Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

A dabble of Statistical TheorycraftFollow

#1 Aug 30 2011 at 8:58 AM Rating: Good
Guru
**
691 posts
This thread, in many ways, is a direct response to this thread. Specifically, it is in relation to the newly official announcement of the distribution of stats post 1.19. I felt it would be inappropriate to usurp that thread with this question, so I pose it as it's own separate topic.

With this change, a thought that has been rattling around in the back of my head for a few months has been brought abruptly to the fore, and I thought that I would share and possibly begin a healthy discourse on the pros and cons of the issue. This issue being this:

It is a staple of MMOs and RPGs in general that there are two forms of progression (in the purely statistical sense); skill progression and statistical progression. The standard practice is to make Skill progression the sole property of "Level" progression (be it actual levels, ranks, or skill trees), while Statistical progression is shared between "Level" progression and "Equipment" progression (gear, ships, what have you). I have found myself thinking in recent months about this balancing act and have wondered - would there be discontent if the balance was dramatically shifted? What, psychologically speaking, would the response be if this relationship was turned on it's head?

For instance, the most extreme (and probably most obvious) example would be to make Skills be all you gained from "leveling" while stats come entirely from equipment. In such an example, there is a small degree of realism to be had, but I am unsure of what the player's knee jerk response would be. Underneath your power armor and your fully upgraded super sword, you are still the same squishy creature you were when you started the game. At the same time, there is also a fundamentally rewarding sense when you start getting equipment that really powers your character up.

So, rather than continue going around in circles about it myself like a dog chasing it's tail, I thought I would bring it up now, when the subject may be of fundamental importance to the future of FFXIV.
#2 Aug 30 2011 at 9:52 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
569 posts
No, this is the WoW system and it's full of flaws and it kills of and "realism" a game may hope to retain. Realistically a knight is as good as his skill with the sword, the quality of sword does not give him more skill. It improves his technique as the better quality means more balance, and what not. But buy no means does it impact the skill.

What you imply here is that remove the armor and your a slug, equip and your a god. This was never the case in ffxi, and i hope xiv stays true to that. Armor should enhance the character NOT define him. The system you describe breeds a pile of morons who hide behind the 80%armor 20%skill wall.

Personally a system were armor impacts more than 50% is just unrealistic. I played WoW for 2 months and all i can say is the second you get armored you can leave the skill at the door it makes not difference.
____________________________
99th paper cut, and the grain of salt.
#3 Aug 30 2011 at 10:22 AM Rating: Good
Guru
**
691 posts
TwiddleDee wrote:
No, this is the WoW system and it's full of flaws and it kills of and "realism" a game may hope to retain. Realistically a knight is as good as his skill with the sword, the quality of sword does not give him more skill. It improves his technique as the better quality means more balance, and what not. But buy no means does it impact the skill.

What you imply here is that remove the armor and your a slug, equip and your a god. This was never the case in ffxi, and i hope xiv stays true to that. Armor should enhance the character NOT define him. The system you describe breeds a pile of morons who hide behind the 80%armor 20%skill wall.

Personally a system were armor impacts more than 50% is just unrealistic. I played WoW for 2 months and all i can say is the second you get armored you can leave the skill at the door it makes not difference.

You misunderstand if you think I came into this with any bias one way or the other. On this point however, I think I'm going to have to disagree slightly.

If it were true that you gained more... say... STR in the example above from gear, I would agree with you. However, what I am implying with the given example is that given a character with 90 STR, there is a spectrum where that strength can originate. In Case A [FFXI], 70 out of 90 of that strength came from stats, while 20 came from gear. In Case B [hypothetical], all 90 would come from gear. However, the origin of the STR has no baring on it's effect. In both cases, the player has 90 STR which will, ultimately give the player the same amount of power. The player's skill has no place in the equation in either case.

Similarly, while I agree with your example that a Knight is just as skilled with or without his armor; this is a point I touched on in my original post, saying that Skill - or perhaps technique - would be divorced from Stats - or power.

Edited, Aug 30th 2011 12:24pm by Hulan
#4 Aug 30 2011 at 11:20 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
I agree that we should not try to classify this as either WoW or FFXI style and leave that flamebait topic at the door.

I will disagree with gear being the majority of my ability though. I would like a 70% ability 30% gear split.

It's enough where gear will put you above someone else, but enough of a balance that I can perform better than the "leet" player that bought a full set of +3's with RMT transactions by sheer ability to play the game.

It's also the very opposite of what's happening currently. We're 98% ability 1% gear 1% stat allocation.
____________________________


#5 Aug 30 2011 at 11:23 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
569 posts
In both cases you have 90 that is true. However look at it from a different angle, how realistic is it. With 90 coming from armor progression will be like a stair case, you use item x till item y. And really no change in between getting the items. If you go with base every level up you "grow" and armor is there to assist you as you "grow". When hitting the max level a character should have more to show than a spiffy new armor.

When i hit 75 in ffxi 9years (i picked it up 10 years back) ago after a years grind on my first job i was "amazing how far this char has progressed and grown", i didn't care about the junk i was equipped with.

