Announcements

Join the ongoing conversation on Discord: https://discord.gg/w6Tpkp2

Please read the current update for instructions on downloading the latest update. Players with Mac versions of the game will not be affected, but you will have a slightly longer wait for your version of the new maps. Please make a copy of your character folder before running the new update, just to make sure you don't lose any of your custom work.

It looks like we can give everyone a list of minimum specs for running City of Titans. Please keep in mind that this is 'for now' until we are able to add more graphics and other system refinements. Currently you will need :
Windows 10 or later required; no Intel integrated graphics like UHD, must have AMD or NVIDIA card or discrete chipset with 4Gb or more of VRAM
At least 16GB of main DRAM.
These stats may change as we continue to test.

To purchase your copy of the City of Titans Launcher, visit our store at https://store.missingworldsmedia.com/ A purchase of $50 or more will give you a link to download the Launcher for Windows or Mac based machines.

Power set suggestion.........for future

62 posts / 0 new
Last post
GrazerCoH
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 11 months ago
Joined: 01/19/2016 - 02:45
Power set suggestion.........for future

A wing based power set for winged characters.

Two wings flap quickly for a cone knockback.
Wing swipe for single target knock down.
A wing moves to the front of the character for a "shield" like power for damage mitigation.
A power activation that quickly circles the character around the one he is fighting spamming punches/slashes or whatever. A power for a certain duration with probably a long recharge.
A character spreads his/her wings and feather/metal or whatever shards shoot down onto enemies. AoE power possibly.
A character turn his back on the enemies and spreads his wings for some team shielding for damage mitigation.
Some quick lunges to and from the enemy.

Just some ideas.

Thanx,

Grazer

AcceleratorRay
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 11 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/22/2013 - 05:03
This sounds more like

This sounds more like animation suggestions for a power set.

Having a power set require a costume piece seems to go against the customization options
described in Kickstarter updates.

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 hours ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
In CoH there were powersets

In CoH there were powersets that had hard-coded visual elements as well, such as Arachnos Spider with its animated backpack and Kheldians with their peacebringer and warshade powersets.

The Arachnos Spider powerset actually had the spider backpack animate for some of the powers. Granted, the Arachnos Spider was a complete package that included the backpack as just one element, but the point remains that it was an animated backpack.

And even if "Wings" are not a primary or secondary powerset in and of themselves, it might be something that could be added as a supplement. I can see that if you have this supplement, your back option would have to be wings, and you could choose what wings option you want to represent using aesthetic decoupling just like any other powers.

If we have tertiary power sets and maybe even supplemental power sets, pools or whatnot, then I think it is certainly possible that our devs can have a backpack-associated set of animations and powers. In the case of this thread, it would be a wing supplement, but once we decide if/when it is possible, doable and a thing, other options present themselves such as a spider backpack like what the Arachnos Spider had or maybe a DJ workstation with speakers like this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UabTMqXvavo) , a ludicrous steam-powered whizbang contraption, or any number of options that can be reserved for future expansion.


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 weeks ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
Due to MWM's decision to do

Due to MWM's decision to do full aesthetic decoupling the first thing I think of when someone says "power" here is the mechanics side of it since that is what actually makes it a "power".

So, as powers go MWM won't implement a "wings powerset" since it would be too restrictive but I think there is a fair chance of it being implemented as an aesthetic option. Though I think the best option for implementing it would be for it to only be enabled if you already have chosen an appropriate back option, thus using that in the animation.

DesViper
DesViper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/10/2014 - 00:55
Huckleberry wrote:
Huckleberry wrote:

In CoH there were powersets that had hard-coded visual elements as well, such as Arachnos Spider with its animated backpack and Kheldians with their peacebringer and warshade powersets.
The Arachnos Spider powerset actually had the spider backpack animate for some of the powers. Granted, the Arachnos Spider was a complete package that included the backpack as just one element, but the point remains that it was an animated backpack.
And even if "Wings" are not a primary or secondary powerset in and of themselves, it might be something that could be added as a supplement. I can see that if you have this supplement, your back option would have to be wings, and you could choose what wings option you want to represent using aesthetic decoupling just like any other powers.
If we have tertiary power sets and maybe even supplemental power sets, pools or whatnot, then I think it is certainly possible that our devs can have a backpack-associated set of animations and powers. In the case of this thread, it would be a wing supplement, but once we decide if/when it is possible, doable and a thing, other options present themselves such as a spider backpack like what the Arachnos Spider had or maybe a DJ workstation with speakers like this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UabTMqXvavo) , a ludicrous steam-powered whizbang contraption, or any number of options that can be reserved for future expansion.

I agree on the tertiary idea: the flight set may have an Air Superiority equivalent that could be a wing swipe or similar. Any hand-to-hand set or power could be adapted to wings I suppose.

Instead of a punching uppercut, it could be a winged uppercut animation instead.

I'm stoked for Aesthetic Decoupling!


PR, Forum Moderator
My Non-Canon Backstories
Avatar by MikeNovember
Empyrean
Empyrean's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/16/2014 - 07:51
desviper wrote:
desviper wrote:

I'm stoked for Aesthetic Decoupling!

Moi aussi!

Just used up all I remember from high school french class.

FIGHT EVIL! (or go cause trouble so the Heroes have something to do.)

Grimfox
Grimfox's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/05/2014 - 10:17
To me, this should work

To me, this should work similar to a weapon set. The "powerset" would be "melee weapon," the combat styles would be, nunchucks, daggers, katana, broadsword, titan weapons, and combat wings. Selecting one of these would provide you with the animation style then you would pick a weapon. In the case of the broadsword or katana these may offer a mixed array of eastern and western swords, which may or may not fit the style of the animation. With combat wings you would be limited to wings. Tech wings, natural, bat, dragon, magical, etc but all wings. Maybe you could get a couple of titan weapons and have those attached to your back but generally the "weapon" is wings. Does that make some sort of sense to everyone? I struggle with the function of aesthetic decoupling and powersets and the like.

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 hours ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
Grimfox wrote:
Grimfox wrote:

To me, this should work similar to a weapon set. The "powerset" would be "melee weapon," the combat styles would be, nunchucks, daggers, katana, broadsword, titan weapons, and combat wings. Selecting one of these would provide you with the animation style then you would pick a weapon. In the case of the broadsword or katana these may offer a mixed array of eastern and western swords, which may or may not fit the style of the animation. With combat wings you would be limited to wings. Tech wings, natural, bat, dragon, magical, etc but all wings. Maybe you could get a couple of titan weapons and have those attached to your back but generally the "weapon" is wings. Does that make some sort of sense to everyone? I struggle with the function of aesthetic decoupling and powersets and the like.

Grimfox, that makes perfect sense to me. So if you have a melee weapons powerset your basic attack would be a quick strike, your next could be a more powerful strike, maybe you'd get a block and ripose attack, a flurry attack and finally a power attack of some sort. No matter what your melee weapon, those would be the attacks of the powerset. So if you had a hammer, a sword, a chainsaw, a crabclaw, a spirit construct or a pair of wings, those attacks wouldn't change. The only difference between them would be how they were animated. So, sure, why not wings? But as was stated earlier, this would be the only powerset of the group that would require a particular costume piece. Would that make it a barrier to adoption or just one more academic exercise in game logic for the programmers?


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Grimfox wrote:
Grimfox wrote:

I struggle with the function of aesthetic decoupling and powersets and the like.

The general principle is that there should never be a "required" costume item/object needed to make a power work. Having said that I understand there are some situations that are more clear-cut when it comes to that principle than others. For example it's pretty easy to accept that you don't need to wear physical armor to use a given defensive power because in a superhero setting it's easy to accept that you could be like Superman and not need armor to be invulnerable. On the other hand it could be harder to "explain" the animations associated with a melee weapon power if you don't hold a melee weapon in your hand.

Huckleberry wrote:

But as was stated earlier, this would be the only powerset of the group that would require a particular costume piece. Would that make it a barrier to adoption or just one more academic exercise in game logic for the programmers?

I would suggest the Devs lean towards avoiding powers directly tied to any specific physical objects or costume items. Again I understand that some limited exceptions will have to be made like for example an archery powerset would need some kind of manifestation of a bow in your hand, even if it's a bow made of energy that disappears when not being used. Things like this ought to be handled by being able to choose customized animation sets for generalized powers as much as possible.

In the long run I wouldn't necessarily be against a "wing-based" powerset but I would definitely limit anything like that to a tertiary set of powers or maybe temp powers. I would say the same for any other "travel-based" attacks that are basically side-effects of using a travel power offensively against opponents (i.e. Super Speed charges, Super Leap stomping, etc). The main reason for this is that we don't want people to favor specific travel powers just because any attacks related to them are "better" than the rest - this is a logical extension of not allowing clothing to provide any in-game effect to prevent everyone from wearing the same exact min/maxed outfits.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

DesViper
DesViper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/10/2014 - 00:55
Lothic wrote:
Lothic wrote:

Grimfox wrote:
I struggle with the function of aesthetic decoupling and powersets and the like.
Huckleberry wrote:
But as was stated earlier, this would be the only powerset of the group that would require a particular costume piece. Would that make it a barrier to adoption or just one more academic exercise in game logic for the programmers?
I would suggest the Devs lean towards avoiding powers directly tied to any specific physical objects or costume items. Again I understand that some limited exceptions will have to be made like for example an archery powerset would need some kind of manifestation of a bow in your hand, even if it's a bow made of energy that disappears when not being used. Things like this ought to be handled by being able to choose customized animation sets for generalized powers as much as possible.

Maybe it'd be more broad, like "physical ranged" that covers guns, arrows, bolts, and throwing knives.

Single target physical damage: single shot with the gun, or a single arrow from a bow or crossbow or a single throwing knife.

Add an energy augment for a magic arrow or something.

AoE physical damage: grenade from a rifle, or a hand-thrown grenade, or a grenade arrow or bolt, or an exploding throwing knife (like in Naruto).

