Green Monster Games - Curt Schilling

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!

Draegan_sl

2 Minutes Hate
10,034
3
Yes and it"s difficult. Instead of making things simple, Tad is complicated by expanding the Holy Trinity to the Holy Quadality (is that even a word?) where you need Tank DPS Healing and Ninja

Edit:
@Genjiro
Stop with the FD pulling crap. Tad is the biggest Monk homer ever, and you"re obviously obsessed with the class as well. So there is no rational argument to be had.
 

Twobit_sl

shitlord
6
0
Genjiro said:
There is a big difference between being required, and adding in pulling skills to simply make things easier, the exact fucking same way crowd control spells like sheep and mez do. Did you need the monk to fd pull? No. Was it required? No.
Uqua disagrees. Juggs around Trak disagree too. Trash in PoTime disagrees also. Half of PoFire disagrees. There was a ton of shit that required FD.
 

Campa_foh

shitlord
0
0
Draegan said:
You"re still gonna get people playing Tanks, Healers, Damage. And pre-reqs for any of the good skills are gonna force you down a certain path anyway. Skill Based systems only allow for more useless hybrid builds. Dev"s still have to account for certain abilities in their dungeons no matter which way you paint it.
As has been said a wider variety of options available to the players should allow the developers a wider range of content design. If the content continues to only be designed with the holy trinity as the only option then that"s how things will continue to be.

But there is nothing, except for dev time, preventing an encounter being designed that can be both a normal 5-man Tank n" Spank for a typical Tank/Healer/CC/DPSx2 group but also how a couple of alternative ways to kill the Boss that take advantage of other skills the game allows.

Lets say for example there is a game using a skill based system that still allows for people to make the "Pure" templates but also includes a number of skills that would be considered outside the norm. For this example 5 of those skills are: Climbing, Demolition, Entice, Invisibility, & Lockpicking.

Group Makeup:
1 - Pure Tank
2 - Pure Healer
3 - Hybrid CC w/ lockpicking, invis, & entice (though I guess entice could be considered a CC skill)
4 - Pure DPS
5 - Hybrid DPS w/ climbing & demolition

In an area above part of the Boss" patrol path is a ledge with some large boulders on it and in an adjacent room behind a locked gate is another mob you typically end up fighting further in the instance. When the group enters the area with the Boss they notice the boulders above his patrol path & the mob in the adjacent room. They notice there is path off to side of the room that would give a climbing path for their hybrid DPS to get to the area beneath the boulders and would let him place some explosives under the ledge that would bring the boulders crashing down onto the boss.

However this path has a number of pulls in the way that a normal group would just be able to bypass. So the group proceeds clearing the path and as the climber prepares to do his job, the CC hybrid makes his way back down and towards the locked down taking advantage of his ability to invis to avoid aggro"ing the Boss. As the DPS hybrid sets the explosives and moves away from them, the CC hybrid begins picking the lock.

As the explosion rains boulders down on the Boss the CC hybrid opens the door allowing the mob in the adjacent room to wander in and check out the commotion, at which point he entices him to engage the now severely injured and unable to stand Boss.

At this point the rest of the group engages in the fight on the Boss while the CC hybrid continues to use his entice skill to keep control of the other mob. But entice can only last so long so the group must get the Boss down before it is up. Thankfully the boulders have brought the Boss down to 50% and because he can"t get out from beneath them disallows him his typical bonuses to evade & dodge plus prevents use of his AoE stomp attack. However he does gain the ability to launch boulders at the players and he is enraged from the amount of damage he has taken. With the enticed mob acting as the tank on the Boss, the group"s Tank can start building up aggro on the enticed mob knowing the CC hybrid has a huge threat value with the mob.

If things go well the Tank should be able to get to the top of the mobs threat table before the Boss is killed. If not and the group can"t burn down the mob quick enough before he kills the CC hybrid then the DPS hybrid is going to have to use his long cooldown (like way long given the usefulness) stun grenade to disorient the mob and clear the threat table.



There is nothing about the tech currently available that would prevent such an encounter. The only thing that would be required is spending the time designing the encounter to allow for it and testing/balancing as best as it can be done. It is more work from the encounter design perspective but it gives players more options & improves replayability which are 2 things MMOs have been regressing on lately IMO. I think we are all in agreement things can take longer to be delivered as long as we see that extra time was well spent.
 

Gaereth_foh

shitlord
0
0
Twobit Whore said:
Yeah.. except if you have any PvP at all in your game you can be damn sure everyone will want to melt faces, oh and they might have a lockpicking alt.

But you are wrong, I do understand what you are saying and as I said yesterday.. why couldn"t you have those be "secondary skills" in a class system? Maybe one person takes the picklock secondary skill on their warrior and the priest takes climbing..

