DB Feature 'Road Map'

[SockDog]

[QUOTE=tokamak;433732]It becomes a problem when being highly supportive is easy. And I felt that Brink went that way. There was no prestige in constantly supporting your team other than that you would merely have to remember to keep on doing it.

The trick is to make mediocre supporting as easy as mediocre shooting and excellent supporting as difficult as excellent shooting. If that’s the case then a player should be able to not ever fire a single round but still be as valuable as the best shooter in the game. That’s what I would find incredibly appealing.[/QUOTE]

Is it also not a problem when people don’t support their team? Like you lose the map because you run out of health or ammo?

I felt Brink forced exactly what you’re proposing, strained reliance on support. “Quick let me buff you”, “let me buff you back”, “Stop it! That tickles!”. It also gave no benefits to move around classes to provide support where it was needed. Another thing you think is a positive.

The game is a shooter, if you’re so terrible at shooting, that not even matchmaking can help then maybe move onto something else. I certainly don’t want to be playing a game built around the concept that never firing a bullet is how you win. Priorities dude priorities.

[tokamak]

Is it also not a problem when people don’t support their team? Like you lose the map because you run out of health or ammo?

I’d consider that a fair loss. It’s quite similar to losing the map because you’re not hitting enough relevant targets.

The game is a shooter, if you’re so terrible at shooting, that not even matchmaking can help then maybe move onto something else. I certainly don’t want to be playing a game built around the concept that never firing a bullet is how you win. Priorities dude priorities.

There’s already enough shooters that revolve purely around shooting. I never really understood what made an SD game so appealing to people who mostly care about shooting over games that clearly focus on it more. If I want to shoot at stuff I go play R6, COD or CSGO, if I want more depth then I go play ETQW.

And it’s not that never firing a bullet is how you win. That’s skewing my words. Never firing a bullet is a pretty self-limiting and daft tactic if you ask me. I’d just like to see players, on average, be as valuable to their team by being supportive as they could be, on average, by shooting at things. I’d also like to see star shooters carry the team by sheer bodycount as much as I’d like to see star supporters carry the team by superb supporting (IE excellent healing, reviving, scouting and capturing forward spawns).

I deeply resent the way you’re trivialising these skillsets because the only thing they lack is the necessity for good hand-eye coordination. Aside from that they need as much if not more resourcefulness than simply shooting at players.

The class abilities need to be more than that little thing you do in between firefights. That’s what bothers me so much. Currently class abilities are being treated as some luxury, a little treat to indulge in whenever you’re not pulling the trigger. I find that lame as hell, this stuff has got to be more important in this game.

felt Brink forced exactly what you’re proposing, strained reliance on support. “Quick let me buff you”, “let me buff you back”, “Stop it! That tickles!”. It also gave no benefits to move around classes to provide support where it was needed. Another thing you think is a positive.

I brought up Brink because that’s what I think you’re fearing. Brink trivialised the class abilities in a different way. They were incredibly important, definitely. But just as you say, the handlings were easy chores. You could hand your support out indiscriminately without putting any thought on it. Like I said in my last post, all that was needed is to remember to keep doing it.

I want class abilities to be important. As important as they were in Brink. But there needs to be considerably more skill in their application (and thus becoming considerably less prevalent than in Brink). And then I’m mostly talking about the macro level, supportive players need to be constantly juggling their limited resources in order to use them as efficiently as possible. The micro level can also be harder, or at least be more expressive. I’m not worried about this because SD is already taking this the right way with throwing down packs and reviving at short-range. I’m sure that will sort itself out.

What needs to be looked at is the resource-management system. This is still way too limiting for supportive players. You don’t want to provide a large base pool of resources as that would make them too available to any type of players.

What needs to happen is that there should be a scarce amount of resources for any players, but if a player wishes to focus on this, he should be able to, with effort and skill, generate more resources for his class abilities.

The most simple way to go about this is to provide speed up cooldowns for proper application of the abilities.