Cone physical damage: burst from an automatic rifle, or machine pistol burst, or multiple arrows from a bow or crossbow, or many throwing knives.

I'd love to combine them: machine pistol burst, single shot throwing knife, hand thrown grenade.


PR, Forum Moderator
My Non-Canon Backstories
Avatar by MikeNovember
Foradain
Foradain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/25/2013 - 21:06
Grimfox wrote:
Grimfox wrote:

To me, this should work similar to a weapon set. The "powerset" would be "melee weapon," the combat styles would be, nunchucks, daggers, katana, broadsword, titan weapons, and combat wings.

We'd also want to include tail strike options, for characters with tails, especially if there is a thagomizer costume option.

Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
Foradain's Character Conclave
.
Avatar courtesy of Satellite9 Irezoomie

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 hours ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
Foradain wrote:
Foradain wrote:

We'd also want to include tail strike options, for characters with tails, especially if there is a thagomizer costume option.

Tail attacks would be pretty cool.

I don't know if you envisioned a tail theme on your primary melee weapon powerset, applying it to all of your attacks instead of any other weapon or power. Examples could be a scorpion-style character, or maybe one like the alien from the Alien franchise, or maybe even Doctor Octopus. We would have the same issue with wings in that the option to apply a tail-oriented theme to your melee weapon powerset would require you to actually have a tail and not a melee weapon. Or did you just want some special attacks for characters who have tails? I don't mean to speak for what the developers can or can not do, but I expect you could have a special tertiary or otherwise supplemental power pool that is unlocked if you have equipped your character with a tail, likewise with unlocking a wing set if you have wings equipped.

Game balance would have to be addressed, or else everyone would have tails and wings for the added power. But if tails and wings just gave some added novelty powers like buffets, slaps or something like that or maybe something that is a reproduction of an existing power in a primary or secondary powerset, then maybe it wouldn't mess with balance too much.

Another way to provide balance with these kinds of additional powers would be to limit the total number of powers we can use at any given time. If we will have a limited number of action bar buttons and we have to decide which among all the available powers/actions we know, then providing powers associated with wings or tails or backpacks or any number of add-ons would not be unbalancing. This is because those actions would just increase the number of powers we get to pick from without changing the number of powers we get to use at any one time. So tails or wings or whatnot would give us some more colorful options, but not any more power than someone without them. Does anyone know if the developers have stated whether they are going to have a DCUO or GW2 style action bar with limited slots or are we going to have WOW or CoX style action bars with an unlimited number of slots?

P.S. Who is with me that the origin of the term Thagomizer is just awesome?


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
DesViper
DesViper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/10/2014 - 00:55
Huckleberry wrote:
Huckleberry wrote:

Foradain wrote:
We'd also want to include tail strike options, for characters with tails, especially if there is a thagomizer costume option.

Game balance would have to be addressed, or else everyone would have tails and wings for the added power. But if tails and wings just gave some added novelty powers like buffets, slaps or something like that or maybe something that is a reproduction of an existing power in a primary or secondary powerset, then maybe it wouldn't mess with balance too much.

Well first on the game balance, I'm pretty sure tails, wings, extra arms, etc would be alternate animations rather than their own powers.

However, the animation speed would need to be comparable, otherwise min/max-ers would recognize that wings/tails/etc would be objectively superior to otherwise.


PR, Forum Moderator
My Non-Canon Backstories
Avatar by MikeNovember
Foradain
Foradain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/25/2013 - 21:06
desviper wrote:
desviper wrote:

Well first on the game balance, I'm pretty sure tails, wings, extra arms, etc would be alternate animations rather than their own powers.
However, the animation speed would need to be comparable, otherwise min/max-ers would recognize that wings/tails/etc would be objectively superior to otherwise.

Three cheers for Æsthetic Decoupling! ¡^_^¡ ¡^_^¡ ¡^_^¡

I'm fairly sure the devs are limiting animations available to a given power based on whether or not the animation can be squeezed/stretched to fit the time required for balance. So the wing buffet animation might be an option for a power on the time scale of a haymaker, but not a rabbit punch, while the tail sweep might take longer still...

Hopefully these sorts of animations aren't too far down on the list, but I doubt we'll see them at launch.

Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
Foradain's Character Conclave
.
Avatar courtesy of Satellite9 Irezoomie

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Huckleberry wrote:
Huckleberry wrote:

Game balance would have to be addressed, or else everyone would have tails and wings for the added power. But if tails and wings just gave some added novelty powers like buffets, slaps or something like that or maybe something that is a reproduction of an existing power in a primary or secondary powerset, then maybe it wouldn't mess with balance too much.

desviper wrote:

Well first on the game balance, I'm pretty sure tails, wings, extra arms, etc would be alternate animations rather than their own powers.

However, the animation speed would need to be comparable, otherwise min/max-ers would recognize that wings/tails/etc would be objectively superior to otherwise.

Things like differences in animation speeds could end up being the very can-o-worms I was alluding to in my last post. Again I'm not strictly against the idea of using body parts as weapons but if people figure out that Power X works better with the "head horn" animations than the "fist" animations everyone will be running around with horns on their head, or worse yet, will use the head horn animations regardless if they have actual horns on their heads which would look stupid.

Again I would suggest restricting "costume item based body part" attacks and "travel power based" attacks to limited tertiary powersets or temp powers where those powers can be better controlled/balanced. If they start letting these things become too widely available to the more common primary/secondary powers things might get far too "min/maxy" for everyone's sake and overall diversity would suffer.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
Lothic wrote:
Lothic wrote:

Things like differences in animation speeds could end up being the very can-o-worms I was alluding to in my last post. Again I'm not strictly against the idea of using body parts as weapons but if people figure out that Power X works better with the "head horn" animations than the "fist" animations everyone will be running around with horns on their head, or worse yet, will use the head horn animations regardless if they have actual horns on their heads which would look stupid.
Again I would suggest restricting "costume item based body part" attacks and "travel power based" attacks to limited tertiary powersets or temp powers where those powers can be better controlled/balanced. If they start letting these things become too widely available to the more common primary/secondary powers things might get far too "min/maxy" for everyone's sake and overall diversity would suffer.

But, this is the Point of Aesthetic Decoupling, that the Looks have no relation to the Effects. Your head-butt, wing-buffet, tail-lash animations will be fit into the time-frame of the action/attack/power in question. It might look funny, but it will have no effect on the outcome of the given power-activation. The Devs specifically mentioned designing animations that could be shaped to fit the activation-time of the associated power.

I think it would be absolutely Cool, to have wings and other appendages Not be Static when powers are animating!

Be Well!
Fireheart

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Fireheart wrote:
Fireheart wrote:

But, this is the Point of Aesthetic Decoupling, that the Looks have no relation to the Effects. Your head-butt, wing-buffet, tail-lash animations will be fit into the time-frame of the action/attack/power in question. It might look funny, but it will have no effect on the outcome of the given power-activation. The Devs specifically mentioned designing animations that could be shaped to fit the activation-time of the associated power.

I think it would be absolutely Cool, to have wings and other appendages Not be Static when powers are animating!

If the Devs have specifically said they intend to make animation speeds a non-issue when it comes to combat power effectiveness then that'll be great. If they can actually pull that off then it'll be even better.

Still I would hope the Devs consider very carefully any time they might consider making certain power(s) that are dependent (even if only aesthetically dependent) on using certain costume items and/or rely on other more basic travel powers. Any dependencies like this automatically impose limitations on character concepts. For instance let's consider a tail-based attack power - sure the Devs might implement that by "aesthetically coupling" some kind basic melee attack to tail animations. But what if the in-game effect of that basic melee attack power doesn't really "make sense" when it's linked to another kind of animation set, like one that might be hand-based or aura-based? This might mean that most people will only use that given melee power with the tail animations which would lead to the undesirable situation where you effectively MUST have a tail to use that otherwise generic power or else it looks overtly dumb.

I'm just saying that great care needs to be taken when it comes to linking costume items (which in this case relates to extra non-human body parts) to powers, even if those links only exist as optional aesthetic animations. One of the great strengths of CoH was that powers were generally free of being hardwired to unique items or body parts. As I said before I understand a few allowances should probably be made, but those should be the notable exceptions not the general rule.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Elios Valoryn
Elios Valoryn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
Joined: 02/27/2016 - 06:59
I want a basket ball

I want a basket ball animation where I cross and dunk on my foes!!! Breaking ankles to break their spirit!
Lol, I do like the idea of tail and wing based attacks. The concept of aesthetic decoupling is so amazing and gives a lot more diversity in characters, and that alone makes things so much different than what many other games offer and allow. Im excited to see what it's really like.

As foolish as this seems,

Gotem.

From ya boy, Elios.

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 hours ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
Lothic wrote:
Lothic wrote:

Still I would hope the Devs consider very carefully any time they might consider making certain power(s) that are dependent (even if only aesthetically dependent) on using certain costume items and/or rely on other more basic travel powers. Any dependencies like this automatically impose limitations on character concepts. For instance let's consider a tail-based attack power - sure the Devs might implement that by "aesthetically coupling" some kind basic melee attack to tail animations. But what if the in-game effect of that basic melee attack power doesn't really "make sense" when it's linked to another kind of animation set, like one that might be hand-based or aura-based? This might mean that most people will only use that given melee power with the tail animations which would lead to the undesirable situation where you effectively MUST have a tail to use that otherwise generic power or else it looks overtly dumb.

Lothic, I think you missed the point of aesthetic decoupling with that statement. If someone has a blaster type power, and has a tail, and the developers have given people the option of using their costume tail to be a point of origin for the blaster effect, then what we would probably see as the animation is the character pointing his or her tail and the the blast coming from the tip of the tail. If you think that looks overtly dumb, I suppose that's you opinion. Someone else might think it looks cool.

Someone with a third eye on their forehead would think it was cool to have their blaster powers come from their forehead, and would probably look down upon someone who had forehead originated blaster power without a third eye.

