Forums » General Pantheon Discussion

How strong should enemies be?

    • 438 posts
    August 14, 2018 7:53 PM PDT
    *youre not up for
    • 19 posts
    August 14, 2018 8:03 PM PDT

    Personally, I'm a fan of the FFXI model.

    Early on, you can defeat mobs with equal level fairly easy. Around the time you hit level 12, you can probably still defeat them solo, but not without a lot of downtime (especially if you are a mage) and it just keeps going that route until level 25 or so when it becomes very likely that you will lose. Around level 50 it's starts to curve a bit back the other way with many jobs having an incredibly toolset and you can conceivably defeat even enemies that are a bit higher level with a lot of time invested.

    I don't know how similar it is to EQ, but after 12 leveling solo becomes very time consuming and just not possible with certain jobs. The very idea of gaining a single level solo after 20 is laughable. I seem to recall doing that math on one of my more solo adept jobs at level 70. I was able to kill enemies that were a few levels higher then me solo... I think I calculated it would take me over 80 hours of play to gain single level.

    • 40 posts
    August 14, 2018 8:11 PM PDT

    Jhey said:

    Personally, I'm a fan of the FFXI model.

    Early on, you can defeat mobs with equal level fairly easy. Around the time you hit level 12, you can probably still defeat them solo, but not without a lot of downtime (especially if you are a mage) and it just keeps going that route until level 25 or so when it becomes very likely that you will lose. Around level 50 it's starts to curve a bit back the other way with many jobs having an incredibly toolset and you can conceivably defeat even enemies that are a bit higher level with a lot of time invested.

    I don't know how similar it is to EQ, but after 12 leveling solo becomes very time consuming and just not possible with certain jobs. The very idea of gaining a single level solo after 20 is laughable. I seem to recall doing that math on one of my more solo adept jobs at level 70. I was able to kill enemies that were a few levels higher then me solo... I think I calculated it would take me over 80 hours of play to gain single level.

     

    The only difference in the models being that when you change classes you carry your skill ups with you over to the next Job.  Not enough to be game breaing, but if you use shared weapons it's a huge boon and your parry rate is capped for low levels as well.  They'll likely balance it out in a meaningful way.

    • 134 posts
    August 14, 2018 8:12 PM PDT

    FULL PASS on that. And I mean this kindly, by the way.

     

    My characters in EQ felt super powerful, even though they needed to be in a group to do content 99% of the time. So I'm good on having to feel 'epic'. Heck - I'm willing to bet most of us don't even want to feel 'epic'. Games now adays try to make people feel like they're special or legendary and I"m sick of it. I want to be a run-of-the-mill Bard, trying my best to stand out from the crowd and having adventures and misadventures along the way.

     

    Not another FFXIV - where you zone into a dungeon, pull the first half of the zone, AOE spam it down, then rinse and repeat.

     

    Enemies should be difficult to take down and require groups. Soloing should be possible only with classes that have the tools to pull it off via kiting, root dotting, fear dotting, and kiting in general in addition to just outright being much higher level than the enemy.

     

    I don't want a graveyard game where everyone just runs around soloing. If you want that kind of gameplay there are HUNDREDS of MMOs out there that have it.

     

    View this game as Dungeons and Dragons. You want a party with you all the time.

     

    So to answer your questions.

     

    So anyway, what do you guys think about enemy strength?

    Looking good so far, could be harder.

     

    Do you, like me, want enemies to have roughly the same power as a player character of the same level?

    Absolutely not. If that were the case no one would ever group.

     

    Or do you want them to be stronger?

    Yes, much, much stronger.


    This post was edited by Dhampir at August 14, 2018 8:12 PM PDT
    • 209 posts
    August 14, 2018 8:15 PM PDT

    bigdogchris said:

    I've thought about this too.

    It's odd that a group of level 20's have to team up to kill 1 level 20 enemy. I would expect a group of level 20's have to team up to kill 1 level 30ish, and that a level 20 character had a 50/50 chance of soloing a level 20 mob.

    That said, I still want the XP/leveling rate to be based on grouping, regardless of what level the mobs are.