IE:

• Every revive nets you an instant medpack recharge
• Every ammo pack distributed to a player running on his last clip will double your ammo regeneration until it’s full
• Every enemy player killed while being scanned by a HB sensor will speed up the HB sensor cooldown.
• Every successful artillery or air strike kill will speed up their cooldown.

Obviously these are examples, please don’t pick the individual details apart, it’s about the idea behind it. Players that focus on these abilities and put extra time in it in order to employ them excellently should be able to do it more than players who just employ them on the fling without much thought.

[tokamak]

Doublé post.

[SockDog]

I’d consider that a fair loss. It’s quite similar to losing the map because you’re not hitting enough relevant targets.

So your answer to one problem is to introduce more of them?

There’s already enough shooters that revolve purely around shooting. I never really understood what made an SD game so appealing to people who mostly care about shooting over games that clearly focus on it more. If I want to shoot at stuff I go play R6, COD or CSGO, if I want more depth then I go play ETQW.

It’s a shooter. I don’t get your fascination with making every SD game into some RTS/RPG/FPS hybrid under the delusion that’s just going to work with a bunch of random people who are mostly expecting a shooter.

And it’s not that never firing a bullet is how you win. That’s skewing my words. Never firing a bullet is a pretty self-limiting and daft tactic if you ask me. I’d just like to see players, on average, be as valuable to their team by being supportive as they could be, on average, by shooting at things. I’d also like to see star shooters carry the team by sheer bodycount as much as I’d like to see star supporters carry the team by superb supporting (IE excellent healing, reviving, scouting and capturing forward spawns).

As I said, people who play the classes in addition to the changes would make a difference. The point being that when people didn’t play as intended the whole game doesn’t fall over itself and break. Again, you seem content to make these contrived mechanics with an expectation that everyone follows them to the letter.

I deeply resent the way you’re trivialising these skillsets because the only thing they lack is the necessity for good hand-eye coordination. Aside from that they need as much if not more resourcefulness than simply shooting at players.

And you, as always, are trivialising the shooting. It seems quite clear that this bores you to tears, so much so, in your bleary eyes, you can only see a game that fits with stuff you find enjoyable. Stuff that largely works better in different games.

The class abilities need to be more than that little thing you do in between firefights. That’s what bothers me so much. Currently class abilities are being treated as some luxury, a little treat to indulge in whenever you’re not pulling the trigger. I find that lame as hell, this stuff has got to be more important in this game.

No, they’re decisions you make in the heat of the moment. Do I shoot to kill that guy or do I heal/ammo my team mate so they don’t need to make a big retreat? What pressure are you under when you’ve already resigned yourself to the fact that you’re not going to engage the enemy? I don’t see the huge dilema for a medic who’s role is ONLY to run in and revive his team mates. Between firefights what skills are you showing other than being a mobile dispensary.

What needs to be looked at is the resource-management system. This is still way too limiting for supportive players. You don’t want to provide a large base pool of resources as that would make them too available to any type of players.

What needs to happen is that there should be a scarce amount of resources for any players, but if a player wishes to focus on this, he should be able to, with effort and skill, generate more resources for his class abilities.

The most simple way to go about this is to provide speed up cooldowns for proper application of the abilities.

IE:

• Every revive nets you an instant medpack recharge
• Every ammo pack distributed to a player running on his last clip will double your ammo regeneration until it’s full
• Every enemy player killed while being scanned by a HB sensor will speed up the HB sensor cooldown.
• Every successful artillery or air strike kill will speed up their cooldown.

Obviously these are examples, please don’t pick the individual details apart, it’s about the idea behind it. Players that focus on these abilities and put extra time in it in order to employ them excellently should be able to do it more than players who just employ them on the fling without much thought.

It’s an interesting concept but I think it would just work to expand skill differences with little benefit to the actual game. A good medic is a good medic, having only 4 packs means the better player puts those four packs to use whereas a poor one doesn’t. The above would just mean the good medic is allowed to be even better while the poor one isn’t. You’re magnifying the skill difference, potentially breaking the game through team balance and making the playing field uneven.

[Humate]

:stroggtapir:

[tokamak]

So your answer to one problem is to introduce more of them?