Its all a matter of taste. But without the option to do it, we would never even be discussing it.

So wings, or tails, could be an animation provided to a powerset that would only exist if that costume item exits.

That would be if it were a primary or secondary powerset.

The balance issue we discussed was an issue only if wings or trails had powers of their own that were introduced as a tertiary or otherwise supplemental power pool.


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Grimfox
Grimfox's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/05/2014 - 10:17
Thanks Huckleberry, you did a

Thanks Huckleberry, you did a better job of putting my thoughts into words...or expanding upon them to clarity.

Lothic, you keep referring to wing based powers as a travel based power. I don't think that is an accurate comparison. A winged combat (WC) animation set should/would be a melee weapon based powerset, like katana or broadsword in COH. It wouldn't be defined by the classic travel characteristic of birds. Your powers would be quickstrike, KB, Highpower, build up, and so on. Which all apply equally to katana, broadsword, or wings. Though each would have it's own animation style. IE quick strike for katana would be a simple slash, BS would have a simple thrust, and WC would have a wing swipe. Each attack is a quick movement that deals equivalent damage as any other animation style and requires an additional costume piece. Just because the attack comes from the wings doesn't mean that it is inherently going to provide some sort of travel benefit.

For synergies sake you could choose Fly as your travel power and use "winged flight" as the animation style. Or you could decide to make "The Ostrich" and choose a mix of winged combat, kicking animations for your powers (assuming per power animation selection) and use super speed with a "run" animation style as your travel power.

We aren't mixing a travel pool and a fighting pool they are two separate and distinct entities that happen to synergize aesthetically well if you choose "winged combat" and "winged flight" but you could just as easily choose to eschew that synergy and do your own thing. A winged broadsword wielding angel with rocket boots.

The same thing would apply to a tail based animation style. The attack wouldn't be "tail swipe" it would be "KD" or "AOE spin." Tail swipe would just be the animation. As would "leg swipe" for MA. Both carry equivalent effects and damage (and more specifically DPS) they just look different. Thus all animation styles would "make sense" and not offer any bonus over any other or be dependent on everyone having a tail or horns.

There are still some more questions. Currently melee weapons like swords can't be stored on the body and disappear when not in use (dev fact check?) So would that mean that your combat wings disappear when not in use? My gut says no, but I'm not building the game, nor is my gut and that is probably a good thing.

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 hours ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
The one thing that bugs me

The one thing that bugs me with regard to aesthetic decoupling as a long-time RPG player is the unique characteristics that different weapons have. For instance, a sword attack slices but a hammer crunches. But each would have exactly the same effect in this game. Regardless of whether you are fighting a crystal entity, a robot or a bag of meat.

And we will have burning powers as a set with whatever theme we want to overlay for looks. In this case, burning is defined as an applied DoT. So fire based, acid based, cold based, insect based and gravity based would all be classified as 'burning' in this game (I'm theorizing, don't argue the details if I got one wrong). Sure that simplifies the mechanics, but should I expect a fire based burning DoT to have as much effect on a fire elemental as it would on a tree-kin?

So, to segue back to this thread, lets suppose that someone with wings or a tail chooses to make that the theme for their melee powerset; would a wing or tail attack really be the same as a katana? I suppose if you have razor wings like X-men's Archangel, the answer would be yes. But I also suppose this is where we get into questions of style and applicability. Would someone equipped with a fox's tail opt to get tail attack powers which are the same as someone with a robotic thagomizer? Would the developers anticipate this and limit the options available? (This is assuming the tenuous premise for the benefit of this thread that wing and tail options are even included in the game )


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Huckleberry]The balance issue
Huckleberry wrote:

The balance issue we discussed was an issue only if wings or tails had powers of their own that were introduced as a tertiary or otherwise supplemental power pool.

Sliding down the slippery slope of aesthetic animation choices RELYING directly on having specific costume items (like only getting to use wing animations if you have wings) is not something the Devs of CoT should be embracing without very careful restraint/consideration. They claim there would be no min/maxable combat ramifications (animation speed wise) but I'll believe that when I see it. Beyond that it still worries me that any connections between powers and costume items, even if it's 100% aesthetic in nature, could still tend to lead people towards less costume diversity because too many people may decide that certain costume item/animation combinations are "so cool" that few if any people would want to do anything different.

One more time I'm not absolutely against this idea - I just think it should be handled in a very limited, controlled way. It seems people in this thread are so excited by the possibilities this might allow that they aren't really considering all the ramifications involved with changing what was essentially a guiding design principle of CoH.

Grimfox wrote:

Lothic, you keep referring to wing based powers as a travel based power. I don't think that is an accurate comparison.

Not really. I'd just rather prefer to stick with what made CoH work well which was that no powers/animations REQUIRED or were specifically LINKED to any costume items, regardless if that linkage was functional or just aesthetic. As to the question of whether we are actually ALSO talking about "travel-based attack powers" I would have to agree that's a slightly different issue. But to be fair once you've opened the Pandora's Box of mentioning attack powers that use wing-based animations (which in effect are movements you can usually only achieve while involved with the act of FLYING) the line between the two issues becomes very thin.

I accept that there are people who would want their wing/tail animations to be "related" with how their attack powers look and or/work. I just continue to feel that once that can-of-worms is fully opened as being suggested here the Devs, who for all intents and purposes seem to be having a hard enough time getting the basic game going, will have their work trying to mesh all the various powers and animations multiplied many times.

Huckleberry wrote:

So, to segue back to this thread, lets suppose that someone with wings or a tail chooses to make that the theme for their melee powerset; would a wing or tail attack really be the same as a katana? I suppose if you have razor wings like X-men's Archangel, the answer would be yes. But I also suppose this is where we get into questions of style and applicability. Would someone equipped with a fox's tail opt to get tail attack powers which are the same as someone with a robotic thagomizer? Would the developers anticipate this and limit the options available? (This is assuming the tenuous premise for the benefit of this thread that wing and tail options are even included in the game)

When I made my earlier references to "Pandora's Box" and "can-of-worms" these were among the very things that I was concerned about. Once you start formalizing specific animation sets that are based on various costume items they are going to be hardwired to look/work in very specific ways that are not going to be accepted by 100% of the playerbase. As you said the questions of "style and applicability" will invariably clash with differing character concepts. As long as the game keeps as much of that abstracted as possible people can "roleplay" any explanations they want. But as soon a few of these very specific implementations are introduced it'll have to snowball into dozens of variations before most people are satisfied with the exact look/feel they want.

It might be counter-intuitive but having NO aesthetic animation/costume item combinations would actually be better than only getting a relative few with none of them being quite what anybody wants them to be.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 4 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
I'll try to break this down

I'll try to break this down to you to make it less confusing.
A theme helps provide the the direction for both the mechanics and if we want, aesthetics of a power set.
Burning is a theme that leverages the mechanic of damage over time and would be "things that burn" as part of the appearanc. Burning is not and damage type though it may be indicative of a damage type.

Now when you bring up the problem you have in distinguishing an effect based on the appearance (sword vs hammer) the question is what exactly are you envisioning as being intrinsicly unique to each?

If it is how the character is animated, that is a separate thing. While there may be certain movements that can benapploed to both, there are also certainly distinguishing movements (or animations) which are applicable. Even moreso if you want to animate particular fighting styles.

Of however your issues lies with mechanics, there is very little that is necessarily separtely distinguishing as both could easily be seen as knocking a target down or applying damage over time. This leaves the reasoning for why a power does what it does and what it looks like open to interpretation to the player. Your powers' appearance is as much a costume as your character's appearance is a costume.

If the concern that swords "cut or stab" vs a hammer "smashes or crushes" those aren't combat mechanics. Well they could be if you want them to be, but they won't be for our system. Just as it wasn't necessary to distinguish such in old DnD though there were versions of rules you could. They aren't necessary. We do however have a subsystem for applying different hit effects to make the appearanc of "battle damage" though there aren't plans to use it as such currently. But we have the option open to us for later if we want.

As to the example of something happening differently of your using "fire" against a "fire elemental"'vs "tree kin", this has less to do with aesthetics and more to do with mechanics as far ss damage types. And we do have thise to work with if we want. Though attempting to logically dictate why something is weaker or stronger to one thing or another can be an excersize in futility if you take it too far. And trust me on this, internally we spent hundreds of hours on this topic.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 hours ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
You asked what I meant by the

You asked what I meant by the difference between sword and hammer. You surmised that I might have meant the fighting style or animation. Interestingly, I wasn't concerned with fighting styles at all because I naturally figured fighting styles would be just inherent to the choice of chosen aesthetic. So I actually expected that the CoT team would make the fighting style of a katana weilding warrior different than the fighting style of someone with a billyclub. If you follow through on that: awesome!

Rather, my concern with aesthetic decoupling was one of how the damage and effects didn't care what weapons you used since the weapon you used was aesthetically decoupled from the mechanic. Everyone knows that its pointless to jab a rapier at a skeleton, but a good thwack from a club will send the bones tumbling. Granted that is an simple example that is easy to picture. Earlier I used the example of how the choice of having fire as an aesthetic being decoupled from the burning mechanics means you would find yourself in situations where it doesn't make sense. i.e. fire damage to a being made of fire versus fire damage to a being made of wood. Since the use of the aesthetic "fire" is decoupled from the mechanic of "burning" would the game notice or even care about the damage making any sense? Would something that does extreme cold also be a "burning" theme? I believe you have said elsewhere that it would. If I have that wrong, then I am a complete idiot and stand ready to be educated.

I truly understand why you all would spend hundreds of hours debating this. And I have played plenty of games that didn't care what the target was made of, damage is damage. That doesn't mean that it doesn't bug me. If there is no difference in this game between cold damage and fire damage besides how it looks, then it will always bug me, even if I understand why; but it won't stop me from playing.