When i hit 80 in WoW after 2months (i quit not long after) it felt empty "sure i had full epics equipped" but there's nothing there to show progression. All you do is skip from one set of armor to the next, you never feel satisfaction of a level up, unless you equip armor X than. And even that is short lived.
____________________________
99th paper cut, and the grain of salt.
#6 Aug 30 2011 at 11:34 AM Rating: Good
Guru
**
691 posts
Hmmm good points all. Would you say, then, that a level-less progression system like the one originally described in FFXIV would be greatly hampered by the lack of an easy way to introduce a smooth growth curve to augment armor?
#7 Aug 30 2011 at 12:22 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
569 posts
Hulan wrote:
Hmmm good points all. Would you say, then, that a level-less progression system like the one originally described in FFXIV would be greatly hampered by the lack of an easy way to introduce a smooth growth curve to augment armor?


Well you can have armor scale as you progress however that needs growth be it be level or other wise. A character starts off weak and grows in to the job/class they play, and as befitting armor grows and is more refined in turn. Which makes my mind go full circle to the start you need a method of progression.

I can toss an on said level-less progression, if you can link it, but it's just seems too out there, even FPS online have a "level" system to mark growth.
____________________________
99th paper cut, and the grain of salt.
#8 Aug 30 2011 at 12:32 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
Hulan wrote:
Hmmm good points all. Would you say, then, that a level-less progression system like the one originally described in FFXIV would be greatly hampered by the lack of an easy way to introduce a smooth growth curve to augment armor?


This is somewhat how I imagine materia.

You use X armor while you level into Y armor, and attach the old gears materia to it so its much less about "renting" gear for a few levels (since you sell it back) and more about growth.


I wonder how they will handle turning gear that already has materia attached into materia. It would be nice if say:

Level 9 item turned to materia
Attach to level 12 gear
turn level 12 gear (with previous materia) into higher quality or improved materia
Attach to higher gear

And so on. We'll see.
____________________________


#9 Aug 30 2011 at 1:16 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,825 posts
I look at it like...

A skilled warrior in top physical shape can effectively wear a heavier and more restrictive armor than a squire in mediocre phsyical shape.

The skilled warrior might not even be as strong as the squire, but knows the techniques and such that allow him to effectively wear that more restrictive gear which provides more protection AND still deal out a higher level of damage.

That's why I don't like the any level can wear any level of armor thing. I dabble in "cosplay" in the sense that I go to ren faires with various forms of armor and when I'm drunk (not a good idea) swing swords with my friends. I am NOT skilled, but no matter the alchohol intake... I tend to do better wearing just my kilt than I do wearing my kilt and chain. My plate set isn't steel, just aluminum, but it hinders movement even more than my chain does. That's as close to real life as I can get.

I would assume that in a fencing situation without alchohol, that a trained person could whoop my **** wearing full plate while I was wearing chain or just my kilt. Not only would any hits I get in not do much damage... the dude in full plate with training would likely not let my faster self get that close in the first place. (Longwinded way of saying that training+heavy armor=evasion AND protection)
____________________________
FFXI:Sylph - Perrin 75 Hume THF; Retired (At least from my use any way)
EVE Online:ScraperX; Retired
WAR:IronClaw- Peryn SW;SkullThrone- Grymloc BO; Retired


#10 Aug 30 2011 at 2:01 PM Rating: Good
Guru
**
691 posts
So it sounds like of the people responding to this thread at least, it's pretty much unanimous that characters should naturally grow stronger over time in their own right, while gear and equipment serve as a second layer to sit on top.

It follows then that a completely level-less system is difficult if not impossible, since most players seem to feel the need to have some sort of rigid superstructure to support their customization. Does anyone think that a completely modular system would even be feasible, given what we have already talked about?

I mean to ask this question in the context of the previous questions. That being that with a completely modular growth system (putting aside for a moment any innate difficulties that causes), it is incredibly difficult to grow character's stats in a smooth and organic fashion. The easiest solution to the problem would be to have player stats grow through gear procurement. Since we have already established that most of us would feel uncomfortable with all stats being on the gear, this is an non-optimal solution.
#11 Aug 30 2011 at 2:39 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
I think a game that is COMPLETELY gear based would be interesting but not in an mmo setting.
____________________________


#12 Aug 30 2011 at 3:08 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
569 posts
Completely gear based would not be ideal for any game imo, enough said.

Hulan can u reword paragraph 2 and 3 confusing the **** out of me.
____________________________
99th paper cut, and the grain of salt.
#13 Aug 30 2011 at 3:53 PM Rating: Good
***
3,530 posts
To clarify for Twiddle:

Hulan wrote:
So it sounds like of the people responding to this thread at least, it's pretty much unanimous that characters should naturally grow stronger over time in their own right, while gear and equipment serve as a second layer to sit on top.


"Lots of people seem to like the ability to level combined with the ability to wear weapons and armour."

