Much of the discussions surrounding power utility, damage mitigation, etc., overlook the critical difference between strategy and tactics. Part of the problem with MMORPG design, and one of the reasons MMORPGs are losing ground to MOBAs, restrictive MMOGs, and sandbox MMOs, is that most MMORPGs are caught trying to balance PvE vs PvP usage of their powers and defenses. The key reason this problem occurs to begin with is that MMORPG players and designers both have little or no understanding of the relationship between strategy and tactics. Their entire concept of games is built on tactics of individual encounters with little or no consideration for how that individual encounter fits into an overall strategy. One of the reasons that so many quests and missions fall into "collect ten of this item" or "defeat ten of these enemies to find a clue", transforming the game itself into a massive grind fest, is that no design consideration is given to the creation of diverse strategic pathways.
Strategy is a plan for how the player will get from the first day of character creation to the completion of the most difficult task force in the game. The simplest form of strategy, and the only form built into most MMORPGs, is the selection of powersets. The MMORPG itself decides the strategy ahead of time by designing the game around the "holy trinity" of Gary Gygax: paladin, mystic, thief (usually interpreted in gameplay as, "tank, healer, damage dealer"). This design paradigm encourages interaction between players by creating built-in dependencies, but at the same time, it limits gameplay to a single strategic pathway, resulting in a long, slow grind from beginning to end. It also means that virtually every single MMORPG in existence, regardless of the world, the storylines, the mission styles, the genre, or the concept, all play more or less exactly the same way. One of the major reasons that MOBA are so rapidly gaining ground in both PC and Mobile markets is that human intelligence in PvP encounters allows players the freedom to seek different tactical uses for the same fundamental types of gameplay. Human intelligence of players fills in where human intelligence of designers has fallen short.
This is also why MMORPGs wind up with such elaborate rulesets for combat encounters. Death penalties, DPS, and survivability are the only design considerations Gary Gygax's holy trinity allows for. Designers develop elaborate mathematical tables for how these interact and one subset of players gains maximum enjoyment from the game by deciphering the tables based on gameplay. In my opinion, this is the number one critical flaw in MMORPG design. It dramatically increases the work load of designers, reduces gameplay to mirror images of every rival game, and allows a single subset of players who are also mathematically inclined to gain more enjoyment from the game than anyone else.
Chess is an example I fall back on over and over again. Like Othello and Baccarat, it is one of the oldest games in the world. All of these ancient games have one thing in common: a simple ruleset with simple goals. This design simplicity allows players themselves to create almost unlimited strategic approaches to the games, with every individual player approaching the game with a different interpretation of how to use the ruleset to reach the goal before their opponent. Granted, all of these ancient games are also designed around PvP encounters, normally between single opponents (although Parcheesi can feature up to six players at once). Again, MOBAs provide something similar while also incorporating minimal storylines and some degree of character presentation that implies a virtual world, or as a minimum, a virtual arena. The key challenge in MMORPG design is to preserve the simplicity of the ruleset while maximizing the virtual experience.
Many of the things I have proposed over the past three years have been ways to accomplish this by incorporating into the game a much more diverse set of strategic pathways. It appears that some of these ideas were already on the minds of the City of Titans designers (assembling clues into a unique storyline, for example). One of the most exciting things for me as I have watched this game progress is the ways that the design team has claimed to be incorporating into the game a variety of strategic pathways. I am very much looking forward to finding out how Alignment, Clues, Augments, and Refinements will diversify the strategic pathways available. My hope is that this will truly be the first MMORPG where I can outfit two characters with identical skills, start each one at zero, and experience two completely different types of gameplay because they are not limited by both of them being forced into a single strategic pathway.
If you folks can follow through on your design concepts, then this game will change the MMORPG world completely, taking us so far away from Gary Gygax's holy trinity that we might have to come up with an entirely new game category. MWM looks like the first MMORPG design team in history to understand the difference between strategy and tactics.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My author page at Amazon: https://amzn.to/2MPvkRX
My novelty shirts: https://amzn.to/31Sld32
And here I though that you were going to go on some great big rant but after reading it all I can only say "Well said sir, well said". I have never really thought of it in those ways as you present here but so much makes more sense now, and most of it is related to how easily I loose interest in MMORPG's depending how "closed" the progression path is. Probably one of the reasons I liked CoH so much even though it did suffer from this as well to some degree.
