DevTracker

[Ronyn]

Lighter armor and the inherent fragility, but high-speed/mobility and low fire-rate with high-velocity projectiles, for me.

Sounds fun.

---------------------------------------------------

This is an example of a specific set of preferences. It is how this player wants to experience the game. Now if a heavy armored, slow moving, rapid fire weapon build was inherently more effective it isn't necessarily going to make a person want to play that entirely different way right? That person is just as likely to simply not want to play the game at all. This is a situation where a game has to be balanced well enough that using a build of each type is a viable option. Sure, there may be better and worse versions of that low fire-rate with high-velocity projectile weapon, but if that whole weapon category is an objectively weaker choice it dissuades a player from using an entire play-style which is can be a part of alienating an entire type of player.

Balancing such things is not easy, and it will never be perfect balance. It just has to be close enough. When it isn't the developers must re-tune until it is. It's an ongoing pursuit.

 

[Ronyn]

Well the beauty of horizontal progression is that you DO get an edge from tuning, but it's not because your numbers are bigger or because you've played the game longer and found more gear or got more XP. It's because you're getting the machine to fit you better, allowing you to play to your strengths more.

This is always the case on paper, but never the case in the actual end product. One particular build or loadout, or set of builds/loadouts always edges out the competition, and once that is found any other loadout being used is a self-imposed disadvantage. The more options you give people, the harder it is to adequately balance all options, and then you just get stuff like "this weapon would be good if these two weapons didn't do nearly everything it did, but better"

What daynen is referencing is correct.
Conceptually, horizontal options are what define the differences between roles and playstyles.
Do you build for heavy armor and high impact? Do you build for high speed and rapid fire?
These are different directions that should not be inherently better than each other.
Each will likely have it's place to shine brighter but with the variety of encounters it's rarely one version that is king in every situation.

What Beeman is referring to is the ongoing pursuit of balance. There will always be builds/roles/classes that over perform or under perform regardless of the system used (class based or classless). Though, because that's simply the nature of the beast, it should not be a reason not to build a system in a certain direction.

With every new option you create another new balance problem, but you also create another new way for the player to express themselves. That is the push and pull of it. The better designers will find smart way's to categorize said options when using a so called classless system so that each options can be properly weighed, measured and effectively balanced against other in their category. Then, of course, take that same approach when comparing categories against each other.

 

[Ronyn]

Idea is the same, defend drill from enemies.

I'm going to simply wait until it's playable to discuss whether that statement is reductive or not. I believe the mock up will be able to distingish itself.

We are going for the same general idea only way better. Heh

 

[Ronyn]

Well good luck with that. It will be nice to see progress being made. Ultimately I can just go drop a thumper in FireFall right now if I want to play that mockup.

Firefall's thumper encounter and Ember's THMPR encounter are going to be different experiences to one degree or another.

 

[Ronyn]

What's involved in a mockup? Walk around in a checkerboard map? Mockup to me means a test of the base mechanics of moving, walking/running/jumping, maybe aim your gun (if one is even modeled/animated), stuff like that. Mockup implies bare bones, like a sketch.

The term "mock up" leaves a certain amount of leeway in it's meaning. That in mind it can be tricky to follow it's implications to a point of clarity. The particular version of a mock up we will see for Ember is described here-
" The ultimate goal of the current milestones is to build what we call a playable mockup. The mockup is meant to demonstrate the potential fun, marketability and playability of the game. We’re going to take one encounter, the iconic “thumper” encounter and build it to a high degree of polish in Unreal Engine 4.

In the playble mockup, backers will be able to suit up in an jetpacking, gliding, Omniframe with a default loadout of weapon and abilities. They will be able to call down a THMPR MEK-A and start mining for resources while waves of xenomorphs and the Tsihu attack to try and stop you. When the THMPR is finished it will run back to a target area where you will have to escort and defend it along the way. When it reaches its destination, the resources will be deposited as your “score” and the mockup will end."