Hulan wrote:
It follows then that a completely level-less system is difficult if not impossible, since most players seem to feel the need to have some sort of rigid superstructure to support their customization. Does anyone think that a completely modular system would even be feasible, given what we have already talked about?


"A game without levels is difficult to make because players seem to like more structure in their character growth. Does anyone think a system composed of various little parts of [independent stat] growth would even work?"

Hulan wrote:
I mean to ask this question in the context of the previous questions. That being that with a completely modular growth system (putting aside for a moment any innate difficulties that causes), it is incredibly difficult to grow character's stats in a smooth and organic fashion. The easiest solution to the problem would be to have player stats grow through gear procurement. Since we have already established that most of us would feel uncomfortable with all stats being on the gear, this is an non-optimal solution.


"With character growth not using a relatively stable level-structure, it is hard to make sure stats grow smoothly. The easiest solution to this problem (the problem of not using levels) would be to have people chase gear instead but, since people have expressed their dislike of gear-based systems, this is not a good solution."

Thus OP seems to have a problem here: s/he sees a way to move away from chasing levels, but it risks falling into the problem of chasing gear instead. Out of the pot and into the fire, so to speak.

So, is there a solution that has the advantages of levels that... well, isn't levels? XD
____________________________
"... he called to himself a wizard, named Gallery, hoping by this means to escape the paying of the fifteen hundred crowns..." (Machen 15)

"Thus opium is pleasing... on account of the agreeable delirium it produces." (Burke para.6)

"I could only read so much for this paper and the syphilis poem had to go."
#14 Aug 30 2011 at 4:14 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
569 posts
Ok tyvm kitty.
Quote:
"A game without levels is difficult to make because players seem to like more structure in their character growth. Does anyone think a system composed of various little parts of [independent stat] growth would even work?"


Yes , look at Morrowind, as you skill the little parts, your level in increased, which in turn boosts stats. However this will not work in a MMO, it is simply too complicated and time consuming to be viable. The new trend of game play is focusing on the 2-3h's every 1-2days. The stile of 9h's straight on a run is quickly fading.

Quote:
So, is there a solution that has the advantages of levels that... well, isn't levels? XD

Well if one exists i know not of it, after you kill mob X, or finish quest Y you need to get compensated. And thus progress/grow through the game. FFXI if you remove the level and stats, and have it all based on the weapon skill you could in theory accomplish an level-less situation, but am sure all can see the flaw in that.

Edited, Aug 30th 2011 6:16pm by TwiddleDee
____________________________
99th paper cut, and the grain of salt.
#15 Aug 30 2011 at 4:52 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,962 posts
TwiddleDee you're looking at the entire question from inside the box of your previous experiences.

"What if stats were determined primarily by gear."

Is what the OP asked, what you read is:

"What if stats were determined primarily by loot."

There's a big difference. When you think of a game like WoW, and where gear comes from, any gear worth it's salt is loot, even the crafted stuff is primarily loot that a crafter just happened to be required to throw it together. Loot from instances. A player's stats while not entirely determined by their gear, is for the most part thusly determined.

To think that FFXIV will be an exception to this rule, or that FFXI was an exception somehow, is actually a bit of an ill-conceived idea. Perhaps gear was not quite as important, it still made a huge difference on your effectiveness.

To return to my original point though. I was actually hoping that when the game was first talked about, (this game that is) and how much freedom we'd have with our gear and skill choices, that gear would almost entirely determine our stats.

Not in the way that you're thinking though. Not in the "I can only wear cloth, and since I'm wearing this cloth robe that's better than your cloth robe so I'm better" way, but in the "I choose to wear a robe to raise my magic potency, and leather boots to raise my evasion" way.

If gear had a class of its own that determined base attributes based on the level of the equipment and the type (leather, mail, plate, robes, etc) and then any bonuses for that specific gear was applied on top of that, it would allow for more customization, and I think accomplishing what the OP was originally attempting to get at.

What if your equipment determined your role.

Now would this work with the direction they're taking FFXIV nowadays? No, it really wouldn't, they've forsaken the idea of a classless game, and are working on implementing jobs. Gear will shift back to a more standard MMO itemization route, with a lot of ridiculous SE quirks.

But this is a hypothetical thread, and if they had taken that classless route with more commitment, and uncoupled weapons from skill progression, or rather divided it up further, this approach to gear could have been excellent.

Set a bunch of magic skills and wield a staff, but equip plate armor? If the gear had a huge impact on stats you'd be a very survivable magic wielder. Wield a sword and set a cornucopia of different skills, then equip a mixture of leather and cloth and you've made a Red Mage.

The key is that the gear would have a huge impact on your stat as a base, gear with rare materials (and dungeon loot) would give you slightly larger bonuses on top of that base armor class and rank bonus.





And now, after a small white space for the sake of clarity, a different topic:

How a Decoupled Progression System Could in Fact Work

There is one truth that some of you have already mentioned, entirely doing away with levels or ranks would be a very bad idea, if you're attempting to remain within this genre. For various reasons, some of those financial, but other reasons just come down to organization and separation of content. One way or the other some sort of tier-ing has to exist, or things will just be too hard for the design team to wrap their brains around.

