PlaneShift
Gameplay => Wish list => Topic started by: Kuiper7986 on October 01, 2003, 06:57:24 am
-
There are a lot of MMORPGs or MUDs that have one character fight on monster at a time. So I was wondering, is team battling encouraged? In simpler terms is it better to fight with a group against a monster? I\'m sure there will be monsters that can be killed if you go solo but I think its more important as a community of players to help each other fight monsters. I\'m sure this would be important because guild wars are in the game, so in a way they go coinicide together.
Best Example I can think of, for you to think.
Bob is going out on a long journey what is the probability in the game of him surviving himself against the probability of him surviving if he brought a partner along. For now were aren\'t going to state what monsters are out there or where he\'s journeying but how the Dev\'s forsee how the game will be like.
-
I think it is most likely that teaming up and guilds will be a major part of the game to come.
-
Originally posted by Mogura
I think it is most likely that teaming up and guilds will be a major part of the game to come.
That\'s good, hunting monsters in a party with your friends is just way more interesting than killing some little slimes or something alone.
-
Team battles are just as encouraged as single player fighting is. You can only kill so many creatures alone, where you can kill the much harder creatures if you bring along a party, however, as long as the party fighting game rules aren\'t set in stone, noone can be sure what benefits the most... :P
-
ya but I\'m sure the strong monsters hold better items. If you fight in teams you can beat the monster but chances of getting that item go down.
-
Originally posted by Kuiper7986
ya but I\'m sure the strong monsters hold better items. If you fight in teams you can beat the monster but chances of getting that item go down.
That is not a problem if you party with your friend cuz i guess they\'ll give the item to the one that needs it the most, at least thas what i would do. But then again there are people who dont think about that and just take everything they see on the ground, in that case if you get it first its yours.
Team fighting should be encouraged in any mmorpg cuz thats a way to interact with other players and help each other...
-
Yep, team fighting, team guildwars, huge battles etc - that would be great!
-
But then again there are people who dont think about that and just take everything they see on the ground
That\'s where guilds come into the game, and as it says on some page somewhere on the PlaneShift site - Guild play is encouraged, and honestly, if I was teamed with guild players who are like that, I daresay I would reconsider staying there... However, I\'m lucky that I\'m not. :D
Edit: I think I forgot the point in this post. :P Team with your guild members or personal friends, instead of teaming with random players. It\'s usually more organized, and you can be sure that most, if not all, will benefit from it. :)
-
Originally posted by NikonX
That is not a problem if you party with your friend cuz i guess they\'ll give the item to the one that needs it the most, at least thas what i would do. But then again there are people who dont think about that and just take everything they see on the ground, in that case if you get it first its yours.
In EQ it wasn\'t much of a problem if you partied with the right people (that is, non-n00b and non-1337). We would usually agree to the looting rules before hand. There was ninja looting, where it was a free-for-all who got the loot. There was rotation looting, a varient of which allowed you to give up the loot for an extra turn. For those parties with leaders who could be trusted, there was quartermaster (leader divides up loot evenly among players, taking special consideration of needs and wants) looting. And then there was the \"I need 20 CB belts, so I\'m not going to let you have any loot. But the EXP is enough, right?\" looting...
I find it hard to imagine a game without party-based combat, what games are you guys speaking of?
The party feature I\'d most like to see is player-verus-player party combat. Of course, you\'d still have to opt in via a duel command. But imagine the strategy in a player-verus-player battlefield, it would be far more engaging than any hunting expedition.
-
Originally posted by Gronomist
I think I forgot the point in this post. :P Team with your guild members or personal friends, instead of teaming with random players. It\'s usually more organized, and you can be sure that most, if not all, will benefit from it. :)
you\'re totally right
-
If agreed upon, a set of looting rules amongst friends is a great way to play in a team. It really works well when you have a variety of player types on the team, so that there is a better chance that the item dropped will be useful to someone in the team. :)
-
I think that EQ had most of the system right... although I would change a few things. If everyone in that party automatically got a random item from that corpse.... for ex:
A guild kills a HUGE NPC monster. They would all be able to loot it at the same time but each would automatically get a different item / items. You would right click the corpse and see one item, while another member in your group would see a different one and so on. That way the odds of getting an item are totaly randomized and no one can guarentee what they get / don\'t get.
-
Here\'s how I see it, just forsay:
This is how I would see the battles per each number of people.
