Forums » General Pantheon Discussion

Upcoming Dev Interview: Combat & Limited Actions w/ Joppa

    • 56 posts
    June 20, 2020 11:15 PM PDT

    I really liked the interview - thank you Bazgrim and Joppa.

     

    A lot of comparisons were drawn from World of Warcraft so I just thought I'd bring up this point here.

     

    In almost every expansion we've seen from World of Warcraft, especially the most recent expansions, we've seen this constant battle the designers have with the pruning and unpruning of classes. They've also done what seems like design experiments with the adding and removal of borrowed power (artifact weapons/legendaries/azerite traits) to classes. We also have experienced how terrible a class feels once that borrowed power is stripped away at the start of the next expansion.

     

    In addition we have seen WoW give us limited access to abilities in the form of the three ability/row talent system. We do not have access to all those powerful CC, movement, survivability and dps/rotational/cooldown abilities. You have to pick and choose which talents you can place on your bar - and then there are additional decisions to make in PvP with PvP specific abilities. You don't often hear players complain about the limitations WoW places on them because they can't switch to a different talent mid fight. In raiding you do see players use tomes to switch out talents after each encounter. In mythic+ you do see players tailor abilities based on party composition and to a smaller degree which dungeon they're running.

     

    So through the years many of us have seen WoW struggling with class concept and design mostly because of ability creep, bloated action sets, loss of class identities, inability to design competitive talents, and clear-cut end-game metas being formed because certain classes have superior utility.  I believe this back and forth of adding and removing powers and abilities is the WoWs team to struggle with developing strong class/spec identities while ensuring each class and spec is well represented at the highest levels of gameplay because they bring competitive utility. It's a never ending balancing act that they will most likely never be able to perfect.

     

    In my mind I believe Joppa is trying to show us the beauty of classes having strong identities while also always having the flexibility to adapt to almost any given party composition or encounter. If the game is designed right from the very beginning they won't constantly have to struggle with what WoW has for years. They're building a solid foundation to avoid the need to constantly balance the game patch after patch - expansion after expansion. We'll be less likely to see a clearcut meta form because between six party members, with 20-30 diffent  abilities to choose from, the likelihood of finding a solution to an encounter is extremely high. They can design in a lot of overlap of utility without taking away from core class strengths or fear homogenization between classes.

     

    I choose to think of it as a system where you can change your abilities outside of combat to perform different roles and provide different utility in the group as needed. Obviously the LAS is... LIMITING - but we should see it from the perspective that they can give us MORE (impactful) options on each class because groups of players have to make important decisions on which of those options to bring into each encounter. If everyone could use all their abilities at once - with no limits - we'd start to see metas form based on which toolkits were the strongest and provided the best utility while performing their core role. If you limit which abilities you can take and sprinkle the utility around with overlap  and alternate solutions spread out amongst all the classes, it becomes nearly impossible for a clearcut meta to develop. We'll see more interesting and diverse gameplay where your ability bar will change depending on what you're doing and who you're doing it with.

     

    Also as an aside to those saying it lowers the skill ceiling - let us not forget having a multitude of abilities on your action bar can reward the dextrous but it also limits individuals with lowered or lost dexterity. Moving the skill cap to the decision making process before a fight and when cooridinating with your team mates opens up the game for some players who can't manage 32+ keybinds due to physical limitations.

     

    • 839 posts
    June 20, 2020 11:51 PM PDT

    Great interview Baz, I was stoked to hear every word out of Joppa's mouth, his vision of the LAS being responsible for creating challenge and his rebuttle to the (in my opinion) some what strange predictions about what LAS will mean regarding people being unable to complete content (lol) in a small group or in a group of 6 and not be able to come up with a solution between them was just perfect and exactly my argument on the old thread.

    Very happy to hear all of it, i hope others got a better understanding of what LAS can do for a game as opposed to what it cant do.

    Thanks Joppa and Baz!

    • 1479 posts
    June 21, 2020 1:16 AM PDT

    Valdora said:

    I really liked the interview - thank you Bazgrim and Joppa.

     

    A lot of comparisons were drawn from World of Warcraft so I just thought I'd bring up this point here.

     

    In almost every expansion we've seen from World of Warcraft, especially the most recent expansions, we've seen this constant battle the designers have with the pruning and unpruning of classes. They've also done what seems like design experiments with the adding and removal of borrowed power (artifact weapons/legendaries/azerite traits) to classes. We also have experienced how terrible a class feels once that borrowed power is stripped away at the start of the next expansion.

     

    In addition we have seen WoW give us limited access to abilities in the form of the three ability/row talent system. We do not have access to all those powerful CC, movement, survivability and dps/rotational/cooldown abilities. You have to pick and choose which talents you can place on your bar - and then there are additional decisions to make in PvP with PvP specific abilities. You don't often hear players complain about the limitations WoW places on them because they can't switch to a different talent mid fight. In raiding you do see players use tomes to switch out talents after each encounter. In mythic+ you do see players tailor abilities based on party composition and to a smaller degree which dungeon they're running.

