Ranarius said:Spluffen said:Its quite funny that when people wish for "hard" it aligns exactly with what its like in EQ, even if it isn't even a matter of hard (this mastery thing is literally a google search away). On the other hand you never see anyone asking for permadeath, full loot pvp or whatever else hard things there are. I propose you guys just replace the word 'hard' with 'everquest' xD
As a side note - I think you have a misunderstanding of the mastery system in this game. There aren't "builds" or "skill trees" ... you can't run out of mastery points ... sure, you could spend a point in something then later on say "hmm, I don't really use that ability very often" but then all you need to do is spend your next point in something different. It's not like WoW where you have a limitted number of points to put in.
Please spare me your elitism, I watched the same video on it as you did.
Spluffen said:You never see anyone asking for permadeath, full loot pvp or whatever else hard things there are. I propose you guys just replace the word 'hard' with 'everquest' xD
I find your posts in this thread very disconnected.
Firstly, from the previous post. Of course players will min/max...to even bring it up as something that might be considered otherwise shows a disconnect (regardless of respecs).
These examples you give are strange:
Permadeath doesnt work with a purely subscription game unless the content is made stupidly easy. VR has to keep players around, working on building their character, long term to make money. To suggest permadeath with the subscription model shows a disconnect.
Full loot PvP is not a thing because this is not a PvP focused game. The amount of players who are going to play pantheon who care about PvP is tiny. Consider it a side game...like crafting or playing the market. In my experience hardcore PvP players dont want anything to do with a pve focused mmo. To suggest full loot PvP with pantheon shows a disconnect.
I'm guessing you didnt play early EQ at the high end and people bring it up repeatedly here so that is why you have animosity?
You have to understand that there haven't been any challenging mmos since then because of a shift in the genre so of course it is referred to repeatedly. To think it wouldn't on a forum based on a game that it trying to bring back hardship...and has a direct link to early EQ with Brad...shows a disconnect.
I have nothing against EQ, in fact i really enjoy it. I'm just tired of the gatekeeping and that as soon as anyone dares to question the status quo of EQ they get these supposed facts about hard this or hard that, even though its obvious that 'hard' has nothing to do with it.
Not sure why you call me disconnected when I give the min/max example. This forum is filled to the brim with people who argue that the right way to play the game is not to min/max or rush or whatever else they deem powergaming. Perhaps you're disconnected?
Or maybe 'connected' means I have to share your opinion?
Spluffen said:Not sure why you call me disconnected when I give the min/max example. This forum is filled to the brim with people who argue that the right way to play the game is not to min/max or rush or whatever else they deem powergaming.
It is not about the right way to play the game, it is about the respec mechanic itself taking away from the game.
I personally see it as a question of paving the way and supporting min maxers and flavor of the month builds. Respeccing exists to make the game easier for the player. Facilitating min maxers as a form of a money sink simply promotes min maxing. Allowing for a simple gold cost takes away the main cost of minmaxing. If you minmax in a world without respeccing your build won't be perfect for every situation. A paladin may minmax to the greatest undead slaughtering tank, then be lacking when fighting bandits. Respeccing allows minmax builds to be tailor made for every situation.
The fear of death, Pantheon plans to bring back to MMOs, will greatly incentivize everyone to minmax for every situation possible.
Respeccing hurts combat balancing. Either they tune the combat to require minmaxing so everyone is forced to do it or they make it so minmaxers are playing the game on easy. Both of those options hurt the game as a whole.
Lastly, when you have finally made it and your PC has every mastery worth taking, congrats you no longer need to pay the money sink to respec your character, until the next expansion at least. That is a lackluster capstone.
which part of "you can max out every mastery for every class" are people in this thread having a hard time understanding. this thread is so redundant, respeccing is meaningless. if you are getting your panties in a twist because people can change the path in which they use to get to maxed out points, so that they can enjoy the journey/gameplay more, then you need to check in with reality. again you can max out all the points. Min maxers will race to 50 anyway then race to max mastery anyway, thats the hardcore life.
OneForAll said:which part of "you can max out every mastery for every class" are people in this thread having a hard time understanding. this thread is so redundant, respeccing is meaningless. if you are getting your panties in a twist because people can change the path in which they use to get to maxed out points, so that they can enjoy the journey/gameplay more, then you need to check in with reality. again you can max out all the points. Min maxers will race to 50 anyway then race to max mastery anyway, thats the hardcore life.
Hey.... OneForAll... Can you max out every mastery point for the class you are playing?
JK... I couldn't help but to laugh a little... then I wondered if you or someone else will have to say it again hehe...
OneForAll said:Min maxers will race to 50 anyway then race to max mastery anyway, thats the hardcore life.
I don't know what game you have been playing to think this, but min maxers tend to just copy paste the hardcore players. You are saying the average player is hardcore because they copy pasted a popular minmaxed build. Those two things are very different.
Edit: As a side note, I don't understand why people are banking on leveling being a short process and a quick burn to "end game" like so many MMOs. Lets say your wrong and you spend 300 hours simply getting to max level then 700 more getting all the masteries. If thats the case your average player is looking at like a years worth of gameplay to get everything if they play no alts. You can't assume it has no meaning at all just because it is possible to get all masteries.
Jobeson said:OneForAll said:Min maxers will race to 50 anyway then race to max mastery anyway, thats the hardcore life.