1 Person fighting against a monster(s) - Freelancer
2-5 People fighting against a monster(s) - Team
2-3 Teams fighting against a monster(s) - Alliance
4-5 Alliances fighting againster a monster(s) - Federation
Most people against 1 monster; 2 Federations(s) - Crusade
-
1 person adventurer
1-5 people few fights the rest enjoy the ride
2-3 teams dud thats ****ing lame coward sons of ****es
4-5 alliances your destroying this game
if a crusade will be implemented then i would leave and play RS2.
-
The whole point of MMORPGs is to team up with people and get to know them. Thus grouping is very important for social interaction in the game. There are a couple of objectives we need to have with this, however:
a) Don\'t totally preclude soloing.
b) Reward grouping, no matter the size.
c) Make very large groups possible, and give them things to do also.
d) Make it so that finding a group doesn\'t take hours.
e) Enable friends at very different levels to group together.
f) Do NOT enable friends at very different levels to power-level their newbie friends by grouping them in hard raids.
I believe our grouping ideas will do this.
- Vengeance
-
Originally posted by Vengeance
The whole point of MMORPGs is to team up with people and get to know them. Thus grouping is very important for social interaction in the game. There are a couple of objectives we need to have with this, however:
a) Don\'t totally preclude soloing.
b) Reward grouping, no matter the size.
c) Make very large groups possible, and give them things to do also.
d) Make it so that finding a group doesn\'t take hours.
e) Enable friends at very different levels to group together.
f) Do NOT enable friends at very different levels to power-level their newbie friends by grouping them in hard raids.
I believe our grouping ideas will do this.
- Vengeance
Great goals to aim for.
-
Originally posted by Vengeance
The whole point of MMORPGs is to team up with people and get to know them. Thus grouping is very important for social interaction in the game. There are a couple of objectives we need to have with this, however:
a) Don\'t totally preclude soloing.
b) Reward grouping, no matter the size.
c) Make very large groups possible, and give them things to do also.
d) Make it so that finding a group doesn\'t take hours.
e) Enable friends at very different levels to group together.
f) Do NOT enable friends at very different levels to power-level their newbie friends by grouping them in hard raids.
I believe our grouping ideas will do this.
- Vengeance
That\'s just....beautiful!
I like the idea of about 20 people in a group treking throught he labyrinths, I am a little insecure hehe. Spiders creep me out.
-
Originally posted by Vengeance
c) Make very large groups possible, and give them things to do also.
- Vengeance
Many games that I\'ve played have had limits for party size, and I think it\'s a good thing to allow large groups. The more the merrier. :))
-
Originally posted by Nikech
Many games that I\'ve played have had limits for party size, and I think it\'s a good thing to allow large groups. The more the merrier. :))
Aye, there\'s no in-game reason for their to be a party size cap. If you want to kill a sewer rat with a group of 30 people, by all means! However, computers can\'t cope with infinite numbers, so there has to be a cap somewhere. 256 members to a party is more than enough, and since computers tend to align things on bytes anyway, it would be silly to implement a smaller cap.
[edit]
I just remembered, in FFXI there seems to be a system for parties to ally with each other. I think the party cap is 20 there, and something like up to 5 parties can ally to form a 100-strong group of people. I don\'t know how that\'s supposed to work...
[/edit]
-
Reminds me of this PSX Rpg that you could have over 100 characters in a single party...I just can\'t remember the game...that was the time of monster rancher 2...ah, those were the days...
-
I think that team partying is definetly a good thing. A system of equal gold would be good, and for quest items, the monster would drop one for each member of the party that killed it. This way they could all complete the quest seperately or as a group (this is kinda how Diablo 2 works).
As for division of normal loot... I think it should be up to the party members to work together and agree on how to distribute things fairly. Doing things for the players can create more problems than unfair looting (though I guess it could be easier to have a built-in loot division system, so this could be an on/off option that is decided at the party\'s creation...). Partying is a must, but as long as big parties are allowed and things work I\'m happy! :D
-
I think that the division should be up to the paties, and you should know that your party will be fair and such. One item per member sounds a bit iffy, Diablo shouldn\'t influence this game like that....
Imagine 60 Holy Swords of The Blue Crystal....when only 5 members of the party did anything....not fair...
-
Originally posted by Harwen
I think that the division should be up to the paties, and you should know that your party will be fair and such. One item per member sounds a bit iffy, Diablo shouldn\'t influence this game like that....