     

    So through the years many of us have seen WoW struggling with class concept and design mostly because of ability creep, bloated action sets, loss of class identities, inability to design competitive talents, and clear-cut end-game metas being formed because certain classes have superior utility.  I believe this back and forth of adding and removing powers and abilities is the WoWs team to struggle with developing strong class/spec identities while ensuring each class and spec is well represented at the highest levels of gameplay because they bring competitive utility. It's a never ending balancing act that they will most likely never be able to perfect.

     

    In my mind I believe Joppa is trying to show us the beauty of classes having strong identities while also always having the flexibility to adapt to almost any given party composition or encounter. If the game is designed right from the very beginning they won't constantly have to struggle with what WoW has for years. They're building a solid foundation to avoid the need to constantly balance the game patch after patch - expansion after expansion. We'll be less likely to see a clearcut meta form because between six party members, with 20-30 diffent  abilities to choose from, the likelihood of finding a solution to an encounter is extremely high. They can design in a lot of overlap of utility without taking away from core class strengths or fear homogenization between classes.

     

    I choose to think of it as a system where you can change your abilities outside of combat to perform different roles and provide different utility in the group as needed. Obviously the LAS is... LIMITING - but we should see it from the perspective that they can give us MORE (impactful) options on each class because groups of players have to make important decisions on which of those options to bring into each encounter. If everyone could use all their abilities at once - with no limits - we'd start to see metas form based on which toolkits were the strongest and provided the best utility while performing their core role. If you limit which abilities you can take and sprinkle the utility around with overlap  and alternate solutions spread out amongst all the classes, it becomes nearly impossible for a clearcut meta to develop. We'll see more interesting and diverse gameplay where your ability bar will change depending on what you're doing and who you're doing it with.

     

    Also as an aside to those saying it lowers the skill ceiling - let us not forget having a multitude of abilities on your action bar can reward the dextrous but it also limits individuals with lowered or lost dexterity. Moving the skill cap to the decision making process before a fight and when cooridinating with your team mates opens up the game for some players who can't manage 32+ keybinds due to physical limitations.

     

     

    Thank you for this great post, amongst the best I've seen on the subject but also subject-wise. I share 100% of your opinion on this matter, and your thinking was really great by comparing different games and issues some of them had.

    • 2756 posts
    June 21, 2020 2:57 AM PDT

    Vandraad said:

    EDIT: I withdraw my statement as it was addressed in Discord to my satisfaction.

    I hope you don't mind if I share the essence of your query and Joppa's response, as I think it was an important query and an important response.

    Vandraad was 'pretty insistent' that Joppa should make it clear that, if the testing community disliked the LAS that VR would listen and it would/could be changed.

    Joppa basically said, yes, they will listen, tweak and, as a last resort if needed, change the LAS.

    • 122 posts
    June 21, 2020 4:01 AM PDT

    disposalist said:

    Vandraad said:

    EDIT: I withdraw my statement as it was addressed in Discord to my satisfaction.

    I hope you don't mind if I share the essence of your query and Joppa's response, as I think it was an important query and an important response.

    Vandraad was 'pretty insistent' that Joppa should make it clear that, if the testing community disliked the LAS that VR would listen and it would/could be changed.

    Joppa basically said, yes, they will listen, tweak and, as a last resort if needed, change the LAS.

    Good to know.  Really, I'm fine with either system, although I do like the sound of this system as it is.  I just want to play the game lol, and I'm sure that with either system VR will do a great job developing it.

    P.S. Can anyone join the Discord or is it reserved for VIP members?


    This post was edited by Morraak at June 21, 2020 4:03 AM PDT
    • 2756 posts
    June 21, 2020 4:14 AM PDT

    Morraak said:

    disposalist said:

    Vandraad said:

    EDIT: I withdraw my statement as it was addressed in Discord to my satisfaction.

    I hope you don't mind if I share the essence of your query and Joppa's response, as I think it was an important query and an important response.

    Vandraad was 'pretty insistent' that Joppa should make it clear that, if the testing community disliked the LAS that VR would listen and it would/could be changed.

    Joppa basically said, yes, they will listen, tweak and, as a last resort if needed, change the LAS.

    Good to know.  Really, I'm fine with either system, although I do like the sound of this system as it is.  I just want to play the game lol, and I'm sure that with either system VR will do a great job developing it.

    P.S. Can anyone join the Discord or is it reserved for VIP members?

    It's VIP. I hope I don't get in trouble for giving a paraphrasing of that exchange! VIP stuff is kinda 'confidential' whereas PA-related stuff is covered by NDA, so I hope I'm ok to just give an indication of what was said, not even quoting...

    I thought it important to drain some heat here. Sorry if I've over-stepped!


