Changing classes into roles, instead of removing them completely?


(onYn) #1

I am pretty sure we all agree on the fact, that identification with a character and the way he allows us to play a game is important for many reasons like game depth, long therm motivation etc… So I have been thinking about the roles of classes in other games, what role they actually fulfill in therms of how we experience the game. I will try to first introduce a different angle of defining specific roles and then go on why they are so important for ballance purposes as well as increasing merc diversity.

I imagine, that there should be 4 roles, with every merc being able to fullfill 1 or at max 2 of those roles. Those who can full fill only one role would be specialists, while 2 roles make you a hybrid.

1) Supplier: Obviously, a person who supplies the players with ammonition, med packs. Suppliers who aren´t a hybrid could supply more efficiently or supply more powerfull things like nades or rockets (to those who can use them).

2) Fighter: Again quiet obvious, someone who is good in fighting. The “fighter” is good with fighting face to face and is not so much focused on positioning compared to a sniper for example. This role would be actually quiet often a hybrid, also have it´s specialists be equipped with heavy guns and a lot of armor/health.

3) Tactician: Tacticians have abilities that either supply your team with informations about the enemy (sensors, some movement detectors maybe, etc…) or can use powerfull abiltiies (airstrikes etc.) or weild powerfull long distance weapons. Both will require a good positioning, while either also need the ability to properly judge the game situation (timing airstrikes/lasers etc.) or aim (in case of snipers).

4) Tanks/Objective: They would be responsible for objectives, and in some cases also for tanking up heavily guarded entrances (maybe this won´t be needed, but in case of poor map design, some dors/ways may be so easy to camp, that you may need such a role). There will be a variety of those guys, with some of them being hybrids and only able to do some of the objectives, while specialists will able to do all the objectives with either a 300% proficiency while having some bonus tankiness or 100% proficiency but just regulary health/armor. Possible brake down:

Only objective guys/tanks specialists or hybrids with them can do objectives, with the supplier role not being compatible with them.

Fighter hybrids: will be able to only plant and defuse bombs. (300% proficiency)
Tacticians: Able to only repair EV´s and “hack” objectives. (300% proficiency)

Tanks could do all the objectives but with the usual 300% proficiency. Specialists however, will be able to do all of the objectives with 100% proficiency. I imagine them looking like mad scientists and stuff :D. I would imagine other specialists having very unique looks as well, so that you could easily identify them.

All of those roles, can be crossed with eachother (beside supplier + objective), allowing most possible combinations and by that (as far as I can imagine) not restricting any merc development like the classic “class” system would do to some extent.

What are some of the benefits the introduction of such roles would have?

  1. They will allow you very unique distinguished play styles, that actually will feel like something that is indeed required, and not just another merc on the battlefield. Right now, you can find some different play styles as well, but they are limited to the fighting only (im some cases in a passive way). Obviously you shouldn´t go ham on the sniper rifle, and as a medic you probably should try to stay alive, but you actually don´t have to. So all the roles even tho existent are very wishi washi and because of that not rewarding at all.

  2. Introducing people into the game will be a major task, that yet needs a lot of work. With such roles, it would be much easier to let someone who just installed the game decide what he wants to do. You could lay down a path that a person walks while experiencing the game for the first time. You could suggest the roles according to the skills the player has/wants to develop. A fighter or tactician would be something for people who are generally good at aiming, or already experienced in DB. Supplyers and objective guys/tanks would actually represent a role that is more beginner friendly, with easier tasks that are still very usefull for the team. Further you coud introduce the first mercs properly and guide the player very efficiently in his first games. Obviously you can do this right now as well, but with clear defined roles with a unique impact on the game it will feel much more special and rewarding as well as allow much more structure for all the mercs that we will be able to pick. Someone who for example liked the role of a supplier, will appreciate a nicely ordered list of further mercs that are good at this specific task instead of a bunch of mercs he actually needs to figure out what they are particularity good with and what there purpose in game is since everyone can kinda do everything.

  3. Every player, who sees all those mercs will eventually want to play and master them all and I am pretty sure that this is what SD wants as well. But honestly, when faced with a insanely high number of mercs, I can imagine people be rather frightened of the ammount of mercs they have to go through. Especially for people who are new to the game it will seem like a even tougher task, since they will have problems to actually know what they can expect from a new merc they potentially “buy”. With those roles, they will not only have an easier time understanding what this merc´s job will be on the battlefield but also will have a certain ammount of sattisfaction once they have played most mercs of one role. They will feel like they have learned something and be kinda good at this or that in the game, and not be still lost in the endless universe of DB. This will allow a much more linear learning curve, since the mercs within the roles will require similar skills. In the end, mastering all those roles will motivate casual and more serious players much more then just mastering individual mercs. It just feels much better to say that you are good at a specific role then on a single merc.