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 weeks ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
Huckleberry wrote:
Huckleberry wrote:

The one thing that bugs me with regard to aesthetic decoupling as a long-time RPG player is the unique characteristics that different weapons have. For instance, a sword attack slices but a hammer crunches. But each would have exactly the same effect in this game. Regardless of whether you are fighting a crystal entity, a robot or a bag of meat.
And we will have burning powers as a set with whatever theme we want to overlay for looks. In this case, burning is defined as an applied DoT. So fire based, acid based, cold based, insect based and gravity based would all be classified as 'burning' in this game (I'm theorizing, don't argue the details if I got one wrong). Sure that simplifies the mechanics, but should I expect a fire based burning DoT to have as much effect on a fire elemental as it would on a tree-kin?

Outside of resistances/defenses to specific damage types that is how it has always been in computer games, and for a good reason. That reason being maximizing your viability with each enemy type you may face. If it's not done so to a very large degree then there would be one very clear optimal group composition for each enemy type or even each individual encounter.

Quote:

So, to segue back to this thread, lets suppose that someone with wings or a tail chooses to make that the theme for their melee powerset; would a wing or tail attack really be the same as a katana? I suppose if you have razor wings like X-men's Archangel, the answer would be yes. But I also suppose this is where we get into questions of style and applicability. Would someone equipped with a fox's tail opt to get tail attack powers which are the same as someone with a robotic thagomizer? Would the developers anticipate this and limit the options available? (This is assuming the tenuous premise for the benefit of this thread that wing and tail options are even included in the game )

I think I get what you are trying to say here, and that would be that wings and tails (and possibly other body parts) are not that easy to classify like "regular" weapons are, even if we limit them to the generic overarching slashing bludgeon or piercing classifications.

Yes that is a problem and probably the biggest one to overcome since it is those classifications that determines if they are appropriate or not for each individual power set, at least in regards to using them in for melee style attacks. For ranged ones (crab-pack style f.i) that would be fairly easy since they don't rely as much on those classifications, plus that there needs to be something more than just swinging it for the attack to function, like a projectile of sorts.

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 4 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
Quote:
Quote:

Rather, my concern with aesthetic decoupling was one of how the damage and effects didn't care what weapons you used since the weapon you used was aesthetically decoupled from the mechanic. Everyone knows that its pointless to jab a rapier at a skeleton, but a good thwack from a club will send the bones tumbling. Granted that is an simple example that is easy to picture.

This example results in far too many damage types where the desire has been to simplify what CoH had while also building in certain flexibilities.

What our system does is leave open to interpretation why your piercing weapon can be effective against a skeleton or a ghost or a man with bricklayered flesh. When the form is separate from function you have more freedom for creativity. Just like CoH could have a person in medieval or tech armor or spandex etc. and all have the Invulnerability set.
.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
DesViper
DesViper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/10/2014 - 00:55
Huckleberry wrote:
Huckleberry wrote:

Rather, my concern with aesthetic decoupling was one of how the damage and effects didn't care what weapons you used since the weapon you used was aesthetically decoupled from the mechanic. Everyone knows that its pointless to jab a rapier at a skeleton, but a good thwack from a club will send the bones tumbling. Granted that is an simple example that is easy to picture. Earlier I used the example of how the choice of having fire as an aesthetic being decoupled from the burning mechanics means you would find yourself in situations where it doesn't make sense. i.e. fire damage to a being made of fire versus fire damage to a being made of wood. Since the use of the aesthetic "fire" is decoupled from the mechanic of "burning" would the game notice or even care about the damage making any sense? Would something that does extreme cold also be a "burning" theme? I believe you have said elsewhere that it would. If I have that wrong, then I am a complete idiot and stand ready to be educated.

I can't think of any game that's without its damage nonsense.

At one end is Fallout 4: physical damage, energy damage, and radiation damage. Were lasers, plasma, fire, and cold are all "energy" which is too minimalist.

At the other end is Oblivion, where ghosts were immune to all physical damage, which makes them rather troubling.

But yeah, should you be able to stab a ghost? no. How about fire, cold, or poison? Makes no sense. "Energy"? Sure? Darkness? Yeah. Psionics? Maybe.

How about a robot? Fire, sure. Cold, poison, darkness, slashing? It's armor wouldn't allow it.

Gotta make a good game with realism within reason. You get to punch ghosts :p Not because it makes sense, but because not allowing it makes ghosts overpowered.


PR, Forum Moderator
My Non-Canon Backstories
Avatar by MikeNovember
Brainbot
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 9 months ago
Joined: 04/25/2016 - 21:30
Tannim222 wrote:
Tannim222 wrote:

I'll try to break this down to you to make it less confusing.
A theme helps provide the the direction for both the mechanics and if we want, aesthetics of a power set.
Burning is a theme that leverages the mechanic of damage over time and would be "things that burn" as part of the appearanc. Burning is not and damage type though it may be indicative of a damage type.

The problem is this doesn't help that much with the confusion. The way you use theme and the burning example meant to clarify are generic to the point of meaningless. Its easy for one to make any assumption about what constitutes a theme. I could think all ability sets will be carbon copies of one another with just a simple mechanics swap such as damage type or recharge speed. Or I could think you will make each ability set fit a much more pre-defined concept like martial arts or guns. I myself was under the impression that a set can be designed with a very specific concept and just allow alternate aesthetics as an option. For example, a set that had a hand gun concept but could allow for anything from any type of hand guns to ray guns to making a gun with your finger and thumb to shooting a telepathic bolt from between your eyes.
I can sympathize with the restraint you must have in providing too many specifics about ability set creation but until we get a clear picture of ability set themes, mechanics, aesthetics and the way they will relate to one another in the actual game we are going to continue to have these discussions and many people will continue to argue just how specific a set can be. I myself don't see a way it can be cleared up until MWM is ready to release an official list of ability sets and at least some breakdown of each.

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Huckleberry wrote:
Huckleberry wrote:

Rather, my concern with aesthetic decoupling was one of how the damage and effects didn't care what weapons you used since the weapon you used was aesthetically decoupled from the mechanic. Everyone knows that its pointless to jab a rapier at a skeleton, but a good thwack from a club will send the bones tumbling. Granted that is an simple example that is easy to picture.

Tannim222 wrote:

This example results in far too many damage types where the desire has been to simplify what CoH had while also building in certain flexibilities.

What our system does is leave open to interpretation why your piercing weapon can be effective against a skeleton or a ghost or a man with bricklayered flesh. When the form is separate from function you have more freedom for creativity. Just like CoH could have a person in medieval or tech armor or spandex etc. and all have the Invulnerability set.

Again I'll point out that once you start implementing the ability for players to choose which animations they want for powers (i.e. aesthetic decoupling) you're going to run into the problem of not supplying the exact "look and feel" that every player wants.

In CoH (especially before power customization) we were stuck with whatever animation set the Devs hardwired in so this wasn't really an issue. Without choice there was no avenue to suggest anything unique. But in CoT once you open the flood gates to "some" amount of choice people will start screaming for many dozens of animation variations (such as how you'd visually handle a rapier trying to stab a skeleton versus poking at a robot). I just hope the Devs are anticipating the mad tidal wave of people saying "I want power X to look this way when I use a stone club versus when I use a flaming katana". It's not going to be a question of damage types that functionally affect combat - it's going to be more like "I'd rather have my energy blast to come from my pinky finger instead of my index finger".

Once MWM gives us an inch we'll ask for a light-year... I hope they're ready for that.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 hours ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
Tannim222 wrote:
Tannim222 wrote:

This example results in far too many damage types where the desire has been to simplify what CoH had while also building in certain flexibilities.
What our system does is leave open to interpretation why your piercing weapon can be effective against a skeleton or a ghost or a man with bricklayered flesh. When the form is separate from function you have more freedom for creativity. Just like CoH could have a person in medieval or tech armor or spandex etc. and all have the Invulnerability set.
.

I understand fully. We've all been playing games with this level of simplification for as long as games have been played. Just because I understand doesn't mean it won't continue to bug me. And I reserve the right to be a curmudgeon about it. hmpf.

Besides, I used that simple example to make the point so that I could bring the conversation back to the example of tails and wings and whether or how it would or would not be appropriate as a full fledged powerset aesthetic.

If we have a limited action bar vice unlimited action bars, then I woukd also like the gadget idea for wing and tail powers. In this concept, everyone gets a single reserved spot in the action bar for a gadget power. If you equip your character with a gadget you can use a power from it in your action bar. So if you have a tail or wings, that would count as a gadget and you could use a wing or tail based power in the corresponding action bar slot. Here's where it gets interesting, because if you want to equip yourself with more than one gadget you can, but if you want to use more than one gadget power, any more than the single dedicated gadget power would have to go into the action bar in place of one of your existing primary or secondary powers. This way, someone could actually have wings AND a tail and could use them both. (wings for buffet perhaps and tail for whipping?) Or they could have a crab backpack or they could be inspector gadget and replace all their attacks with gadgets and gizmos. (I expect that in order to prevent balance busting trinket combos, you would have to make the relative power of a trinket no more than that of a primary or secondary power so that it would be an unattractive option for the min/maxer to sacrifice powers for trinkets.) While probably not a viable idea for opening day, I think this would be cool for a later expansion or update.


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Huckleberry wrote:
Huckleberry wrote:

If we have a limited action bar vice unlimited action bars, then I woukd also like the gadget idea for wing and tail powers.

The question here becomes do we want to be able to collect physical "loot" items that when equipped provide powers that can be slotted in the action bar or do we want to collect abstract "powers" that when used manifest physical forms that don't technically exist but are just animated visuals like emotes. It boils down to what we are fundamentally carrying as an inventory item - are we carrying physical objects (like a gun or wand) or are we carrying abstract powers (such as "Auto Burst" or "Magic Missiles") that when used emotes temporary items just for visual effect?