When all the FFXIV information was floating around, I had a lot of thoughts as I speculated about how they would accomplish what they said they were trying to do. The reality is they never accomplished any of it. Sad, but true.

But I'll outline how I believe they could have done so successfully. (Not necessarily easily, mind you.)

  • Skills are unlocked through Weapons

For those of you who have played Final Fantasy IX, TA, or TA2, you are already going to know what I'm talking about. For those of you who haven't imagine that the new Materia system, and it's spiritbind stat, instead of being applied to creating marginally useful stat enhancing gemstones, was in fact how you mastered a new skill. You get your hands on a Thunder Rod, while equipped you have access to Thunder II, once you've reached full spiritbind (I'm just using this term because it's easier, SP is fine too) you have the option of crystallizing that weapon into magicite.

Magicite is then a permanent key item in side your Magicite Grid (Or whatever other fancy name, sphere grid, license board, you get the idea) and can be set for a number of set points, not unlike the current skill system. SP or spiritbind gained increases linearly or exponentially with the level of the target. So while you may gain 1 or 2 SP a kill off of a level 1 mob, and level 70 you may be gaining 70 SP. This means that as your character level progresses and you're killing stronger enemies, going back and learning low level skills won't be an enormous time sink. But learning those low level abilities at a low level will take a while.

Weapons need not have a hard level requirement, but a required rank to start generating SP, and use the ability associated with the weapon. If there's a sword called "Defender" and it unlocks "Cover" and it's a Rank20 weapon, at Level 15 using that sword you'd have scaled down stats as in the current system in FFXIV, would not generate SP and would not have access to cover until Level 20, thus making the use of low level weapons counter productive. Rare weapons, as well as end game raid weapons could for the most part, be devoid of skills, thus not limiting the mastery of those skills to a tiny fraction of the player base. Instead, those weapons would be meant for players doing difficult content, and who want the absolute greatest edge, not those who are looking to learn new skills.

  • Equipment has a large role in determining Stats

I basically already talked about this in the first section of my post, so I won't go into too much detail, but instead I'll provide some examples. Here we go...

Iron Cuirass
Rank 45
Defense: Rank A
Attack: Rank B
Speed: Rank D
Magic: Rank D
Resistance: Rank C
HP + 45 VIT + 15

Templar's Cuirass
Rank 48
Defense: Rank A
Attack: Rank B
Speed: Rank D
Magic: Rank D
Resistance: Rank C
HP + 100 VIT + 20 STR + 10

Velveteen Robe
Rank 35
Defense: Rank D
Attack: Rank D
Speed: Rank C
Magic: Rank A
Resistance: Rank B
MP + 35 INT + 10

Couerl Jerkin
Rank 50
Defense: Rank B
Attack: Rank B
Speed : Rank B
Magic: Rank C
Resistance: Rank C
Acc + 10 Eva + 10


Please note that these are in no way perfectly balanced, they're just examples, in a vacuum. Now, on top of the usual stat bonuses that come afterwards, and are exclusive to that piece of gear, you'll see the various Ranks listed for some vague stats, these names are by no means the final names, but they show the general distribution of how that armor is going to affect your stats. The leather is balanced, the robe is magic heavy, and the plate is defense heavy.

This could be displayed to the player via a graph of some sort, or via ranks like this, it really doesn't matter. Anyways, let's first take a look at Iron Cuirass vs Templar's Cuirass. Let's imagine the first is crafted, and the second is from a dungeon boss. The second has better bonuses, but both are the same type of armor, so they have the same rankings otherwise. These rankings would be thrown into an equation with player level, to determine the character's end stat.

If you imagine for a moment that they are both the same rank (level) of equipment, and let's say a level 50 character is wearing them, you'd get something like this for their defensive stats...

Iron Cuirass wearing Lv50 player...
Defense Rank A grants... + 500 hp + 45 vit
Gear specific bonuses grant... + 45 hp + 15 vit

while the Templar Cuirass wearing Lv50 player...
Defense Rank A still grants... + 500 hp + 45 vit
Gear specific bonuses grant... + 100 hp + 20 vit + 10 str


** I'm not including any stats for the other ranks like attack, speed, magic, etc.

The iron cuirass is relatively easy to obtain, anyone who saves a little money can buy one, and now their stats are focused on defense (for their body slot at least) the end game raider with the Templar's Cuirass is also focusing on defense, but they have a slight edge, the gear specific stats (what we normally equate with gear in MMOs) are slightly better.

In both cases, the player's choice in what kind of gear to equip altered the way their character played, the main difference in quality is just a small edge (so gear type as a choice affects us greatly, the rarity of the gear determines an edge.)