Imagine 60 Holy Swords of The Blue Crystal....when only 5 members of the party did anything....not fair...
I think the best solution may be implementing several loot division mechanisms. The easiest to implement would be all loot goes to the leader, who divides it up himself (again, requires a trustworthly leader). Of course, it would have to be implemented in such a way as to prevent griefing. Maybe you can only select the division mechanism at party creation, and not mid-adventure?
-
Hm...I wonder if after a hard battle a single golden chest falls to the ground and the entire 60 member party just stares at it...the blood shed.
I am sure the simplest route is the best, as to give it to the hopefully trustworthy leader, and let her/him decide the division of spoils. At least everyone gets the experience, no? So no one really goes out empty handed. I see wether a level of trust is in order there.
Division does sound handy Grak.
-
Long before you get to 256 group members you will run into problems with group funtions. Many games, and I hope PS is one of them, will show you a list of the group members and there health. 256 little bars of health and the characters names would not fit on your screen.
However you could create large groups by making groups of say 10 people and then grouping the group leaders.
-
Err... Who says PS will have little bars of health on the screen, next to the names which these bars belong to? This isn\'t Helbreath, you know... :P Besides, if a group of 10 people decide to kill something which they actually have a chance of killing, (not 10 peasants vs. rainbow-dragon) they should have a chance against it. :D
-
Hrmm... Rainbow dragons vs 10 peasants sounds like a good fight...
Huh? Oh yeah, what we were talking about...
Perhaps assinging numbers to each group and giving them hotkey commands would be nice.
\"Group 2: Ins= Kill Monster, Give me the gold\"
\"Group 3: Del= Why are you sneaking behind me?\"
\"Group 2: Pgup = Where are you g-aaack!\"
\"End= Heal me?\"
-
Derwoodly, there has been a lot of thinking on this. And in reality it will be one group, and later with sub groups, what this means is the overall leader will be able to sub divide his party up. You could have say 10 groups, each with a nuker, healer, thief and fighters?or there will be groups of healers, nukers, heavy infantry, light infantry and scouts? it will be up to the leader to choose how, and up to the user to see what info they want?if they want the status if subgroup B then they get subgroup B and all their vitals.
Also we have in the plans for group heals to not be centered on the caster but around the target?so healing at range will be possible at higher levels.
At least that is what we have on paper :-)
The big issue is group and subgroup designation.
On the, loot issue, that will be worked out, we will have loot that is only good for guilds, temporary loot?that you might as well use ASAP, money that goes to everyone involved?and other stuff. But the dragon dropping one thing is bad.
The better idea is the dragon drops 500 things and it is like a pi?ata of good stuff, but only one or two great things.
Also a list of everyone in the group and what they looted keeps people honest to a degree.
Since you can?t lie about not getting something, when everyone saw the text saying you did take it.
-
I think teaming up in a Party is a good thing, but it shouldn\'t be mandatory to level like in some games..x_x;
Otherwise, teaming up should have its advantages over fighting solo.
As for a item giving system, just do a roll the dice type of thing. You click a button and a number pops up, whoever gets the highest number gets the item (and of course you could pass the item if you don\'t want it). Thats the best way I\'ve seen any game do it so far~(from FFXI if your wondering)
-
Pinata Time!!! What a wonderful way to put it Paxx!
-
Etra, that is almost the same as just having random loot among the party.
The trick in most cases is allowing the people who get the most out what drops, but if creature X usually drops things for warrior centric groups?should the mages be there just out of good will and never get anything?
So, we go back to random exchange?one group member loots and it distributes randomly to all?
I?m sure we will try a few different things.
The pi?ata is just to illustrate the different way to deal with a major creature that requires many people to kill dyeing.
-
I\'m sorry Paxx I did not mean to offend. I really do enjoy your input on the subject. They are reasonable and make sense.
-
hey Paxx how is someone going to join a party? I believe there should be a command that you first select a player then ask the player you selected, \"Do you want to join this party?\" So if someone needs help he can allow the player to join, if he doesn\'t need help he\'ll reject it.
With acceptance:
Bob is fighting monster and Bob knows he can\'t last very long. So a player named Gary comes up to Bob, then targets Bob and sends the join message. On Bob\'s screens it will say, \"Do you want Gary to join the fight?\" Then Bob will select the allow button that will allow Gary to join the fight.
