Champions Online: The No-NDA Merged Edition

[UnSub]

 ... apparently I'm the ChampO stalker. Oh well.

1up Preview

Highlights:

*MUO described as "debacle" by Cryptic CEO Michael Lewis

*ChampO is going to be more Marvel: Ultimate Alliance / X-Men Legends in combat style

*ChampO is going to have a lot more complex systems than CoH/V at launch - loot, nemesis system (which could be a excellent mini-game or a huge waste of time) and so on

*Emmert is trying to put all the stuff he learned from CoH/V into ChampO

[HaemishM]

*Emmert is trying to put all the stuff he learned from CoH/V into ChampO

Too bad he never learned that fast leveling = gud.

[WayAbvPar]

*Emmert is trying to put all the stuff he learned from CoH/V into ChampO

Too bad he never learned that fast no leveling = gud.

Even better.

[Typhon]

The latest update to the website answers a question about choosing powers from outside your archtype.

Basically what it says is that if you choose a power outside of your archtype it functions without a bonus.  Example is with a ranged blast.  Everyone gets the same basic blast power, except the "blaster" archtype which gets a bonus.

I think it sounds like a reasonable tradeoff between flexibility and balance.  They also mention that they are continuing to tweak what the archtypes will be.  Given this system, I'm not all torqued up about archtypes being restrictive, because I think that they are decently within the genre and that they likely make it a bit easier for them to have something that isn't totally out of balance.

[UnSub]

A bit more clarification on ChampO char design aims:

You will be able to select powers of every type for every character - defenses, attacks and other powers. If you wish to make an Energy Projector who has high defenses, you will be able to do this. The opposite is similarly true.

If you wish to make a Brick who can dish it out as well as they take it, you will - absolutely - be able to do this. Yes, a Brick who maximally optimizes for defensive capabilities will be somewhat better at that than, say, a Mentalist who tries to maximally optimize for defensive capabilities.

Note the operative words here: somewhat and maximally

Philosophically, we want Bricks - on average and with everything else being equal - to be a bit better at taking damage than the average Mentalist. However, you will absolutely be able to build a Mentalist who is far better at taking damage than the average Brick if you sufficiently optimize and maximize the various customization choices and focus on defense - and that's exactly why we are spending so much effort at this approach that allows for and gives the player as much customization and as many alternate choices for both character and individual character powers as we can.

What we are shooting for here is tendencies and edges - not rigid definitions as we have implemented in past games. This is a fundamentally different design philosophy, not simply a cosmetic touch-up.

[Trippy]

Go go tank mages!

[Hutch]

OK, I wasn't paying attention during the CoH beta, but I've read tales and rumors of the original power selection system. Didn't they originally start off letting players pick whatever powers they want? And after players rolled tank mages and started scything through the content, they decided to put in the Archetypes that we now know and love?

I wonder if they can really pull this off. I mean, if players can pick any powers they want, they'll figure out the most effective way to spend their points. We did it back in Asheron's Call, and it will happen again here.

I'm not advocating that they go with rigid archetypes. Far from it. I am predicting a caterwauling on the official Champions Online boards from players who built gimpy characters, and are jealous of being out-performed by min-maxers. I am predicting that the dev team will do some datamining and learn that, yes, letting a Blaster Energy Projector pick whatever defensive powers he wants does break the game.

The question is, can they handle it. Can they turn this system loose, and resist the urge to nerf the tank mages? Can they design content that's challenging for the role-players and the min-maxers alike?

Will they let you respec your character out of the box? I'd like to think that this will be one of the "lessons" that they learned from CoH.

[Montague]

A bit more clarification on ChampO char design aims:

You will be able to select powers of every type for every character - defenses, attacks and other powers. If you wish to make an Energy Projector who has high defenses, you will be able to do this. The opposite is similarly true.

If you wish to make a Brick who can dish it out as well as they take it, you will - absolutely - be able to do this. Yes, a Brick who maximally optimizes for defensive capabilities will be somewhat better at that than, say, a Mentalist who tries to maximally optimize for defensive capabilities.

Note the operative words here: somewhat and maximally

Philosophically, we want Bricks - on average and with everything else being equal - to be a bit better at taking damage than the average Mentalist. However, you will absolutely be able to build a Mentalist who is far better at taking damage than the average Brick if you sufficiently optimize and maximize the various customization choices and focus on defense - and that's exactly why we are spending so much effort at this approach that allows for and gives the player as much customization and as many alternate choices for both character and individual character powers as we can.