  4. Even tho there are no “obvious” classes in the game, there are still mercs that are better at certain tasks then others. Putting those mercs in certain categories like the roles I suggested will make team dynamics much easier to understand. In any kind of team forming, be it just in matchmaking, drafts or even in organized teams you will usually look for people who are good at a specific role. Even tho I think that some role identification will happen anyways, I think it would be much smoother if the game would actually support this.

  5. So with two more points to go I would like to touch on how roles would improve the ballance and merc diversity. Right now every merc can do almost anything, with some proficiencies here and there. I honestly can´t predict how much those proficiencies will affect the process of merc picking but at the current state I think that they will be almost meaningless. So what ends up being the only left criteria is what kind of fighting benefits (be it active or passive) does a certain merc bring. I honestly belive that no matter how well you will ballance, the community will allways fight the best mercs for the few indivudal benefits they bring to the fighting aspect of the game and play them for the most of the time. Splitting and assigning some important tasks within the game to different major groups of mercs will actually force the people to play a bigger variety of mercs. Even tho in therms of fighting there will be stronger mercs to pick, they will have to take this or that one, just because the team needs it. Something that I heavily miss in the game right now. This will actually help you to ballance the mercs easier since it won´t be so easy to pinpoint the “best” merc anymore, and even if it the number would be for sure higher then 1. This at the same time will drastically increase the ammount of mercs that will be played regularly.

  6. I already talked about how roles will make team forming and organizing easier. But there are actually many more benefits coming with the competitive aspects of those roles.
    First of all, it will be so much easier to categorize any “pro” players, by that many more people will have a much easier time identifying with them and because of that buy merchandise of there teams or just the mercs they play.
    For any spectator the game progression will be much easier to understand. Certain team compositions and behaviors will be much easier to explain with existing roles rather then just the merc names. Also general member lineups will be better to explain for a bigger audience, since all the merc names are much harder to grasp then the raw roles they fulfill.
    But the biggest point in this part is the impact on any kind of organized team play. Doesn´t matter if it´s just a simple draft or some serious clan wars. Distinguished roles will open up endless varieties to handle various situations. Different targets will have a different priority that will actually influence the game beginning with the decision which merc to play and ending with the position and behaviour (more agressive or passive) of your team. Right now this is almost irrelevant, since as long as anyone survives on the attack or defense he will be able to do the objective or pickup his teammates. Obviously there will be a most efficient outcome of a fight and the people who survive, but from a teamplay and tactical of point of view I think that the current situation is unbearable.

I think that distinguished roles are the 2nd most important thing after better maps that this game needs in order to become really fun. It is very important to give us multiple angles to experience the game, and allow everyone to potentially become good at a certain aspect, that is widely acknowledge as such and can be communicated easily. The structure this would bring would really help everyone who starts of with the game or just wants to focus and become better in a specific thing. On top of that it would bring a significant amount of depth into competitive play.

cheers,
onYn


(Smooth) #2

When designing an improving Mercs internally we do look at the roles and traits of the Merc to try and fill specific gaps we might have in the current lineup.

Each Merc can perform/have several of these and the current list includes things like:

[ul]
[li]Objective Specialist[/li][li]Supplier[/li][li]Healer[/li][li]Area Damage[/li][li]Intel Gatherer[/li][li]Defender/Fortifier[/li][li]Disrupter[/li][li]Heavy Weapons[/li][li]Sniper[/li][li]Close Quarters[/li][li]Long Range[/li][li]Durable[/li][li]Fast[/li][/ul]

When we’re happier with the naming and grouping of these roles/traits you may start seeing them listed in-game.

PS. We want to try and avoid multiple Mercs fullfilling the same role and having the same traits where we can.


(fzl) #3

hmmmmm…interessting…!


(RasteRayzeR) #4

Add covert with binoculars = radar, satchel charge, sten-like silenced gun and can disguise

-> would love to play that merc


(spookify) #5

[QUOTE=RasteRayzeR;515687]Add covert with binoculars = radar, satchel charge, sten-like silenced gun and can disguise

-> would love to play that merc[/QUOTE]

10000% totally agree!!


(prophett) #6

[QUOTE=RasteRayzeR;515687]Add covert with binoculars = radar, satchel charge, sten-like silenced gun and can disguise

-> would love to play that merc[/QUOTE]

Would love this as well - click for my idea :smiley:
http://forums.warchest.com/showthread.php/40784-Merc-Idea-Chameleon

WOuld be a very fun class to play - trolling newbies while in disguise, lol.


(onYn) #7

Sounds quiet interesting! I honestly think that besides those traits, we will need some kind of general roles, that those traits can be assigned to. I am afraid that most of the positive aspects won´t actually reach it´s potential otherwise. I am honestly not to sure what is behind the phobia of assigning something to multiple mercs.

