From here:

"We choose to reveal the game to this extent and this early simply because we wanted to get input from the players."

So - what kind of input are you interested in? 

It's understandable that there is a lot of information that can't be shared at the moment - but what sort of areas are of the most use for discussion?

I'm sure that there are a number of systems that are basically designed and set, and others that are pretty much wide open.  I guess I'm just asking if there are any broad areas that the team is interested in soliciting specific input on.

Originally posted by jakin

From here:

"We choose to reveal the game to this extent and this early simply because we wanted to get input from the players."

 

So - what kind of input are you interested in? 

It's understandable that there is a lot of information that can't be shared at the moment - but what sort of areas are of the most use for discussion?

I'm sure that there are a number of systems that are basically designed and set, and others that are pretty much wide open.  I guess I'm just asking if there are any broad areas that the team is interested in soliciting specific input on.

I'm guessing they wanted to see a reaction from the MMO crowd about a game like this.  It is very important to get the community's opinion, even when they do not give much information about the game.  But with a quest system like this, you have to know about how people feel.  These are only the rough details of what seems like a very interesting game, and you have to make sure people like the concept. 

Also, we do not know how long this game will be in development, you never know if anyone will take the ideas?

Those are my guesses, but what they doing is keeping me on the seat of my chair :D

Mike470 is correct, partly we wanted to see if there was much interest in a dynamic world game that is primarily quest based.  The sheer quantity of emails we have received supporting this idea is encouraging.   It seems there are a LOT of players wanting to break out of the old mold and try something new.  Our hard work has not been in vain. 

However, there are many areas of our game that could benefit from additional discussion.  One of these would be player Abilities.  Although we have the player Abilities system designed, it is in no way written in stone at this juncture.  Here are just a couple  issues we have to face:

1) We are allowing players to seek any new Ability they want.  This gives players the freedom to plan ahead and create the character of their choice.  The issue: will this be too confusing or difficult for the casual player?  If the answer is yes, in what ways could we do this, yet make it easy for casual players to understand and enjoy?

2) Once they have an Ability, we are allowing player to improve these Abilities with both study and practice, without cap.   The issue: Eventuall god like characters that unbalance the game.  In what ways should we limit the growth of players (if at all)?

We already have solutions for these problems, but it might be interesting to hear from players  and see their solutions or alternate options. 

Another completely different area worth discussing is death.  We are currently planning some penalties for death.  However, we are also planning on offering players more than one way of paying those penalties.  Rather than explain our exact plans, we would love to hear people weigh in on the idea of 'free' death vs. death penalties, and how sever they think penalties (if any)  should be to make the game intersting, without making it annoying.

Additionally, we have only just opened discussion on the game.  Over time we will be adding new information that will then spark new discussion about how the game should and will work.  We value everyone's opinion, and do take the time to read them all.

Jatar

I would like to make several suggestions (although I am sure they have already been gone over)

One is that you say people must study to learn the skill.  Possibly a less experienced person of that skill could learn under another player who knows how to use the skill better.  For instance, I am a new player.  As I walk into the city I meet a friendly player who has a high (I am not sure how these abilities will work, so I will just say level for the time being) level in the skill I am working on.  So I train under him and study up on the skill, like he is the master and I am the apprentice.  Not only would this encourage players to group up, but it would also be a good way for people to communicate in the game.

As for death penalties, I always liked  dying with a penalty.  It puts a little more risk and thought into what your plans are in battle.

Good luck on your work!

In many games Death penaltes seem to be a punishment for playing solo. Groups usually have a class to can ressurrect dead players and offset health penalties. Death is a normal result of players pushing themselves and they should be encouraged.

I suggest death is a matter for Divine intervention. Either you build up favour with your god in which case you could ask it to ressurect you. If you can not call due to lack of favour or to limit cost,  be portted to the nearest shrine and a small loss of favour is removed. If you are out of favour with your  God then a penalty in terms of ability and or health is incurred until you are back in favour. Allowing favour to be "bought" by contributing or sacrificing money or items at altars would prevent penalties  getting too harsh. you could still have class/characters who could use their favour to get you resurrected.

I dont like corpse runs they tend to be time wasters and disincentives. they punish solo players again. no problem getting corpse run group after a group wipe.  harder to find help when there is nothing in it for the helper.

Originally posted by Jatar  

1) We are allowing players to seek any new Ability they want.  This gives players the freedom to plan ahead and create the character of their choice.  The issue: will this be too confusing or difficult for the casual player?  If the answer is yes, in what ways could we do this, yet make it easy for casual players to understand and enjoy?

2) Once they have an Ability, we are allowing player to improve these Abilities with both study and practice, without cap.   The issue: Eventuall god like characters that unbalance the game.  In what ways should we limit the growth of players (if at all)?

Thank you Jatar.  I was framing it from the mindset of someone that closely followed the pre-alpha of SWG and was remembering the various discussion threads that cropped up on basic game systems for sake of player feedback.  I was hoping it was likely similar for Citadel.

