities at players, there is no sound reason to restrict gameplay like this. It is tedious, and simply does not feel good as a player to be restricted in such a manner, again, for seemingly no good reason. A LAS like this does not promote strategy, it restricts it.
We're 5+ years in to development. VR should be able to make strong logical arguments for why certain mechanics are, or are not, being used. Instead of "we feel" or "we think" or "we plan", tell us what the exact reasoning is behind this decision and how the game will be better for it. This is potentially a gameplay defining decision, and VR should be able to defend it. What type of things is VR going to pair with a LAS to make it anything other than a tedious, arbitrary restriction?
I love transparency and I love accountability, and I believe both are necessary and very helpful for our team, both now and ongoing.
Don't ever stop pushing us to do better as a Development Team, both in the quality of our work and the quality of our communication.
- Joppa 02/16/15
If you need it explained, you probably wouldnt get it no matter how many times its explained... But I'll give it a go none-the-less.
LAS helps facilitate long term decision making into game play. It forces you to spend a few moments to prepare for what is ahead and not just run ahead facerolling a 100 different slotted hotbar keys. Having fewer active abilities makes your decisions have consequences. Limiting abilities in combat literally forces you to prepare ahead of time and communicate with group members about what you are going to do, instead of everyone jumping into a group and not communicating and just face rolling their hot bars while following the tank.
I've yet to hear a plausible argument to why having your full set of abilities at the ready at any given moment is necessary in a game that intentionally has a slower pace. There are literally dozens of MMO options out there that let you slot a hundred abilities at once.
So the answer is I'm stupid and should go play a different game. You speak in sweeping absolutes and then condescend to others? Perhaps you should try reading what was written before climbing up there on that horse. If the game has 100 abilities everyone wants to have up all the time, that is a game design flaw, not a reason to have LAS. LAS is treating a symptom, the cure is for VR to not have bloated, watered down abilities spammed at players. Suggesting that not having a LAS will lead directly to "face rolling" is a massive logical fallacy, which appears to be the foundation of your argument. You clearly do not understand that the LAS requires VR to make content *easier*.
If you have a root, mez, and fear loaded up at once, please explain to me how it will require less thinking and cooperation with your teammates than if each of you only have one of those? If three of you each have loaded one of those abilities beforehand, what kind of communication will need to take place during the encounter? You're effectively saying it's better gameplay to know *ahead of time* exactly what you need to do, as opposed to having the ability to react to different situations on the fly. Again, how is it "stategic" to know that the boss spawns adds that are cold immune and mez immune before the fight even starts? That's 30 year old gameplay, and straight up cheese. People would complain about EQ being a game where nobody would engage in a fight unless the outcome was already decided. That's exactly what you get with content design restricted by a LAS. If the mobs the boss spawns can be immune to a random element, and a random CC type, that forces groups to actually make quick decisions and work as a team. Basically everything you're saying about the positives of a LAS are false, if not straight up backwards.
Wasnt personal, for me this is about the developers not straying from the long proposed vision of the game. They have outlined a vision for a game for us fairly plainly for us to see since the beginning. I could care less if its 8, 12, 16 hotkeys but there is a limit for me, where having every possible ability up for any situation at once ruins it for me. LAS is one of the aspects of this game that drew me in. No game has done it quite like EQ1 had back in the day.
Simple fact of the matter is those design choices may not be ideal for some. I get it, but there are already plenty of games out there offering what it is people want. For some this is a critical point of contention (myself included). So the ball is in VR's court to either hold fast onto their original design (as I and many others have bought into) or waver and appease those who want to replicate the stuff that already is out there in other games.
Wasn't personal? You told me I was too stupid to get it even if it was repeated to me, yet you still cannot answer why you want it, you just do. We've already detailed why it is *less* challenging, *less* tactical, and requires *less* communication. What *exactly* about the LAS improves gameplay and makes the game more fun? If you prefer preparation out of combat for an encounter you already know the outcome of, to dynamic decision making in combat, perhaps it is you who should go play one of a million other games.
arazons said:EQ1 you were limited to how many active abilities you had available to use at any given time, without rememming and replacing what was active with what you want to be active. This had to be done outside of combat.
This is what they plan to do here.
VR, stick with it.
No, it did not. This is absolute gold. You're basing your opinion on VR capturing the spirit of something you don't even know.
Keno Monster said:arazons said:EQ1 you were limited to how many active abilities you had available to use at any given time, without rememming and replacing what was active with what you want to be active. This had to be done outside of combat.
This is what they plan to do here.
VR, stick with it.
No, it did not. This is absolute gold. You're basing your opinion on VR capturing the spirit of something you don't even know.
Clearly you never played.
You had a spell gem bar that would only allow you x amount of spells/abilities active at any given time. You could "hotbar" any of them you wanted across the hotbars and pages of hotbars. But you could still only memorize a fixed amount of spells/abilities at a time.
Keno Monster said:arazons said:Keno Monster said:arazons said:Keno Monster said:I have yet to hear a compelling argument for a severely limited action set. I would love to hear VR chime in and defend this decision with actual data on why they think it's necessary. This is a real time MMO, not a turn based strategy game. If the desire is to require meaningful decision making in combat, how does limiting the action set so drastically promote that? There is no logic in stating decisions will be more difficult or more important to make when you have so many fewer options. Is the argument now that preparation out of combat is more important than decision making in combat? That is extremely weak.