    Maybe @Joppa can share his experiences with designing the game and why it makes more sense or is easier to face similar level enemies as a group, rather than a group facing higher level mobs as normal progression.

    Yeah, in EQOA the con was based on the individual, not the group. Groups would generally grind things 2 or 3 levels higher than their own for max xp (but a level 20 group would still be slaughtered by a single level 30 enemy). Even then, if two mobs were pulled at once and one wasn't promptly rooted, things would get dicey, so it was never easy.

    As some people have mentioned, CC will play a big role in Pantheon (far bigger than in EQOA), and that may be a reason why the same kind of power scaling wouldn't work so well. But I too would be interested to hear them talk about this.

    • 388 posts
    August 14, 2018 8:31 PM PDT

    I think people should be able to solo green to yellow cons up to lev 10-ish,

    then high go to white/blue til around 15,

    then low blues (and of course green) from then on. (there were 3 levels of blue in EQ1 and even a Light blue if I remember right) 

    basically copy the EQ1 standards. If you knew what you were doing, and didn't mind how long it took, you could solo 1 to 50. it just took 2 years ;p 

    (still think Fiona is too hard for the levels that will be in that area) 

     


    This post was edited by Flapp at August 14, 2018 8:32 PM PDT
    • 209 posts
    August 14, 2018 8:35 PM PDT

    dorotea said:

    Grouping should be encouraged but not mandatory and there should be plenty to do when not in a group. Yes I agree soloing should be slower and give fewer rewards but it should be perfectly viable from level 1 to level-cap.

    I too would like to see soloing be slow with fewer rewards, but not completely impossible. Using EQOA as an example again, all serious xp grinding needed to be done in a group, but soloing the odd enemy here and there was always an option. It was actually less solo-friendly than what you're describing, because there was no feasible way to solo from level 1 to max level. But at least there were certain things one could do solo if they didn't feel like grouping for whatever reason that day.

    dorotea said:

    Some of my posts are directed to lobbying VR, or at least pointing out reasons why my preferred approach makes sense for them. This one is not. It doesn't need to be they have confirmed repeatedly that Pantheon will be group-focused but solo-friendly and largely for the reasons I mention.

    I've always been glad to hear that there will be some solo content in Pantheon. I'm mostly curious if that content will be soloable because the con system will be different (like non-elite rather than elite mobs) or if it will be because there are literally areas with fewer mobs packed together. Time will tell. :)

    • 209 posts
    August 14, 2018 8:46 PM PDT

    Bronsun said:

    Get into the game before you start changing it.

    I’m certainly not trying to change the game, only giving my opinion on something that, as far as I know, hasn’t been set in stone yet. I’m sure VR values our feedback, even if they end up going in a different direction, and I think the best time to share our thoughts is before we’re all in the game and things are locked in. Just because I have a preference doesn’t mean I’m in the majority, or that it would be the best thing for the game if it were implemented. The devs have to make the call on that. But it can’t hurt to share it and let others share their ideas as well.

    • 209 posts
    August 14, 2018 8:51 PM PDT

    Thanks, everyone, for your responses. A lot of interesting points of view here. I actually never realized what a difference there was in the con system between EQ and EQOA, and the FFXI model is new to me as well. I'm very interested to see how conning and soloing are handled as the game heads into alpha and beta.

    • 67 posts
    August 14, 2018 11:09 PM PDT

    I think it is pretty hard to compare two fights with different mobs and different PC classes even at the same level. A caster will have a hard time against a caster mob, whereas some melees who can interrupt the spells can kill it more easy. However, a caster should have an advantage against a pure melee mob, if he can keep the distance. 

    I also understand the point that a group of 20s should kill a mob of lvl30. In EQ you had a hard time to perform a good hit when the mob was 10 levels above yourself, even worse for spells ... And actually i think that makes sense! A mobs level does not only mean it has more HP, MP and more stats, but it will resist spells more often, land more spells on you and same for hits. 

    Time will tell, I see good points for easier mobs, but I also understand the way it is right now. There are so many factors when it comes to soloing, that it is hard to say "A lvl 20 char should have a 50/50 chance to kill a lvl 20 mob". You cant say that without dismissing unifying monsters and classes ... and thats boring.

