Instance debate

[BunnyHunny]

Before mocking me consider the idea that I may have more knowledge on development than you do and you're actually making a complete ass of yourself.

I was not mocking you. I simply pointed out that your example was useless, because balance in solo player games is irrelevant for this discussion.
If you think that pointing out facts makes me an ass... go figure what is wrong with you.

The example of Dark Souls is exactly that; an example. I did not say Em-8ER should be modelled after Dark Souls nor did I say that it would be a good idea. There are many games out there with challenging PvE and Dark Souls just happened to be the one I picked.

Yeah... it is an example. Examples are supposed to be useful in a specific context.
Yours is 100% useless in the given context.
You say it yourself, no suggestion to model ember after Dark Souls. Why even mention it, then?

Everybody knows that there are skill based PvE single players (open or not doesn't matter here).
Everybody knows that there are skill based PvE multiplayer games.
Everybody knows that there are skill based open world PvP games.

Seemingly, nobody knows even one skill based open world PvE multiplayer game, or has a decent idea as to how the content should be balanced, and how individual skill would impact.
We would need an example for that. For nothing else.

Yeah, about that "YOU DIED" thing. That happens in multiplayer too.

Like i said.
Except, it won't matter when an individual fails, because there are many others.

I keep repeating myself, but it seems to be necessary since you guys do not get it.

In an instanced fight with a limited number of players (5-20), it matters, when an individual fails. The enemies are balanced for that limited number of players and the platoon loses 5-20% of max effectiveness for each person failing.

When the fight is in the open world, what are the numbers that the enemy strength, number and HP are balanced around?
Independent of that, when 1 player in 200 dies, nobody notices that.
The IMPACT OF SKILL/FAIL is low.

Now, you clearly haven't read the Vision Book (or even the sections available on the forums) or weren't paying attention. If you are crap at the game that's its own punishment, you act as cannon fodder for the Tsi-Hu Beasts to rip to shreds since if the AI pays attention it'll go after the weakest link while Humanoids will attack more competent players.

The AI goes after the weakest link? How is determined, who is the weakest link?
How is that supposed to work? If somebody just stands there, somewhere in the area, they focus that guy down, because that guy seems to be the weakest?

You talk about how stuff is supposed to be, but say nothing about how it is supposed to work.

Your Omniframe will be destroyed and you'll be playing guard duty while waiting for it to be repaired, and maybe respawns will be disabled at bases under attack. This is an easy problem to deal with with multiple solutions some of which already exist.

How does that affect the overall fight?
If one individual dies and there are at least 100 people fighting in the same area, nobody will notice that.
Individual skill does NOT matter then.

Only the average skill matters, because it only matters, when many people are dead at the same time.

However, Em-8ER is a shooter based around skill and most of the skill in a shooter is fundamental stuff like aiming, movement, ability use, knowing your enemy and its capabilities, etc.

In FireFall, building a proper setup with perks, modules, prefixes etc was probably the most important part.
In FireFall, there were instances. Instanced had exclusive rewards and required a certain amount of skill.
It was only in the instances, that individual skill and team play mattered.
Ember is supposed to be a spiritual successor to FF, but without instances.

Now again: how do they intend to make skill and coordinated team play matter?
As i already explained multiple times, it seems like it will be all about player numbers, when it comes to winning any kind of fight and all about time investment, when it comes to progressing.

You do the same thing, yet again. You say what it is supposed to be, but no explanation as to how that is supposed to work.

Em-8ER has a solid foundation that needs a bit of imagination and love, creating ideas to work around the current planned features isn't hard.

If it isn't hard, why don't you tell me how to balance open world multiplayer PvE content?

 

[spiralofhope]

-skill will not properly be rewarded (no requirement for individual skill, in order to be able to unlock things and beat content)
>> instances, top contributor rewards (top contributor=player with highest impact in an event with at least x participants, more participants -> higher top contributor reward)

-time investment will be the only driving factor for progressing (playing better might reward slightly more, but still nothing that time could not get you)
>> top contributor rewards, army bonuses, instances

-all rewards are simply an amount of resources and therefore nothing special (reward does not feel "rewarding")
>> instances with exclusive (rare) drops, exclusive top contributor rewards

-crafting any item will require a high amount of resources (no special, rare items from hardcore content required)
>> exclusive rewards for instances, rare mobs and top contributions

Regarding these. The thumping grind gets increasingly hard, rewarding ultra-rare resources at its most difficult point. If it were possible to appropriately judge participation in these events (somehow), then this skill could be properly rewarded.


Food for thought: Imagine a thump where, at the final moments, a breach is formed and the thumper is swallowed. The original thumper owner has its tracking beacon and can go in, but the only success is with a team. This is the instance. Big fights, and technology gains / material rewards are only available in this way.