Anyways, for the pub play I think those percs will be enough, at least if ordered in some raw roles that are easier to grasp on first sight then this already quiet huge list. However, this isn´t going to help competitive play at all. In an objective game like we have it right now, the idea of allowing every merc to do everything even if very inefficient is going to be fatal for any tactic and teamplay oriented aspect of the game.

This is the reason why I think that for the more complex modes, like the objective game mode, we should have slightly different settings. Even tho it would be a little bit unclear for total newcomers why this and that is different in a game they watch from what they actually see while playing, I think the benefits of supporting casual as well as more organized players will be overall worth it. Since you are about to release different game modes in the future, I don´t think that a slightly different objective game mode would be a bad idea. I even think that it would be a very good idea, considering the little effort it would require compared to designing a completely new game mode.


(rookie1) #8
  1. Tanks/Objective: They would be responsible for objectives, and in some cases also for tanking up heavily guarded entrances (maybe this won´t be needed, but in case of poor map design, some dors/ways may be so easy to camp

That would be cool stuff having an Fat big guy rushing on doors to break them open:=))


(Mustang) #9

There needs to be some text over the merc’s image when picking them to know which roles they best served doing.

And a way to filter mercs if you want to find one of a particular role, or one similar to another merc you enjoy using.


(Glottis-3D) #10

[QUOTE=Mustang;515721]There needs to be some text over the merc’s image when picking them to know which roles they best served doing.

And a way to filter mercs if you want to find one of a particular role, or one similar to another merc you enjoy using.[/QUOTE]

very good idea


(tokamak) #11

Why is labeling a good idea? Isn’t getting to know the performance of each merc just part of the experience you develop by playing the game?

Sure the game should give a warning when the team lacks any objective-oriented classes. But apart from that I don’t really see any valid reason to hold player’s hands like that. We don’t need to indicate when the game considers a team ‘unbalanced’ that’s up to the players and it also depends on the meta-game.

I’m all for very deep, diverse and exotic roles. But we don’t need the game to bluntly state how the merc is supposed to be played.


(Glottis-3D) #12

because clever labeling is always a good idea. putting books on the right shelves.

we alrdy have 20+ mercs and any newcomer will not know whom to pick or why pick one mercs over another mercs, because they are all in one big pool.
tbh this is obbious. good sistematization is always helpful


(tokamak) #13

The joy of being a newcomer is finding that stuff out yourself. I feel this is taking away one of the most enjoyable parts of the learning curve.


(Mustang) #14

It’s a good idea because keeping them secret is a bad idea, it helps new or lazy players have a suggestion of what merc they should try next instead of randomly stabbing in the dark, it allows for team compositions to be analysed in more ways, it establishes that we don’t have classes anymore, if facilitates speedier locating of a merc from a big long list. I don’t see any hand holding.


(Glottis-3D) #15

those newcomers, that you speak of, were in the 90s. they are now gone forever. =)


(Anti) #16

We will absolutely label Mercs with their roles and play styles as it’ll help players connect with ones that suit their own play style, help reinforce the Merc’s role and will hopefully lead to people jumping onto similar Mercs when they tire of a specific one.

Leaving this to ‘discovery’ would be willingly letting players have a potentially bad experiences that could have been prevented. I’d much rather players were discovering how to get the best in-game application out of a Merc rather than them trying to theorize what the Merc actually is.


(PixelTwitch) #17

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Anti again.


(tokamak) #18

Are we looking at a Merc’s identity being composed of say, 1 to 3 of the archetypes you listed?


(Glottis-3D) #19

[QUOTE=Anti;515759]We will absolutely label Mercs with their roles and play styles as it’ll help players connect with ones that suit their own play style, help reinforce the Merc’s role and will hopefully lead to people jumping onto similar Mercs when they tire of a specific one.

Leaving this to ‘discovery’ would be willingly letting players have a potentially bad experiences that could have been prevented. I’d much rather players were discovering how to get the best in-game application out of a Merc rather than them trying to theorize what the Merc actually is.[/QUOTE]

mb even a nice structural filters for mercs (checkboxes) in the mercs page.

Highlight mercs with:
“Close quaters capabilities” - check!
“Objective specialist” - check!
“Defender/Fortifier” - check!

and you’ll get Proxy being the brightest of all mercs, then the Black guy, then Bushwalker.
But if you uncheck the “Objective specialist”

you’ll get Aura and Proxy highlighted.


(tokamak) #20

[QUOTE=RasteRayzeR;515687]Add covert with binoculars = radar, satchel charge, sten-like silenced gun and can disguise

-> would love to play that merc[/QUOTE]

Should call him Macklemore