    • 768 posts
    August 14, 2018 11:18 PM PDT

    Obviously it's too soon to call for anything gamechanging. 

    When solo: fighting a bunny should be fairly easy as long as you have a stone to throw. fighting a farmer on his land, should still be manageable if you have some experience under your belt. If your mentor has just given you your first cloth armwraps it would still not be a surewin. If you return to that farmer with an actual sword and shield, he would be no match for you. When you encounter an evil rogue, that shield and sword might be a necessity if you want to come out of the encounter alive. When you return to that rogue with expert skills and mastercrafted weaponry, you could win the fight more easely. If you encouter a tribal Lord, you'll need some luck and all the previous to win this solo battle.              (bring a friend and you'll win more easely ofc)

    So to say that equal level cons should be easy or difficult is not something so obviously definable. There should be degrees in difficulty. Fighting a deer or a wolf could (should?) be a different experience. If I want to travel alone on Terminus I should be able to. With some sensation of risk and avoiding certain mobs, I should be able to reach most solo content on my own (puzzlehurdles not included ofc).

    I like how Pantheon has handled the killrate so far in grouporiented zones. 

    First off, other players might tackle mobs more effectively/efficiently than the dev's in their streams. Even they are still learning how to play their own game, so give them credit for showcasing the best they can so far. The game and the players in it are not yet honed to perfection, so the degree of difficulty during fights could altered merely based on that.

    Second; No hack/slash buttonsmash fest please for any kind of encounter. If you hardly have the time to work in a combat art or 2 before the mob is down, something is clearly offkey.

    And third; when it comes to levels. I see a logic in a higher level mob resisting a lower leveld player's ca's/spells. You'ld just have a harder time getting those hits in. Same goes for group content. There is no need for those levels to be different (lvl 50 player vs lvl 60 mob). It could already be sufficient to maintain 50-50. I'ld go even so far as to say that a 50PC should not be able to kill a 70NPC. The loot and xp he'ld get should not be useful for a lvl 50 PC. But that's just me.

     


    This post was edited by Barin999 at August 14, 2018 11:25 PM PDT
    • 363 posts
    August 14, 2018 11:24 PM PDT

    Gyldervane said:

    I’m certainly not trying to change the game, only giving my opinion on something that, as far as I know, hasn’t been set in stone yet. I’m sure VR values our feedback, even if they end up going in a different direction, and I think the best time to share our thoughts is before we’re all in the game and things are locked in. Just because I have a preference doesn’t mean I’m in the majority, or that it would be the best thing for the game if it were implemented. The devs have to make the call on that. But it can’t hurt to share it and let others share their ideas as well.

    Yup. I'm just waiting to see what they come up with first, and then if I don't like it I'll have plenty to say in Alpha and Beta.  From what I have seen, its pretty spot on to what I was hoping for.  In fact I'm thinking it could be harder, but I'm waiting to see some train footage before I make my final judgement. Trains can wipe a zone if done correctly. :D

    As for soloing, I'm sure there will be rats a plenty!  ;)


    This post was edited by Willeg at August 15, 2018 7:23 AM PDT
    • 313 posts
    August 15, 2018 12:19 AM PDT

    Flapp said:

    (still think Fiona is too hard for the levels that will be in that area) 

     

     

    Not sure if she's too hard, but she certainly isn't melee friendly...  Obviously it's too early for serious complaints, but if she stays like she is, there's going to be a lot of salt from melee DPS.

    • 58 posts
    August 15, 2018 6:13 AM PDT

    It does strike an odd chord that it would take a warrior, ranger, wizard, enchanter, cleric and rogue to defeat a "random bandit 01" of equal level... and then they move on to the next random bandit.  

    I think it's less so when the MOB is a giant snake or bear, or a dragon.

     

    Some games have addressed this successfully.  I think City of Heroes was one.  That game had different classes of MOBS, the loweliest being "minions."  A Hero could defeat several minions, but stronger foes could go toe-to-toe with player characters- and require better tactics or bigger groups.   

     

    I do like the tactical feel of the combat and the planning and thought required when the MOBS are hard.  