As to your specific points:

1)  I believe that the "casual player" often gets underestimated in their ability to understand game systems.  Basically - I'm of the opinion that the amount you play the game has little bearing on how well you understand the systems provided:

a)  there is a well-structured and polished tutorial experience, and

b)  systems are well and fully documented on either the website or in the game manual.  (Such documentation can even be solicited from the active playerbase)

With those elements in place I truly believe that anyone can learn a system if they are willing to.

Facing basic facts, the only way an MMO gets away with poorly documented / introduced systems is to model their systems so closely to other popular choices that the players see very little to adapt to.  As CoS is attempting to break the current MMO mold (or maybe mould?) I don't see this as a desired avenue.

In sum - I'd suggest designing as complex a system as is required to achieve the design goal.  Then devote a significant amount of development resources to ensuring a very very polished and thorough newbie experience.  Sure there will be people that complain about the complexity - but there will likely be just as many that cherish it.

While on the topic of casual players and skill progression - I would strongly suggest considering a real-time progression model (similar to the one EVE uses).  It is - bar none - the most casual friendly advancement system I've yet encountered, and comes with a couple of other hidden benefits:

- players tend to stay longer because they can keep progressing their character even when they don't have the time or motivation to play.  In fact I've seen people maintain accounts for months after they've moved on to other games because they're not sure if they're done and want to keep progressing their character "just in case".

- it takes a large step towards changing the "grind" mentality of players fostered in other leveling systems.  In EVE you can simply log in and do what you want rather than facing the choice of "grinding out your last bit of XP for a level".  I'm not saying there's no grind in EVE, not by a long shot - but a key element of CoS will be breaking the conventions newer MMO players take as granted.  The concept of a "leveling grind" really must be the first on the chopping block IMO.

2)  Very difficult to discuss without more specific information on how the skill system works (i.e. are skill levels additional discrete abilities, or are they mathematical improvements on the ability granted when the skill was first chosen).

If the former (i.e. pick the Ability: CAST FIRE, and get cast fire dart at level 1, fireball at level 2, etc) then I think you're stuck with a hard limit.  I'd go with a system like UO's in this case - where you can choose X number of abilities to take to max level and then be able to drop current abilities in favour of new ones as time goes on.

If the latter (i.e. pick the Ability: CAST FIRE, and each level gives you a more powerful / longer range / etc. spell effect) then there is really no need to hard cap the player.  Simply allow unlimited progression but on an exponential scale of diminishing returns - such that there would be an effective cap, but one that is decided by the player in how they choose to allot their time / skill points.

The latter scenario would be more amenable to having offline skill progression as a component of the system IMO.

Finally - the death penalty (apologies for the wall of text).

IMO, death penalties only exist because traditional MMO design emphasises a static world.  If the player wasn't punished for failing they would simply zerg-rush any given objective until they finally win through.  In and of themselves death penalties don't really help the game.

Given that CoS is being designed from a dynamic standpoint - the death penalty can very easily simply be failure in whatever task you were attempting.  If you die and can't return (mechanics of death aside), the village burns to the ground and whatever reason you had to try and prevent that outcome is rendered nul and void.

From this point of view, stacking on a penalty (i.e. loss of items or experience) would really be rubbing salt in a wound.

Now - depending on whether there is a player-crafting system and how it functions, item decay on use and/or on death might be a crucial function.  I would personally go with the use penalty - but that's really integral to any discussion of a crafting system.

Equally - depending on the mechanics involved, there may be a requirement for "rez sickness" or similar to prevent zerg-like effects.  Honestly I was actually a fan of the accumulated "combat fatigue" effect SWG had.  It imposed some downtime (which many people hated) but imposed downtime also seemed to increase community interaction in many cases.

In thinking about how to make a complicated ability system "casual friendly", I started thinking about how I put together a build when playing an RPG (MMO or not). I often take out a piece of paper and write out possibilities for character builds. I'll crunch the numbers, pick the skills, write down notes for  ideas or possibilities to explore, etc. With MMOs, there are often web based stat calculators (like the WoW talent calculators) that help you to do this, but at a pretty basic level.

What if a tool like this was integrated into the game itself? But it would need to be more comprehensive than just a stat calc (would need to be able to save builds, make notes, it would probably need to even be able to make suggestions based on your desired play-style, etc.), and it would have to be integrated into the tutorial such that you would have to use it early on to get the hang of planning out a character. It could be a "training journal" of sorts. A tool like this, if done well, would be an MMO-dream-come-true for me.

And Jatar, I'm sure you guys are hearing this a lot, but thank you (you being MMO Magic) for daring to be different and daring to dream big. The paradigm shift that you are proposing for this genre is a huge one, but it is definitely the direction that I'd like to see things go. So far, what I've read has described my dream game. Some of what has been said sounds so different and so difficult to implement that I'm hesitant to get too excited, but I'm rooting for you and can't wait to see what you've got hidden up your sleeves.

You know - it just struck me.  A great deal of the percieved complexity in MMO skill systems (and combat systems, etc) might be due to the proliferation of numbers and stats in most games.

I have this feeling that a great many players start missing the forest for the trees when it comes to picking skills.  They're so worried about picking a "wrong" build - having less than optimal DPS or an inefficient skill point layout - that they don't pick a build based on what they like or what they'd like to do.