I don't know what game you have been playing to think this, but min maxers tend to just copy paste the hardcore players. You are saying the average player is hardcore because they copy pasted a popular minmaxed build. Those two things are very different.
Not having a respec still allows for min/maxing. It just makes it so there aren't as many "flavor of the month" type of builds.
Maybe flavor of the month builds aren't a problem? The system already doesn't allow for either or type of choices. Maybe it is ok that johny come lately can respec to the "optimal" ability set up without any testing or trial and error just because he read a webpage?? (Johny can probably do that even without respec because it is only those cutting edge players who have to go through the trial and error period before the info is out there).
Respecs do make it so a large percentage of players will be identical. From VRs point of view it is easier to balance content if everyone is identical. I don't think that is what the players want? But maybe some do?
@one for all
Joppa said in the recent dev stream that it will take a "very long" time to max out all of the abilities. It was related to AA's in EQ. I took it that there is no chance we will max them all out before a next expansion comes and they add more. It is designed that way on purpose to keep people playing (even the fastest players). So while theoretically you can earn them all, in reallity the newer info we received seemed to state otherwise.
OneForAll said:so you're telling me "hardcore" players and " min maxers" are two entirely different demographics?
Trying to put words in peoples mouths while quoting them is a bit silly.
Are hardcore players minmaxers? Almost certainly.
Is your average minmaxer a hardcore player? Of course not.
I used to be a hard core player but was typically a "mediocerist" haha. I refused to ever play the "flavor of the month" or the "op class"
@Spluffen It's confusing to me that you are up-to-date on the info and you're using phrases like "screw up your character permenantly" ... that is why I offered that clarification. It has nothing to do with being elite, I'll freely admit I'm dummer than most people who post on this forrum. As far as I know it's impossible to screw up a character permanantly. If I'm mistaken someone feel free to explain.
@Ranarius
In the Shaman stream Chris mentions a player could spend all of their mastery points in to the "greater mastery system" (I take that to mean things like stat boosts, run speed, AA stuff yea) instead of in abilities. Let's say there are Not respecs, And you are a casual player who could not make up the mis-used points (if it's that hard to obtain them), then I suppose you could screw up your character / have to do a lot of point hunting to fill your abils out that maybe your play time doesn't allow. I'm trying here but that is not perma haha
philo said:The upgrade being worse or somehow lesser than the previous level is a strawman argument. This conversation can only be had if we are under the assumption of balance. You simply have to have faith that VR balances it well. It is an invalid point.
No, a strawman argument is when you distort another person's argument into a point they didn't make in order to make it easier to refute. The following is a good example:
philo said:@merkades
You listed a whole bunch of things that people have asked for over the years that dont specifically relate to the topic but what it comes down to is, many people want a variety of hardship in their game.
You obviously dont agree. Which is completely ok.
Some people are looking for hardship and consequences for failure.
There are 1000 games out there with fast leveling and easy combat and free respec type of choices. That's not what drew people to this game. That is not what VR has advertised.
Ranarius said:Counterfleche said: Actually, you can lock yourself out because, if you upgrade a skill, the new one replaces the old one. If you decide you preferred the older version, you are S.O.L unless you can respec.That's a little confusing...I must be missing something. When you put a mastery point into an ability/skill you do not lose what it used to do. It just becomes better. Can you give an example of what you mean?
Like...a single target spell becomes a group heal. Is there a situation where you wish it was NOT a group heal now and you'd prefer the single target heal? There might be good examples, if so you might have a point.
Just to clarify I am leaning more towards no respecs at this point.
With that said let me throw out a hypothetical situation using the example you gave. Lets say you have that single target heal, that becomes a group heal. And lets say the group heal uses 50% more mana than the single target version. This could cause someone to want to revert it back to that single target heal if they are always tight on mana and the ability itself is frequently used in their main spell setup.
Even with that example I would prefer that the player have to work towards a larger mana pool than the ability to "reset". Decisions have to have consequences for them to be meaningful. The consequence of that decision forces the player to then work towards a larger mana pool.
Whilst Joppa has said players will be able to theoretically max all masteries, it is a reasonable assumption, given what we have seen and heard so far, that the average player, or indeed, anything but the hardcore player, will never reach full mastery even if they reach max level. Therefore, one's choice of mastery will probably be very meaningful and important and continue to be so for a long time if not forever.
That being the case - especially because we would *want* mastery to be meaningful and worthwhile - it will be entirely possible to make regretful choices that are permanent without some limited respec.
Whether you *want* that or not is subjective I suppose, but I think it's pretty clear there *is* an issue worth discussing.
Counterfleche said:philo said:The upgrade being worse or somehow lesser than the previous level is a strawman argument. This conversation can only be had if we are under the assumption of balance. You simply have to have faith that VR balances it well. It is an invalid point.
No, a strawman argument is when you distort another person's argument into a point they didn't make in order to make it easier to refute.
To have a concern that a system may be unbalanced is fine. To use that as reason against the system is foolish.
Again, if you don't have faith that VR will implement the system well, that is the issue...not the system itself.
We are getting pretty off topic. Maybe we should continue this line of discussion in PMs if you want to go down this path of discussing unbalanced systems? (which I'm willing to do. Feel free to pm me.)