If they manage success and pull out with that thumper, it is loaded up with particularly high-value cargo.. and there is now an open-world event to haul that back. Others can join in to help and real a little bit of that secondary reward.

 

[Thunderstrike]

I was not mocking you. I simply pointed out that your example was useless, because balance in solo player games is irrelevant for this discussion.
If you think that pointing out facts makes me an ass... go figure what is wrong with you.

It wasn't the facts, it was the tone. If you want to avoid people thinking you're insulting them then you should work on your writing style and try to think of how people can interpret your post. If you truly weren't trying to, then you wouldn't have actually insulted me here.

Yeah... it is an example. Examples are supposed to be useful in a specific context.
Yours is 100% useless in the given context.
You say it yourself, no suggestion to model ember after Dark Souls. Why even mention it, then?

It was an example I used to say that challenging PvE can be pulled off, which at the time was relevant to the discussion. It was an offhand mention, stop making so much out of it.

Everybody knows that there are skill based PvE single players (open or not doesn't matter here).
Everybody knows that there are skill based PvE multiplayer games.
Everybody knows that there are skill based open world PvP games.

Seemingly, nobody knows even one skill based open world PvE multiplayer game, or has a decent idea as to how the content should be balanced, and how individual skill would impact.
We would need an example for that. For nothing else.

Probably because there are none. No one here is backing Em-8ER to get a game that already exists, the only other attempt I know of was Firefall and in the end invasions were scrapped because the higher-ups went with a generic WoW-style MMO.

Like i said.
Except, it won't matter when an individual fails, because there are many others.

I keep repeating myself, but it seems to be necessary since you guys do not get it.

In an instanced fight with a limited number of players (5-20), it matters, when an individual fails. The enemies are balanced for that limited number of players and the platoon loses 5-20% of max effectiveness for each person failing.

Looks like I'm going to have to repeat myself too.

So what makes you think that the enemies cannot be balanced for a large number of players to fight? Certain enemies, such as the planned Tsi-Hu Beast will gain more power upon killing a player and if the Tsi-Hu have minibosses among the humanoid ones a "bloodthirst" variant that siphons player shields to create its own isn't that far-fetched. Large Kaiju involved in Invasions will be a major threat that will require multiple players to take down (eg, multiple weak spots that one player cannot attack at the same time) and capable of quickly destroying buildings that require resources to repair and rebuild, which depends on players successfully completing THMPR mining sessions. Losing said buildings prevents players from accessing key game systems such as resource storage, sensor arrays, repair depots, etc. A single downed player could mean the difference between losing a major construction such as the refinery and slaying the Kaiju before it can do more damage. Bear in mind while this is happening more players will need to be fending off the regular Tsi-Hu to protect those taking out the Kaiju.

The more a player pushes themselves and their THMPR during a mining session (which will probably require multiple people) the greater amount of and quality of resources they get, but they must also be able to return the THMPR to a refinery before it is destroyed. The core aspects of a skill-based shooter like Em-8ER are at play here:

• Aim: being able to quickly target and kill enemies with minimal ammo used
• Movement: being able to dodge enemy fire and attacks, while directing it away from the "VIP" (the THMPR)
• Ability use: knowing when and how to use your abilities and create more potent combos.
• Tactical awareness: being aware of what your enemy can do and being able to counter that most efficiently
  
• Battle sense: knowing when to pull out of a fight and retreat

To delve deeper for a moment in regards to Em-8ER's systems:

• Weapons that require more skill to use will be more powerful. Think weapons such as the Ambassador from Team Fortress 2 (pinpoint accurate at any range with a restriction on how often it can do this), the AWP from Counter-Strike (expensive, slow fire-rate, slow reload, slow movement speed, relatively low ammo count), the Tau Cannon from Half-Life (burns through uncommon ammo type, requires precise aim, alt-fire is a charge-based high-damage shot).
• Movement will be essential when encountering Beast Tsi-Hu as dying to them makes everyone else's life hell as mentioned earlier and melee damage ignores shields and does heavy damage to the player's non-regenerating armor or health. Drawing fire away from the THMPR and then trying to avoid that fire will be a risky (somewhat safe so long as you watch your shields and regen as necessary) way of keeping it going longer. Melee weaponry will be a major part of a Light Omniframe's potential arsenal, so please keep that in mind with the previous notes.
• Not sure if I have to comment on ability use. If you really need to, Overwatch, XCOM 2, Prey 2017, Borderlands, Firefall. Google them.
• Tactical awareness will be vital for fighting Kaiju and different enemy types. This sort of stuff is only loosely defined at the moment because there's not really a need to get into that level of detail yet so I'll have to use an example such as TF2 (because f*ck Overwatch). If a Soldier fires a rocket at a Pyro the Pyro is capable of reflecting that rocket which now does extra damage and in many cases kills the Soldier. When doing PvE this would mean that that Pyro will be a lot more consistent in reflecting shots and the Soldier will need to switch to his secondary weapon (shotgun, in this case) and take out the Pyro. But the Soldier has a third option of rocket-jumping out of the way of the Pyro avoiding the encounter entirely and letting his teammates take the Pyro out for him.
• Battle sense is knowing the game's own mechanics and how much health on the THMPR is left and what you'll need for the journey home. I don't think I have to say any more on this.