What we are shooting for here is tendencies and edges - not rigid definitions as we have implemented in past games. This is a fundamentally different design philosophy, not simply a cosmetic touch-up.

I applaud this. If they can get rid of the aggro, tank spank'n heal gameplay that would be awesome.

I'm still skeptical though that they'll be able to do it to the degree that he says.

[shiznitz]

The first 6 months of ChampO will be based in Nerf City.

[Lantyssa]

OK, I wasn't paying attention during the CoH beta, but I've read tales and rumors of the original power selection system. Didn't they originally start off letting players pick whatever powers they want? And after players rolled tank mages and started scything through the content, they decided to put in the Archetypes that we now know and love?

I think they got rid of it fairly early, maybe alpha or the design stages, but yes.  SWG did the same.

I wish games would let us make those choices, but I fall pretty far on the "Sandbox.  Yay!" side of the spectrum.

[Venkman]

Interesting system. As long as it can properly direct players towards roles (for those who want such direction) while also giving maximum choice to players, could be cool.

If it survives to launch.

[UnSub]

OK, I wasn't paying attention during the CoH beta, but I've read tales and rumors of the original power selection system. Didn't they originally start off letting players pick whatever powers they want? And after players rolled tank mages and started scything through the content, they decided to put in the Archetypes that we now know and love?

The free form character creation system didn't outlast CoH's friends and family beta testing. The issue wasn't just tank mages - the other end of things were players who put all their points into Flight, so could fly very well but not do anything else. There are some articles that go into the reasons behind the change. Not stated is that CoH was running over-schedule and probably over budget, so they had to move quickly and get things playable in order to avoid becoming vapourware.

As for nerfs: yeah, possibly. Hopefully beta is largely devoted to seeing what kind of power combos skew the game, but I also believe that achieving perfect balance isn't one of Cryptic's aims for ChampO. They appear to be aiming more for an 'everything is unbalanced' style of power development.

[Trippy]

Guide to the original CoH trailer

Download site for trailer (it's no longer available on the CoH site)

[Hutch]

As for nerfs: yeah, possibly. Hopefully beta is largely devoted to seeing what kind of power combos skew the game, but I also believe that achieving perfect balance isn't one of Cryptic's aims for ChampO. They appear to be aiming more for an 'everything is unbalanced' style of power development.

"Let things be unbalanced" is a great attitude to have. I had a nice long incoherent screed written about devs and nerfing and betas and retail, but I will summarize: I remain skeptical. I think no one yet has figured out how to have a skill-based no-archetype mmog without the character base devolving into a handful of tank-mage builds. And these guys aren't Blizzard. I predict that the official beta, as well as the unoffical paid beta (aka early retail) will be a period marked by profound nerfing, and a great gnashing of teeth.

[cmlancas]

It really doesn't have to be that way. I've played MUDs for years that have struck a balance between tank mages, tank warriors, and tank rogues. It all works, just MMOG designers haven't found the balance yet.

[Ragnoros]

I would remind everyone that this is not Fantasy Diku. This is a SUPERHERO DIKU! Why do we fucking need the Tank-Healer-Mage setup?

Let EVERYONE be super. 

It really shouldn't be THAT hard to make reasonably balanced. 

Sure there will be a "best" build, there always is. But as long as you give your average player some direction. Or better yet, the inability to screw themselves over. You're Golden.

[Hutch]

I would remind everyone that this is not Fantasy Diku. This is a SUPERHERO DIKU! Why do we fucking need the Tank-Healer-Mage setup?

Let EVERYONE be super. 

It really shouldn't be THAT hard to make reasonably balanced. 

Sure there will be a "best" build, there always is. But as long as you give your average player some direction. Or better yet, the inability to screw themselves over. You're Golden.

I want there to be tank mages, don't get me wrong. I just have my doubts whether the devs can handle the idea. I envision thus: a few months after retail, they will nerf a fun but unbalancing aspect of gameplay, and utter an apology along the lines of "we never thought players would build characters to be as powerful and weakness-free as the game will let them, even though some of us have had some experience in the design and post-launch support of mmog's in the past."

If they're going in with the mindset that unrestricted skill selection will lead to players rolling up tank mages, and that's ok, then great. Perfect. Now test the hell out of it, and create gobs and gobs of content that can stand up to the tank mages, without simultaneously crushing the role-playing gimps.