It would seem that if we made things like this "physical gadget" based you could better define the animations associated with them. For instance if you had items called ".38 revolver" or "M-16 rifle" then you'd know when you used them that the power related to the revolver would look like a revolver in you hand whereas the M-16 would look/act like a M-16. On the other hand if you had a power called "Magic Missiles" that power could manifest itself as a wand, staff of even from your eyes, hands, etc. The power in this case doesn't automatically describe the animations that are attached to it.

CoH tried to make everything like this 100% power-based - technically speaking there were no physical inventory items in CoH. But maybe CoT could explore the idea of having actual physical items that are the "physical focus" of power effects. I would suggest that anything like this be kept fairly generic and there should never be a physical item based power that would ever be more unique/powerful than any inherent powerset type power. Otherwise this game could quickly become a loot-centric game where the players who had the best items were suddenly more powerful than a player without any physical items.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 hours ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
I wasn't at all attempting to

I wasn't at all attempting to propose a loot system where we collect and equip gear, so that is not the question here. Not at all. Unless I misunderstand you.

I think the creators have already told us that our costume design and power design capabilities would let us pick the origin points of our powers. So if you have a wand as part of your costume you could select to originate the magic missile from your wand in character creation. Things would get pretty wonky if you were a pistol powered character and you wanted the bullets to come out of your forehead even though you had a revolver in each hand... I do not envy the developers' task of deconflicting all these possibilities.

But whether I misunderstand you or not, let me use your example and build on it: if there was a mentalist out there who wanted to have a .38 sidearm for self defense in situations when she didn't want to use her mind-melting abilities, then I suppose you actually could have a .38 as a gadget that would give you a basic shoot with a bullet ability in your gadget action slot. Your mentalist could probably obtain an M-16 and a box of grenades, too; equipping both of those in addition to the pistol makes three, which means two of her mentalist powers would have to be replaced.(because only 1 gadget power is reserved) She would be sacrificing the power of her mentalist abilities for more physical capabilities.

But a pistol powered character would would not want to equip the .38 because it would give him no added benefit and in fact his basic pistol skill would probably be better than the pistol gadget because of his training and natural aptitude in his primary ability. He might want that box of grenades, if it gives him an AoE stun ability that he otherwise wouldn't have had. But for argument's sake, let us create a contrast to the mentalist I just discussed: Let's say the pistol powered hero has a magically cursed kabuki mask as his gadget. It creates a fear aura effect which is a short ranged AoE causing nearby enemies to flee. It wouldn't be as powerful as the mentalist's fear ability because it wouldn't have the mentalist's knowledge and aptitude to get into someone's mind, but it would still be valuable to the pistol wielder anyway because it gives him a valuable self defensive crowd control ability he otherwise wouldn't have had.

Those are a few examples of gadgets that could fit what you were discussing I think. I actually wasn't thinking of anything as mundane as a gun or mask, but I suppose if we ever decide to go this route, it should be considered. And if damage type resistances ever do play a role in this game, it would make sense that a fire-weilder have a supersoaker as a gadget in case she runs into a fire elemental and a rapier-weilder have a crowbar as a gadget just in case he runs into a skeleton.

This whole concept would be moot, however, if we are given unlimited action bars. If that were the case, then I could see people making some very unbalanced twinks with both wings and a tail, the kabuki mask and the box of grenades, a pistol, an M-16, a supersoaker, a crowbar and a silver surfer surfboard, etc etc. Min/maxers would be required to all be the same. This would not be desirable in my book.

By the way, OP, if we've taken your thread too far off your topic, please bring us back.


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 4 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
I do hope to include a wide

I do hope to include a wide range of temporary crafted powers. Each of these may be customizable as well. We discussed the possibility of a specific temp power action bar but decided by providing multiple action bars and allowing players to place powers in them as they see fit, one wasn't necessary.

We do plan to have a specific hot bar for specifc temp powers if they're part of a mission requirement so it is easy for players to locate the power.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 hours ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
Tannim222 wrote:
Tannim222 wrote:

I do hope to include a wide range of temporary crafted powers. Each of these may be customizable as well. We discussed the possibility of a specific temp power action bar but decided by providing multiple action bars and allowing players to place powers in them as they see fit, one wasn't necessary.
We do plan to have a specific hot bar for specifc temp powers if they're part of a mission requirement so it is easy for players to locate the power.

Cool beans!


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Grimfox
Grimfox's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/05/2014 - 10:17
I was away for a little bit

I was away for a little bit and am now caught up. Rolling back a ways.

"Not really.(1) I'd just rather prefer to stick with what made CoH work well which was that no powers/animations REQUIRED or were specifically LINKED to any costume items, regardless if that linkage was functional or just aesthetic.(2) As to the question of whether we are actually ALSO talking about "travel-based attack powers" I would have to agree that's a slightly different issue.(3) But to be fair once you've opened the Pandora's Box of mentioning attack powers that use wing-based animations (which in effect are movements you can usually only achieve while involved with the act of FLYING) the line between the two issues becomes very thin.(4)"

2. In COH certain powers required and were specifically linked to certain costume choices that I would describe as functional. Katana, Broadsword, Titan Weapons, Dual Pistols, Crab Pack, etc etc were all tied to specific costume requirements. Really every power in the game (post power customization) was linked to a limited set of required animations/costume. Energy blast required the user to pick an energy blast animation (limited to one animation set) and colors for it. You couldn't pick energy blast power set and assign it a katana animation. Just like you couldn't select katana powerset and apply martial arts animations. They were linked to specific animations.

If I understand what Tamin is saying there will be only one "power set" per "class," in COH terms, and then you will choose animations and colors. Those animations may require picking an additional "costume" option like a sword. So the whole idea that you can create a system that doesn't require some level of costume dependency/links is beyond me. I'd like to hear how you think katana and broadsword styled powers will work if you aren't required to select those from the costume options. Returning to Wings. They are just a costume piece like a katana or broadsword. The only question I have that relates to the functionality of this set is whether the wings would disappear after combat like a katana or broadsword, or if you can chose an idle animation that would have them resting behind you. If the latter then doing something similar for katana and BS etc should be a breeze and allow for a character to have their weapon displayed at their hip back etc. when not in use. Which is something that was requested till the end in COH.

4. The key word here is "usually." COT is an unusual game with unusual characters. I could build a complete set of animations based on winged combat that would not require that character to be flying or move at all. And by move I mean movement on the plane or beyond how any other melee fighter might move. IE a winged combat player may not swoop around his target so fast to create a twister that would send that target flying into the air, but he might accomplish the same by beating his wings rapidly whilst standing before his target. Which would be no different than Soaring Dragon in the katana set of COH which had the user knocking his target into the air. If you can't envision a winged combat set that doesn't involve swooping and flying loop-the-loops then you are probably not going to play a winged combat character. But I'm sure there are some that would. Once you combine that basic power set with a flight based travel set you can create the appearance of swooping and looping to your hearts content. Or If you want to play "the Ostritch" and take SS and wing swipe at your foes while running past at speed. You can do that. The point is movement is not required to create an effective winged combat set. But when paired with movement travel powers there can be a natural synching which exists primarily in the mind of the creator.

Finally, I'm agree with brainbot's last statement. The basic example of aesthetic decoupling referencing fire and burning is fine for giving the broad strokes of aesthetic decoupling. Given the particular topic of this thread where we are talking about a more complex aspect of that aesthetic decoupling the example falls flat. If you can't provide more details, fine. "We aren't ready to disclose that information at this time" would be sufficient. We wouldn't be happy today, but we understand that there is a lot of ironing to do, and probably still some cutting and sewing.

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 4 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
Grimfox wrote:
Grimfox wrote:

If I understand what Tamin is saying there will be only one "power set" per "class," in COH terms,

Not quite. Each classification will have multiple power sets. It is in our kickstarter that the game will launch with 5 power primary power sets. What those sets look like however, will depend on the number of available animations and colors selected by the player.

Now, in theory we could make powers that provide the appearance of movement (like super speeding around one or more targets), but the character will end in their starting position if that were the case.
A power that actually moves the caster is possible too (typically referred to as lunge attacks), but such powers are only being applied judiciously in melee sets (as in not very many) or will appear in a movement-power-themed combat Tertiary set. Think a pool power in CoH, with attacks designed with movement as a theme (moving the caster or moving the target), with customizable animations based on various movement powers.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
Brainbot
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 9 months ago
Joined: 04/25/2016 - 21:30
Grimfox wrote:
Grimfox wrote:

Finally, I'm agree with brainbot's last statement. The basic example of aesthetic decoupling referencing fire and burning is fine for giving the broad strokes of aesthetic decoupling. Given the particular topic of this thread where we are talking about a more complex aspect of that aesthetic decoupling the example falls flat. If you can't provide more details, fine. "We aren't ready to disclose that information at this time" would be sufficient. We wouldn't be happy today, but we understand that there is a lot of ironing to do, and probably still some cutting and sewing.

Aesthetic decoupling is the one of the least understood topic on the forums IMO. Assumptions run from yours of one ability set per class to others where the set absolutely cannot have anything specific about it in any way or it invalidates aesthetic decoupling.
Here is Tannim222's statement from the Valiance Online thread giving a hypothetical example.

Tannim222 wrote:

All the fighting styles and weapon skins (along with weapon animations) are all interchangeable in our system. Even if we have a set called "super strength" it can can be customized by the player to look like "brawling", martial arts, or use weapons.

I really hope that ability sets are not designed so basic that all weapon and fighting styles are treated the same in the combat mechanics. I hope what Tannim222 means is that the mechanics of the set will reflect a super strong fighting style but with aesthetic decoupling it will allow players to choose brawling, martial arts or weapons. It's my desire that popular ability set concepts like dual pistols, martial arts, super strength and so on will be represented in the game with more than just aesthetic changes and that there will be ability sets which will have combat mechanics for them.
I personally envision a game where I want to explore new combinations of abilities for each character I make and not just see a new animation or color for my blasting. I do not want what amounts to a more advanced pallet swap as the only difference between distinctive abilities and I really don't want the only mechanical difference between sets to be superficial like ability order, secondary effect or damage type.