I don’t see losing by inadequate play as a problem at all.

It’s a shooter. I don’t get your fascination with making every SD game into some RTS/RPG/FPS hybrid under the delusion that’s just going to work with a bunch of random people who are mostly expecting a shooter.

I’m not going to let the name of a genre a game happens to be in limit my expectations.

As I said, people who play the classes in addition to the changes would make a difference. The point being that when people didn’t play as intended the whole game doesn’t fall over itself and break. Again, you seem content to make these contrived mechanics with an expectation that everyone follows them to the letter.

Nonsense. I want people to have a choice. If you want your entire team to focus on shooting then that should be a legit tactic, but you’re going to have to accept that you’ll be lacking in many facilities. A team that focusses entirely on keep each other supported may build a strong front but at the same time they’ll risk not killing the opponents fast enough to get through their respawns.

Either extreme or a balance in between I want that to be a choice. I don’t want one single valid way of playing. That’s what you want with your ‘a shooter is a shooter is a shooter’ attitude.

And you, as always, are trivialising the shooting. It seems quite clear that this bores you to tears, so much so, in your bleary eyes, you can only see a game that fits with stuff you find enjoyable. Stuff that largely works better in different games.

Absolute nonsense, you’re just repackaging my words.

No, they’re decisions you make in the heat of the moment. Do I shoot to kill that guy or do I heal/ammo my team mate so they don’t need to make a big retreat? What pressure are you under when you’ve already resigned yourself to the fact that you’re not going to engage the enemy? I don’t see the huge dilema for a medic who’s role is ONLY to run in and revive his team mates. Between firefights what skills are you showing other than being a mobile dispensary.

Well that’s your lack of imagination then. A medic 100% focussed on healing and reviving sees very different things happening than a medic who’s also committed to fighting.

But you’re still not getting the point here. A player that is committed to a particular role who finds himself in a situation where that role is inappropriate and then declines to adapt and do something else simply is a bad player. But that doesn’t mean that there will be scenarios where being 100% committed to support is an excellent way of helping the team in the same way that 100% commited to fighting is. I want the game to cater to both situations and again if you say ‘nay, I want this game to be about firing bullets’ then you’re severely limiting the depth and scope of the game, making it incredibly repetitive and yes, that’s what bores me to tears.

I think it would just work to expand skill differences with little benefit to the actual game.

That sentence really didn’t say anything at all.

. A good medic is a good medic, having only 4 packs means the better player puts those four packs to use whereas a poor one doesn’t.

It puts a hard limit on what a player can do with the class ability. I say that the player who puts those four packs to the best use should be rewarded with the ability to distribute more of it while the player who is shoddy with his resources should be struggling with that limit.

[SockDog]

I don’t see losing by inadequate play as a problem at all.

Inadequate play of others. This is just frustrating and adding more and more elements that lead to that frustration is just asking for a ****ty experience.

I’m not going to let the name of a genre a game happens to be in limit my expectations.

LOL. Never a bigger admission of your fantasy world than that.

Nonsense. I want people to have a choice. If you want your entire team to focus on shooting then that should be a legit tactic, but you’re going to have to accept that you’ll be lacking in many facilities. A team that focusses entirely on keep each other supported may build a strong front but at the same time they’ll risk not killing the opponents fast enough to get through their respawns.

Either extreme or a balance in between I want that to be a choice. I don’t want one single valid way of playing. That’s what you want with your ‘a shooter is a shooter is a shooter’ attitude.

Sigh. This again? You want to limit choice to something predefined and restricted rather than allowing players to adapt through their own skill. Again, this isn’t an MMO, you’re at best 12.5% of the capability of your team and fixing someone’s role to one job is patently idiotic. As I’ve said in the past the only way stuff like that works is if your .125% of the team or you’re playing something competitive where team configuration is part of the overall strategy.

Absolute nonsense, you’re just repackaging my words.

I’m commenting based on your many posts. It’s pretty evident that you find the shooting aspects boring and will do anything to push the game away from that.