I truly hope MWM can make the content and questing as dynamic and free as they have plans for.
My only issue with this post is there are no suggestions for alternatives. One of the best parts about CoH was that the 'trinity' could be replaced with nearly any other configuration of archetypes and playstyles and the players could succeed. This post does not appear to acknowledge that, nor does it suggest alternate strategies from the deplored 'trinity'.
I'm interested in hearing more development of this idea, please.
Be Well!
Fireheart
I was following you until I got to this statement:
What do you mean by "different types of gameplay?" When they both have identical skills. Or are you referring to the way each can customize his or her skills to let them play each character differently?
[hr]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.
Consider first, the Alignment system. Three character values defined by the character's actions: Law, Violence, Action. The moral position of the character within this tripolar axis determines a variety of interactions within the virtual world of Titan City. The manner in which different NPC groups interact with your character, how far they trust your character with information, what kind of missions they are willing to trust your character with, how they respond when encountering your character in the street, are all going to change depending on your character's moral position within the Alignment axis. Choices early on can be "redeemed" by choices made later on. The fluidity of the Alignment axis will force the player's character to develop different strategic pathways as they work their way through the game. If it works as described, then one of the two characters I mention above might find itself heavily allied with Titan City Police forces while the other one is constantly fleeing them. This creates the potential for different strategic pathways far beyond the simple idea of, "who do I beat up next to get the EXP I need to level up?"
Consider second, Masteries. Three (at launch, five later) different core elements of the character that shift and change depending on how the player chooses to develop them. Let's say I create two spellcaster-style characters and give each an explosive set that I label "Fire". Because of how power customization works, the same basic skills could also be labeled "corrosion" or "decay", but let's assume I stick with the classic, "Fire". For all practical purposes, I have two Fire Mages (or Fire Blasters, or whatever). One of those characters I develop with a strong inclination for an Action Alignment and a Ranger mastery. Now I have a classic Ranged Damage Dealer identical to Ranged Damage Dealers in every game in existence. But the other character I develop with a strong inclination for Law Alignment with a Stalwart mastery. Now I have a hybrid character with ranged Fire skills, working on the side of traditional good, and the ability to take a great deal of punishment in a close up fight. This is something entirely new in a MMORPG. I cannot follow the same strategic pathway as the first character. All of my alliances are different, all of my missions are different, my role within any given team will be different. I must carve out a completely unique strategic pathway in order to work my way up from day one to completion of the Ultimate Task Force. Shucks, even within that Ultimate Task Force the two characters will have completely different roles.
Consider third, Augmentations and Refinements. Let's say I create a third character with the same Fire skillset. But this time I focus on using Augmentations and Refinements to alter how each of those skills works. I'm still playing a primarily ranged DoT skillset, but now some of those DoT will hit harder, work faster, or (depending on the Refinements available to me) work completely differently when it hits. Skills that were vitally important for the first two characters become minimized with this one, while skills that were less than ideal for the first two characters are now front and center. Same skillset, but by making different choices with how the character works through the Alignment Axis, the Masteries, Augmentations and Refinements, each character will interact with the virtual world in completely different ways and follow completely different strategic pathways as they do so. The strategic priorities change in accordance with how the character evolves based on choices made both during missions and during character development.
Same skillset. Same basic character. One identical to the Ranged Damage Dealer in every game in existence, two that have almost nothing in common with Gary Gygax's holy trinity.
If everything works as described, then the nature of the game has changed completely. It may require taking four or five characters completely through development from zero to completion of the Ultimate Task Force to genuinely master the game. This is not quite the flexibility of Chess or Parcheesi, but we've come a long ways from either Ultima Online or City of Heroes.
Most players have a single strategic pathway that they follow in every game they play. They are a tank, a healer, or a damage dealer. They build their character to maximize its effectiveness within that single strategic pathway. This is how Gary Gygax designed Dungeons and Dragons, and this is the format that is preserved even within City of Heroes (prior to the release of CoV). Small variations existed in City of Heroes, but nothing that violated the core strategic pathways every player was accustomed to finding in an RPG.