This was extremely disappointing news with seemingly no justification other than "EQ did it". I might be the biggest EQ can do no wrong fan boi around, and that argument holds no water, even with me. This is an archaic design that harkens back to the single player turn based games that influenced MMOs 20+ years ago. If the game doesn't spam bloated skills and abilities at players, there is no sound reason to restrict gameplay like this. It is tedious, and simply does not feel good as a player to be restricted in such a manner, again, for seemingly no good reason. A LAS like this does not promote strategy, it restricts it.
We're 5+ years in to development. VR should be able to make strong logical arguments for why certain mechanics are, or are not, being used. Instead of "we feel" or "we think" or "we plan", tell us what the exact reasoning is behind this decision and how the game will be better for it. This is potentially a gameplay defining decision, and VR should be able to defend it. What type of things is VR going to pair with a LAS to make it anything other than a tedious, arbitrary restriction?
I love transparency and I love accountability, and I believe both are necessary and very helpful for our team, both now and ongoing.
Don't ever stop pushing us to do better as a Development Team, both in the quality of our work and the quality of our communication.
- Joppa 02/16/15
If you need it explained, you probably wouldnt get it no matter how many times its explained... But I'll give it a go none-the-less.
LAS helps facilitate long term decision making into game play. It forces you to spend a few moments to prepare for what is ahead and not just run ahead facerolling a 100 different slotted hotbar keys. Having fewer active abilities makes your decisions have consequences. Limiting abilities in combat literally forces you to prepare ahead of time and communicate with group members about what you are going to do, instead of everyone jumping into a group and not communicating and just face rolling their hot bars while following the tank.
I've yet to hear a plausible argument to why having your full set of abilities at the ready at any given moment is necessary in a game that intentionally has a slower pace. There are literally dozens of MMO options out there that let you slot a hundred abilities at once.
So the answer is I'm stupid and should go play a different game. You speak in sweeping absolutes and then condescend to others? Perhaps you should try reading what was written before climbing up there on that horse. If the game has 100 abilities everyone wants to have up all the time, that is a game design flaw, not a reason to have LAS. LAS is treating a symptom, the cure is for VR to not have bloated, watered down abilities spammed at players. Suggesting that not having a LAS will lead directly to "face rolling" is a massive logical fallacy, which appears to be the foundation of your argument. You clearly do not understand that the LAS requires VR to make content *easier*.
If you have a root, mez, and fear loaded up at once, please explain to me how it will require less thinking and cooperation with your teammates than if each of you only have one of those? If three of you each have loaded one of those abilities beforehand, what kind of communication will need to take place during the encounter? You're effectively saying it's better gameplay to know *ahead of time* exactly what you need to do, as opposed to having the ability to react to different situations on the fly. Again, how is it "stategic" to know that the boss spawns adds that are cold immune and mez immune before the fight even starts? That's 30 year old gameplay, and straight up cheese. People would complain about EQ being a game where nobody would engage in a fight unless the outcome was already decided. That's exactly what you get with content design restricted by a LAS. If the mobs the boss spawns can be immune to a random element, and a random CC type, that forces groups to actually make quick decisions and work as a team. Basically everything you're saying about the positives of a LAS are false, if not straight up backwards.
Wasnt personal, for me this is about the developers not straying from the long proposed vision of the game. They have outlined a vision for a game for us fairly plainly for us to see since the beginning. I could care less if its 8, 12, 16 hotkeys but there is a limit for me, where having every possible ability up for any situation at once ruins it for me. LAS is one of the aspects of this game that drew me in. No game has done it quite like EQ1 had back in the day.
Simple fact of the matter is those design choices may not be ideal for some. I get it, but there are already plenty of games out there offering what it is people want. For some this is a critical point of contention (myself included). So the ball is in VR's court to either hold fast onto their original design (as I and many others have bought into) or waver and appease those who want to replicate the stuff that already is out there in other games.
Wasn't personal? You told me I was too stupid to get it even if it was repeated to me, yet you still cannot answer why you want it, you just do. We've already detailed why it is *less* challenging, *less* tactical, and requires *less* communication. What *exactly* about the LAS improves gameplay and makes the game more fun? If you prefer preparation out of combat for an encounter you already know the outcome of, to dynamic decision making in combat, perhaps it is you who should go play one of a million other games.
Noone called you stupid so calm down.
arazons said:Keno Monster said:arazons said:EQ1 you were limited to how many active abilities you had available to use at any given time, without rememming and replacing what was active with what you want to be active. This had to be done outside of combat.
This is what they plan to do here.
VR, stick with it.
No, it did not. This is absolute gold. You're basing your opinion on VR capturing the spirit of something you don't even know.
Clearly you never played.
You had a spell gem bar that would only allow you x amount of spells/abilities active at any given time. You could "hotbar" any of them you wanted across the hotbars and pages of hotbars. But you could still only memorize a fixed amount of spells/abilities at a time.
It's amusing the person who said "If you need it explained, you probably wouldnt get it no matter how many times its explained..." needs it explained repeatedly that you could indeed change spells/songs in EQ during combat.
I think it's interesting in how people describe ..how.. they want to play the game. I can see I will approach the game from a much different perspectiv than most. If you're into measuring TTK, or bulbs of experience in your two hour play time, in the most efficient way, I'm not that guy. You're a half step from swarm pulling six green guys for maximum effect. My ideal group is more social, slower, more risk (that is maybe two Bubs of yellows or reds as opposed to blowing down three Bubs of greens in two hours). I think killing greys should result in no loot. Everyone plays for their own reasons. For me 8 main spell/actions and 6 buff slots works great. This is very in line with how VR has stated how they are planning Terminus to be. It's not a decision they have to justify, it's a core value they are programming into Terminus.