Squad mechanics will probably work as they did back in FF, health and name will be on the side of the screen with a special squad chat (can't recall if voice chat existed but people will use Discord anyway) and cohesion will be up to the players to work on.

In summary:

• Some common enemies will become more powerful with the more players they kill.
• Player forces will need to be split between defense against regular enemies that can overrun the others that deal with the larger threat. These sorts of things happen on the fly and rarely need complex negotiation between players. If either "team" fails in their goal the base is lost and replaced with an entrenched lot of Tsi-Hu.
• Various mechanics that exist in all shooters are going to be of importance, it's just the scale that's different.
• Players that push themselves successfully in the THMPR encounter will be rewarded, those who do not will fail and the war effort slows down.

When the fight is in the open world, what are the numbers that the enemy strength, number and HP are balanced around?
Independent of that, when 1 player in 200 dies, nobody notices that.
The IMPACT OF SKILL/FAIL is low.

How is the death of one player not being immediately felt in the gut of every player related at all to the issue of skill and failure?

They're both issues, sure, but they're not related. Now to address all three points of what you've just said:

• Numbers will be based around however many are required for an Invasion-scale event to trigger. If you want specific numbers you're barking up the wrong tree because we're not even close to being able to definitively say what the servers can and cannot handle.
• Non-issue. But I and many other FF vets will attest that when someone was downed we'd do what we could to rescue them so long as it was reasonably safe (not in a pool of lava). Multiple people would help out. But this is why certain common enemies will gain more power upon killing a player, to make the loss of another gun and subsequent gain of power felt by the players in the immediate vicinity.
• Skill/fail is still an important aspect, just not as important as a traditional raid where a few players fight hundreds of enemies. An army of bad players will still fail, it's just that there's a bit more wiggle room for the best to "carry" the others, so long as they're not feeding the enemy the kills needed for them to gain more power.

On a semi-related note to that final point, rewards can be dispensed from a large "pool" according to percentage of enemies killed (with a Kaiju being worth more) out of however many spawned. A mathematic algorithm to do this would be easy to make and probably already exists.

The AI goes after the weakest link? How is determined, who is the weakest link?
How is that supposed to work? If somebody just stands there, somewhere in the area, they focus that guy down, because that guy seems to be the weakest?

First of all, it was a suggestion. Second of all, it's artificial intelligence. You can program it to do whatever you want, Deep Learning is a thing and I'd advise you Google it. Simply by having the AI keep track of who's doing damage and who isn't allows it to pick out the easiest targets to gain power to take out the next weakest. Third of all, yes, if someone is standing there doing nothing in the middle of nowhere then he's easy pickings for the AI to take out. It could be bait! It could be an AFK player! Either way, one of them will die first.

You talk about how stuff is supposed to be, but say nothing about how it is supposed to work.

Good grief mate, I've outlined systems twice before making this post and you keep demanding more explanation on systems that are elementary for shooters while making outrageous assumptions about how all games in a given genre must work.

How does that affect the overall fight?
If one individual dies and there are at least 100 people fighting in the same area, nobody will notice that.
Individual skill does NOT matter then.

Only the average skill matters, because it only matters, when many people are dead at the same time.

Invasions won't just be enemies pouring in through the gates, some players will have to take out things such as artillery and whatnot as they did in FF.

Beyond that, you're asking for a co-op shooter. Plenty of those on the market, take your pick.

In FireFall, building a proper setup with perks, modules, prefixes etc was probably the most important part.
In FireFall, there were instances. Instanced had exclusive rewards and required a certain amount of skill.
It was only in the instances, that individual skill and team play mattered.
Ember is supposed to be a spiritual successor to FF, but without instances.

No one's said no instances. It's a way of delivering story which Em-8ER will have. I'm not sure why you don't think designing your 'frame's build won't be important in Em-8ER.

And you're asking for a co-op shooter with instances. Plenty of those on the market, go take your pick.

Now again: how do they intend to make skill and coordinated team play matter?
As i already explained multiple times, it seems like it will be all about player numbers, when it comes to winning any kind of fight and all about time investment, when it comes to progressing.

You do the same thing, yet again. You say what it is supposed to be, but no explanation as to how that is supposed to work.


