Darkfall "Released"

[Jayce]

I can't believe no-one has picked up on Tasos' statement that the game will be automatically balanced because anyone can have any skill yet.

That works for RL.

But RL is neither balanced nor consistently fun.

[Arthur_Parker]

Well, starting a thread about it might help.

[Rishathra]

//I prefer dual classing nerd and pigfarmer.

[tazelbain]

So religion is an attempt to balance real life like an MMO?

[Azaroth]

Most things are.

[Sophismata]

Hell, the only reason this whole "casters can't wear armour" conception even exists is because of Gygax's crazy notions of magic.

*Bzzzzt* Nope it's because the easiest way to balance the huge DPS and/or high utility of casters is via massively lowered survivability. Glass cannons and all that.

Not quite. Think back to why casters are archetyped as Damage/Utility units with cloth for armour. It has little (if anything) to do with videogame balance.

[Wasted]

Hell, the only reason this whole "casters can't wear armour" conception even exists is because of Gygax's crazy notions of magic.

*Bzzzzt* Nope it's because the easiest way to balance the huge DPS and/or high utility of casters is via massively lowered survivability. Glass cannons and all that.

Not quite. Think back to why casters are archetyped as Damage/Utility units with cloth for armour. It has little (if anything) to do with videogame balance.

They played their videogames on tabletops back then.

Also Gandalf wore a dress

[Sophismata]

They played their videogames on tabletops back then.

Also Gandalf wore a dress

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqO7zEWu0W0 

[IainC]

Hell, the only reason this whole "casters can't wear armour" conception even exists is because of Gygax's crazy notions of magic.

*Bzzzzt* Nope it's because the easiest way to balance the huge DPS and/or high utility of casters is via massively lowered survivability. Glass cannons and all that.

Not quite. Think back to why casters are archetyped as Damage/Utility units with cloth for armour. It has little (if anything) to do with videogame balance.

It's because people enjoy playing that archetype. I now officially have no idea what your point is.

[Sophismata]

It's because people enjoy playing that archetype. I now officially have no idea what your point is.

Ah, sorry, I'll elaborate. The cloth-wearing caster came about in videogames because of D&D. The reason that magic users wear cloth in D&D wasn't because of game balance, it was because of the way Gygax envisioned and implemented his magic system (drawing inspiration from the 'Wizard' archetype in literature). The reason that magic users ended up having so much utility and (barring some min-maxxing, player's choice, etc) damage was due to the nature of the magic system, itself.

This was carried into MUDs and many video games. The caster has now been cross-pollinated with the glass cannon - the glass cannon, by its very nature, trades survivability for damage. Casters do not have to be glass cannons, in my opinion they were forced into the role by the popularity of D&D (and, to a lesser extent, the sources it draws from).

Hope that clears it up.

[IainC]

Ok, I see your point but still, the pure caster archetype is a popular one so game designers like to include it. Other caster archetypes - including heavy armoured reaver/paladin/shadowknight archetypes - also exist and are generally featured in games too but the DPS caster is something that a lot of people like to play. If you're going to put it in an unmoderated game then it needs to be balanced (not so much of a concern for tabletop RPGs generally). D&D balanced the awesome power of mages in a number of ways, D4 hit points and no armour was one way, the other was making them laughably poor at low levels. Having one spell a day and the effective combat rating of a lettuce sandwich isn't a lot of fun for a combat oriented MMO/MUD so designers let them do stuff all the time in exchange for not being very robust. Having a heavy armoured, ranged DPS machine balanced with melee is going to be a challenge.

[ashrik]

20 days until the revolution!

[DLRiley]

Heavily armored caster removes the need to bring warriors/melee. PVE class balance (which rarely exist) at least dictates that 90% of the classes can remotely useful compared to other classes in a group. A range class with passive survivability just craps on that concept in pve and just wonks on melee combat in pvp. The day when casters carry armor is when warriors stop being designed as tanks. 

[Venkman]

Is that a bad thing?

Purity leads to limitations. How many un-guilded PUGs are limited because there's no healers nor tanks about? Heck, how many in-guild PUGs are limited because the three tanks are already occupied and the three healers are with them?