This is where the true challenge lies for the dev team, and I think it's a huge, paradigm-breaking challenge. Thus my hefty skepticism.

As far as letting the players screw themselves over, that's why there should be respecs available.

[Lantyssa]

It shouldn't be that hard to figure out a character's rough DPS and damage soaking capabilities and adjust enemies accordingly.  We've been stuck in staticly designed enemy land for far too long.

CoX does it with their giant monsters and a couple of other things based on levels.  Now figure it out based on the actual abilities of the character.

[Ragnoros]

It shouldn't be that hard to figure out a character's rough DPS and damage soaking capabilities and adjust enemies accordingly.  We've been stuck in staticly designed enemy land for far too long.

CoX does it with their giant monsters and a couple of other things based on levels.  Now figure it out based on the actual abilities of the character.

I think that would be a nightmare to try and balance. And the players would exploit the system, as always.

Lastly you would have the Oblivion effect. You would never feel like you were getting stronger. And worse case if it was poorly designed like the system in oblivion, you might actually get weaker as you gained levels.

Edit: I know personally in oblivion towards the middle of the story I nearly gave up as I had basic skills in everything, which inflated my level, meaning my meager skills in any given field could not best them.

[Venkman]

Here's a topical analogy: who'd win in an unplanned fight: Superman vs Batman, Spiderman vs Wolverine, Iron Man vs the Thing. Fantasy has already had clear roles and responsibilities for classes. Comics have always had specific roles per comic IP. Crossing over them in a generic lateral experience is asking for trouble. As a result: CoX.

It's not impossible. It's just hard, with no guarantee it'll work, which is just what money folks like hearing.

I'm with those predicting something similar to CoX.

But then, I also don't think ChampO will ever launch.

[Lantyssa]

Lastly you would have the Oblivion effect. You would never feel like you were getting stronger. And worse case if it was poorly designed like the system in oblivion, you might actually get weaker as you gained levels.

Oblivion was a very poorly done version of this.  It just counted your total skill points and it didn't matter if they were in axe swinging or flower picking.

My suggestion would be to figure out the player's actual capabilities.  It's not hard to calculate DPS or resistances.  If they want to get more accurate the game can even track power usage.  WoW and other games have plug-ins that do this for entire raid groups, so it's not that complicated.

That gives a baseline.  Now randomize from there.  Enemies could still be weak or crushingly overpowered.  Then resistances and weaknesses kick in.  The power adjustment doesn't have to be linear either.

Since it's based on each character a truly gimpy one will have a fighting chance and can contribute a little.  The point isn't to completely flatten the difficulty, just to keep the extremes able to function.  (I'm thinking the low end of things, although it could place a soft cap on abilities, too.)

[Venkman]

That actually sounds very much like Diablo 2. Semi-randomized content in instances based on your personal or group makeup. And it did result (for me anyway) in the problem Ragnoros raised: that you never feel like you're getting stronger because the challenges in front of you always scale to your current level. D2 did put upper and lower limits on just how much a zone could be scaled, the same way CoX instances do.

It's harder to balance because you're working more in formula/procedural land, but it's also less taxing on the content-creation side of the equation. I prefer static content that is properly utilized to convey your strength. For example, I like games with critical social/commerce junctures. High levels return and can periodically toy with the stuff around such places that used to give them headaches during the formative levels. But of course, the games I like are also the most expensive to make 

[Typhon]

I'd prefer scaling that threw different types and numbers at you - similar to CoX's minion/leutenant/boss structure.  And while we're wishing, I wish the leutenants and bosses actually started to use thier minions in a clever way as the encounters scaled up higher.

So, when you are "level appropriate" you get a minion.  You face off against multiple minions if you are above the "level appropriate" level.  And so on.  In this way, nearly every level is "level appropriate".  This would (theoretically) make it more natuaral to have characters of diverse levels fighting in one area, - they'd just need to adapt their tactics.  (In this "only in my head" game there aren't tanks/healer/dps'rs, players need to use abilities to seperate, incapacitate and brute-force mobs.  Retreat should always be a possible necessity).

[Lantyssa]

If you're going for a level-based system (*gag*) then that could certainly be an additional weighting factor.  There are plenty of ways to balance it if you want players to be able to return to previous areas and kick some bad-guy around.  Those are design issues though.  CoX has scaling, but it also lets players adjust their difficulty.  There's no reason not to give such an option in a system that can dynamically adjust mob capabilities on a per-character basis.