Now, keeping in mind that they are not in fact the same rank, one is 45, and one is 48, let's discuss how optimal ranks could work. It's not complicated, and not too different than the current system. Below the optimal level, it scales based on your level, at and above the optimal rank you would essentially gain a small bonus, like +10% stats contribution, for using something that you are optimally ranked with, but the stats the armor provides no longer increase after the optimal rank. So for instanced, at Rank 47, that (Rank 45) Iron Cuirass may only give +500 hp +45 vit from it's Rank A defense rating, while at the same rank, the (Rank 48) Templar's Cuirass may only grant +480 hp +42 vit, and at rank 48 when the optimal rank is reached, it may grant something more like +550 hp, +50 vit. (Not exact numbers.)

  • Level Matters... Still!

If you've actually read this far, you may not be convinced - after all, how does leveling work? What does leveling impact? I briefly hinted at it in previous sections, but level is still very important. The player still gains EXP, still gains levels, but instead of directly granting stats, or skills, it's merely a gating system.

We gain access to new skills we can learn via weapons, and we gain access to new optimally ranked equipment, and any equipment we are wearing is multiplied by our level to grant us more stats. The reality is, this is a far better option than allowing a player to choose our stat growth. If you don't agree, I would like to see you argue that point.

If we can freely set our abilities, but gear matters little and our stats are determined by allotting them manually, we have very little freedom in reality. We must choose to either excel at one thing, or be okay at everything, or constantly reassign stats. Or have some kind of system of saving sets of stats, which is convoluted.

Instead, our level multiplies by the gear rank for each stat distribution. If we choose to set all magic spells and wear all robes we are very specialized and focused magic users. Our magic is more potent, and we have access to more spells than someone who sets a mixture of skills and wears a mixture of gear types. That person is however, more versatile. The reality is, with a system like this, we can choose to prepare ourselves differently for the challenge ahead, without having to worry about resetting our stats or any convoluted "stat save" systems.

If we're about to go out on a solo adventure, setting a mixture of skills, heals, nukes, melee attacks, defensive skills and wearing hybrid-focused leather is probably our best bet. And this should be the path of most solo adventurers. If we're going into group content, we can focus on a role we want to perform, throw on some plate armor and stack as may defensive abilities as possible to make a tank.

Regardless, what skills we have access to and how much that gear adds to our character, is still determined by our level. Our level is still a good metric of our power! We just have a lot more freedom.

  • Okay so there's some Caveats

The astute among you will already be pointing out how open to exploitation this system really is. You're right! With no regulations on this system, a player could set a perfect combination of skills and gear, and exploit broken parts of the system, and make absurd character builds.

I do have an answer to this though... Skill-linking.

What the **** do I mean? Okay, so if you're going to give a character a limited number of points, and tell them that every skill has a certain point value, and that's the end of it, there's lots of problems. For one thing, before I talk about how this leaves your skill system open to exploitation, I'm first going to talk about how it weakens the sense of accumulation and specialty.

A player who is essentially attempting to create a Black Mage, who focuses solely on black magic, and wearing robes, is going to be limited in the way they set spells by this system, as much as anyone else. What I mean by this is, while in a game without set points, that caster if they had access to Stone IV, will also have access to Stone III, Stone II, and Stone I.

With set points, why would that mage ever set those spells if they're taking away precious set points from spells they'll use more regularly? They wouldn't, unless... Setting spells of a kind gave discounts on set points, and stat bonuses. Say you set Stone IV and Stone III together, the set cost of Stone III goes from 4 to 2, and for linking the spells the player gets a +15 INT +50 MP bonus. Skill-linking!

Not only does this reward players who want to focus on certain skill by giving them an edge in that direction, it also makes the system more complex, forcing players to think more about what they set, and how they set it. If you just cherry pick all the skills that are amazing by themselves, the likelihood that those all link in a helpful fashion is very low. Thus you lose out on a lot of bonuses to the effectiveness of those skills, and you also have to spend more set points to do so.

In this way, you give players freedom to create a character the way they want to, without creating a situation where some kind of weird mash up of the game's best skills, cherry picked onto one character, will always create the absolute best build. You have to look at the bigger picture. It's not just about choosing the best skills, its about choosing the way you want your character to play.



I'd love to put a TL;DR here, but the reality is, it's just too complex of a topic to do so, I haven't edited this post yet, so I apologize in advance for any grievous spelling/grammar errors. Now, off to do things!

Edited, Aug 30th 2011 5:17pm by RamseySylph
#16 Aug 30 2011 at 8:06 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
569 posts
Quote:
What if stats were determined primarily by gear."
"What if stats were determined primarily by loot."

Those are the same thing, worded differently gear is loot, and loot is gear. Unless you equip the apples some mobs drop. I understood the OP bang on, else i would have given a 5 word reply that had no validity.

Quote:
that gear would almost entirely determine our stats.

Not sure how you came to this conclusion, i followed XIV from the moment it was announced and that never came across. SE for that mater no game has made thing 100% armor, games change the base to armor ratio. But never do 100%.

As for you new wall of text:

Interesting, to complicated for it to be feasible thought. (a lot of typed for a pipe dream)
RamseySylph while i may have looked in the box, you looked for far out side i think you lost your self.