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
Brainbot wrote:
Brainbot wrote:

Here is Tannim222's statement from the Valiance Online thread giving a hypothetical example.
Tannim222 wrote:
All the fighting styles and weapon skins (along with weapon animations) are all interchangeable in our system. Even if we have a set called "super strength" it can can be customized by the player to look like "brawling", martial arts, or use weapons.

I really hope that ability sets are not designed so basic that all weapon and fighting styles are treated the same in the combat mechanics. I hope what Tannim222 means is that the mechanics of the set will reflect a super strong fighting style but with aesthetic decoupling it will allow players to choose brawling, martial arts or weapons. It's my desire that popular ability set concepts like dual pistols, martial arts, super strength and so on will be represented in the game with more than just aesthetic changes and that there will be ability sets which will have combat mechanics for them.

I think what Tannim was describing, there is another look at 'aesthetic decoupling'.

Say you create a melee character with the Super Strength powerset. The powerset establishes the power-progression of what powers are available at what level and some basic mechanics of damage and secondary effects. Then you choose an Animation set, or perhaps an individual animation for each power. This Animation set might be Capoeira, and you character does Super Strong Capoeira, or it might be Brawling, or Martial Arts, or it might be Broadsword, where your character does Super Strong Sword attacks.

All of this is irrespective of Costume, although, any weapons in your Animation or Powerset might be customized as part of the costume, just like in CoH.

Be Well!
Fireheart

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 4 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
Brainbot wrote:
Brainbot wrote:

I really hope that ability sets are not designed so basic that all weapon and fighting styles are treated the same in the combat mechanics. I hope what Tannim222 means is that the mechanics of the set will reflect a super strong fighting style but with aesthetic decoupling it will allow players to choose brawling, martial arts or weapons. It's my desire that popular ability set concepts like dual pistols, martial arts, super strength and so on will be represented in the game with more than just aesthetic changes and that there will be ability sets which will have combat mechanics for them.
I personally envision a game where I want to explore new combinations of abilities for each character I make and not just see a new animation or color for my blasting. I do not want what amounts to a more advanced pallet swap as the only difference between distinctive abilities and I really don't want the only mechanical difference between sets to be superficial like ability order, secondary effect or damage type.

Fireheart has it right. What a set does has very little to do with what it might look like. When we design sets, they are based off of a Theme. Themes are used to indicate the types of effects a set leverages. Burning is a Theme. The Burning Theme leverages damage over time. It is an indicator that the visuals impart something that burns - what that is can vary. Then there are the colors. Then there may be (depending on the type of set or individual powers) different animations, weapon skins, and possibly emanation points. Every single set we design uses this process. This way, even if a classification has 5 power sets, even if it is possible to make each look the same (which may not always be the case), each will function differently.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
Brainbot
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 9 months ago
Joined: 04/25/2016 - 21:30
Fireheart wrote:
Fireheart wrote:

I think what Tannim was describing, there is another look at 'aesthetic decoupling'.

Say you create a melee character with the Super Strength powerset. The powerset establishes the power-progression of what powers are available at what level and some basic mechanics of damage and secondary effects. Then you choose an Animation set, or perhaps an individual animation for each power. This Animation set might be Capoeira, and you character does Super Strong Capoeira, or it might be Brawling, or Martial Arts, or it might be Broadsword, where your character does Super Strong Sword attacks.

All of this is irrespective of Costume, although, any weapons in your Animation or Powerset might be customized as part of the costume, just like in CoH.

You seem to be saying that each ability set will have specific animations designed to go with the set, a super strong Capoeira which would be a different set of animations than a super fast Capoeira. I find it unlikely there will be different animations or aesthetics for each ability set simply because of how much work is involved in animation.
But your assumptions here go to my point that aesthetic decoupling has not been explained by the developers in a way that is meaningful. You could be right or wrong in what you think Tannim222 was saying I don't know. Only the developers can really explain it and I don't think they are not ready yet. Even if Tannim222 tried to clear it up again I doubt it would do anything because this is an ambiguous subject that cannot be explained in examples or vague descriptions.
Until the developers can shed actual light on aesthetic decoupling as it relates to ability design, and mechanics we are just spinning our wheels.

Nyxz
Nyxz's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
Joined: 10/09/2015 - 03:37
In re to:

In re to:

"You seem to be saying that each ability set will have specific animations designed to go with the set, a super strong Capoeira which would be a different set of animations than a super fast Capoeira."

My understanding of decoupling based on the above example is that both the strong and fast would use the same animation. The difference would be in the amount time it takes to complete each animation. For example, the first tier power of each would be a quick attack using the exact same animation. The strong form would take longer to complete but do more dmg; and vise versus.

Brainbot
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 9 months ago
Joined: 04/25/2016 - 21:30
Guess I was typing mine while

Guess I was typing mine while Tannim222 was typing his.

I do thank you for posting Tannim222 honestly I do. I just don't think this will clear up much for people and the same assumptions will continue. For some they will still see the easily adaptive and obvious variety of burning as indicative of all sets. Burning is a singular example that cannot be easily made to fit any ability set one might expect in a super hero game.
Some of the obvious sets you might expect in a super hero game can be treated the same. Super Strength, Freezing abilities, poison abilities and so forth can all be given a very wide range of aesthetic choices. Other obvious sets like Claws, plants abilities, pet summons, handguns etcetera are not as easy to make interpretations fit multiple aesthetics. The more specific the theme the less aesthetic choices available.

The burning example is a great way to emphasize the capabilities of aesthetic decoupling but it does not answer the questions that cause threads like this one and the inevitable response that you see in many of them.
Is Burning as specific a set will be? Are you relying on aesthetics to provide differences between combat styles like martial arts vs swords only or will there be actual mechanics to represent different combat styles? Will there be other differences in set mechanics beyond just damage type and secondary effects like activation times or recharge times? How much variety in choice can sets like armor, defenses and support have and still be unique sets? We don't even know how many abilities a set will have, if we have multiples to choose from locking us out of the other choice and so on.

I love the idea of aesthetic decoupling and can see aesthetics as a good way to offer a lot of variety on release without needing to design and balance as many sets in the game. I also can see that aesthetics are not always the best way to offer that variety. Unique set mechanics that interact with other abilities and the game itself in distinct ways is as important and maybe more important than just how it looks.
It would be nice if ability set design was revisited in a coming update with some indication of variety and how specific a theme might be as well as how the themes relate to mechanics and aesthetics.

Brainbot
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 9 months ago
Joined: 04/25/2016 - 21:30
Nyxz wrote:
Nyxz wrote:

My understanding of decoupling based on the above example is that both the strong and fast would use the same animation. The difference would be in the amount time it takes to complete each animation. For example, the first tier power of each would be a quick attack using the exact same animation. The strong form would take longer to complete but do more dmg; and vise versus.

It could be that will be the way MWM does animations this but the point I was making was not really about aesthetics, it was about set design. Are we just going to get a set called fast melee and a set called strong melee and the only difference is the activation times? How unique can a set be when the design intent is to allow for as much cross over in aesthetics as possible? Are the sets going to be intuitive in description or intentionally vague?
I trust MWM to have thought of all this and have it worked out already as well as other questions I have like replayability and player retention but cannot understand why these subjects have not been expanded upon alot more than they have been so far.

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
But why would the Devs be so

But why would the Devs be so simplistic? Wouldn't the Point be to design powersets that are different Mechanically? Not just with different powers and types of powers, in different orders, but with different basic effects. Those differences could make the same Animations seem different. Also, there's nothing saying that the number and type of Animations is fixed, there could be lots more animations is a set, but not all of them would apply to a given Powerset.

In CoH, there were many powers that used the same basic animation, but had extra visual effects that made them look different, Flurry, Sands of Mu, Shadow Maul, and Barrage, for example. As I recall, the CoH Devs actually had to tweak the animations of each of these powers, to fit the underlying mechanics of the powers, but the CoT Devs are planning ahead, so they don't have to.

I really think that this 'problem' would be better discussed after we have an Alpha-game, or an early Beta-game, so we can see examples of what does and doesn't work. Right now, all I'm hearing is fear and worry and demands for information that may not be ready for release, yet.

Be Well!
Fireheart

Brainbot
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 9 months ago
Joined: 04/25/2016 - 21:30
Fireheart wrote:
Fireheart wrote:

I really think that this 'problem' would be better discussed after we have an Alpha-game, or an early Beta-game, so we can see examples of what does and doesn't work. Right now, all I'm hearing is fear and worry and demands for information that may not be ready for release, yet.

You may be hearing that but it isn't what I am saying. And I don't know what 'problem' you are talking about. I am talking about the conflicting, misleading and argumentative posts that result in discussing something ambiguous.
If your typical response to anyone who states what they would like and not like as well as a desire for clarity and information is to accuse them of fear mongering and demands I would prefer it if you did not reply to my posts.

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 4 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
Brainbot]Guess I was typing
Brainbot wrote:

I do thank you for posting Tannim222 honestly I do. I just don't think this will clear up much for people and the same assumptions will continue. For some they will still see the easily adaptive and obvious variety of burning as indicative of all sets. Burning is a singular example that cannot be easily made to fit any ability set one might expect in a super hero game.
Some of the obvious sets you might expect in a super hero game can be treated the same. Super Strength, Freezing abilities, poison abilities and so forth can all be given a very wide range of aesthetic choices. Other obvious sets like Claws, plants abilities, pet summons, handguns etcetera are not as easy to make interpretations fit multiple aesthetics. The more specific the theme the less aesthetic choices available.

Claws, plants, handguns are still only about weapon models and animations. Pet summons are a little differnt in that for our Operator classification, each power set will have a theme which may have variances on that theme for each type of pet. Even so, what the pet looks like, does not necessitate how it can function (well it may slightly, but specifics aren't necessary to get the point).