WoW is the last and best use of strict archetypes, and therefore the only active game we need that features them. For future titles, I'd rather throw out the 30 year old convention in favor of a different fantasy world in which Tanks can cast spells and Mages can wear armors, with appropriate limitations. Ya know, like back when UO Mages could wear plate but couldn't regen mana in Meditation, or how Warriors could train up just enough magic to have some utility.

There's nothing wrong with these concepts.

[K9]

Heavily armored caster removes the need to bring warriors/melee. PVE class balance (which rarely exist) at least dictates that 90% of the classes can remotely useful compared to other classes in a group. A range class with passive survivability just craps on that concept in pve and just wonks on melee combat in pvp. The day when casters carry armor is when warriors stop being designed as tanks. 

This is only true if you are working within a very narrow and pre-existing framework, such as the WoW class system. Your answer typifies how pervasive some of these notions are, and they're really founded on narrative rather than any solid reasoning.

All classes have a varying mixture of certain factors: survivabilty, manouvreability, dps, range and utility. These are all highly nebulous factors and trying to explicitly quantify a give classes ability in any given factor vis-a-vis another class is what leads to all the whining on forums. However, there's really nothing that says warriors must be tanks, other than convention. You could quite concievably implement a melee-range caster tank based on high hp and mitigation, or a ranged physical DPS class whose survivability is rooted in evasion and mobility. Tanks don't have to use swords, you just think they do.

[Jack9]

a different fantasy world in which Tanks can cast spells and Mages can wear armors,

Where everyone is the same. Everyone is a magetank for versatility, leading to almost none.

[IainC]

Wait, what are we even arguing about here?

Different takes on the standard archetypes exist and are often found in games. I'm not sure why we're all pretending that for some reason game designers are sticking religiously to the basic Fighter/Mage/Cleric AD&D character classes?

Are we arguing that players choose these classes because unimaginative designers don't give them an alternative or are we saying that players enjoy playing certain archetypes so designers give them what they want?

These archetypes are pervasive and I don't think that's a bad thing. Even in a fantasy world, it can be important to have points of obvious familiarity. 'Armoured guy who's good at fighting', 'Skirmishing archer', 'Combat healer' and 'poorly armoured ranged DPS machine' are all tags that players can pick up on and relate to easily even if the rest of your system is mould-breaking alt fantasy featuring races that have never seen a vowel. I've heard it put forwards that one of the reasons for Albion being the most popular realm in DAoC was the familiarity with the class archetypes - new players can get a handle on what a Wizard or a Paladin or a Cleric is but not many would know what to expect from a Skald or a Valewalker or a Nightshade for instance. I don't know how true it is but it sounds as though it could reasonably be so.

I'd rather throw out the 30 year old convention in favor of a different fantasy world in which Tanks can cast spells and Mages can wear armors, with appropriate limitations. Ya know, like back when UO Mages could wear plate but couldn't regen mana in Meditation, or how Warriors could train up just enough magic to have some utility.

There's nothing wrong with these concepts.

There is. You're swapping one balance issue for another. If tanks can cast spells why would you be a tank that didn't cast spells? Why would you not wear armour as a caster. You're giving players the illusion of choice but really all you're doing is offering them different archetypes that are simply hidden from casual view. I'm not saying it won't work, but it's not a revolution.

[DLRiley]

I'm more PVP oriented and don't see the tank + nuker + healer combo a conductive to PvP at all. However the concept of a dedicated healer is something that no pocket healing can really replace. Depending on the nature of the game that role needs to be actually designed into the game. At best for PVE (still talking about class balance) you want to insure that ALL classes have survivability, something that really has less to do with purity and more to do with how friendly your game is to both players who play solo or to players who want to know that they might not always need a nuker or a tank or even a healer to complete certain content. As a PvP'er all classes must have relevance on the battle field. If you want to design a range damage dealer from that wears armor and a melee that only slightly decent at spells, there better be a good reason why I should field the melee with some magic over the range damage dealer with warrior armor.

If you design your classes to acute, you will have to field everyone to cover the weaknesses, if you design your classes to obtuse, there is no point to the class system since all classes play the same.

[cmlancas]

Is this actually releasing?  I can't be assed to read the thread, since it's like driving a nail in my pecker, but I'd like to partake in the lulz.

[IainC]

Is this actually releasing?  I can't be assed to read the thread, since it's like driving a nail in my pecker, but I'd like to partake in the lulz.