I'm simply saying it is possible to adjust every mob to match the player in an intelligent way if that is what is desired.  It can take the edge off poorly made and min/max builds and let players play the game without worrying so much about their capabilities.

For difficulty I would really like to see improvements in AI.  I always hear about devs scaling it back because it's too smart for players.  Let's get some of that in games for those who want a challenge.

[Venkman]

Yea, that's come up before actually. Mob AI certainly could be smarter. But as this genre has devolved from choice to planned acquisition along linear paths, the mobs are merely content gates. And I think that's ok.

To actually make an immersive world where choices matter, you need to do a lot more than just smarter AI. You need to change the entire concept of XP generation to unlock skills, most of what passes for "quests" nowadays to move away from Kill X/Trigger Y stuff, and in general provide more relevant use of combat in the total game world.

Right now, 99% of what players actually do in a game is combat. And that's driven by the need to personalize a character. And that's limited by the choices we can make. And that's limited by the convention of designing against Time and Stats rather than by Skill and Choice. All of this leads to a game solely about NPC genocide, with the negative connotation mitigated by respawn.

So for what the popular games are today in the West, dumb AI is the more appropriate choice.

[UnSub]

Lead dev says "We might take archetypes / classes out altogether... but we haven't decided yet".

I don't care either way, but not having ATs / classes probably makes the char development system more flexible. On the other hand, having a class / AT forces a choice and arguably reduces cookie cutter designs (or, in reality, creates a cookie cutter design or two for each class to line up on).

[WayAbvPar]

Lead dev says "We might take archetypes / classes out altogether... but we haven't decided yet".

I don't care either way, but not having ATs / classes probably makes the char development system more flexible. On the other hand, having a class / AT forces a choice and arguably reduces cookie cutter designs (or, in reality, creates a cookie cutter design or two for each class to line up on).

If they follow through I might actually play. Is there any PvP? PvE + classes = dead to me.

[UnSub]

Yep, PvP is being taken into full consideration - the dev behind that side of things is a big PvP fan from Shadowbane and Eve.

Other notes:

1) Those people going to Gencon or PAX will get to see the first live playable demos of ChampO. If someone is going, I'd like to get a report back.

2) Cryptic picked up at least one person from Perpetual Entertainment. If they picked up one, they probably picked up more. Still doesn't answer the question if they have the STO licence or not.

[Nevermore]

Meh, not really about ChampO so I'll just start a new thread.

[UnSub]

The ChampO website has a counter on it with about 45 days on the clock. This (apparently) takes us to about July 28, which is after the San Diego Comic Conference.

So, something important to be announced in 45 days for ChampO. Hopefully beta, but we'll see.

[UnSub]

The ChampO website has a counter on it with about 45 days on the clock. This (apparently) takes us to about July 28, which is after the San Diego Comic Conference.

So, something important to be announced in 45 days for ChampO. Hopefully beta, but we'll see.

That counter is under games. Champ O is already listed.

Bwa?

EDIT: Got over my temporary retardation - the counter is up on the Cryptic site under 'Games' and is listed as separate from ChampO. Yeah, it probably isn't a beta countdown for ChampO, but a countdown for STO.

[UnSub]

Unofficial ChampO PC specs have been posted... kinda. Katalyst, a community rep, has posted her new PC specs that will / does allow her to play ChampO on it.

I'm all about wanting to help , so while I can't post any specs for the game just yet (those will be coming at a later date), I can post the specs for the new computer that I'm going to be getting for my personal use at home.

Again...DISCLAIMER: these are NOT "the" specs for the game. These are merely the specs for MY new personal PC.


Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 (3.0ghz)
Asus P5KPL-VM motherboard
4gb RAM
Nvidia GeForce 8800GT (512mb) video card
565w Enermax Power Supply
DVD-R/W
500gb Western Digital Hard Drive
Windows XP 32bit

And yes, I will be able to play the game on it. I hope this helps a little itty bit.

[Trippy]

Okay, that was really not helpful. She should nix her own post.

[UnSub]

I agree - posting system specs that haven't been officially vetted can / will create a lot of problems.

I posted them here as a point of interest and in case they disappear from the official forums.

[Numtini]

ROTFL what game won't that computer play.