    • 2138 posts
    August 15, 2018 6:17 AM PDT

    Flapp said:

     

    (still think Fiona is too hard for the levels that will be in that area) 

     

    Yes, Fion is the higher level NPC wandering around the lower area, something to learn and be wary of. Since she wanders maybe she starts higher up in the keep and then makes her course down and then up again.

    But I could see higher levels coming back in, (or back out!) for some revenge against Fion. Also, she was defeatable. I think Koopa could have kept up if he was more familiar with the shaman class- and he was the only healer. In the next attempt (with Hiveleader?) they had 2 healers I think- it was still a challenge even then and the devs did mention they were trying something out of their league in going after Fion.

     I thought this was cool because it reminded me of some group experiences I had where the group I was in got accidentally tight just from us being on at the same time fairly regularly and we got confidence which had us accidentally doing harder things- which gave us MORE confidence and made wipes against hard monsters less humbling. It also had us thinking about maybe making the decision to join a guild as a tight functioning group, provided we could "guest" more members of a particular guild in our group before making a decision and also be invited into some of their guild groups - away from our normal group- to see if we meshed.

    • 245 posts
    August 15, 2018 6:36 AM PDT

    http://www.wolfsheadonline.com/the-everquest-paradox/

     

    This is exactly what we need, challenges that continuously slowly increase as we level. it's what made EQ so great and what made all the MMOs since EQ that lack it feel boring or easy.

     

    Requesting soloable content at all levels is what has dumbed down and ruined many modern MMOs.

     

    I seriously doubt we will see a lot of soloable mobs in Pantheon, or people will solo the content they have surpassed at a group stage but can now solo. Say a level 35 character soloing goblins in HHK, but a level 25-30 group would take down 6v1.

    if you want lots of soloable content then I really don't think this game is right for you, you should probably look at an MMO that's built like that, your choice is essentially any MMO in existance except EQ and Pantheon.

    • 3852 posts
    August 15, 2018 6:55 AM PDT

    >Requesting soloable content at all levels is what has dumbed down and ruined many modern MMOs.<

    I would say that having solo content comparable to or better than group content in terms of speed of leveling is one of the things that has ruined many MMOs. Most MMOs I have played (not a small number) soloing is the way to go for fast progress - other than speed-leveling groups. Normal groups are useless for experience, they just give possibly better gear which doesn't matter since you outlevel gear so fast.

    Let us hypothetically say that in Pantheon there is soloable content at all levels but the gear you get is distinctly worse than the gear you can get doing group content and you gain levels half as fast. So the solo content is intended for people that *really* don't like grouping but enjoy old-school style games (so their subscription money helps support the rest of us) and as a fallback for the rest of us on days when we can't group but want to be in the game. 

    Would you consider this a bad thing? Is your view that Pantheon should be group content only rather than grouping preferred but soloing accomodated but distinctly inferior?

    • 1315 posts
    August 15, 2018 7:02 AM PDT

    Rather than the strength of a single mob I am more interested in the strength of an encounter.  There could be single mob encounters in which case they are single pullable and only their strength matters.  There could be pairs or trios that a group can just brute force kill.  There could be an elite mob with multiple minions that need a combination of tanking, off tanking and burst AOE.  There could be an elite mixed combat group that needs complex CC and target priority for a skilled group to be able to defeat.  There could even be mobs that intentionally hide behind cover and use ranged attacks.

    The idea of soloing would be limited to finding single mob encounters with enough space that you would not end up agroing the larger encounters.  Due to encounter size experience bonuses single mob encounters would also be the least time efficient way to exp.

    All of this requires a specific type of AI design and doing away with the idea of single pulling mobs out of a group.

    • 3852 posts
    August 15, 2018 7:25 AM PDT

    >All of this requires a specific type of AI design and doing away with the idea of single pulling mobs out of a group.<

    I agree with everything you say other than this. 

    A good solo area could have individual mobs not groups of linked mobs. Thus the AI would be the same as anywhere else and you wouldn't need to pull mobs out of a group. The experience would be tailored to be a lot less rewarding. There would still be challenge - I am not suggesting WoW type areas in Pantheon. One at-level enemy might kill you. Some classes might only be able to solo lower level enemies.