    This post was edited by disposalist at June 21, 2020 4:16 AM PDT
    • 2756 posts
    June 21, 2020 5:31 AM PDT

    I've re-watched the interview and taken notes - thought I might put them here in case they help others.

    In Summary
    LAS is all about accentuating strategy both in wanting players to consider carefully what is about to happen and in wanting players to need to react with synergy and creativity to the unanticipated.

    Re. Bad LAS choice = Fail
    Not the goal or expected to be an inevitable result.

    Does the LAS decision have any connection to easing a port to consoles?
    No. Not in the slightest.

    Swap abilities (rearrange hotbar) in combat?
    No [though see later for clarity/exceptions]

    "When you're conditioned by this system"
    This is a phrase that is quite telling, to me. Joppa is expecting us to have to get used to it before we fully appreciate it, I think. I hope people can give it that chance.

    You can have several customised, named loadouts and switch between them easily (when allowed)

    LAS = 14 slots+. An 8 slot ACTION bar and a 6 slot UTILITY bar + a 'Utility belt' (for potions, etc) all available IN COMBAT

    ACTION skills are those that innately apply hate/threat to a target

    UTILITY are the others

    BUFFS in 2 categories
    Short Duration "Steroid" like buffs: Very potent (5 sec to 5 min)
    Long Duration (> 5 min). Long buffs are 'indefinite' (whilst on hotbar)

    General hotbar
    Standard double-8 hotbars, but customisable and can add more
    For macros, quest items (?), regen food+drink, clickies, trade skills (fishing), lock picking, sense traps, trapping, etc

    Potion/Utility belt
    Special effect food, drink, potions
    Available DURING combat
    Will work like buffs. Can be stopped/started/paused as they are swapped in/out of active hotbar

    Buffing 'outside' the group
    Will be 'scaled down' in some way according to level difference
    Will be reduced to 20 minutes
    To avoid 'powerleveling' issues

    Relating to 'scaling down' of buffing outside groups, but sounds like a general principle...
    "...our focus in Pantheon is on maintaining the most high quality group, raid and guild gameplay that we possibly can and where certain social aspects need to be diminished in order to maintain that group, raid and guild integrity of gameplay then that's a line that we have to be willing to walk and a side of the line we have to be willing to fall on"

    Powerleveling
    Clearly viewed as undesirable

    Pet classes/hotbars
    Necromancer mentioned "can be" a pet class (I'm guessing optional 'raised' dead with limited pet functionality like EQ 'charmed' creatures? OR maybe just via apic abilities at higher level?)
    Pets will have their own hotbar/UI
    Pets will have a little bit more of a life of their own with ability sets growing large

    Dispositions (and Manifestations) dynamism and LAS preparation
    Joppa gave a WoW arena match example to explain that you can only ever be prepared to a less than perfect extent and that finding your loadout isn't perfect during an encounter does not mean you just may as well give up. Compensating, improvising and coping with the unexpected between you and your group is part of the challenge.
    Also, if challenge level is high and none of your group members can compensate for a skill you have missing, then, yes, failure and death can happen. This is not a bad or even undesirable thing.

    With LAS aren't you going to arrive at a 'known loadout' quickly/easily?
    With UAS, isn't there more 'skill' in combat?
    Subjective and Joppa believes the opposite is true. With UAS, you are simply arriving at known rotations, which is no 'better' than known loadouts, but has removed the planning/unexpected aspect of LAS.
    Mathematically, LAS adds the complexitiy of permutations on top of the number of combinations that UAS gives you.
    Whilst UAS gives you more options, LAS adds (and spreads out) tactical options and adds the challenge of having to improvise more.

    Could similar limitation be achieved with UAS + cooldowns, etc.
    Similar, yes, but there are a lot of significant differences. Limitations in UAS games are different (spec choices, which cannot be altered in combat).
    LAS allows devs to make skills more potent and significant, because you've already chosen to *not* have another available *at all*.
    LAS allows multiples of the same classes in a group to be more viable/meaningful/significant (but, don't class specs do that in UAS games?)

    What if you don't want to be bothered with swapping hotbars for different encounters?
    And if that *is* viable, how do you ensure all skills are important?
    LAS or UAS you want to make all skills be desirable. It's of primary concern no matter the hotbar system.
    Also, 14 abilities isn't a small subset and though characters will have their goto loadout, the secondary/tertiary abilities will be important enough in some encounters (dispositions, environment, surprised, traps, etc) to still get used.

    Keepers will be able to give insight into monster abilities (just dispositions?) "from a distance"

    Example (from Joppa) of changing hotbar mid-combat: -
    (Also an example of how LAS fits in with other Pantheon systems, like climbing)
    "I envision things like the rogue being able to use flash bomb get out of combat switch to his shadow fall loadout use a grapple hook to get himself nearly instantly up onto a wall face above the target and then you shadow fall right on top of it"

    Down-ranking (Ability upgrades remove/replace previous abilities)
    Classes will have 20 to 30 core/distinct abilities at max level (not including rare/epic abilities)
    Level 25 to 30 is where you might expect to have all your 'core' abilities and you might start making hard choices over LAS
    The progress will naturally increase in significance as you level towards max

    Any concept of 'unlocking' additional ability slots?
    Joppa is not keen on the idea. Want to keep it consistent. Any changes will be fundamental to the whole system and reflect a change in what devs think is best for the system.