Brainbot wrote:

The burning example is a great way to emphasize the capabilities of aesthetic decoupling but it does not answer the questions that cause threads like this one and the inevitable response that you see in many of them.
Is Burning as specific a set will be?

Brainbot wrote:

Are you relying on aesthetics to provide differences between combat styles like martial arts vs swords only or will there be actual mechanics to represent different combat styles?

Combat "styles" are merely aesthetics. Mechanics are designed as such to be agnostic as possible to "combat styles". A typical melee set may look like fancy martial arts, street brawling, use weapons one handed, or hold a weapon two-handed.

Brainbot wrote:

Will there be other differences in set mechanics beyond just damage type and secondary effects like activation times or recharge times?

Yes!

Brainbot wrote:

How much variety in choice can sets like armor, defenses and support have and still be unique sets?

Plenty! I can't divulge the exact number of pre-planned sets I've designed, but I can say I've planned for the future. Thus far, we have 5 sets prepared for launch and they each play differently.

Brainbot wrote:

We don't even know how many abilities a set will have, if we have multiples to choose from locking us out of the other choice and so on.

I understand that you're eager for more information. Many people are just as eager as you are. I wish I could spill the beans on plenty of stuff, but there are reasons infomration is being with held. Paramount among those is that we're prototyping combat and have to test things out to make sure they work as expected.

Brainbot wrote:

I love the idea of aesthetic decoupling and can see aesthetics as a good way to offer a lot of variety on release without needing to design and balance as many sets in the game. I also can see that aesthetics are not always the best way to offer that variety. Unique set mechanics that interact with other abilities and the game itself in distinct ways is as important and maybe more important than just how it looks.
It would be nice if ability set design was revisited in a coming update with some indication of variety and how specific a theme might be as well as how the themes relate to mechanics and aesthetics.

Every set will play differently from others. Think how Katana from CoH was a rather normal set as for as figuring out how to play it. While Titan Weapons used its own momentum mechanic to increase the animation time of powers and unlock a power which spent the momentum. The difference here is that Katana wouldn't be limited to the same animations with different weapon models (we wouldn't even name a set "Katana"), but could be anything from bare-handed fighting, to a weapon in one hand, or holding a weapon with two hands, or even other stuff like using wind in melee attacks, earthen weapons, etc. Titan Weapons would also not be limited to "huge weapon models", but have many varients as well. Of course initially, there may be sets with limited offerings in customization (which is part of the planning phase to make sure each set will offer some choices as its a major selling point of the game).


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
Brainbot wrote:
Brainbot wrote:

You may be hearing that but it isn't what I am saying. And I don't know what 'problem' you are talking about. I am talking about the conflicting, misleading and argumentative posts that result in discussing something ambiguous.

Exactly! You say you don't know what the 'problem' is, but then you describe the 'problem'. Unfortunately, there is no 'solution' available at this time, because we don't know anything. Yet, you continue to point to the 'problem' and declare that here must be a solution, or if there isn't a solution, then the game must be in trouble.

However, Tannim (mostly) and other Devs have given us all of the information that is available right now. So, instead of inventing more issues and saying they're problems that must be fixed(!), why not accept that the Devs are not foolish enough to leave those 'problems' unfixed and enjoy the speculations and suggestions about the imaginary stuff we don't know (yet!)

Because, regarding 'problems' with alarm, over and over, looks like fear, to me. Fear that you're going to be disappointed. Fear that you will have invested time and energy in a 'bad game'. And it's just not necessary.

Be Well!
Fireheart

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 hours ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
I'll admit that some of

I'll admit that some of Tannim's posts have left me more confused than I was before I read them, but I think that is because Tannim has a specific lexicon he and MWM are using and we throw our own assumptions into what those words mean and carry away an incorrect understanding. For instance, there are terms like "powerset" and "set" and "theme" and "style" and "power" and "ability" all in a single post. When you add in the number of posts by other people (including myself) who have also used those terms in different ways and ran down our own tangents with them, it is no question why some of this is clear as mud.

Here's what I understand of what a POWERSET may be: Melee offense, ranged offense, defense, control, support. That makes five (5).
Here's what I understand THEME may be: hand weapons, burning, titan weapons, energy, aura. Such that most any theme can be applied to most any power set
Here's what I understand about STYLE: martial arts, single-handed weapons, two-handed weapons, bare fists, guns, fire, cold, wind, dark, earth, plants, etc. Such that most any can be applied to most any combination of power set and theme.

So, while the burning THEME can be a melee offense SET used with the fire STYLE, it would play completely different than the burning THEME applied to the ranged offense SET and the defense SET. This example should be easy to understand for those of us who played CoX, because there was a difference between a fire/fire scrapper and a fire/fire tank and a fire/fire blaster.

And after we've chosen our THEME, we can choose the look and feel of the powers and abilities. If we've chosen a STYLE that requires certain costume choices, such as a hand-held weapon, then I expect that weapon would be among the customization options here and not in costume creation, since our weapon is a manifestation of the powers we've chosen.

I would expect that some choices of POWER SET and THEME would preclude some choices of STYLE. For instance, ranged offense SET would probably be required in order to entertain the gun STYLE under the hand weapons THEME. But I could also see some sort of hand weapons included in a STYLE option for other combinations like energy THEMED support POWERSET.

I'm sure I got the specifics wrong since I'm just taking a stab in the dark at the contents and examples within each term; but in general I think these are the terms Tannim has used and what he means when he uses them. So if I got some of my specific examples wrong, please don't let that distract you and the rest of us from the general gist of what the lexicon means and how it will be applied.


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Brainbot
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 9 months ago
Joined: 04/25/2016 - 21:30
Tannim222 wrote:
Tannim222 wrote:

I understand that you're eager for more information. Many people are just as eager as you are. I wish I could spill the beans on plenty of stuff, but there are reasons infomration is being with held. Paramount among those is that we're prototyping combat and have to test things out to make sure they work as expected.

Again thanks for taking time to respond. And thanks for giving a slightly clearer picture on the subject.
I get that you cannot talk about some of these things yet. I have said it many times myself and was not asking you to talk about it. Its the reason why I took issue with Fireheart's faulty accusations.
My point was not to get more information it was that the typical knee jerk response of aesthetic decoupling and the inevitable misleading and presumptive discussion will continue without that information anytime anyone suggests anything in the realm of abilities. Instead of discussing the idea the OP presents they now get bogged down in trying to explain how their idea can fit decoupling which further gets mired by the conflicting assumptions people have made about the subject.
In this thread alone there has been a lot of differing opinions on what aesthetic decoupling is, what should be strictly aesthetic options and what should be game mechanics, what is costume and what is power aesthetic and so on. You have seen it yourself Tannim222 and its why you have made attempts to clarify things for people. Your hands simply are tied right now on giving the information that would help this.
I am not in complete agreement that the paramount reason it can't be cleared up completely right now is because of prototyping combat but I do understand that that you have reasons even if they are not ones I can see at this time.

Pyromantic
Pyromantic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 7 months ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/14/2013 - 08:20
Tannim222 wrote:
Tannim222 wrote:

Plenty! I can't divulge the exact number of pre-planned sets I've designed, but I can say I've planned for the future. Thus far, we have 5 sets prepared for launch and they each play differently.

May I please ask for some clarification here? Does this mean that you currently intend to have 5 different primary sets for each of the 5 classifications at launch? Meaning 25 sets, 5 each for melee, ranged, support, control and defense?

Brainbot
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 9 months ago
Joined: 04/25/2016 - 21:30
Fireheart wrote:
Fireheart wrote:

Exactly! You say you don't know what the 'problem' is, but then you describe the 'problem'. Unfortunately, there is no 'solution' available at this time, because we don't know anything. Yet, you continue to point to the 'problem' and declare that here must be a solution, or if there isn't a solution, then the game must be in trouble.

No i said I don't know what problem you are talking about. Then i explained what I find to be a occuring which you still don't understand. It may be an exercise in futility to ask, but can you point to one instance where I implied the game must be in trouble? Where I demanded anything? You can't because I didn't. Asking for more information is not demanding it. Pointing out how the lack of information affects the community and what information would be most helpful IMO is not fear mongering. I know you have come to think of yourself as a self appointed bodyguard for MWM against any perceived criticism but none exists here. MWM are grown ups who understand what I am talking about so just stop please before either of us say something we will regret.

Elios Valoryn
Elios Valoryn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
Joined: 02/27/2016 - 06:59
Wait but Fireheart wasn't

Wait but Fireheart wasn't only addressing you before. Fireheart simply said that it seemed like people were afraid of something. And what Fireheart said is completely valid because a lot of people fear the unknown and, none of us know much about how all of this really works. In reality were all as clueless as the next guy. Fireheart's just trying to assuage people's fears by telling them to wait for the alpha or more realistically a video presentation of this entire concept.

As foolish as this seems,

Gotem.

From ya boy, Elios.

blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 weeks ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
Huckleberry wrote:
Huckleberry wrote:

Here's what I understand of what a POWERSET may be: Melee offense, ranged offense, defense, control, support. That makes five (5).
Here's what I understand THEME may be: hand weapons, burning, titan weapons, energy, aura. Such that most any theme can be applied to most any power set
Here's what I understand about STYLE: martial arts, single-handed weapons, two-handed weapons, bare fists, guns, fire, cold, wind, dark, earth, plants, etc. Such that most any can be applied to most any combination of power set and theme.

Here's my take on it:

Powersets are the actual group of powers that you will be choosing from when picking specific powers, directly equal to fire melee, energy melee, fire control, thermal radiation, fiery aura and so on from CoH. Melee, ranged, control and so on are the classifications and specifications that makes up an archetype, not sure if they will different (outside of overall efficiency) if chosen as primary compared to secondary.
Pretty sure that the "5 sets" Tannim was referring to for launch was per AT.

