Adventureless
non-adventure.
Sure, being able to take the one stray MoB, or able to seperate the one as a test of your own abilities at your level, yeah. Below your level, sure. way below- getting into easy terrirory, lets not forget the South park eposide where the killed level 1 pigs forever just so they could level up, but that would be the fate you will have chosen.
See others wearing cool stuff? not for you, as that si quested and lore, possibly BOE, I hear crafted stuff is decent but those mats are in dungeons and you could buy them but it would take alot of selling drops from level 1 pigs to merchants to get enough but hey, you do you. unless you adventure for them but then you would have to group.
And this is meant to be group centric. Anythig else woud be an first person shooter. Crescent Reach or LDoN, anyone?
Equitable.
Design the creatures and the challenges of the world with substance and immersion in mind. If people use skill, prerserverance and character power to solo something you didn't expect to be soloed then don't worry about it. There will always be a line for what is possible but there will always be players pushing against that line driving it foreward. You can't hold them back and you will ruin your game trying. Many games get thrown out of whack by focusing on design against the best players or for the worst players. I feel the best route is to just design for average players and let the fringes revolve around a stable structure.
These "in one word" questions are too hard to adhere to! Some thoughts that occur: -
1) Pantheon is a group-focused game. There are a ton of soloable RPGs out there including, oddly, massively multiplayer ones. To have a group-focused game is a clear difference and a desired choice, not a limitation. When you pick fantasy instead of sci-fi you alienate some players. When you pick group and not solo you alienate some players. This is fine.
2) People don't have to only play one game. You can play Pantheon and then, if you don't have the time or inclination one session to group up, there are a ton of soloable RPGs out there...
3) There is 'solo' content that isn't the combat loop. Gathering, crafting, socialising, travelling, exploring, etc.
4) A 'group' doesn't have to be a full one or a perfect synergy. Some little care picking your encounter type and level should allow for duos, trios, and non-optimal groupings of all sorts.
5) Some experienced players with powerful characters will be able to solo content. I wouldn't try and *stop* people soloing content, but it should be *designed* to be group content for the majority of players.
6) Grouping should be easy to organise and encouraged from day one so that it is a natural part of the game. PUGs ('pick-up' groups of random players) should be totally normal. With a little bit of training info and some nice mechanics this shouldn't be too hard for VR to achieve.
7) You don't need to be socially adept to group. Grouping will possibly be most efficient and effective with a close-knit, social group, but should be totally fine for people with social 'challenges'. You should only have to click "accept" and play your class well to be a great group member.
8) Even level 1 doesn't need to be easily soloable content. Possible, sure, but not easy and not a 'default' to be encouraged. It should be clear from the start that even a duo is beneficial and soloing is the harder exceptional choice.
9) If you make Pantheon intentionally soloable to any significant degree, then it will change the nature of the whole game. It isn't something that will just exist side-by-side and not effect the group focus. I'm not going to list all the reasons - it should be pretty obvious - the point is, it's a choice, like including PvP would be. It fundamentally alters the game, it isn't just a benign additional option. If Pantheon is supposed to be group-focused, let's please do that and not add aspects that detract from that.
Make it like EQ1. In certain places for certain classes with certain gear, it is easier or more viable (paladin with GB in Unrest, etc). In certain spots if you want to camp 1 or 2 guards who pop solo, and want to sit there, you can and while it will be steady and reliable it is boring and slow. Even in EQ with the right gear almost every class can solo something, but it is rarely interesting or fun long term, but it is usually possible. Some classes are way better at it and that is ok. I don't care that every class is way different and some can do stuff others can't. No need for participation trophies, although things like bards pulling an entire zone should not happen.
disposalist said: ... 9) If you make Pantheon intentionally soloable to any significant degree, then it will change the nature of the whole game. It isn't something that will just exist side-by-side and not effect the group focus. ... It fundamentally alters the game, it isn't just a benign additional option. If Pantheon is supposed to be group-focused, let's please do that and not add aspects that detract from that.
IMO:
Agreed, completely with this item. If, for example, you have any intentionally solo-able content at each level, or even every other level, players will consume that solo content 24x7 for as long as the servers are online. The only thing required is that the mobs reward the player with XP. Even if they dropped nothing in the way of loot, resources, consumables, or any other tangible reward of any kind, this will still be true.
