Character Class and Abilities restriction idea for Brink 2

(SinDonor) #21

[QUOTE=tokamak;375717]I fully recognise the issue you’re trying to solve. Brink’s customisation is pointless because there isn’t really much substantial difference between the possible builds.

Your idea is an explicit restriction though, and it would go a long way in solving it, it’s not really nuanced and definitely not elegant. It shouldn’t just be a cut and dry choice in class, that’s too simplistic in the other end. Like Horse said, simply increasing the costs would be much nicer.

My idea would be to make rank 1 abillities cost 1 coin, rank 2, two coins and rank 3 three coins. That way people can have all rounder builds with the rank 1 abilities but if they want higher ranks they’re forced to chose between the classes.

It’s definitely silly that you can have a character with the highest ranks for each class.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, this would work for me too. You understood my point. I wasn’t looking to restrict just for the sake of it.

(Teufel_Eldritch) #22

I think much of what you are trying to accomplish with your idea could be done by just adding more abilities…like a lot more. That way not everyone would have the same skillsets.

(SinDonor) #23

I am ALL for that as well.

(tokamak) #24

Might that be because they can have all the high ranks?

(DarkangelUK) #25

Honestly I think it should be the opposite, or at least the same choice but less that can be active. We were told initially that you can use your abilities to tune and tweak your player to match your play style, when really you just take everything and any value in choice is thrown out the window. Dare I say it, but CoD gets it right with only allowing certain perks to be active, therefore you have to make your choice wisely and based on how you want to play, and that gives those choices meaning rather than “Oh i’ll choose that one, cos I’ll just unlock the other one and have it soon anyway”.

(tokamak) #26

Indeed, at least in COD you could truly define yourself.

(SinDonor) #27

That’s what I was trying to do with my suggestion in the OP. I wanted Engies to be Engies, Soldiers to be Soldiers, not everyone to be some sort of 3-class hybrid with access to all the Rank 5 uber-abilities.

(tokamak) #28

Well you don’t pick your classes like that in COD either, there’s still flexibility. It shouldn’t be too cut and dry but to lose all definition is the other extreme.

(Teufel_Eldritch) #29

[QUOTE=DarkangelUK;375753]Honestly I think it should be the opposite, or at least the same choice but less that can be active. We were told initially that you can use your abilities to tune and tweak your player to match your play style, when really you just take everything and any value in choice is thrown out the window. [/QUOTE]But if there are a lot more abilties(something like 3 times the amount of abilties we have now) than there are level credits then you could tune & tweak your playstyle in a way that isn’t so cookie-cutter.

[QUOTE=SinDonor;375762]That’s what I was trying to do with my suggestion in the OP. I wanted Engies to be Engies, Soldiers to be Soldiers, not everyone to be some sort of 3-class hybrid with access to all the Rank 5 uber-abilities.[/QUOTE]That’s what I like about BRINK tho, the hybriding. You are not so confined to a certain class as you are in many other class based games. For me BRINK = class freedom.

(DarkangelUK) #30

There’s only so many you can make before they all start being similar, mundane, or pointless to have equipped. I’d rather have a small amount of meaningful abilities tbh. That’s a lie, i’d rather have no abilities at all, but I’m just an old grump :tongue:

(tokamak) #31

I guess you’ve never played No One Lives Forever multiplayer?

(L00fah) #32

I love this idea… A LOT.
I played Guild Wars religiously and it sounds the same as that.

I would absolutely LOVE to play Operative/Engineer. <3 Then I could repair my own turrets and set mines EVERYWHERE.

(wolfnemesis75) #33

[QUOTE=L00fah;376152]I love this idea… A LOT.
I played Guild Wars religiously and it sounds the same as that.

I would absolutely LOVE to play Operative/Engineer. <3 Then I could repair my own turrets and set mines EVERYWHERE.[/QUOTE]Thanks. I like the idea too.

(tokamak) #34

Absolute restrictions are crude and only appeal to simpletons who don’t like the idea of putting actual thought into their builds.

A double class system with 5 ‘classes’ (counting ‘general’ as well)
n!/(n - r)!
Makes: 5!/(5-2)! = 10. That gets you 10 different builds. Great.

(yeah I know 5x2 would got the same point but at least this prevents anyone from bothering with the argument that the order matters)

You need scarcity and path dependency for things to get interesting. This makes building configuration incredibly dynamic, a constant balance between specialisation and generalisation. WoW’s talent trees are a great example of that. Three trees in which you can advance by spending your pool of talent points. The further you climb in a tree the more specialised and interesting it gets (although the lower talents are very powerful by themselves, they’re mainly passive, base stats). This way you can balance between three paths (and thus in Brink’s case, five paths). Players like to pursue one tree full, cut here and there to get a second half way, but it was also possible to go down all the three paths equally and get a really rounded and versatile builds (albeit without any special stuff)

Your choices should be so scarce that you can pursue one tree fully and have about half for the second if you spent everything.

Brink is almost at that point (I suspect it once was but eventually appealing to the 10 year old audience at which the game was aimed it was dropped). The problem is only that players have too much coins and ranks aren’t path dependant (you can pick the last ranks without spending any on the first). Spending in the lower ranks to get to the higher ranks should be a requirement, that, and making higher ranks more expensive should resolve the lack of scarcity in coins.

(wolfnemesis75) #35

[QUOTE=tokamak;376267]text[/QUOTE]I know what you’re saying, but I think it works fine in Brink as far as being able to spend the points however one wants on higher ranks and not on lower ones with the exception of the Turret. I am fine with it. Allowing players the freedom to do as Brink does currently has many pros and far less cons. I am fine with how it is currently. A Dual Class option would be a neat option or some kind of Specialization, but what’s there currently is a strength imo.

(tokamak) #36

Right now players only have the freedom to not be different from one another.

(wolfnemesis75) #37

[QUOTE=tokamak;376272]Right now players only have the freedom to not be different from one another.[/QUOTE]Not true. And also with the customization, they can look different and can choose different builds. Are they similar at times, sure. Is that a horrible thing? No. This is why I feel Brink needs to add layers of customization in terms of Badges and Medals and Titles in other places to push the uniqueness of character. I’d maybe add some more Rank 1 abilities forcing more choices. But other than that, I am fine with how Brink is in terms of how many points there are and how one can choose to setup their builds.

(tokamak) #38

The builds aren’t any different because they all incorporate the same set of important abilities. People have two or three of them in each class and thus are master at everything.

(wolfnemesis75) #39

[QUOTE=tokamak;376274]The builds aren’t any different because they all incorporate the same set of important abilities. People have two or three of them in each class and thus are master at everything.[/QUOTE]Which is fine. I understand all that. But it works fine and lets people choose whatever they want. Works. :slight_smile:

(tokamak) #40

Sure, keeping a game shallow is one of the easiest ways to avoid any issues.