22nd January apparently. Check back in 3 weeks for the full skinny I guess.

[schild]

I'd really, really like to make a rule about posting about Darkfall post-release. We all know it's going to basically be terrible. As such, it's probably better for the whole industry if we completely ignore it unless it's fucking awesome. And since it won't be fucking awesome, I think we should talk about Spleunky, or whatever. Anything. Anything but a game that's very obviously going to be a boring mess. Otherwise it just feels like we're forcing the hate. And that's just dumb - AND - a waste of time.

[ezrast]

The reification of the tank/healer/dps method of class design is something that always perplexes me. You guys have played Diablo II multiplayer, right? The game has the armored guy who's good at fighting, the skirmishing archer, and the poorly armored ranged DPS machine, and the balance doesn't all go to pieces when the paladin gets access to Fist of the Heavens or whatever. (edit: Fist of the Heavens is a spammable long-range nuke, not terribly good but it is given to the highest-armored class in the game)

Even in non-class-based systems, there's no reason why a warrior putting a couple points into fireball has to be more effective than putting those same couple points into making her swords skill higher. If a skill-based game has everybody turning into tank mages, its because the devs did a shitty job of balancing, not because classes are the only way to balance things.

I'm going to go talk about Spelunky now.

[cmlancas]

I'd really, really like to make a rule about posting about Darkfall post-release. We all know it's going to basically be terrible. As such, it's probably better for the whole industry if we completely ignore it unless it's fucking awesome. And since it won't be fucking awesome, I think we should talk about Spleunky, or whatever. Anything. Anything but a game that's very obviously going to be a boring mess. Otherwise it just feels like we're forcing the hate. And that's just dumb - AND - a waste of time.

No way.  It's going to be the most fun I've ever had playing forum wars.  I'm going to shine my boots with the tears cried by hundreds of let-down fanbois.

[schild]

I'd really, really like to make a rule about posting about Darkfall post-release. We all know it's going to basically be terrible. As such, it's probably better for the whole industry if we completely ignore it unless it's fucking awesome. And since it won't be fucking awesome, I think we should talk about Spleunky, or whatever. Anything. Anything but a game that's very obviously going to be a boring mess. Otherwise it just feels like we're forcing the hate. And that's just dumb - AND - a waste of time.

No way.  It's going to be the most fun I've ever had playing forum wars.  I'm going to shine my boots with the tears cried by hundreds of let-down fanbois.

I'm probably just going to be banning them and letting them slide out on a slip-n-slide of their own tears. I don't want people that....blind to be around here.

[SuperPopTart]

I think we just experienced Schild being nice to the emofanpersons. Blind? Cute.

[schild]

I think we just experienced Schild being nice to the emofanpersons. Blind? Cute.

Nice?

What do you mean nice?

[tmp]

Is that a bad thing?

Tbh no, i don't think it's a bad thing, personally. It's a different thing and that might be seen as bad by some, but i dunno.... i've been rather curious how plausible a MMO would be where every player could be competent tank/healer/damage dealer all in one (i suppose with some variations akin to how different talent trees work in WoW rather than full scale class variations) So guess it's nice there's one crazy MMO going that route and i can watch this experiment done with someone else's money. 

[Signe]

I think we just experienced Schild being nice to the emofanpersons. Blind? Cute.

Nice?

What do you mean nice?

You know deep down inside you're all warm and fuzzy.

Well, fuzzy anyway.

[Venkman]

I highly endorse schild's strategery as it regards to DF. We don't need another WAR emohateon around here. It's not even cathartic to the bystanders.

There is. You're swapping one balance issue for another. If tanks can cast spells why would you be a tank that didn't cast spells? Why would you not wear armour as a caster. You're giving players the illusion of choice but really all you're doing is offering them different archetypes that are simply hidden from casual view. I'm not saying it won't work, but it's not a revolution.

That's why you limit it. Again, UO. A Tank was not going to Corp Por a dedicated Mage. But they could learn enough utility magic to cast Recall and therefore a few other things. And it made PvE easier.

