Feyshtey said:azaya said:I don't recall having to run back on raid wipes all that often. Even if everyone died there would be a break in / rez crew that would get everyone going again. And I don't recall it taking 2 hours except in some extreeme cases where our raid had to call in favors from other guilds to get bodies back, that was unusual but it could and did happen ocassionally.
Mostly you're right and the corpse run is being blown a bit out of proportion. Although I do remember at least 2 wipes in Plane of Fear that we completely failed to recover from and had to wait 24 hours for another guild to clear the zone in to get our corpses out.
In all fairness though, Fear did have a notoriously insane aggro range on spawn in. Hate was rather glitchy too, but rarely an over nighter.
Dullahan said:Gamey mechanics vs worldly mechanics.
WoW mechanics were gamey. It did nothing but remind you it was just a game. You die, you respawn at the dungeon, buff and retry. It bears no semblance to reality. There was no real loss involved and recuperation was a trivial matter.
On top of that, the fight mechanics themselves were gamey in that a small misstep of a single player in the DDR format of raiding often meant a complete wipe. To me, that doesn't mean raiding is fun. To me that is just as tedious as a corpse recovery is for you.
Raiding in EQ was more about preparation and knowledge rather than dexterity and pattern memorization. Time was the biggest challenge, not how well you executed the dance steps. Doesn't mean I don't want more skill involved than raids in early EQ, but if you are really such a fan of WoW, they just dropped a new expansion.
Also, its not about being right or wrong. To me, your opinion is clearly wrong but thats just subjective based on my desire for a virtual world, not a fantasy lobby game.
At this time, I am currently playing WoW. But, I am here because I am hopeful for an amzing game. Also, I really am not trying to argue. I just really don't believe that raid mechanics can be super awesome in a non-instanced environment. But, and I have said this many times, I want to be proven wrong. And finally, I really was not trying to say one way is better than the other, but I just really am finding grinding, lack of mechanics, and super harsh penalties for those lack of mechanics very unenjoyable. But, to each his own I guess.
Anyhow, after I respond to a couple more posts, I am done talking about this. Not that I enjoy giving up, but this is not a forum where I think my feedback is gonna count. It's like trying to convince a Trump supporter that he has flaws.
Anticlergy said:Amsai said:@Anticlergy
The only problem with that line of thinking is the lack of a feeling of danger. Oh death where is thy sting? Frustration from defeat is different, and rising to the challenge are different from a feeling of danger with real teeth. Im not saying it has to be corpse runs, but how would you do this if not corpse runs?
My personal opinon is that a harsh death penalty cannot have an engaging encounter go along with it. If the encounter is so designed so well, that it could take over 100+ attempts, there is not a snowballs chance in hell that people stick around for something like that if they need to run back for 2 hours after each wipe. Basically, I am cool with being bad and dying being something frowned upon. But, they need to seperate something like that from hard encounters. And, I don't mean hard because it ougears you, I mean hard because it takes your raid 100+ wipes to kill it. There is a difference between designing a challenging encounter and masking a challenging encounter with an awful death penalty.
My response is basically that I agree with you to a certain extent. But you also have to realize what type of game this is. Yes I do want challengeing encounters which is some of the reason I made that list above. It should be hard, no one outside your group should be bale to change the tide of battle (good or bad), it should be based on highly interdependent class role group play, and failure should be punishing (not crazy punishing but everyone has their limit). However, this is supposed to be a more social game. So some of the challenge many would argue comes from the social interaction (relying on people for corpse runs, teleports, etc). For this reason the gameplay will be a little slower and more strategic.
FFXIV while not really actiony is a perfect example of what this game should not be. Its too fast paced for proper strategy and social interaction. Many are hoping that there will not be "rotations". And Im pretty sure most people dont want highly choreographed fight sequences that play like dance dance revolution (stand here, run here, run back, run there, move away from others etc.). I know I found them annoying. I could do them with effort but I decided it wasnt worth the effort and quit because it wasnt fun like XI was for me. If this is what you mean by challenging encounters you are probably in for some dissapointment. Dungeons will feel like a dungeon crawl and not a tennis match.