Edited, Aug 30th 2011 10:10pm by TwiddleDee
____________________________
99th paper cut, and the grain of salt.
#17 Aug 30 2011 at 8:16 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,962 posts
TwiddleDee wrote:

Those are the same thing...



No. They're not. You may have read my post, but you did not comprehend it.

Loot is only gear that you obtain via a quest, or a drop, and encompasses other things. Gear is something you equip, whether you bought it, got it as a drop, etc.

The heart of my post was that gear could have a role in largely or entirely determining your stats, without the rarity of the item being the determining factor. Whether a plate body came from crafting or an instance, wouldn't play the major role in determining how it impacted your stats. Instead the armor would have a set of multipliers based on its type, that would be evenly stacked, regardless of how rare the item was.

Any additional bonus stats, would be the edge, and the main difference between rare and common armor.

In this system, gear determines the style of play for your character, and is a visual indicator as such. You could look at someone, and based on the type of gear they're wearing (not the class they examine as) what their role in combat is, and usually be close to the mark. It allows for a lot of freedom, but escapes the trappings of a system where LOOT is everything, but is in fact a system where gear is.

Technically you could argue that in many cases loot = gear, but that wasn't my point, it was merely my hook. Don't argue on the hook because it won't do you any good.

TwiddleDee wrote:
SE for that mater no game has made thing 100% armor, games change the base to armor ratio. But never do 100%.

Edited, Aug 30th 2011 10:08pm by TwiddleDee


Smiley: dubious

I never said SE directly implied any of the systems I talked about, far from it. I stated clearly that, it was how I imagined SE could approach achieving all the high-concept goals they outlined in their literature.

Ramseysylph wrote:
But I'll outline how I believe they could have done so successfully. (Not necessarily easily, mind you.)


Nothing about the system I outlined is too complex to execute. It merely needs to be balanced in a different way than a traditional class based MMO. It may have a few more potential breaking points but it's not impossible.

Normal MMO systems are just as complex, they just seem less complex because we're more familiar with them.



Edit: I obviously can't speak on behalf of the OP, so I'm not necessarily saying that you misunderstood him, though I believe his thoughts on a character's stats being 100% derived from gear, was not necessarily indicative that he meant the system had to be largely favoring the approach that high rarity loot makes a far better character.

Edit for your edit:

TwiddleDee wrote:

RamseySylph while i may have looked in the box, you looked for far out side i think you lost your self.


No, I'm quite sure I know where I am. It's pretty hard to get too out there in a hypothetical theorycrafting thread. I took the conversation as a design challenge, and outlined how a system could accomplish what the OP had proposed (to a degree) and moreover, others had mentioned, a system where level is almost irrelevant, or is merely a tier-ing system for content access.

Edited, Aug 30th 2011 7:30pm by RamseySylph
#18 Aug 30 2011 at 10:23 PM Rating: Good
Guru
**
691 posts
I'd like to thank KittyKane and Ramsey for a few things quickly. First of all, I had to step out for the evening, so thank you for responding to TwiddleDee's question for me; your response was as well put as any I could have made. Secondly, putting aside whether I agree or not, I relish a dissenting opinion from the majority we've seen so far.

For myself, I found your proposal fascinating. I think it has a lot of potential to solve some of the major issues in a near level-less system. I have only two question for now: would you see the procurement of experience points and SB points to be similar to, say, exp and AP in FFIX? On another thread entirely, there is a risk that players will begin to be dissatisfied and feel empty when they level since the levels have no real meaning in and of themselves. Do you think that this is a real problem, and if so, do you think that there is an easy solution?

Edited, Aug 31st 2011 12:23am by Hulan
#19 Aug 31 2011 at 2:10 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,962 posts
Hulan wrote:
I have only two question for now: would you see the procurement of experience points and SB points to be similar to, say, exp and AP in FFIX?


I'm not entirely sure what you're asking, but functionally they would be similar, of course. The systems are similar. EXP is something you're gaining all the time, AP/SB is being gained if you're wielding a weapon you haven't mastered yet. Sometimes training to gain SP/SB is going to involve using a weapon in class you may not even be interested in using, or a weapon that's a very low level.

In that way, it provides interesting scenarios where you have to take a different approach to facilitate your character's learning process. In some ways, this goes a long ways in actually making you feel like your character is actually training. On the other hand, you're confronted with a balancing act, grouping with a gimped weapon or a weapon class you're not prepared to use could seriously tick people off.

Hulan wrote:
On another thread entirely, there is a risk that players will begin to be dissatisfied and feel empty when they level since the levels have no real meaning in and of themselves. Do you think that this is a real problem, and if so, do you think that there is an easy solution?


Actually no. I don't think that's a danger at all, if anything this system plays into the collectible compulsion far more than even FFXIV's current system. In this system, the player is always gathering new weapons, always looking out for the next skill they can learn. They don't merely "obtain" a skill after they level up, they don't go and buy a scroll and use it. Once they level up they must then train to unlock that skill.