Class systems are easier. Takes out the guesswork of min/maxxers. But it also forces players into decisions they're not ready to make. That in turn forces future games to borrow the conventions of prior games, so that when veterans migrate they're not completely alienated. And that's how you get cloth-wearing Mages and Tanks that can't cast spells. And that in turn is how you get a lack of Tanks and a lack of Healers in comparison to a limitless quantity of hybrids in a game half soloed.

And that's why we got WoW. It's here, done, and there's no one who can one-up that experience in any meaningful way. So everyone else is forced to look at where WoW could be potentially weak and build around that.

I'm not saying we'll be going back to UO skills anytime soon (though that'd be a welcome sight). But I do think anyone who wants to take a serious shot at the "next big MMO" is going to need to do more than "healers can now heal even better". Something fundamental.

[Sophismata]

Hmmmm, I'd love to make everyone a mage. Then have different schools of magic equate to different combat styles / archetypes. Kill the preconceived notions of Tank / DPS / Healer and how Fighter / Mage / Cleric are always matched up to them. You open up a lot of design room, but sacrifice familiarity. Personally, I hate familiarity.

[UnSub]

I highly endorse schild's strategery as it regards to DF. We don't need another WAR emohateon around here. It's not even cathartic to the bystanders.

I enjoyed WAR's experience. The forums about it were more fun than the actual game (and my interest lasted longer).

If DF's devs come here to post, even better. They won't, of course, because they need to keep living in that little bubble where everyone agrees with what decisions they've made.

I don't think we should ignore DF, but Schild's right about forcing the hate. We just need to let the lulz flow naturally.

[SuperPopTart]

I think we just experienced Schild being nice to the emofanpersons. Blind? Cute.

Nice?

What do you mean nice?

You know deep down inside you're all warm and fuzzy.

Well, fuzzy anyway.

I am not sure that you can post here if someone has ever described you "Warm".
We are cold blooded creatures, dearest Signe.
And so are you

[Jack9]

the balance doesn't all go to pieces when the paladin gets access to Fist of the Heavens

Currently there are nonstop baal runs, all day, every day, run by bots. 99% of the bots making and running are hammerdins (paladins with blessed hammers). The consummate magetank of high armor high damage plus it's AOE. There is no need for any other class. There is only dealing mass damage and moving forward opening a portal. Take enough damage do the equivalent of a "heal" and port home, rinse repeat. So easy a bot can do it.

I'd love to make everyone a mage

Most MMORPGs do this to some extent. WoW being the best example, because of the number and utility of the "class specific spells" (aka abilities, talents, whatever). Warriors have melee, mitigation, and aggro spells. Rogues have evasion, detect trap, and invisibility spells (both warrior and rogue also have positional spells, which other classes do not). Hunters have animal and ranged spells. Etc etc etc.

In MMORPGs it's rare to have a player with no spells to affect their environment and provide playstyle options. Least popular class in EQ beta? An Ogre Warrior (like a troll without the regen!). I believe that players enjoy having more options at any given time, to a point (unless they are of the belief it will earn them some type of sufferer's status or scarcity reward- see leveling to 80 in WoW as a melee-only hunter, being the first tank to level cap or whatever). Finding that point is subtle, but it starts with, everyone is a mage of a certain type.

[Lantyssa]

There's a really easy way to balance armor and dps -- the more heavily armored on is, the less damage you do with weapons or spells.  The less protected, the more your dps, healing, or whatever goes up.  It can get a little tricky to balance if someone can do all things, but overall it's just not that hard.

Of course as long as we're stuck with class-based systems with a huge reliance on gear instead of innate character traits, we're unlikely to see this change.  The entire point of items is to raise those traits without lowering the corresponding ones.

[DLRiley]

There's a really easy way to balance armor and dps -- the more heavily armored on is, the less damage you do with weapons or spells.  The less protected, the more your dps, healing, or whatever goes up.  It can get a little tricky to balance if someone can do all things, but overall it's just not that hard.

Of course as long as we're stuck with class-based systems with a huge reliance on gear instead of innate character traits, we're unlikely to see this change.  The entire point of items is to raise those traits without lowering the corresponding ones.

i think the last two mmo's followed this theory even while using classes. I don't think its a matter of balancing out survivability/damage ratio. Your not doing anything special by allowing players to swing up or down the pendulum. It's really a matter of balancing the skills in game according to Team based encounters vs balancing based on 1v1.