And if it's un-intentionally solo-able, the same outcome will be true, while the economic damage will be greater and it will additionally contribute to class envy. Especially if there are any rewards produced and/or if the mob rewards the player with XP. This is the successful formula for all solo-able MMO's since 1999: Let players advance on their own, and they will, as often as they wish.
Even if the player only gets 20% of the XP per TTK as compared to a group, they can do it for 12-14 hours a day, rather than 1-2. You can't compensate for that temporal disparity without artificial/arbitrary and extremely punitive caps and limits that will negatively affect subscriber retention.
Just do it how EQ1 did it. Hate to sound so copy cat, but most of us are here because of EQ1. In EQ, you could still progress when no one was around, better with some classes than others obviously. Though, it was never as effective as group work. Even warriors could down a mob with long recovery times if their gear was good enough.
EQ had a good balance of solo, feeling like a badass at times, and reality of needing a group.
disposalist said:These "in one word" questions are too hard to adhere to! Some thoughts that occur: -
1) Pantheon is a group-focused game. There are a ton of soloable RPGs out there including, oddly, massively multiplayer ones. To have a group-focused game is a clear difference and a desired choice, not a limitation. When you pick fantasy instead of sci-fi you alienate some players. When you pick group and not solo you alienate some players. This is fine.
2) People don't have to only play one game. You can play Pantheon and then, if you don't have the time or inclination one session to group up, there are a ton of soloable RPGs out there...
3) There is 'solo' content that isn't the combat loop. Gathering, crafting, socialising, travelling, exploring, etc.
4) A 'group' doesn't have to be a full one or a perfect synergy. Some little care picking your encounter type and level should allow for duos, trios, and non-optimal groupings of all sorts.
5) Some experienced players with powerful characters will be able to solo content. I wouldn't try and *stop* people soloing content, but it should be *designed* to be group content for the majority of players.
6) Grouping should be easy to organise and encouraged from day one so that it is a natural part of the game. PUGs ('pick-up' groups of random players) should be totally normal. With a little bit of training info and some nice mechanics this shouldn't be too hard for VR to achieve.
7) You don't need to be socially adept to group. Grouping will possibly be most efficient and effective with a close-knit, social group, but should be totally fine for people with social 'challenges'. You should only have to click "accept" and play your class well to be a great group member.
8) Even level 1 doesn't need to be easily soloable content. Possible, sure, but not easy and not a 'default' to be encouraged. It should be clear from the start that even a duo is beneficial and soloing is the harder exceptional choice.
9) If you make Pantheon intentionally soloable to any significant degree, then it will change the nature of the whole game. It isn't something that will just exist side-by-side and not effect the group focus. I'm not going to list all the reasons - it should be pretty obvious - the point is, it's a choice, like including PvP would be. It fundamentally alters the game, it isn't just a benign additional option. If Pantheon is supposed to be group-focused, let's please do that and not add aspects that detract from that.
They are supposed to be man, I'm not asking for serious feedback or using this info to pass onto the Devs, it is purely CM content to engage with you folks and my "In One Word" segment is supposed to be challenging!
You'll notice I ask for one word on things like Goldfarming, Cash Shops, Soloing etc. all things that require a lot more to describe your feelings on and force you to use one word to see how funny/creative you guys can be! :D
You may also notice I don't "like" or "heart" or respond to any replies longer than one word (except this one to explain why!!) lol
Kilsin said: ... I'm not asking for serious feedback or using this info to pass onto the Devs, ...
IMO:
That's truly unfortunate, given many of these community replies would be valuable feedback to the development team.
But, as that's not the case, it does set the tone and expectations for any future posts like this.
Kilsin said:disposalist said:These "in one word" questions are too hard to adhere to! Some thoughts that occur: -
1) Pantheon is a group-focused game. There are a ton of soloable RPGs out there including, oddly, massively multiplayer ones. To have a group-focused game is a clear difference and a desired choice, not a limitation. When you pick fantasy instead of sci-fi you alienate some players. When you pick group and not solo you alienate some players. This is fine.
2) People don't have to only play one game. You can play Pantheon and then, if you don't have the time or inclination one session to group up, there are a ton of soloable RPGs out there...
3) There is 'solo' content that isn't the combat loop. Gathering, crafting, socialising, travelling, exploring, etc.