Without acceptance:
Bob is fighting a monster and he knows he can win. So a player named Larry comes up to Bob, then targets Bob and sends the join message. On Bob\'s screen it will say, \"Do you want Larry to join the fight?\" Then Bob will select the refuse button that will not allow Larry to join the fight.
It\'s simple and effective. I\'m strongly pro for this.
-
The large group size game mechanics is a great idea. I am glad the development team is working on that. Grouping in mass can be alot of fun. feels like a online party. However the time it takes to organize such large groups make smaller groups better for everyday playing.
I would like to see a game that encourages teams of 3 to 10 players. When larger groups are used it is hard to tell who is contributing to the goals of the group and who is eating a ham sandwich at the keyboard.00000000000000000000000
oops, sandwich just droped and my head hit the keyboard as I wresled it from the cat.
-
Ok, some clearing up.
Harwen-
I took absolutely no offence to what you said, I thought you took it in the same joking fashion I thought I conveyed?I keep forgetting the happy faces though?my bad.
Kuiper7986-
Joining a group is the same in most MMORPGs unless we find a better way.
Person invites (while not in battle) person accepts and they get a group shat bar and view a few of the others stats in minibar format.
To join or help a guy in a combat you do it out of the kindness of your heart?so you just do it, no joining in any way.
I?m not sure how to better describe it because it has been pretty standard in MMORPGS for a while now?hell even in D&D video games it is almost the same, but you have no control over the other members of your group.
Derwoodly-
One thing we will have to work out in game is how we deal with organizational tasks.
Do we want the leader of a group to be the only one to be able to invite or allow him to delegate, should the leader get exp just for organizing, even if he is not involved in the fight (not in our plans currently) but will probably be in some way, as it could also get exploited with leaders who are always in the center of the fray and not organizing.
The key is how we subdivide large groups and if we can have some way of showing ?sub-group status? as opposed to just show everyone in one large group.
-
I dont know how many players you want to allow in a sub-group. But to give ideas i want to describe a way another MMORPG is using for its parties. Their parties have up to 11 members (you plus 10 others).
They use a small window only with livebar and name for each member. The window is placed above the head if you can see him. If not, it is placed at the edge of the screen. Position of the window indicates the direction the other is. For example top center is in front of you, but out of sight, left center is on your left side, down center is behind you, etc. Those windows have a range(too far away and they dont show up, if windows dont show up the others out of range for group boni also)
They also have an optional window with a list of party members and their status.
I find that system good, cause you can easiely find your members and see their status. There are only some problems when some of the small windows are at the same place: you cant see the info on the lower ones.
-
Originally posted by paxx
To join or help a guy in a combat you do it out of the kindness of your heart?so you just do it, no joining in any way.
and get \"killstealer!!\" thrown my way?? no way... I\'d rather watch the poor suckers die... :P
-
Originally posted by Xalthar
and get \"killstealer!!\" thrown my way?? no way... I\'d rather watch the poor suckers die... :P
That depends on how xou get expierience and loot. you had not to implement it in killer-gets-all. You can also work damage-based, time-based, hit-based. i prefer damage-based, for me seems the fairest for expierience, at least.
-
ya Paxx I agree with you. Pic
Is this what you mean?
On the bottom right hand corner there\'s a list of the people in your party plus HP and MP.
(http://www.ffextreme.com/ff11/images/72.jpg)
-
I saw a reference to Diablo II...
I can only hope that PS will never become like that insult to multiplayer gaming.
-
Ah, yes, let us not even think of such things. I was thinking a total of your party\'s hp and mp could be shown as another bar on the screen...so you would at least know when someone was hit, and the general status of your party. Which would lead you to give out commands depending on their situation.
Hm....I already see a flaw in this. But I think I have countered it.
The bar works by dividing the bar into sections representing individual players. A name perhaps next to their respective sections. As the individual bars decrease, the whole gets smaller. of course, you have the option to turn of the names on the bar, as well as hiding the bar altogether.
-
Nice Pic Kuiper!
I don\'t know what language it is in, but that is the general idea of what I had in mind. It looks like with that format 6 players is maximum. Any more and it would cover too much of the screen.
Thanks for the Info Paxx!
-
I agree with all of this to the fullest! And I forgot to quote who ever said people will have problems with getting fallen items from items but just give it to your guild member and then roll dice to see who gets it or something! SORRY IF I\'M TOO OFF SUBJECT!
Team battles RULE!
-
BTW sarios only likes this idea because he knows he will be fighting with the amazing WAYLANDER
-
OFCOURSE!!!! : )