Ask anyone who plays a Blue Mage and they can tell you what the compulsion of learning a new skill is like. It's about collecting things, players will always have an inventory full of weapons they're currently working on mastering. This is going to extend to weapons beyond their current level, and they're going to be very excited to finally be able to unlock these new skills when they manage to level up. Like FFXIV's current system, you can use a weapon at any rank, thus the accomplishment of equipping it is diminished. On the other hand, in this system, you're unlocking that new skill, there's all sorts of new potential when you reach the optimal rank for a weapon. It's exciting, possibility is exciting.

And the further reality of this system is, there's no way a player can master every skill available at any given level. Even if they make it a point to fight enemies so weak they barely give any EXP but still grant SP/SB, it would take some serious effort to do so. So there's always a sense of real, tangible progress.

On the second point, nothing is easy. If this system was easy to implement, someone would have done it. That doesn't mean it can't be done, or it won't be done, it just means it hasn't been done yet.
#20 Aug 31 2011 at 8:42 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
569 posts
RamseySylph wrote:
TwiddleDee wrote:

Those are the same thing...



No. They're not. You may have read my post, but you did not comprehend it.

Loot is only gear that you obtain via a quest, or a drop, and encompasses other things. Gear is something you equip, whether you bought it, got it as a drop, etc.


Considering we are talking about items that can be equipped, you loot the gear that drops yes they are the exact same thing. At which point in time did I ever hint toward any gear/loot which can not be equipped. As for comprehending you post, it was not difficult, though you really need to summarize your thoughts.

Quote:
The heart of my post was that gear could have a role in largely or entirely determining your stats, without the rarity of the item being the determining factor. Whether a plate body came from crafting or an instance, wouldn't play the major role in determining how it impacted your stats. Instead the armor would have a set of multipliers based on its type, that would be evenly stacked, regardless of how rare the item was.

Any additional bonus stats, would be the edge, and the main difference between rare and common armor.

In this system, gear determines the style of play for your character, and is a visual indicator as such. You could look at someone, and based on the type of gear they're wearing (not the class they examine as) what their role in combat is, and usually be close to the mark. It allows for a lot of freedom, but escapes the trappings of a system where LOOT is everything, but is in fact a system where gear is.

Technically you could argue that in many cases loot = gear, but that wasn't my point, it was merely my hook. Don't argue on the hook because it won't do you any good.


Yes i know what you were aiming for, and quite simply it would not be a valid option for any MMO to choose. Armor should NOT be the thing that defines a class, the class should define the armor. A PLD lets say uses plate and sword, a BLM cloth and staff, a MNK leather and h2h (using the jobs as they are well known). If what you equipped defined you then every one would be all over the place with no solid designation. A sword wielder in cloth =/= RDM sorry.

Quote:
I never said SE directly implied any of the systems I talked about, far from it. I stated clearly that, it was how I imagined SE could approach achieving all the high-concept goals they outlined in their literature.

Ramseysylph wrote:
But I'll outline how I believe they could have done so successfully. (Not necessarily easily, mind you.)


Nothing about the system I outlined is too complex to execute. It merely needs to be balanced in a different way than a traditional class based MMO. It may have a few more potential breaking points but it's not impossible.

Normal MMO systems are just as complex, they just seem less complex because we're more familiar with them.


Only reason i use SE is that well we are speculating, making speculation on there creation. So it is befitting to use then front and center. As for your concepts, as interesting as they may be, they do not follow the path SE has clearly set. In updates from the producer it is clearly outlined that gear is planed to be given a bigger slice of pie, however still keeping it in check so no more then a ration 80 to 20. 20 being given to gear.

Quote:

a system where level is almost irrelevant, or is merely a tier-ing system for content access.


I call it level, you call it tier. However after some looking it to it it may be possible. Imagine this. Weapon skill: sword that can be increased from 0-500, and as you fight thus boosting you sword skill you get the opportunity to equip stronger swords. As well as learn stronger skills for the sword or weapon. This can be applied to armor as well the more "use" a type of armor the more attuned you char. becomes to it. Thus boosting the bonus you get from using that armor as well as the option of equipping stronger armor as your skill rises.

Hulan wrote:
For myself, I found your proposal fascinating. I think it has a lot of potential to solve some of the major issues in a near level-less system. I have only two question for now: would you see the procurement of experience points and SB points to be similar to, say, exp and AP in FFIX? On another thread entirely, there is a risk that players will begin to be dissatisfied and feel empty when they level since the levels have no real meaning in and of themselves. Do you think that this is a real problem, and if so, do you think that there is an easy solutio


Ok to the point, even if level means nothing it would not leave an empty feeling IF, and only IF there can be growth in a different aspect. Showing progression, and leading to further growth. The reason i implied that armor should not define a job/class is armor doesn't grow, can be upgraded, altered augmented, but it's still armor. It's the person using it.