Well that’s your lack of imagination then. A medic 100% focussed on healing and reviving sees very different things happening than a medic who’s also committed to fighting.

But you’re still not getting the point here. A player that is committed to a particular role who finds himself in a situation where that role is inappropriate and then declines to adapt and do something else simply is a bad player. But that doesn’t mean that there will be scenarios where being 100% committed to support is an excellent way of helping the team in the same way that 100% commited to fighting is. I want the game to cater to both situations and again if you say ‘nay, I want this game to be about firing bullets’ then you’re severely limiting the depth and scope of the game, making it incredibly repetitive and yes, that’s what bores me to tears.

It’s a lack of imagination? To expect someone to make decisions based on the situation they’re in rather than predetermining what they are going to do and to hell if they can’t be of benefit. And the game is about both, yet you want to have this massive emphasis on support like it really matters to dish out ammo away from the frontline.

That sentence really didn’t say anything at all.

It puts a hard limit on what a player can do with the class ability. I say that the player who puts those four packs to the best use should be rewarded with the ability to distribute more of it while the player who is shoddy with his resources should be struggling with that limit.

It says you’re not creating anything but a larger skill gap. Would you think it’s a good idea to give one of the better shots in the alpha more damage per bullet or more ammo over someone that isn’t as good. How does that help the game flow? You’re just creating a bigger disparity between player skills and doing so artificially to boot. This is your other little trait, that skill in itself is not a big enough differentiator and must be augmented with artificial rewards. The player that uses those 4 medpaks best is already benefiting their team more than one who doesn’t, giving that player more rewards is redundant in this respect if not down right negative to the game.

[tokamak]

It says you’re not creating anything but a larger skill gap.

Yes, yes, in fact the skill ceiling increases tremendously that way. Once class abilities CAN become something more than that little thing you do with the hard limit you suddenly find yourself torn between many different ways in which you can be a huge asset to your team. Oh dear, decisions decisions…

[Tast1c]

WIth that being said, pls be always objective, i dont want to see your ambitious posts ending in a big quarrel.

I think everybody ( in theory) get your points. Since this is a FPS shooting will always be kinda the core of the game. Aim -shoot- kill - decisions after decisions. But this core can be extended with everything we can think of. Around the core there are the abilities of each class.
The only gordian knot that i can see, will be the balancing and how it will be solved. imho there will be some aspects of the game, everybody has to accept, whether he likes it or not! Sure we want shooting skill to the max, also want class ability skill to the max (with maybe using only covering fire). That wont happen. Since we are individuals with own ideas for the game. We can try to shape the game in a greater direction and build a concensus, but not more. Even this community is big enough that every detail cant be considered.

This system must be a healthy mixture of needing skill, but sometimes things can be easier to achieved, with those abilities, independent of the “skill-gap” between players. How much “skill” is required? Is it measurable? Has it to do with luck sometimes? Or situations where you can easier take the advantage, but only for players that experience more often the same situation to handle it. Another thing is, that there will be always a skill-gap. Its all about the player itself. I think everyone of us is cooking with water, right?
In the end, we can only encourage the devs, and surprise them with our great ideas. I think they have to discuss enough. Clear.

To carry on this discussion, please if you want write you core statement/summary about this planned ability system/ gameplay mechanics. Dont always quote each other, and negotiate its statement more or less. Commenting is always fine, but i guess there is no need of circular thought process

(pls dont quote me^^) Whether it will be my lack of my english expressions, that you not/ understand / misunderstand, maybe my post is not saying a lot and thats also fine.

/thoughts end,

[tokamak]

WIth that being said, pls be always objective, i dont want to see your ambitious posts ending in a big quarrel.

Don’t worry. Sockdog and I are used to this

To carry on this discussion, please if you want write you core statement/summary about this planned ability system/ gameplay mechanics. Dont always quote each other, and negotiate its statement more or less. Commenting is always fine, but i guess there is no need of circular thought process

You’re right. It’s very easy to indulge in that style of discussing, and it’s great to vent but hard to follow for outsiders.