City of Villains offered the first real break in tradition, especially in the way they took classic pet handler and evolved it into the Mastermind. Now, instead of a single mindless attack pet (or perhaps three, but still mindless) the Mastermind had three different classes of pets with three different roles in combat encounters. Plus, by developing their Secondary in different ways, they changed how they interacted with and supported the pets. The Dominator, Corrupter, Stalker, and Brute were slightly improved variations on the Gary Gygax trinity with a small amount of hybridization, but the City of Villains Mastermind was the first skillset to provide a variety of different strategic pathways depending on which pets were chosen, which secondary was chosen, and how the player used Enchancements to modify the impact of the skills they possessed and their pets used. One Zombie/Poison Mastermind might function as a team healer and Reviver that also does damage, but a different player with a Zombie/Poison Mastermind might move in the direction of pure damage dealing, making their strategic pathway nearly identical to pet classes in a dozen other games. At the same time, Zombie/Traps or Zombie/Force Field require yet even more innovative gameplay and entirely new strategic pathways. One of the reasons some players hated the Mastermind class is because it required much more long term planning and foresight than any character class they had ever played before. They did not have the ability to think strategically and had no desire to develop it.
Unfortunately, we have very little information about how the Operator class will work in City of Titans. Basically all we know it is will be too complex to program to offer at release. Personally, this tidbit alone is enough to send my imagination launching in a hundred new directions. Just laying Alignment, Masteries, Augmentations, and Refinements on top of the City of Villains Mastermind would have been glorious enough. To add even more depth to the class is truly icon shattering. Depending, of course, on how well MWM pulls it off. But I anticipate great things!
In short, all bets are off. Any preconceived ideas about to play a MMORPG are going to be shattered. If everything works as described, this game will open up a whole new universe of potential strategic pathways.
This is a good thing.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My author page at Amazon: https://amzn.to/2MPvkRX
My novelty shirts: https://amzn.to/31Sld32
Thanks, you've mentioned things to 'consider', things we have zero information about, at this time. We have only the vaguest ideas about how they will work, as far as I know. I don't see how these things will effect Strategy, Tactics, or Playstyle, such that they will offer a different path to success than the old standard of 'murder lots of things and profit'. How do these things work differently than the 'Trinity' of Tank (to fixate the opponent's aggressive behavior), Spank (with DPS), and Heal (to keep everyone alive)?
Great shout-out for the Mastermind/Operator as a unique departure from the 'Trinity', though it's basically a 'trinity in one'. What about CoH's wonderful Controller? Surely, that was an amazing deviation from the 'Trinity', as well? Okay, sort of a 'two-in-one', being able to control the opponent's aggressive behaviors and also 'defend' through buffs, debuffs, and heals.
If the 'Trinity' strategy is unsatisfactory, what other strategies might we deploy?
Be Well!
Fireheart
The description here has less to do with the alignment system and more to do with Faction Reputation. Alignment is descriptive in that it relates to the choices made in missions. Those choices may affect the way certain stories play out, yes. As will they could also intersect with particular factions positively or negatively. But in of itself, the Alignment system isn't the driver of the over all system.
Masteries are based on classification. Alignment has nothing to do with how a Mastery operates. Also, Masteries do not have a theme like "corrosion" or "decay". Themes are something we use to associate a term with a particular mechanical function. Such as Burning is a theme used to indicate damage over time.
Each Classification will have at launch, 3 Masteries of 3 tiers available over a span of levels. Over time, there are 10 different combinations of Masteries per classification. Our Ranger classification can't select Stalward Masteries.
This isn't too far off. Augments basically improve what a power does. If it is a damage attack, you can improve the damage for example. Refinements improve how it does what it does. If the power has a cool down timer, you can refine the cool down so it recharges faster.
Certianly CoH broke convention with the trinity aspect of gameplay with its huge emphasis on buff and debuff powers and very effective control capabilities. Granted, leveraging heavy debuffs still required someone to "tank" - at least 1 or 2 heavy debuffers to garner the aggro but with sufficient debuffing and buffs to mitigate the encounter.
The controls however, deviate greatly from many other games which typically resort to control powers with very short, highly manageable (from an encounter and pvp perspective) durations.
Yet, each of those still required some lower bound of damage inorder to sufficiently defeat the spawn.