The mechanical challenge will more than likely be based on a combo of group synergy, class expertise, gear check, appropriate strategy per class make up (yes there will be more than one way to do things) such as kiting, dual tanking, backwards tanking, CC checkers, etc., boss weaknesses and exploitation, environmental conditions (high heat, cold, etc), resource management (though not as far as EVEs spreadsheets in space), and the occaisional oh crap moment where you do need to move away or counter or do some gimmicky thing like drop a boulder on the bad thing. If that still sounds like tank and spank then so be it. But me and my Linkshell could and did die often to bosses in FFXI, and it was considered more or less tank and spank for a lot of things. And sometimes encounters could be a lot tougher for one class set up then another. Things had away of not going according to plan as well. But I never experienced this in FFXIV. If everyone knew what they were doing then it was always a garunteed win. I would just say when you think of death penalty, challenge, and skill you will also have to include immersion and social interaction into your though process for this game. But as I said earlier, there is a ballance: immersion, social interaction, mechanics.
Feyshtey said:The rest of your post really isnt applicable, so I'll just stick with this.
I never associated the difficulty of the encounter with the punishment for failure. What I said was that if the penalty sucks, you will fear it. When you fear it, you appreciate success more. It's not complicated.
I agree with you man. But, my point was that if the encounter has amzing mechanics then I am cool as hell with a death penalty. I am just not cool with a death penalty for the sake of having one. My entire point in every post that I have made is that I want this game to have engaging mechanics. Now, I will not lie and say I cannot see how they can pull that off in an open world setting, but I am all for being proven wrong.
Anyhow, I am not trying to argue. I just think that you and I have different things we enjoy. And, there is not getting through to either of us it seems. So, I will be sitting back and watching from here on out. Not because I don't want to give feedback, but because I feel that it is gonna fall on deaf ears. I am just gonna hope that the Devs pull off something amazing.
Amsai said:Anticlergy said:Amsai said:@Anticlergy
The only problem with that line of thinking is the lack of a feeling of danger. Oh death where is thy sting? Frustration from defeat is different, and rising to the challenge are different from a feeling of danger with real teeth. Im not saying it has to be corpse runs, but how would you do this if not corpse runs?
My personal opinon is that a harsh death penalty cannot have an engaging encounter go along with it. If the encounter is so designed so well, that it could take over 100+ attempts, there is not a snowballs chance in hell that people stick around for something like that if they need to run back for 2 hours after each wipe. Basically, I am cool with being bad and dying being something frowned upon. But, they need to seperate something like that from hard encounters. And, I don't mean hard because it ougears you, I mean hard because it takes your raid 100+ wipes to kill it. There is a difference between designing a challenging encounter and masking a challenging encounter with an awful death penalty.
My response is basically that I agree with you to a certain extent. But you also have to realize what type of game this is. Yes I do want challengeing encounters which is some of the reason I made that list above. It should be hard, no one outside your group should be bale to change the tide of battle (good or bad), it should be based on highly interdependent class role group play, and failure should be punishing (not crazy punishing but everyone has their limit). However, this is supposed to be a more social game. So some of the challenge many would argue comes from the social interaction (relying on people for corpse runs, teleports, etc). For this reason the gameplay will be a little slower and more strategic.
FFXIV while not really actiony is a perfect example of what this game should not be. Its too fast paced for proper strategy and social interaction. Many are hoping that there will not be "rotations". And Im pretty sure most people dont want highly choreographed fight sequences that play like dance dance revolution (stand here, run here, run back, run there, move away from others etc.). I know I found them annoying. I could do them with effort but I decided it wasnt worth the effort and quit because it wasnt fun like XI was for me. If this is what you mean by challenging encounters you are probably in for some dissapointment. Dungeons will feel like a dungeon crawl and not a tennis match.