[SockDog]

Don’t worry. Sockdog and I are used to this

Afterwards we cuddle and make internet babies. Tok spends hours picking out which class and abilities the baby will have for the rest of its life.

[Jonny_Hex]

Ultimately I want to players to be able to make their ‘next’ class choice in response to current in-game situations. I don’t mean ‘oh look it’s a X objective and only X class can do that, so I better go as X’. What I mean is that players can look at their team composition, evaluate the enemy composition, and respec accordingly, based on what they feel is needed at the time. That means less emphasis on ‘forced’ objective-based class utility and more emphasis on the utility of class abilities irrespective of a specific objective. I’m rambling. I’ll post a new thread later to canvass opinions - hopefully I’ll explain it a bit betterer.

Edit: I just made the best lasagne ever. Jealous? You should be

[SockDog]

[QUOTE=Jonny_Hex;433910]Ultimately I want to players to be able to make their ‘next’ class choice in response to current in-game situations. I don’t mean ‘oh look it’s a X objective and only X class can do that, so I better go as X’. What I mean is that players can look at their team composition, evaluate the enemy composition, and respec accordingly, based on what they feel is needed at the time. That means less emphasis on ‘forced’ objective-based class utility and more emphasis on the utility of class abilities irrespective of a specific objective. I’m rambling. I’ll post a new thread later to canvass opinions - hopefully I’ll explain it a bit betterer.

Edit: I just made the best lasagne ever. Jealous? You should be :D[/QUOTE]

This sounds like what I’d expect and hope for, IMO this give people a lot of choice but also a lot of chances to make the wrong (not optimal) choice.

And thanks. I’m like super hungry.

[tokamak]

That doesn’t really illuminate too much on the intended ability:combat ratio. I want that ratio to be balanced so that there will be as many situations where a class ability fits as there are situations where fighting fits. Quake Wars came close to that ratio with a mild bias towards fighting, which was okay. DB however currently has the balance completely thrown towards fighting and it really doesn’t matter a whole lot what else you do. I see that as a problem and that’s why I’m glad it’s on the road map. And again, I’m really up for pitching ideas to make the classes more distinct.

[Ashog]

Haha Stoffi

omnomnomnom :stroggtapir:

For me these are nomnomsomg the most:

[ul]
[li]Improved class viability [/li][li]Continued weapon and movement tweaks[/li][li]Clans focus test[/li][li]Improve hit feedback and status UI [/li][li]Improved command map [/li][li]Improved options menu[/li][li]Better abilities HUD[/li][li]Context chat system [/li][li]Demo viewing support [/li][li]Map five[/li][li]Custom game sessions[/li][/ul]

Very impressive list SD! Happy to see you are thinking about all of these.

What I am a bit worried about is no sign of

[ul]
[li]SDK and custom content support bumping Locki[/li][li]Story background by Ed[/li][li]also VOIP and anticheat as mentioned by people above[/li][/ul]

Are these things still considered for the future?

[Dormamu]

[QUOTE=Anti;433198]Hey,

[ul]
[li]Store and monetization systems
[/li][/ul]
[/QUOTE]
Before you go with Store and monetization systems, tho i will keep this in “Coming in the Future” we need to point out first if their will be a xp/coin/level wipe/reset when we hit beta and when the game is released. At the moment if you decide to wipe, it will not have a big impact, as you don’t have anything to buy. This will change as soon as you introduce some bling-bling in the equation, the best example is the second key bug. Multiply it by 10 and you will have some idea.
I know is not a big deal (now), we should focus on other parts for the game, i just think this will become a problem and the sooner you deal with it the sooner will go away and let you focus on the important parts of DB.
I’m for wipe/reset so we don’t have some misunderstanding.

[SockDog]

I’d actually like SD to have some DRP (disaster recovery program) testing on the stats and XP stuff, perhaps when they’re doing stress tests in the Open Beta. Seems all of those systems fall over and/or corrupt at some point so simulating that and how it will be fixed should be on Fireteam’s agenda.

In regards to player’s accumulating XP, Coins and unlocks. I’m not going to feel attached to anything until the game is totally released and we’re considered players not testers.