    What is the chance of this changing due to testing feedback?
    What input from testers re. LAS do you want?
    They want feedback as ever and will listen, but the system has deep integration with other aspects of Pantheon, so they will want it given the opportunity to settle and will want sophisticated feedback with reasoned explanations and examples. They won't be making snap changes due to simple loud dislikes.
    VR are not 'sitting on the fence' with LAS. They aren't unsure and waiting for feedback to decide for them. The system is deep rooted with an underlying philosophy they believe is right for Pantheon, but they are definitely listening, as always, and wanting feedback.

    Characters will have one 'active' ability unique to their race. Will have to 'wait and see' on whether they are Utility or Action.

    Will ability loadout choice be heavily influenced by gear choices?
    Nothing like GW2 where abilities are dependant on the weapon you hold. Not that end of the spectrum.
    May be some synergies between skills and main weapon, but should mean you would have reason to use both loadouts depending in situation, rather than feel pigeon-holed to one or another.

    Will you be switching out gear as much as you do skills/hotbars?
    Don't see gear switching being as often, but it could depend on many factors, not just skill synergies. Hard to quantise.

    Direlords can tank dual-wield or single-hander

    There will be a 'bonus' system for using appropriate weapon-vs-body-type, eg. using a blunt weapon will have a bonus against skeletons, but a dagger user won't be penalised.

    • 273 posts
    June 21, 2020 9:42 AM PDT

    disposalist said:

    I hope you don't mind if I share the essence of your query and Joppa's response, as I think it was an important query and an important response.

    Vandraad was 'pretty insistent' that Joppa should make it clear that, if the testing community disliked the LAS that VR would listen and it would/could be changed.

    Joppa basically said, yes, they will listen, tweak and, as a last resort if needed, change the LAS.

    Since Joppa was making a lot of parallels to WoW in the interview, I hope this doesn't mean they will also give in to whoever is bitching the loudest, like Blizzard has for the last 15 years.

    WoW wasn't my first, nor necessarily my favorite MMO, but it is the one I played the longest (2004-2011), and it's the only one I play today in the form of Classic. The game suffered over the years because of a lack of coherent design from Blizzard. Every major patch changed some core functionality of the game. Every expansion came with it a dramatic redesign of every class. The pessisimists will (and did) say it was because Blizzard just wanted to keep making money, and I'm sure there's some truth to that. I really think it was because they thought they were helping the game by appeasing the community and giving them what they were begging for. In some cases it did (Vanilla Ret Paladin vs. TBC Ret Paladin is a prime example of a good redesign of a class), and in other cases it ruined the fundamental tenets of the game (i.e. LFG/LFR). I'm also sure that attitude is the only reason the game has survived as long as it has, but at the same time looking at the core playerbase of the game now, versus the core of players 15 years ago, there is a marked difference in attitude and outlook for the game, and why they play it, and that is a big part of the reason of why I haven't played retail WoW since 2011.

    I wasn't really aware of it at the time, but sixteen years later I do a lot of work and study relative to media theory, and in that there is a general philosophy that, as much as technology is a reflection of us, so too are we shaped by it. I don't think there is a better example of that in the gaming industry than World of Warcraft. Blizzard's iterations on WoW have shaped its playerbase as much as Blizzard (and the players) have shaped the game. I hope VR are smart enough to be cognizant of that as they move forward and begin taking in tester/player feedback, and with each proposed change take into consideration what kind of players do they want to attract with Pantheon.


    This post was edited by eunichron at June 21, 2020 9:45 AM PDT
    • 1921 posts
    June 21, 2020 9:58 AM PDT

    Joppa said: I have to ask - Vjek have you watched the interview? I keep seeing a few posters here, on Reddit and a few other places with a very similar message: you only have 8 abilities.

    What I made very clear in the interview is that you will have 8 Action abilities and 6 Utility abilities available to you in combat. That is 14 abilities total. Not 8, not 12 - 14.

    When I see it consistently put forward that you will only have 8 abilities available in combat, it starts to sound like people aren't really listening, which means what could be a fantastic discussion coming from a place of clarity on both sides ends up being much less (personal jabs aside ;) ).

    Yep, you got me. I forgot to use the word "action" in one post, of all the posts I've made.  After I posted it, I thought, you know, I should maybe add 'action' in there, but nah, people will know what I mean from the context of the post.  Nope!