In the theory that you augment/upgrade armor, to get stronger and in turn define you class to progress the evident flaw leaving people empty is simple and clear. You spend 3months to acquire tire 5armor (lets say), and it defines your class, skills, you abilities, that all fine and could give some satisfaction. However were it leaves a bad taste is the fact that the char you play is still a weak pile and a fly farting can KO him if he ever took that armor off. As well if your armor defines you, they second you take it off your equal to the bum's you pass by ever day.
____________________________
99th paper cut, and the grain of salt.
#21 Aug 31 2011 at 2:40 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,962 posts
TwiddleDee wrote:
Yes i know what you were aiming for, and quite simply it would not be a valid option for any MMO to choose. Armor should NOT be the thing that defines a class, the class should define the armor.


Why? And to clarify I'm asking why on both counts of your argument.

Why is it specifically not valid for an MMO?

Why should armor not define a character?

(You say said class, but if you had read, I was talking about a class-less system. It's important to make a distinction between character and class, the system I proposed does not have classes.)

I won't argue these points, because you didn't make an argument, you just stated that they wouldn't work, I would actually love to hear your reasoning before replying.

TwiddleDee wrote:
If what you equipped defined you then every one would be all over the place with no solid designation.


No? Instead of making you read again, since you didn't grasp my points the first time I will attempt to summarize for you, as you requested.

  • Gear stats forces/encourages choose a type of gear that supports their role.

Because a character's stats are assembled by their level multiplied by the distribution graph of stats on each piece of armor, a vast majority of the player's stats (anything barring skill-link bonuses) comes from what type of armor they choose to wear. If they are focused on being a Black Mage style character, they must equip a staff, rod, or other magic focused weapon, as well as magic focused cloth (robes etc.) in order to excel. Equipping anything else would gimp their magic potency.

On occasion they may find this to be worth it, (fighting low level enemies where they want extra defense, but don't need magic potency etc.) But for the most part, a caster focused player will have to wear caster focused gear or suffer. Not suffer penalties, but merely, suffer from not having the best contribution to stats from the type of armor they're wearing.

You'll still be very capable of looking at a player and understanding what their character's role in combat is. Lots of plate = defensive, lots of mail = strength, lots of leather = speed, lots of cloth = magic, etc. There would be more complexity than this, and certain pieces of gear that are hybrid or cross-class focused, but you'd recognize those pieces. You're example was that someone could wear a hodgepodge of different types of gear. That's true, but they'd have a hodgepodge distribution of stats. If you see someone wearing a wizard hat, a leather jerkin and plate boots, you're going to know that they're not focused on excelling at any one particular stat. Their character is going to play accordingly.

  • Setting similar skills reduces set point cost and provides statistical bonuses.

Encourages players to build their character's skills with a specific role in mind. Focusing on one or two types of skills (defense, offense, support, etc.) Still allows for hybrids, but at the cost of reduced strength at any given specialization per number of total assigned specializations.

TwiddleDee wrote:
However were it leaves a bad taste is the fact that the char you play is still a weak pile and a fly farting can KO him if he ever took that armor off. As well if your armor defines you, they second you take it off your equal to the bum's you pass by ever day.


I don't think this is as big of an issue as you believe it is. Not many players run around naked, and even if they did they shouldn't expect to fight naked. As long as gear used your level as a multiplier, and adjusted your stats accordingly, no matter what gear you're wearing, your level will impact your stats.

In reality though, if you're naked the game could just apply an even distribution to all your stats, you'd be weaker and less specialized than if you were wearing gear, but you wouldn't be a 1 hp character with 1 vit, 1 str, 1 dex, etc.

Edited, Aug 31st 2011 1:42pm by RamseySylph
#22 Sep 01 2011 at 4:59 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,275 posts
Quote:
The skilled warrior might not even be as strong as the squire, but knows the techniques and such that allow him to effectively wear that more restrictive gear which provides more protection AND still deal out a higher level of damage.


Not arguing, just thought I'd comment:

When it comes to chain armor, it's pretty much strength-dependent. A chain-shirt weighing 40lbs will hamper the skilled but physically weaker warrior more than it will inhibit the strong squire who is more capable of bearing the weight. There aren't really any techniques involved that would allow him to circumvent this, he's basically strapping an iron blanket over his torso and trying to fence.

Plate armor, on the other hand, is specifically designed for mobility, even full sets with articulated joints. While they weigh a lot, the weight is more evenly distributed across the body, allowing for a surprising amount of agility (probably not a good idea to try cartwheels wearing full plate, but you can certainly run in it and you won't be helpless if knocked off your feet). In this case, I'd say the advantage would be with the skilled warrior because he would know how to move for best effect, while the squire would probably have strapped his armor on wrong, or if girded by someone else, would still find his movement inhibited in certain directions unexpectedly.

Seems kind of counter-intuitive: you'd think chainmail would be more conducive to agility.
____________________________
Ealdwulf wrote:
So one of the big downsides of playing PUP, and why almost everyone hates them, is that they all display the wounds of Christ?
Sephrick wrote:
I'd imagine it as descretely reaching around said person, not screaming kamehameha as I use the pld as a trampoline.
dmhlucky wrote:
the curse of good DD's is they tend to have less Defense, meaning they get high for more.
Master ketrel wrote:
Its just an emote you sick son of a *****
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 26 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (26)