The mechanical challenge will more than likely be based on a combo of group synergy, class expertise, gear check, appropriate strategy per class make up (yes there will be more than one way to do things) such as kiting, dual tanking, backwards tanking, CC checkers, etc., boss weaknesses and exploitation, environmental conditions (high heat, cold, etc), resource management (though not as far as EVEs spreadsheets in space), and the occaisional oh crap moment where you do need to move away or counter or do some gimmicky thing like drop a boulder on the bad thing. If that still sounds like tank and spank then so be it. But me and my Linkshell could and did die often to bosses in FFXI, and it was considered more or less tank and spank for a lot of things. And sometimes encounters could be a lot tougher for one class set up then another. Things had away of not going according to plan as well. But I never experienced this in FFXIV. If everyone knew what they were doing then it was always a garunteed win. I would just say when you think of death penalty, challenge, and skill you will also have to include immersion and social interaction into your though process for this game. But as I said earlier, there is a ballance: immersion, social interaction, mechanics.
I can totally see your points about scripted mechanics. I also agree with your depiction of FF14. I just hope that the Devs make something amzing here. I really do. I just want a new game with amazing content.
Amsai said:The mechanical challenge will more than likely be based on a combo of group synergy, class expertise, gear check, appropriate strategy per class make up (yes there will be more than one way to do things) such as kiting, dual tanking, backwards tanking, CC checkers, etc., boss weaknesses and exploitation, environmental conditions (high heat, cold, etc), resource management (though not as far as EVEs spreadsheets in space), and the occaisional oh crap moment where you do need to move away or counter or do some gimmicky thing like drop a boulder on the bad thing. If that still sounds like tank and spank then so be it. But me and my Linkshell could and did die often to bosses in FFXI, and it was considered more or less tank and spank for a lot of things
This is a great breakdown of ways of making something challenging, without making it purely a skill check. All of these things lend themselves more to time devotion, cooperation and knowledge, rather than reaction time. They are in and of themselves challenging, but its more about the time required to learn the encounter, to bring the necessary classes, obtain the necessary equipment and abilities, when and what abilities to utilize. Strategy, planning, knowledge which all require time (vs reflex/memorization).
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/2771/spell-limits/view/post_id/43130
You lost me when you said "real" mechanics. I understand the benefits of instanced based raiding (just finished 5 years in RIFT) and I agree what you mean by bringing those kind of mechanics that being in a specified environment are vs say being in an overland and you're surrounded by individuals. So I will agree with you that there are somethings that can not be done in that more broader environment vs one that is build for the encounter. But assuming you have done some overland raiding, one of those "added mechanics" is knowing that others are watching and you wiping mean you may not get that fight...at all. That was always that extra "pressure"
Dullahan said: Gamey mechanics vs worldly mechanics.WoW mechanics were gamey. It did nothing but remind you it was just a game. You die, you respawn at the dungeon, buff and retry. It bears no semblance to reality. There was no real loss involved and recuperation was a trivial matter.
On top of that, the fight mechanics themselves were gamey in that a small misstep of a single player in the DDR format of raiding often meant a complete wipe. To me, that doesn't mean raiding is fun. To me that is just as tedious as a corpse recovery is for you.
Raiding in EQ was more about preparation and knowledge rather than dexterity and pattern memorization. Time was the biggest challenge, not how well you executed the dance steps. Doesn't mean I don't want more skill involved than raids in early EQ, but if you are really such a fan of WoW, they just dropped a new expansion.
Also, its not about being right or wrong. To me, your opinion is clearly wrong but thats just subjective based on my desire for a virtual world, not a fantasy lobby game.
It comes down to exactly this for a lot of the main contentious issues.
Not "good" or "bad" mechanics, objectively, but mechanics that dictate what kind of game you have.
Having encounters that are "difficult" because you might fail 100 times (in one long night) before you get it right makes for one kind of game.
Having encounters that are "difficult" because you might need to prepare for 10 hours and if you fail it will take 2 hours to try again makes for another kind of game.
I think most of the folks in this forum interested in Pantheon are leaning toward more emphasis time for preparation and recovery because it tends to make for a slower paced, more tactical and social game. The faster paced, try-die-try-die-repeat is less attractive simply for the way it plays, not because it's a fundamentally "wrong" mechanic.
There is a tendancy in these forums for people to say "no, that's wrong" when a more 'correct' response might be "I'd prefer not because that would probably make the game play less how I'd like it".