    As you've just re-iterated, which has been true since last year, there are 8 action abilities.  It's not mis-information to say there are 8 action abilities.  You just said it.
    There has been no enumeration, per class, of what specific skills and spells go into the 6 "other" slots.  As soon as you tell us, we'll know. 
    Until then, would speculation on what goes in the six slots be helpful? Hardly.

    The only new piece of information in the video, compared with the March video, is that there will now be a small number of consumables available on a new/tiny conusmables in-combat hotbar. 
    In March, that was not the case.  In June, it now is. No explanation as to why you changed your mind on that, but it would be intriguing to know the reason.

    Everything else about this system, as shown, designed, and discussed, is logically and in effect the same as what Chris Spears developed for Shroud of the Avatar, with their "limited action set" locked/unlocked/random hotkey/hotbar UI.  Chris Spears had the same design goals as you.  He attempted to convince the community it was awesome, same as you.
    It was met with an overwhelming negative response from the community both prior to testing and once tested.  They burned 2 years, betting the farm on a system that was logically flawed, and it failed.

    Then it took another year and a half to get Chris to relent and finally move to a traditional UI so the players were in fact playing the game, instead of fighting with the UI.  But remnants of the system remain in the game.  As you've mentioned, this is "deeply rooted" in Pantheon.  It'll likely take even longer to fix, once players realize they will be fighting the UI, not the monsters.

    • 2419 posts
    June 21, 2020 9:59 AM PDT

    eunichron said:

    disposalist said:

    I hope you don't mind if I share the essence of your query and Joppa's response, as I think it was an important query and an important response.

    Vandraad was 'pretty insistent' that Joppa should make it clear that, if the testing community disliked the LAS that VR would listen and it would/could be changed.

    Joppa basically said, yes, they will listen, tweak and, as a last resort if needed, change the LAS.

    Since Joppa was making a lot of parallels to WoW in the interview, I hope this doesn't mean they will also give in to whoever is bitching the loudest, like Blizzard has for the last 15 years.

    In light of your statement of 'whoever is bitching the loudest', I want to make it absolutely clear what my quesiton to Joppa actually entailed.  I asked that if, during the course of testing, the testers overwhelming determine that this particular design choice of LAS and not switching in combat will negatively impact the overall health of the game, that VR will change it.

    To me, that is not responding to 'those who ***** the loudest'.  I followed up later to state that such feedback from testers should be presented with logical arguments to support their position, either for or against it.

    • 273 posts
    June 21, 2020 10:10 AM PDT

    Vandraad said:

    In light of your statement of 'whoever is bitching the loudest', I want to make it absolutely clear what my quesiton to Joppa actually entailed.  I asked that if, during the course of testing, the testers overwhelming determine that this particular design choice of LAS and not switching in combat will negatively impact the overall health of the game, that VR will change it.

    To me, that is not responding to 'those who ***** the loudest'.  I followed up later to state that such feedback from testers should be presented with logical arguments to support their position, either for or against it.

    I wasn't necessarily talking about you specifically, which is why I cut your portion of the quote out of Disposalist's.

    I may not agree with everything you say, but in general I find your concerns and questions to be well thought out and presented, and I can respect that. It actually gives me a lot of hope for the game to know there are other players/testers here taking it as seriously, no matter what side of the fence they fall on.

    • 2419 posts
    June 21, 2020 10:55 AM PDT

    eunichron said:

    Vandraad said:

    In light of your statement of 'whoever is bitching the loudest', I want to make it absolutely clear what my quesiton to Joppa actually entailed.  I asked that if, during the course of testing, the testers overwhelming determine that this particular design choice of LAS and not switching in combat will negatively impact the overall health of the game, that VR will change it.

    To me, that is not responding to 'those who ***** the loudest'.  I followed up later to state that such feedback from testers should be presented with logical arguments to support their position, either for or against it.

    I wasn't necessarily talking about you specifically, which is why I cut your portion of the quote out of Disposalist's.

    I may not agree with everything you say, but in general I find your concerns and questions to be well thought out and presented, and I can respect that. It actually gives me a lot of hope for the game to know there are other players/testers here taking it as seriously, no matter what side of the fence they fall on.

    I totally get it, I do.  I went further with that conversation and promised to Joppa that I would do my very best to surpress my misgivings that my internal theorycrafting has led me to about their design choice and try to test it with an open mind. If I find that I'm incorrect in my assessment I would be the first to acknowledge it and apologize for what has been seen by  many to be attacks upon VR and support their design choice.

    Many have questioned how we can criticize a given design choice when we have not yet experience. I respond to that by saying it isn't difficult to extrapole from previous experience across 20+ years of gaming  and apply that to future possibilities, especially if you have put in the effort to know as much as possible about the game mechanics of all the games one has played.  Many people just play the game with little thought to why things are they way they are.  They just accept it.  I'm not one of those so when I'm presented with a mechanic, delving into the possibilities is second nature.