4) A 'group' doesn't have to be a full one or a perfect synergy. Some little care picking your encounter type and level should allow for duos, trios, and non-optimal groupings of all sorts.
5) Some experienced players with powerful characters will be able to solo content. I wouldn't try and *stop* people soloing content, but it should be *designed* to be group content for the majority of players.
6) Grouping should be easy to organise and encouraged from day one so that it is a natural part of the game. PUGs ('pick-up' groups of random players) should be totally normal. With a little bit of training info and some nice mechanics this shouldn't be too hard for VR to achieve.
7) You don't need to be socially adept to group. Grouping will possibly be most efficient and effective with a close-knit, social group, but should be totally fine for people with social 'challenges'. You should only have to click "accept" and play your class well to be a great group member.
8) Even level 1 doesn't need to be easily soloable content. Possible, sure, but not easy and not a 'default' to be encouraged. It should be clear from the start that even a duo is beneficial and soloing is the harder exceptional choice.
9) If you make Pantheon intentionally soloable to any significant degree, then it will change the nature of the whole game. It isn't something that will just exist side-by-side and not effect the group focus. I'm not going to list all the reasons - it should be pretty obvious - the point is, it's a choice, like including PvP would be. It fundamentally alters the game, it isn't just a benign additional option. If Pantheon is supposed to be group-focused, let's please do that and not add aspects that detract from that.
They are supposed to be man, I'm not asking for serious feedback or using this info to pass onto the Devs, it is purely CM content to engage with you folks and my "In One Word" segment is supposed to be challenging!
You'll notice I ask for one word on things like Goldfarming, Cash Shops, Soloing etc. all things that require a lot more to describe your feelings on and force you to use one word to see how funny/creative you guys can be! :D
You may also notice I don't "like" or "heart" or respond to any replies longer than one word (except this one to explain why!!) lol
I do get it hehe (which is why I gave a one word response too) but if it prompts a few other thoughts I figured you wouldn't mind if I got them down here.
I appreciate the one-word answer questions for what they are and they can sometimes prompt some fun and interesting responses when you attempt to distill your thoughts' and feelings that far, but, like I say, sometimes it's just too thought prompting to stop at that!
If you'd rather the format was stuck to, maybe you could always add a disclaimer to explain it? Like: -
Note: Please do only use one word for you answer. It's just for fun, but also we find distilling your thoughts to one word can produce some interesting and unexpected results. If you feel moved to make more comment or discuss, please feel free to start another thread. Enjoy!
I love games, where you are able to solo if you play smart and hope that will be the case here too. I hated what they did in EQ2 for example. Linking groups of mobs together, so no matter what tactics you tried you simply weren't able to break them apart. Didn't feel very realistic either, as in reality you will almost always be able to split groups of people if you are just imaginative enough.
So in a way, you should be able to go everywhere solo. You shouldn't be able to kill everything everywhere, but at least be able to see everything and find spots where you can kill something with care.
vjek said:Kilsin said: ... I'm not asking for serious feedback or using this info to pass onto the Devs, ...IMO:
That's truly unfortunate, given many of these community replies would be valuable feedback to the development team.
But, as that's not the case, it does set the tone and expectations for any future posts like this.
Kils has always made that very clear.
This really doesnt "set the tone and expectations for any future posts". I'm quite surprised to see that response from you vjek. I thought we were all very aware the community questions were just to encourage interaction and pass the time and not to gather any meaningful feedback.
I entirely agree with vjek. I have always assumed that Kilsin did these questions *primarily* for the reasons philo mentioned but *secondarily* to pass on any especially cogent comments or any particularly strong consensus of opinion.
Kilsin's post earlier in this thread essentially tells me to stop replying to these posts unless I am very bored.
vjek said:Kilsin said: ... I'm not asking for serious feedback or using this info to pass onto the Devs, ...IMO:
That's truly unfortunate, given many of these community replies would be valuable feedback to the development team.
But, as that's not the case, it does set the tone and expectations for any future posts like this.
I mix between joke posts like "In One Word", "Who Would Win", "Would You Rather" etc. which are meant to be fun and to engage and challenge you with more serious posts like "Community Debate", "Hot Topic" and "Developer Feedback" which I look a bit more into and sometimes use internal talk to get answers from the community.
In One Word will never be the title of a serious feedback post!