Breaking away from the Trinity, one step is stealth gameplay. This relies on as much avoidance of spawn aggro as possible. Yet typically still requires a certain threshold of damage output to successfully deal with combat encounters. There is always a possiblity of creating missions which leverage this combination of stealth and damage for succcess. It is harder (because it is limiting in a non-skill oriented MMO such as this), but also possible to create very specific stealth gameplay where success is determined purely by stealth (get the thing withoout being caught, escape the place without being caught).
Another form of gameplay is what I'd call "political". That is, being able to talk your way through encounters. Again something which may not happen in this game with its emphasis on combat, but it is something we're considering for the future (no promises).
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
I always thought my Mind/Storm Controller would be perfect for this sort of 'no aggro' stealth mission. They never see it coming and they never know what hit them.
Be Well!
Fireheart
I've a number of times said, to be novel, I would like to see an MMORPG do away with taunt. You've got no taunt, you've got no tank. You've got no tank, you have no tank/heal/dps.
CoH stepped up to the brink and offered the tools to deal with this -- robust controller classes, but boss fights all devolved to tank/heal/dps anyway. Worse, it allowed the creation of a near tank-mage with tanks with aoe damage, allowing the pulling of entire maps giving the tank a way to both survive it and kill everything.
So realize a tank is just a malformed controller, and do away with it.
Second, as for general strategy, MMORPG design seems to be "no tricks allowed", you must stand there and be whapped, because the designers plan for certain damage rates and heal rates and that is that is that is that >:-(
So in old EverQuest, you had clever players punished with bans or quick hacks to "fix" the cleverness. I am not talking about hacky exploits, but clever gameplay within legitimate game engine rules.
In a few rare places, you could go on a bridge and shoot at a thing, which would run up and around to get at you on the bridge. You could jump back down and it would reverse course. Repeat at will.
And god help you if you found a legal spot to shoot something that the thing couldn't shoot you back from, and was too stupid to move itself around. I am not talking tricks like jumping off a fixed-path mount and landing on a roof that should be inaccessible, either. These are normal places and clever hiding spots.
No, anything that deviates from having your family jewels well-exposed and proximate to be used as a punching bag on a precalculated game of hp attrition, is forbidden.
This is terrible. Get rid of it all and redo.
A third example is pets. EQ had pets in the necromancer, and Champions has them. But they get in the way of the tank-hp-attrition design. So if fighting the red dragon in ancient-release EQ, and everyone now is a necro or mage, and they send in pets, give the dragon a pet fear aura and have him send the pets on their way, and get back to hp attrition.
In Champions, have bosses either have boss assistants that must be pulled away, but which run back to the main boss if any pets are used, or give the boss a pet destruction aoe power that kills pets regardless of how strong.
Back to hp attrition. Two things scraping down each other's hp. That is a that all that is allowed, because that is all that can be conceived.
__________________
[IMG]http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll38/Gnurl/a72b7fba-8da2-4ac8-8e18-0f8453f7d3ee_zpscc5b27b5.jpg[/IMG]
The very existence of the taunting tank irritates, for it requires idiotic AI that obeys the taunt.
While most taunt effects in games are actually designed to manipulate threat of the caster and / or aggro listings of the AI, that doesn't make the AI itself idiodic. It is the way "taunts" manipulate the threat / aggro mechanics which is relatively a simple work-around in order to provide players a tool to control the encounter.
This doesn't make tanking a bad thing in of itself. Many players enjoy that playstyle.
We are looking looking to employ several different methods to the tanking playstyle with our Stalwart Masteries. One of them does rely on a taunt mechanic. But our Taunt is not a direct manipulation of threat or AI aggro lists. This was a direct request of our AI dev in fact. As a result, our taunt mechanic is part of our control schema.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
Interesting. Using contol abilities to perform a taunt doesn't change the mechanic too much, but does change the 'lore' behind it enough to be better accepted in the minds of the playerbase a whole lot more than it is in a typical fantasy setting.
As to these other masteries and tanking playstyles you refer, I am eager to see how you do them! Sometimes I really enjoy playing the tank and the responsibilities that come with it. So I am enthusiastically behind any attempt you make at coming up with new ways to be the bastion.
EDIT: By control schema, did you mean how a player controls the character? Perhaps I horribly misunderstood you there.
[hr]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.
Controls by their definition in this game do affect how a player controls their character (just like immobilization affects whether you can move or not). In what ways and how...well that's all part of the schema ;).
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]