    • 470 posts
    August 15, 2018 7:30 AM PDT

    Gyldervane said:

    1. It allows for at least a bit of soloing.

    Even if most content isn’t supposed to be soloed, I feel there should always be a certain amount that a solo player can do on his/her own. Having enemies on a power scale that more or less mirrors that of the player (a level 30 orc being about as strong as a decently geared level 30 player, for instance) allows the solo player to kill the odd mob here and there without having to call in reinforcements. Promoting grouping and socialization is very important, but I feel a little bit of self-sufficiency is important as well.

    I don't think soloing should be removed entirely, but I do believe NPCs should be stronger than the average player and here's why: If you've played pretty much any recent MMORPG and you've played say, older EverQuest, this will make more sense. But the easier you make the mobs, the easier they will be for groups to simply annihilate. It's in a lot of ways the difference of what we see group gameplay in Pantheon now as, where you have to be careful with pulls, use crowd control, mind the adds, and assist the tank vs just pulling a whole gaggle and AoEing them down rapid fire style. That last one happens so much in modern MMORPGs that I've honestly taken a break from even playing them. And I love me some MMORPGs.

    Before everyone got ubered out in EQ, you had to play more tactful. That's what a lot of us are hoping for with Pantheon. My more recent return to EQ came when Coirnav serverlaunched. I played that for a while and jumped between that and Agnar. But with everyone fresh at the time, having some of those fun trods through Kael Drakel and Velketor's Labyrinth were fun again. You couldn't solo mobs in there unless you were one of those really crafty "better at soloing classes" like the druid with a hefty mana regen buff and a lot of luck with not getting resisted.

    2.   It makes your character feel more epic.

    For me, knowing that my character is as strong as an enemy of the same level makes it feel like my character is a powerful adventurer in his own right. Even if the vast majority of his career will be spent grouping with others, it’s still nice to know that he can at least hold his own against a single supposedly equal adversary. Where is the satisfaction in working to build your power through levels, gear, and abilities if you’re always lagging behind a lowly goblin scout of the same level? Again, strength in numbers is great, but I feel there is something to be said for personal strength as well.

    Now, I really want to emphasize that just because I’d like to see enemy strength toned down a bit, that does not mean that I’m advocating for a WoW-esque easy mode experience where a player can blow through legions of baddies solo. Like most of us, I absolutely want the game to encourage grouping, and for most of the content to require it. But I would personally rather see the challenge in combat come from a slightly larger number of equal-strength enemies than from a smaller number of pound-for-pound superior enemies. This was how it worked in EQOA (I never actually played the original EQ), and it was the best combat system of any game I’ve played. In EQOA, a player could usually expect to be able to solo a white con (same level) opponent, though they might lose a large chunk of their life in the process and need to rest and eat to regenerate health and mana afterward. It was definitely not possible to solo one enemy after another with any sort of speed, and grinding xp was always done in a group because of this. Also, getting attacked by two or more white cons at once (let alone yellow or red) would usually result in certain death, so you had to be really careful about your pulls. Dungeons and the like could only be attempted in a full group, and were still fraught with peril, as it was very easy to end up getting attacked by several enemies at once and being overwhelmed. I liked this balance a lot because it made your character seem strong while also still making grouping absolutely imperative for the vast majority of content. One big difference I do see between EQOA and Pantheon, however, is that in EQOA groups were only four people compared to Pantheon’s six. Perhaps this difference would make it difficult or impossible to balance combat in the same way. For all I know, maybe enemies have to be stronger than players in order to keep from breaking the game somehow. I can’t speak to whether or not that’s the case, but I just wanted to share my own opinions about how I would like to see enemy strength calibrated, assuming it’s possible to do it that way.

    So anyway, what do you guys think about enemy strength? Do you, like me, want enemies to have roughly the same power as a player character of the same level? Or do you want them to be stronger? I’d like to hear people’s thoughts.