    This post was edited by Vandraad at June 21, 2020 10:59 AM PDT
    • 560 posts
    June 21, 2020 12:01 PM PDT

    @vjek I have not followed Shroud of the Avatar and so I have no idea how unpopular there LAS design was. But I have been following Pantheon and I do not see it as overwhelming negative response. I am not a VIP so maybe I do not get a full picture. It seems to me the majority of people are on the fence and hopeful about a LAS.

    I am wondering do you see the majority of players for against Pantheons LAS?

    • 1273 posts
    June 21, 2020 12:07 PM PDT

    vjek said: It'll likely take even longer to fix, once players realize they will be fighting the UI, not the monsters.

    That is a very strong assumption based on the experience from another game with a different design philosophy.  I would consider "Fighting the UI" something that is cumbersome to use, clicking things not doing what I expect them to do, difficulty in using the game as designed.  I would NOT consider a LAS having anything to do with "Fighting the UI," it's simply a design philosophy.  You calling it something like "Fighting the UI" is misleading and it really feels like you're trying to pull people into your camp by using fear tactics.  

    Let's test it out, which some people will get to do pretty soon.  Then we can start talking about it using real facts and not fear tactics.


    This post was edited by Ranarius at June 21, 2020 12:10 PM PDT
    • 2756 posts
    June 21, 2020 12:19 PM PDT

    vjek said:

     

    There has been no enumeration, per class, of what specific skills and spells go into the 6 "other" slots.  As soon as you tell us, we'll know. 
    Until then, would speculation on what goes in the six slots be helpful? Hardly.

    Joppa did say that the Action slots will be skills that cause hate/threat and Utility will be the others.

    vjek said:

    The only new piece of information in the video, compared with the March video, is that there will now be a small number of consumables available on a new/tiny conusmables in-combat hotbar.

    There was a huge amount of detail in that interview that hasn't been heard before, but that aside, what makes you think the new utility belt bar is 'tiny'? I didn't get a hint at a size.

    vjek said:

    In March, that was not the case.  In June, it now is. No explanation as to why you changed your mind on that, but it would be intriguing to know the reason.

    From the context in which he talked about the consumables, it sounds like it is because they decided to treat them like utility buffs.

    vjek said:

    Everything else about this system, as shown, designed, and discussed, is logically and in effect the same as what Chris Spears developed for Shroud of the Avatar, with their "limited action set" locked/unlocked/random hotkey/hotbar UI.  Chris Spears had the same design goals as you.  He attempted to convince the community it was awesome, same as you.
    It was met with an overwhelming negative response from the community both prior to testing and once tested.  They burned 2 years, betting the farm on a system that was logically flawed, and it failed.

    Then it took another year and a half to get Chris to relent and finally move to a traditional UI so the players were in fact playing the game, instead of fighting with the UI.  But remnants of the system remain in the game.  As you've mentioned, this is "deeply rooted" in Pantheon.  It'll likely take even longer to fix, once players realize they will be fighting the UI, not the monsters.

    Or because it is deeply rooted in the game philosophy and closely integrated with other systems it should work well?

    Perhaps it failed in Shroud because the community were so utterly unwilling even before trying it?

    Maybe something failing in Shroud doesn't mean it will fail in Pantheon even though it looks similarly designed. There are plenty of MMORPGs with UAT that failed...

    Maybe Shroud was/is just bad. I tried it ages ago and when I stopped playing it it was not because of the action set system, that's for sure.

    As I've said before, I'm not 100% for LAS, but not all LAS (or all UAS, for that matter) is the same. For me, the only implementation over the years that has been notably wonky and a significant reason for me leaving the game was ESO's and clearly plenty of people are fine with ESO.

    • 2756 posts
    June 21, 2020 12:25 PM PDT

    Ranarius said:

    vjek said: It'll likely take even longer to fix, once players realize they will be fighting the UI, not the monsters.

    That is a very strong assumption based on the experience from another game with a different design philosophy.  I would consider "Fighting the UI" something that is cumbersome to use, clicking things not doing what I expect them to do, difficulty in using the game as designed.  I would NOT consider a LAS having anything to do with "Fighting the UI," it's simply a design philosophy.  You calling it something like "Fighting the UI" is misleading and it really feels like you're trying to pull people into your camp by using fear tactics.  

    Let's test it out, which some people will get to do pretty soon.  Then we can start talking about it using real facts and not fear tactics.

    Re-memming spells in combat in Everquest was a prime experience in "fighting the UI" that some people would be ecstatic to see in Pantheon.

    Nothing Joppa has presented so far has me thinking we will be "fighting the UI" even that much. In fact, I believe one thing he is trying to avoid is 'struggling' with multiple toolbars and he often makes clear the intention to avoid people 'playing the UI' watching dozens of cooldowns and playing dance-dance-revolution with the keyboard and a flashing disco floor of skill buttons.