[Dormamu]

[QUOTE=Jonny_Hex;433508]Ultimately we intend to implement a ‘new player’ flow which takes you through the basics - something like the tutorials in TF2 or the ease-in progress limitations of Ghost Recon Online, or somewhere in between, or both. Nothing decided as yet, other than it would be optional.

Interesting that you mention Demon’s Souls. Yes, it did disregard the usual western SP conventions, but it wasn’t actually that hard, if you researched outside of the game. More interestingly, Dark Souls (despite its technical issues) is a much better game, because they made some concessions to accessibility - bonfires, flasks and a more natural progress through the game world made for a more engaging experience. Less guessing on where to go next, more obvious short cuts, clearer short and long term goals and objectives. Maybe that’s just me…
[/QUOTE]
Most of the games have some kind of basic training, tho i don’t remember seeing some kind of medium/expert training in them, at the moment most of the tutorials are more visual than helping an noob how to train, why not give them a more complex kind of Brink challenges/coop.

Good point on Demon’s Souls tho i think your challenge is to keep them in your game and not let them research outside on how to improve their game-play. Using some kind of expert challenges, be more objective, escort duty thru single or co-op will keep those players have some fun and also train. you can also sell the medium advanced training, make some cash and also keep them from go outside of your game for tips/hints/cheats and so on.

[tokamak]

[QUOTE=Dormamu;434029]Before you go with Store and monetization systems, tho i will keep this in “Coming in the Future” we need to point out first if their will be a xp/coin/level wipe/reset when we hit beta and when the game is released. At the moment if you decide to wipe, it will not have a big impact, as you don’t have anything to buy. This will change as soon as you introduce some bling-bling in the equation, the best example is the second key bug. Multiply it by 10 and you will have some idea.
I know is not a big deal (now), we should focus on other parts for the game, i just think this will become a problem and the sooner you deal with it the sooner will go away and let you focus on the important parts of DB.
I’m for wipe/reset so we don’t have some misunderstanding. :D[/QUOTE]

Noo! This isn’t how reality works at all.

Beta testers LOVE and CRAVE hard resets!! This is why you want to make the beta last as long as possible. Get people invested, get all the nerds to map out the fastest way to get where they want to be, make them prepare and then BAM fresh start, the race is ON.

This worked for EVERY beta I’ve ever been in. People were always looking forward to wipe the slate clean again and all get a fair start on which they go completely mad. Blizzard even encourages this further by introducing test realms where people can do their ‘warm up’ for every patch with new content. That way they don’t have to restart the actual game which indeed would be disastrous. With the patch realms they even encourage it further by awarding ‘server first’ and ‘world first’ for people who obtain an item as the first person ever.

That’s another thing DB should steal. Milestones should stick. If you hold a record on fastest plant (on a full server) then people should be able to see that. If you’re the first who unlocked a certain piece of cloth or a class or whatever then that should be an achievement.

[meat]

[QUOTE=Jonny_Hex;433617]Yes, absolutely.

And yes - it’s really important that we find as many ways as possible to support different playstyles and allow players to feel able to be useful and rewarded, even if they’re not the best at aiming and shooting. Supportive teamplay, XP rewards, levelling are all good examples.[/QUOTE]

Well alot of this describes my game play lol. Can’t hit the side of a barn from inside, But I play the support roles, medic and engie, and FOPS. If there wasn’t a way to keep engaged in the game I wouldn’t play it very long. So far I think if I am playing my class’s role I am getting a sense of helping my team, and that works for me. Seeing the awards page and seeing best medic always makes me smile. It’s the people who don’t play the role there class calls for who will have issues. You don’t revive, don’t drop health packs for your team your not going to make best medic on the awards page, and you might not get as much satisfaction from playing. Same goes for FOPS got to drop that ammo got to hammer that EV.
Keeping new players with limited skills like me playing the game over a long period of time will depend on how well you do support different playing styles.
Training the new players in the importance of supporting their team in whatever class they play I think is key. Were not all killing machines!