What makes this system a skill-based system exclusive that couldn"t be done just as well with a class-based one? Why would it be better? Is it simply the illusion of choice that makes it preferable?
Yes...pvp makes it interesting until the anti-facemelter shows up to block the facemelter. Then the anti-anti-facemelter shows up, etc, etc, etc. What matters is that you have counters, checks, and balances. If someone chooses to make their character all about assisting others then they damn well should get kerploded in PvP by the facemelter.

Secondary skills on top of a template is cool....classes with meaningful skills after the basic class is fine because you are just extending the skills of the class.

A class is just a pre-assigned skill tree and I would prefer to define my own skill tree. I would prefer to make more meaningful choices as to the direction of my character even if they are, or maybe especially because, it might not be anything that helps with combat.

I would have a ball with a mini-game or something involving music. I take musical skills, I learn to play, groups can play together, etc, etc. That to me is as important a choice as increasing my dps while to others its stupid.

But I would like that choice.

Skills allows people to pick what they want. Sure, some folks want to be the best and they will do everythign possible to find it..while others just want to play and have fun.

Classes take averages and combines them. Warriors generally average this and priests average that.....but what about the people that don"t want to be average?? What if you want something different but still effective?? That is difficult to do because classes are rather constraining towards paths other than they average for that class.

Classes are a defined path to walk upon while a total skill tree could be a tangential mess of criss crossing paths going every which way. Sure you can combine them both...but then the defining portion is still the skills unless you make them meaningless. WOW is a hybrid...an arms warrior isn"t the same as a prot warrior, a shadow priest isn"t the same as a holy priest but the only thing that defines them as different is the skillset not the class.

Class is generality while skills is precision.
 

Draegan_sl

2 Minutes Hate
10,034
3
You just created an enchanter type of class or whatever you want to call it. You just created a dungeon that would almost require a person who could bypass content. I know I wouldn"t do that dungeon unless I had that guy that could get me through that.

Regardless of the examples. You"re still creating archtypes and skillsets that are required for dungeons. Sure you could do it without them, but thats not the best way to do it. You"re still being punished for not having a certain skillset in your group.

I"m fine with that, thats how these games are. I guess we all agree then. With skillsets that are required you still become a class without being one in name. I still havn"t seen an example of a setup where you don"t need someone skilled as a tank, dpser or a healer or mr.fixit.
 

Twobit_sl

shitlord
6
0
Campa said:
There is nothing about the tech currently available that would prevent such an encounter.
I disgree. I"m sure that some company could come up with one or two examples of this, but I think you fail to realize how much work that it would entail. To have dozens of dungeons, each with special and unique situations like this would take years and years to create. Would each dungeon just have one token boulder or would they be filled with them? The more you add the more you increase time and money required to create it.

I have often underestimated what it takes to do stuff myself, but after seeing some of it firsthand... I saw the error of my ways.
 

Genjiro

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
5,218
5,066
So one or two mobs in EQ warrant its removal or made it bad for the monk class and/or the game? Not like WoW has any skills that are important for those 1 or 2 raid mobs either, /wave Garr, shackle undead etc etc. I"m mostly referring to just normal exp grind groups anyway, and once again, there was nothing wrong with the skill nor was it required in any way, shape, or form.

And to Draegan, you fail at making any argument other than "you like monks". I"m guilty as charged, it was a fun class and I like martial arts themed characters--so what? I don"t even care about what tad10 was posting as I haven"t been closely following this thread after the handful of you monday morning developers have turned it into steaming shithole status from just shithole status. Point is, for 99.9% of the game if you didn"t suck balls and weren"t in a guild full of retards, you hardly needed monks at all or feign death. It was just a *gasp* emergent mechanic that added some flavor to what would have otherwise been a boring-as-fuck and completely irrelevant class to play.
 

Twobit_sl

shitlord
6
0
Genjiro said:
So one or two mobs in EQ warrant its removal or made it bad for the monk class and/or the game? Not like WoW has any skills that are important for those 1 or 2 raid mobs either, /wave Garr, shackle undead etc etc. I"m mostly referring to just normal exp grind groups anyway, and once again, there was nothing wrong with the skill nor was it required in any way, shape, or form.
Well you can"t just refer to one thing and ignore the rest. It"s all part of the whole. If you didn"t need it for grind groups then why would you need it all then?
 

hammerdown_foh

shitlord
0
0
If we"re going to continue to play EQ-like mmos for the next 20 years, then yeah, specialized class dominance will continue to be the rule, and hybrids will forever be marginalized by encounters that are essentially all alike and thus susceptible to specialization. If MMOs are going to evolve, and encounters diversify such that one solution isn"t the best for everything and things aren"t predictable, then we can certainly break free of that.
 

Campa_foh

shitlord
0
0
Twobit Whore said:
I disgree. I"m sure that some company could come up with one or two examples of this, but I think you fail to realize how much work that it would entail. To have dozens of dungeons, each with special and unique situations like this would take years and years to create. Would each dungeon just have one token boulder or would they be filled with them? The more you add the more you increase time and money required to create it.