    • 945 posts
    June 21, 2020 12:26 PM PDT

    I find it a relief that power leveling will be less than optimal compared to EQ.  I literally made a Druid in order to later be able to level an alt to turn into my main... how F'n bizzare is that!?  Casters level WAY more easily in EQ (without a power level) and melee level super fast with a power level and the end game result for me was that the game play for melee at "end game" was far more rewarding/satisfying (opposed to having to keep your distance from everything or pray that the tanks can position well) but the low levels as a melee were absolutely horrible.

    With that said, I hope the gameplay for both casters and non-casters is somewhat equal in terms of power creep and fun gameplay.  (One example was casters having the ability to Bind anywhere being an incredibly unfair advantage that really pushes people away from playing melee once they experienced playing the other side).

    • 1273 posts
    June 21, 2020 12:36 PM PDT

    disposalist said:Re-memming spells in combat in Everquest was a prime experience in "fighting the UI"

    Hmm, I guess people will find things to complain about no matter what.  I remember thinking that re-memming spells in EQ seemed quite reasoable...even in the beginning when you were forced to stare at the spell book while doing it.  I just figured it was part of the roleplay ... You want to memorize a new spell?  You better re-read it for a minute.

    Never even would have crossed my mind that that was a UI issue, it was always a roleplay issue for me, haha.

    • 560 posts
    June 21, 2020 12:43 PM PDT

    I was wondering about how he described buffs. It sounds like a lot of them might act more like auras which I think is a cool take on buffs. It might be better if they acted more like a bard song so that if you disband from the group you still have that buff for a set amount of time. Well maybe not exactly like bards. If they do act like auras, I can see disbanding from the group only to then rebuff the group with the same buffs so they can keep them after you are gone. It seems silly that buffing a none group member would last longer then your own group.

    I felt Joppa’s explanation on how buffs will work on none group members was also well thought out. He seems to get the benefit they offer the giver and receivers. But also sees a need to curb the benefit so that it is not overpowering. I hope that a higher level to buff will be better than the one you could cast on yourself.

    • 2756 posts
    June 21, 2020 1:23 PM PDT

    Ranarius said:

    disposalist said:Re-memming spells in combat in Everquest was a prime experience in "fighting the UI"

    Hmm, I guess people will find things to complain about no matter what.  I remember thinking that re-memming spells in EQ seemed quite reasoable...even in the beginning when you were forced to stare at the spell book while doing it.  I just figured it was part of the roleplay ... You want to memorize a new spell?  You better re-read it for a minute.

    Never even would have crossed my mind that that was a UI issue, it was always a roleplay issue for me, haha.

    I agree - though the spellbook was 'unwieldy' it was justified.  What I'm saying is, if LAS is somehow "fighting the UI" then the clicky scrabbling that was re-memming mid-combat in EQ defintely is in spades.

    And I agree, people *will* find things to complain about no matter what, hehe.

    • 122 posts
    June 21, 2020 1:24 PM PDT

    Thanks for throwing that list together @disposalist

    And I agree, the new ways buffs are done sound interesting to me.  As far as buffing lower players not in your group, I hope that those buffs will still be a little better than if they were to get buffs from someone their own level.  That way they can still recognize it as a special thing, but not so powerful that low levels are given god mode.  Again, it's a balancing act.

    • 76 posts
    June 21, 2020 1:37 PM PDT

    @vjek how can you compare the LAS from Sota to the LAS in Pantheon? Shroud was a heavily instanced solo game. Much of the content was solo friendly and the end game was basically a house/castle crafting sim. I can understand a LAS in a solo game being possibly an awful concept. When you only rely on yourself to overcome obstacles a LAS can be very punshing, but Pantheon is nothing like Sota and a LAS in a group centric open world mmorpg is a much more viable concept than in a solo instanced crafting sim. When you have to rely on others to achieve a common goal it makes for much more compelling game play. In a party of 6 players having access to 30 spells/abilites at any given time means a total of 180 spells/abilites being able to be used for each encounter. Meaning you will have the answer to every encounter you come across. Not only that but it limits who you want to bring to that party. You're not going to bring 2 clerics with you if you already have one who has access to all 30 abilities. With Pantheons LAS it allows for you to bring multiple of the same classes. Say one clerics has his healing loadout set equiped and the other has more of a combat loadout. This allows for more engaging group play and the decisions you make for those encounters matter.


    This post was edited by Ogretwo at June 21, 2020 1:38 PM PDT
    • 113 posts
    June 21, 2020 3:38 PM PDT

    I think that Joppa did a great job explaining the LAS choice and various ramifications.

    I much prefered LAS in other games and having to think about which spells to have memmed over UAS with 6 hot bars on my screen.

     

    I'm confused that so much of the discussion is self centered. A ton of "My loadout" and not a lot of group loadouts. I feel like it's a mountain out of a mole hill the entire thing. You may not always know what to expect but that's why you do a quick skill check and at least cover the basics. "Who has snare? We need a couple stuns there are healers around here" It's no different than group composition and saying "You main heal, you main tank, you off tank" or something. Then you adapt. If you can't snare it you root it or stun it. If it's immune to all CC you Burn it down mana dump.