    The unfortunate part here is that if the enemies are equal in strength and power to a group, they pretty mcuh will be meat for the grinder. In a lot of ways this is the model used by WoW, GW2, and a multitude of others for enemies (epics being a sort of exception). And they get pulled in several at a time and the AoE hammer dropped. Boosting the hp seems like such a low tech addition to challenge, but it's a tried a true method that works. When those AoE's don't rapidly drop those mobs, they start dwindling you down. And in comes the need for crowd control. And this too is the reason many post-2004 MMORPGs don't even have crowd control dedicated classes. 

    I see you played EQOA. I never did play that and to me it, from video I watched at the time, appeared to be a lot like early EQII, which I hated by way of how combat functioned. But I did play the original EQ. If you would like a sample of how this gameplay works in practice, I recommend subbing to EverQuest when they start up a new Progression server and give it a try. It's not quite the same these days with all the changes and such, but it'll give you a taste. But if you want more of an old school EQ taste, try Project 1999. That's an EQ emulator server that's way more old school. You just need to...~cough~ acquire the software to play.

    The thing about old EQ is you could solo better with some classes as not all classes were created equal (nor should they be). Druids, wizards, and enchanters were great at soloing. Warriors could, but uh, they had to be careful. :)

    http://www.gucomics.com/20000816

    PS: I loved those EQ line of comics.


    This post was edited by Kratuk at August 15, 2018 7:31 AM PDT
    • 1315 posts
    August 15, 2018 7:52 AM PDT

    dorotea said:

    >All of this requires a specific type of AI design and doing away with the idea of single pulling mobs out of a group.<

    I agree with everything you say other than this. 

    A good solo area could have individual mobs not groups of linked mobs. Thus the AI would be the same as anywhere else and you wouldn't need to pull mobs out of a group. The experience would be tailored to be a lot less rewarding. There would still be challenge - I am not suggesting WoW type areas in Pantheon. One at-level enemy might kill you. Some classes might only be able to solo lower level enemies.

    The special AI I was refering to was more the combination of agro linked mobs and mobs that will actually follow small unit tactics rather than just run up and face grind.  A group of solo mobs can be single pulled but the 2 weapon orc fighter can not be pulled out of the group consisting of an orc sword and board, orc with a bow, orc shaman and orc druid as they are linked.

    • 801 posts
    August 15, 2018 8:10 AM PDT

    It should take at least 24 mini raid to be able to take down a mini boss, and the larger versions a full raidish. If you do it with less, only means your top gamers. However getting these full raids to all come out past 40 is getting really hard these days.

     

    Tanks stop logging in, feeling useless, as usual. So make the tank worthy this time around. I am honestly sick of hearing it, and they get the ability to whine so bad and get us all nerfed.

     

    Clerics hard as heck finding, they are burnt out from logging into every raid because thats all they do is heal... give them an extra bone....

     

    Enchanters, OH they are OP not!!! we need them but only a few to mez the mobs. then later expansions ok we dont need you to play a enchanter anymore, ply a mage, or a off healer. Like really?

     

    So thats pretty much it, except for the other whines we need more DPS.

     

    Fix that and maybe we might have 100 raids again.... Just saying it wasnt all the fun.

    • 2752 posts
    August 15, 2018 3:21 PM PDT

    dorotea said:

    No problem with people being able to solo (though content shouldn't be designed specifically for soloing) as long as it takes at least twice as long to level. Most classes should be scraping by off light blues to solo (unless there ends up being a separate con system for solo players). 

    • 1281 posts
    August 15, 2018 3:50 PM PDT

    Bronsun said:

    Get into the game before you start changing it.

    I'm not asking for it to be changed. I just am curious to why MMO's (not just Pantheon) are designed this way. There must be something us outsiders are not seeing.


    This post was edited by bigdogchris at August 15, 2018 3:51 PM PDT
    • 2752 posts
    August 15, 2018 4:35 PM PDT

    bigdogchris said:

    I'm not asking for it to be changed. I just am curious to why MMO's (not just Pantheon) are designed this way. There must be something us outsiders are not seeing.

     

    A "level" 20 orc isn't the same as a level 20 player. When an npc is listed as "level" 20 what it is really saying is that the npc/mob has a strength level intended to be challenging to a level 20 group (or player for many modern solo MMOs). While yes it is listed as a level 20 orc, the orc isn't really level 20 in the same way a player is level 20.