View Full Version : Goals of Combat Change

04-15-2005, 11:33 PM
<DIV>Hi Moorguard, everyone else...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Let me preface by saying that this request is mostly due to the sheer complexity of the changes we are seeing, and the ease in which significant problems could get lost in the testing process.  I'd like us to be given enough information so that we can give our feedback in an organized framework which will facilitate the testing process.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Specifically, I was hoping that perhaps we could get some more specific word about what the goals of the combat change are, so we can better give feedback on whether these are in fact occuring (And whether or not any of the goals themselves can be improved)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm assuming that at some level there are specific goals on what should be accomplished here - ie.  "Scout base classes should now be taking approximately 5% damage over the course of a fight with a solo green mob, avoidance base tanks 3%.."etc.  Something quantifiable, that we can measure our actual performance against</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It is in all of our best interests that these changes make the game more fun for everyone when it is complete, and we can best do this if we know what the overall goals are for the changes.  Some of the goals may present problems in themselves (And I'm sure we'd be quick to call attention to those) but more likely it will help us identify the missed goals that have slipped through the initial QA and design process to hit the "real world" of our (somewhat) larger player base.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Many of us play here because we want to be closer to the design process, and because we feel like being testers allows us to change the game world for the better.  Being able to see what the higher level goals are (As opposed to the lower level specific changes in the patch notes) would enable us to help you far more effectively.</DIV>

04-16-2005, 12:45 AM
<P>Good call.</P> <P>I'd like to know, too.  I think it would clear up the discussions a bit, or at least make them more productive.</P>

04-16-2005, 04:51 AM
<DIV>I agree with this as well. I really enjoy the development process, and testing. And I would like a bit more indepth descriptions on the overall purposes of changes made to the game. It helps the tester provide meaningful and productive information reguarding the changes made.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Lady Eternity</DIV>

04-19-2005, 10:57 AM
Great post, and I will add just a bit to this:  understanding the current combat rules better would also help. For example, what exactly is the Attack number?  Is it related to chance-to-hit, damage, or both?  Seeing the impact of raising that number, it seems to have more to do with to-hit than anything else.  Yet this number can be raised by raising your STR, and is not effected at all by increasing AGI, even though AGI, according to the mouseoever text, helps your accuracy. Does it really help there, or not? Perhaps some at SOE are concerned about being too specific regarding game mechanics, for fear that it will make it easier for players to find loopholes or min/max their way to easy success.  But if the game rules are well designed, then understanding them should make the game more challenging and more rewarding, because they should offer fairly balanced tradeoffs which players can face. In my opinion, basic mechanics rules should be a very open topic: very clearly documented, and easy for any player to understand with a reasonable level of specificity.  Look how many scouts read Moorgard's post, and began to cry, because they objected to melee damage becoming STR based, not realizing that it has always been that way.  This is the kind of information that should be clear for them to understand and utilize. <div></div>