     

    IF you do fail, that's part of the adrenaline, of learning, of danger, risk vs reward, and  you have your monk FD or rogue stealth back up to your corpses whatever, you do better next time or come back in a couple levels/gear.

     

    I'm really not understanding the doom and gloom over this, it sounds very normal for a challenging mmo to me lol.

    • 122 posts
    June 21, 2020 4:32 PM PDT

    GeneralReb said:

    I'm confused that so much of the discussion is self centered. A ton of "My loadout" and not a lot of group loadouts. I feel like it's a mountain out of a mole hill the entire thing. You may not always know what to expect but that's why you do a quick skill check and at least cover the basics. "Who has snare? We need a couple stuns there are healers around here" It's no different than group composition and saying "You main heal, you main tank, you off tank" or something. Then you adapt. If you can't snare it you root it or stun it. If it's immune to all CC you Burn it down mana dump.

    This also made me think that LAS would tie in well with how people upgrade their abilities.  For example, a wizard and a warrior might both have a stun but the warrior has a more upgraded version of it so to give the wizard another spell meant for dps damage the warrior takes over stun duty.  It adds in a dynamic so that not everyone is just spamming stuns that might not be as effective.

    • VR Staff
    • 176 posts
    June 21, 2020 5:18 PM PDT

    vjek said:

    Yep, you got me. I forgot to use the word "action" in one post, of all the posts I've made.  After I posted it, I thought, you know, I should maybe add 'action' in there, but nah, people will know what I mean from the context of the post.  Nope!

    I'm not trying to "get" anyone - legitimate discussions should include a vested interest in clarity on both sides. In your post that I quoted, as well as your first post in the thread, you reference only 8 Active abilities. Since I just finished an interview where one of my main goals was to unequivocally state players will have 14 Active abilities, it should be understood why I would seek to clarify statements that sound contrary to that.

    vjek said:

    As you've just re-iterated, which has been true since last year, there are 8 action abilities.  It's not mis-information to say there are 8 action abilities.  You just said it.
    There has been no enumeration, per class, of what specific skills and spells go into the 6 "other" slots.  As soon as you tell us, we'll know. 
    Until then, would speculation on what goes in the six slots be helpful? Hardly.

    Partly why I asked if you had listened to the interview was because I further defined the difference between Action and Utility abilties. Action abilities innately modify hate on a target, Utility abilities do not.

    I'll add more flesh to those bones by outlining the known Shaman abilities by their LAS type:

    Shaman Action Abilities: Mantle line (HoT), Hand line (DH), Echo line (group HoT), Hurry the Past, Shackle line (Str/Sta debuff), Animus DoT line, Fang line (Animus DD), Fire DoT line, Water DoT line, Slow line, Tidal Wave, Erosion line (AC debuff), Headwinds

    Shaman Utility Abilities: Gate of Forgotten Eras, Grip line (Str/Stam buff), Reptilian line (Poison/Chemical resist buff), Fireclaw line (Fire/Nature resist buff), Skymane line (Melee Haste buff), Interlocking Stones (AC buff), Wisdom buff line, Cleansing Flame, Walk the Ages, Wind Strider (Movement speed buff)

    You may choose 8 of those Action abilities and 6 of those Utility abilities to have as a total of 14 active abilities in your loadout.

    vjek said:

    Everything else about this system, as shown, designed, and discussed, is logically and in effect the same as what Chris Spears developed for Shroud of the Avatar, with their "limited action set" locked/unlocked/random hotkey/hotbar UI.  Chris Spears had the same design goals as you.  He attempted to convince the community it was awesome, same as you.
    It was met with an overwhelming negative response from the community both prior to testing and once tested.  They burned 2 years, betting the farm on a system that was logically flawed, and it failed.

    Then it took another year and a half to get Chris to relent and finally move to a traditional UI so the players were in fact playing the game, instead of fighting with the UI.  But remnants of the system remain in the game.  As you've mentioned, this is "deeply rooted" in Pantheon.  It'll likely take even longer to fix, once players realize they will be fighting the UI, not the monsters.

    This is where you lose me completely. I'm actually quite familiar with SotA's Random Deck system, complete with its scratch-and-win ability cycling where you literally never knew what ability would randomly pop up on your bar in the place of the ability you just used (yes, causing you to keep your eyes locked on your hotbar because you had no idea what ability would show up next). Not to mention the slug blockers that would lock out one of those limited slots completely for a time.

    So when you say "everything about our system, all we've shown, designed and discussed, is logically and in effect the same", it's hard to know how to respond because of how disimilar the two systems are.

    Maybe you could point me to the source interview/stream/article etc. that led you to interpret the two systems as being essentially the same?