Theme would be what differs one powerset from another in that that it essentially "decides" damage and secondary effects. The only one of your examples that I can see applying here would be Burning (due to it being mentioned by MWM). Other ones I can see here would more in line of Smashing (can be done through weapons, bare fists and energy), Slowing, Piercing and such broader "aspects". As far as possible they will not "limit" themes to specific groups of "weapons" since they want as a broad range of origins as possible to be applicable to every theme.

Style is pretty much what you say, the aesthetics available for a specific powerset. From my understanding it is divided into three distinct parts, weapon (emanation point), animation (what you do and/or basic "projectile" animation) and "effects" (what the projectile or such looks like and any "extra" particle effects).

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 4 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
Quote:
Quote:

Here's what I understand of what a POWERSET may be: Melee offense, ranged offense, defense, control, support. That makes five (5).
Here's what I understand THEME may be: hand weapons, burning, titan weapons, energy, aura. Such that most any theme can be applied to most any power set

The power sets are correct. Most of those themes however are not. The only one correct is burning, all the others are aesthetics, not themes. Themes dictate the direction of mechanics to be applied within a power set. Themes are what separate one set from another no matter what they look like.

We don't use "style" as it is being used here when designing a set. That may be a category for designing animations.

Quote:

My point was not to get more information it was that the typical knee jerk response of aesthetic decoupling and the inevitable misleading and presumptive discussion will continue without that information anytime anyone suggests anything in the realm of abilities. Instead of discussing the idea the OP presents they now get bogged down in trying to explain how their idea can fit decoupling which further gets mired by the conflicting assumptions people have made about the subject.

These difficulties due to aesthetic decoupling are understandable, it is a level of customization that has never been attempted by a game before.

The best advice I can give is to forget anout what a power might look like and more about what it does.

Quote:

May I please ask for some clarification here? Does this mean that you currently intend to have 5 different primary sets for each of the 5 classifications at launch? Meaning 25 sets, 5 each for melee, ranged, support, control and defense?

Correct. Originally it was 4 but he stretch goal to include a 5th was reached during our KS.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 hours ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
Tannim222 wrote:
Tannim222 wrote:

Quote:
Here's what I understand of what a POWERSET may be: Melee offense, ranged offense, defense, control, support. That makes five (5).

The power sets are correct.
Quote:
May I please ask for some clarification here? Does this mean that you currently intend to have 5 different primary sets for each of the 5 classifications at launch? Meaning 25 sets, 5 each for melee, ranged, support, control and defense?
Correct. Originally it was 4 but he stretch goal to include a 5th was reached during our KS.

Okay. Now I'm confused again. Is it 5 powersets or 25?

And is the use of the term "classification" correct in this context? According to the Classification and Specification chart here: http://cityoftitans.com/forum/updated-classification-and-specification-chart, a classification is just the choice of primary power (and there are six being used in that chart, by the way, not five, so I shall assume manipulation will not be incorporated by opening day).

I'm not trying to be picky, but when certain terms mean certain things, it helps us all if we use a common lexicon.


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Pyromantic
Pyromantic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 7 months ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/14/2013 - 08:20
Tannim222 wrote:
Tannim222 wrote:

Correct. Originally it was 4 but he stretch goal to include a 5th was reached during our KS.

Thanks.

blacke4dawn wrote:

Here's my take on it:
Powersets are the actual group of powers that you will be choosing from when picking specific powers, directly equal to fire melee, energy melee, fire control, thermal radiation, fiery aura and so on from CoH. Melee, ranged, control and so on are the classifications and specifications that makes up an archetype, not sure if they will different (outside of overall efficiency) if chosen as primary compared to secondary.
Pretty sure that the "5 sets" Tannim was referring to for launch was per AT.
Theme would be what differs one powerset from another in that that it essentially "decides" damage and secondary effects. The only one of your examples that I can see applying here would be Burning (due to it being mentioned by MWM). Other ones I can see here would more in line of Smashing (can be done through weapons, bare fists and energy), Slowing, Piercing and such broader "aspects". As far as possible they will not "limit" themes to specific groups of "weapons" since they want as a broad range of origins as possible to be applicable to every theme.
Style is pretty much what you say, the aesthetics available for a specific powerset. From my understanding it is divided into three distinct parts, weapon (emanation point), animation (what you do and/or basic "projectile" animation) and "effects" (what the projectile or such looks like and any "extra" particle effects).

My understanding of it is similar, but I would explain it a slightly different way. Perhaps Tannim222 can comment on how accurate I am with this.

Powersets and themes aren't really different concepts; they are inextricably linked. There is no concept of "Fire Melee" as it existed in City of Heroes. There might however be a "Burning Melee" set. What distinguishes this is not that it uses fire, but its theme: it primarily uses attacks with a damage-over-time component. There might also be other things that are considered appropriate for the set, such as a debuff on a power that thematically exists because the DoT aspect is painful. You might envision that damage over time existing because you set the target on fire, burn it with acid, cause deep wounds with a jagged blade, or leave a lingering disintegration effect, but those are aesthetic choices that have nothing to do with the mechanical application. Similar to Power Customization that came about later in City of Heroes' life, but broader in scope.

You might have another set that is "Heavy Melee." Here the theme is not damage over time, but a tendency towards slower-activating attacks and other appropriate effects such as knockdown, knockback and stun. You select the set and powers as appropriate, and then in the same sense that you create your costume, you choose from animations that suggest superhuman strength, attacking with massive weapons, using a heavy-hitting martial art, or using limbs made of metal or stone. This last choice has no effect mechanically but determines the aesthetic expression of your powers.

Is that accurate?

Felix
Felix's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 4 months ago
Developerkickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/04/2013 - 20:45
That is accurate.

That is accurate.

Just my $0.02

Felix

Know thy users, for they are not you.
"Preliminary optimization is the root of all evil." -Knuth
Coding Lead
a.k.a. Mr Sigma, Mr. Stochastic, Balancing Act, The Oncoming Storm

Pyromantic
Pyromantic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 7 months ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/14/2013 - 08:20
Huckleberry wrote:
Huckleberry wrote:

Okay. Now I'm confused again. Is it 5 powersets or 25? And what is this new term "classification"?

Classification is the character choice that determines what kind of powerset will be your primary: melee, ranged, control, support or defense (as planned for launch). You also select a specification, that gives you similar choices for your secondary set. Together these are analogous to selecting your archetype in City of Heroes.

Link to a sticky thread on this forum: http://cityoftitans.com/forum/updated-classification-and-specification-chart

Link to the KS update: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/missingworldsmedia/the-phoenix-project-city-of-titans/posts/625583

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 2 hours ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
Pyromantic wrote:
Pyromantic wrote:

Huckleberry wrote:
Okay. Now I'm confused again. Is it 5 powersets or 25? And what is this new term "classification"?
Classification is the character choice that determines what kind of powerset will be your primary: melee, ranged, control, support or defense (as planned for launch). You also select a specification, that gives you similar choices for your secondary set. Together these are analogous to selecting your archetype in City of Heroes.
Link to a sticky thread on this forum: http://cityoftitans.com/forum/updated-classification-and-specification-chart
Link to the KS update: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/missingworldsmedia/the-phoenix-project-city-of-titans/posts/625583

wow. quick with the response! gotta hand it to you. I don't think it was 30 seconds before I had edited my post!


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
DesViper
DesViper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/10/2014 - 00:55
Pyromantic wrote:
Pyromantic wrote:

Huckleberry wrote:
Okay. Now I'm confused again. Is it 5 powersets or 25? And what is this new term "classification"?
Classification is the character choice that determines what kind of powerset will be your primary: melee, ranged, control, support or defense (as planned for launch). You also select a specification, that gives you similar choices for your secondary set. Together these are analogous to selecting your archetype in City of Heroes.
Link to a sticky thread on this forum: http://cityoftitans.com/forum/updated-classification-and-specification-chart
Link to the KS update: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/missingworldsmedia/the-phoenix-project-city-of-titans/posts/625583

I remember saying (maybe it's posted in that thread) that a more recent update on classes and specifications contradicted the chart. And Zombie is MIA last I checked


PR, Forum Moderator
My Non-Canon Backstories
Avatar by MikeNovember
Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
The only contradictions are

The only contradictions are in the proposed Names for the 'ATs' that result from Classification/Specification combinations. The basic table of choices is still completely valid, as far as I know.

Be Well!
Fireheart

blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 weeks ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
Pyromantic wrote:
Pyromantic wrote:

My understanding of it is similar, but I would explain it a slightly different way. Perhaps Tannim222 can comment on how accurate I am with this.
Powersets and themes aren't really different concepts; they are inextricably linked. There is no concept of "Fire Melee" as it existed in City of Heroes. There might however be a "Burning Melee" set. What distinguishes this is not that it uses fire, but its theme: it primarily uses attacks with a damage-over-time component. There might also be other things that are considered appropriate for the set, such as a debuff on a power that thematically exists because the DoT aspect is painful. You might envision that damage over time existing because you set the target on fire, burn it with acid, cause deep wounds with a jagged blade, or leave a lingering disintegration effect, but those are aesthetic choices that have nothing to do with the mechanical application. Similar to Power Customization that came about later in City of Heroes' life, but broader in scope.
You might have another set that is "Heavy Melee." Here the theme is not damage over time, but a tendency towards slower-activating attacks and other appropriate effects such as knockdown, knockback and stun. You select the set and powers as appropriate, and then in the same sense that you create your costume, you choose from animations that suggest superhuman strength, attacking with massive weapons, using a heavy-hitting martial art, or using limbs made of metal or stone. This last choice has no effect mechanically but determines the aesthetic expression of your powers.
Is that accurate?

In a way powersets and themes are different since powersets are a specific "implementation" based upon the combination of theme and classification. That is we will get burning as a theme but the implementation will (most likely) be burning melee, burning ranged, burning control and whatever else MWM deems fitting. Same with any other theme. So theme alone does not define a powerset, which is what you seem to be implying.

Also, my bad for having used equal when I should have used equivalent in the comparison with CoH powersets.