I have often underestimated what it takes to do stuff myself, but after seeing some of it firsthand... I saw the error of my ways.
I don"t consider time a technical impedance. Certainly a major major issue & concern, but the tech to allow such a design is there.

But you are 100% correct time is the real constraint but IMO eventually that will be overcome. The toolsets are getting better and we can see that is true just looking at the progression of encounter design from EQ to WoW and hell even from early WoW to now. The next big game will probably have a toolset that is even better and will allow the designers to come up with more interesting & varying designs.

We"re theorizing about a game probably 3-4 years away, I would HOPE by then such encounters could be designed with relative ease.
 

Genjiro

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
5,218
5,066
Twobit Whore said:
Well you can"t just refer to one thing and ignore the rest. It"s all part of the whole. If you didn"t need it for grind groups then why would you need it all then?
That"s the point I was making, you didn"t need it, it was just a nice perk to have if you had a monk around. Monks as a whole were very happy with the class, even without tons of abilities, and that"s ultimately what you want. It wasn"t game breaking, it was simply a nice ability to have that wasn"t even monk exclusive. You could get by without it, but if you had a monk or sk for that matter who knew how to use it, it let you push the bar at times which then made it great---same thing for mez, shaman slow, etc. Under a system like WoW, instead of having the option to say break a spawn which was maybe a level or two too high level to take for your group, you would just have to wait till the appropriate level and come back.

It gave a little more breathing room sometimes, a get out of jail free card on a bad pull or wipe, and it was class defining to monks without being ridiculously overpowered or required in normal grouping. I think it was well balanced all around and fun, and took a high degree of skill in certain pulls, making it useless in the hands of a retard who didn"t know the nuances of pathing, line of sight, agro radius etc (you could say that for most tank classes too though, who pulled).
 

Twobit_sl

shitlord
6
0
My disagreement is with the notion that you didn"t need it because I can"t think of more than a handful of raid targets that it wasn"t required. Maybe you didn"t need it in an exp group in OT or LGuk.. but try doing the King in Chardok without it. Fuck that hallway, fuck it in the ass for hours on end.
 

tad10

Elisha Dushku
5,533
595
Twobit Whore said:
My disagreement is with the notion that you didn"t need it because I can"t think of more than a handful of raid targets that it wasn"t required. Maybe you didn"t need it in an exp group in OT or LGuk.. but try doing the King in Chardok without it. Fuck that hallway, fuck it in the ass for hours on end.
Lets, arguendo, assume you"re right: that a majority of raid targets needed a good fd puller (quick aside chatting with my buddy currently raiding post-PoP/GoD/whatever on Combine he assures me that isn"t the case that they primarily use bards for pulling but whatever). How is that any fucking different from needing a main tank? Seriously. How?
 

Lalala_foh

shitlord
0
0
tad10 said:
Lets, arguendo, assume you"re right: that a majority of raid targets needed a good fd puller (quick aside chatting with my buddy currently raiding post-PoP/GoD/whatever on Combine he assures me that isn"t the case that they primarily use bards for pulling but whatever). How is that any fucking different from needing a main tank? Seriously. How?
When you need a good tank, AT LEAST, you can do something while he is tanking.

My main beef with FD pulling was the waiting while the puller was doing his job, NOT FUN AT ALL.
 

Agraza

Registered Hutt
6,890
521
Bards didn"t get their FD until like Luclin or PoP or some shit. Bards became superior in many situations, but they still had NPCs that had "corpse camp" code on them, which would only activate if they thought the target was dead, such as a feigned death. You could then coth the monk and that mob would stay where you put him, for a while. IIRC, such was rare. Monks were not happy that bards were cutting in on their turf, but this shit is all hazy now.
 

tad10

Elisha Dushku
5,533
595
Twobit Whore said:
I disgree. I"m sure that some company could come up with one or two examples of this, but I think you fail to realize how much work that it would entail. To have dozens of dungeons, each with special and unique situations like this would take years and years to create. Would each dungeon just have one token boulder or would they be filled with them? The more you add the more you increase time and money required to create it.
2bit -- In 1997 had this board existed and someone suggested that someone should take a text MUDs and make it 3D I have no doubt you would have said something just like the above.

Technology improves. Tools improve (well barring of course insane situations where programmers refuse to provide tools for designers but I digress). Design abilities improve. Hardware improve.

The only thing that doesn"t seem to improve is the ability to manage these products (but I digress again).
 

Twobit_sl

shitlord
6
0
tad10 said:
2bit -- In 1997 had this board existed and someone suggested that someone should take a text MUDs and make it 3D I have no doubt you would have said something just like the above.
Probably not since there were graphical MUDs prior to EQ. Little known fact: EQ wasn"t the first online RPG.