My old DM tried to limit the idea of min/max'ing characters by hiding a lot of the stats - perhaps the same thing would be good for the MMO scene?

Originally posted by Jesse01

 

What if a tool like this was integrated into the game itself? But it would need to be more comprehensive than just a stat calc (would need to be able to save builds, make notes, it would probably need to even be able to make suggestions based on your desired play-style, etc.), and it would have to be integrated into the tutorial such that you would have to use it early on to get the hang of planning out a character. It could be a "training journal" of sorts. A tool like this, if done well, would be an MMO-dream-come-true for me.

 

Thanks for the suggestion, but the good news is that our Journal already includes a planning system to shape your character's development.  You can use one of our University Cadres to get a basic plan for the general type of character you want to build, then personalize it with your own modifications.  Or, you can just start from scratch and plan out your own. 

These plans you create are saved in your journal so you can use them for reference each time you need to improve your character (which is fairly often).  You also need this plan to shape your personal story, as you must quest for each ability that you will eventually want to study, so planning ahead is crucial.   After all, you don't want to have some study tokens to distribute into your character and not have the ability you want ready to study.

Jatar

Originally posted by jakin  

Jakin, since your post was a long one (and we appreciate all the thought you put into it) I am going to respond to some of your suggestions below each one, so I'm changing my text to green.

1)  I believe that the "casual player" often gets underestimated in their ability to understand game systems.  Basically - I'm of the opinion that the amount you play the game has little bearing on how well you understand the systems provided:

a)  there is a well-structured and polished tutorial experience, and

We're planning extensive tutorials, all of which can be skipped, some of which can be done at any time.

b)  systems are well and fully documented on either the website or in the game manual.  (Such documentation can even be solicited from the active playerbase)

We're taking documentation in a different direction, in game.  There are libraries and the League offices where players may go to get information without having to leave the game world.

In sum - I'd suggest designing as complex a system as is required to achieve the design goal.  Then devote a significant amount of development resources to ensuring a very very polished and thorough newbie experience.  Sure there will be people that complain about the complexity - but there will likely be just as many that cherish it.

 We certainly hope you are right, as this is the current plan.

(The Ability system is) Very difficult to discuss without more specific information on how the skill system works (i.e. are skill levels additional discrete abilities, or are they mathematical improvements on the ability granted when the skill was first chosen).

If the former (i.e. pick the Ability: CAST FIRE, and get cast fire dart at level 1, fireball at level 2, etc) then I think you're stuck with a hard limit.  I'd go with a system like UO's in this case - where you can choose X number of abilities to take to max level and then be able to drop current abilities in favour of new ones as time goes on.

If the latter (i.e. pick the Ability: CAST FIRE, and each level gives you a more powerful / longer range / etc. spell effect) then there is really no need to hard cap the player.  Simply allow unlimited progression but on an exponential scale of diminishing returns - such that there would be an effective cap, but one that is decided by the player in how they choose to allot their time / skill points.

Without going into detail, the current design is somewhere in between these two concepts.  Abilities you have and study will increase in power, but if you study them enough you will eventually take them to the next Echelon.  Each Echelon then adds a new wrinkle to the ability.  Then you go through another period of improving the Ability at that Echelon, until you attain the next.   And so on.  We currently have no plans for a cap, and will employ some type of diminishing returns.

Finally - the death penalty (apologies for the wall of text).

IMO, death penalties only exist because traditional MMO design emphasises a static world.  If the player wasn't punished for failing they would simply zerg-rush any given objective until they finally win through.  In and of themselves death penalties don't really help the game.

Given that CoS is being designed from a dynamic standpoint - the death penalty can very easily simply be failure in whatever task you were attempting.  If you die and can't return (mechanics of death aside), the village burns to the ground and whatever reason you had to try and prevent that outcome is rendered nul and void.

From this point of view, stacking on a penalty (i.e. loss of items or experience) would really be rubbing salt in a wound.

Equally - depending on the mechanics involved, there may be a requirement for "rez sickness" or similar to prevent zerg-like effects.  Honestly I was actually a fan of the accumulated "combat fatigue" effect SWG had.  It imposed some downtime (which many people hated) but imposed downtime also seemed to increase community interaction in many cases.

Death is a tricky issue.  We considered the idea of the penalty being the failure of your quest.  This would certainly tie into the fact that you cannot repeat any quest in our game.  Just as time moves on in the world, time moves on in the player's story as well, so there is no 'going back' and trying the same thing again.  However, in a fantasy world that has resurrection (which we do) we had to look at your story in the context of advancing time with that as a part of the reality. 

Example: I'm about to rescue a prisoner who is going to be executed at dawn.  Silly me, my friends and I try a frontal assault on the entry gate of the castle and get our clocks cleaned.  Since we all died we choose to resurrect at a Monastery.  Now... it is still some hours before dawn, the prisoner I was trying to save has still not been executed.  Therefore logically, I can still try to rescue him.  So, in this case death was not an 'end' to my quest, it is ongoing.  </