If it isn't hard, why don't you tell me how to balance open world multiplayer PvE content?

Already answered most of these. But this:

If it isn't hard, why don't you tell me how to balance open world multiplayer PvE content?

Captures my attention. Do you think my time is infinite? Do you think I'm actually going to give a definitive answer on whether or not a theoretical system is balanced? Do you think any of what I've speculated (to avoid this being misconstrued, unless implied or stated otherwise everything in this post was based on the Vision Book) on is necessarily going to make it into Em-8ER? Do you actually think that anyone here can give a definitive, 100% concrete answer for how everything in Em-8ER absolutely WILL work?

Before you respond, I want you to do this:

1. Read the Vision Book. There's an entire section on the forums dedicated to the portions that have not been proofread.
2. Take note of specific systems or ways enemies are said to act or react to players.
3. Go through your list of questions and see if any have been answered or could be answered with these systems.

I also want you to Google examples of PvE MMOs such as Everquest and try to find developer resources on making good shooters.

 

[BunnyHunny]

It wasn't the facts, it was the tone. If you want to avoid people thinking you're insulting them then you should work on your writing style and try to think of how people can interpret your post. If you truly weren't trying to, then you wouldn't have actually insulted me here.

Aside from you claiming to know better what i think and why i do things, than i do...
Let's play a game. I call it "find the insult".

Dark Souls is mainly SOLO PvE.
Ember is supposed to be MULTIPLAYER PvE.
That makes a massive difference. How can you not get that?

In dark souls, you run around alone.
Enemies are balanced to fight against 1 player.
If you play bad, YOU DIED and can not progress any further than you deserve.

This is what i said.
If i had actually insulted you, i would probably have to agree with you, but since that is not the case...
It is likely that you expected me to insult you, but that is your fault, not mine.

How is the death of one player not being immediately felt in the gut of every player related at all to the issue of skill and failure?

First, you pulled my statement out of context.
Then you asked a question that i had already answered.

My statement was about the impact of a single person, depending on how many other people are around. And as i already said (in the passage that you pulled this statement out of), if only 5-20 players with average skill are in the fight, the failure and death of one player cause the party to lose 5-20% of their power. It is relevant. When one player fails, it can mean to lose the fight.
When 200 players are involved in the same fight, the failure and death of an individual causes a power loss of 0,5%.
Even if a player is twice as good as the average player, his failure will still have a marginal impact
At that point, regarding the outcome of a fight, INDIVIDUAL SKILL does not matter anymore.

Multiple significant parts of skill are completely lost as well.



Keep making stuff up if thats what you like to do. You can think and say about me, what you want.

Since you seem to like judging things in an irrational manner, i made the effort to upload a nice avatar, so you can slap some stereotypes on me, if you like.

 

[AdmiralStryker]

Aside from you claiming to know better what i think and why i do things, than i do...
Let's play a game. I call it "find the insult".

This is what i said.
If i had actually insulted you, i would probably have to agree with you, but since that is not the case...
It is likely that you expected me to insult you, but that is your fault, not mine.


First, you pulled my statement out of context.
Then you asked a question that i had already answered.

My statement was about the impact of a single person, depending on how many other people are around. And as i already said (in the passage that you pulled this statement out of), if only 5-20 players with average skill are in the fight, the failure and death of one player cause the party to lose 5-20% of their power. It is relevant. When one player fails, it can mean to lose the fight.
When 200 players are involved in the same fight, the failure and death of an individual causes a power loss of 0,5%.
Even if a player is twice as good as the average player, his failure will still have a marginal impact
At that point, regarding the outcome of a fight, INDIVIDUAL SKILL does not matter anymore.

Multiple significant parts of skill are completely lost as well.



Keep making stuff up if thats what you like to do. You can think and say about me, what you want.

Since you seem to like judging things in an irrational manner, i made the effort to upload a nice avatar, so you can slap some stereotypes on me, if you like.

How about instead of a flamewar, we brainstorm ways to make the game punish death(and reward player skill) in open-world PVE? Keep instancing out of it, we're not re-making Warframe. What I see so far:

If you die:
-Your allies lose a gun.
-You can't get back to the fight quickly because you need to wait for your Omniframe to be repaired(or you're using a different Omniframe than previously)
-You're losing out on any rewards you'd get for participating during the time it takes you to respawn and get back.
-Any number of enemy Tsi-Hu are stronger, control more ground, and are able to attack your allies with more focus.
-Potential structures being destroyed, bases lost, anything invested in those structures/bases being lost.
-Potential THMPRs being destroyed.
-Potentially more players/structures being killed due to enemy Tsi-Hu being stronger.
-A Kaiju is going to take longer to bring down and deal more damage.

While I'm okay with pseudo-instances, I want to avoid direct instancing. I want to see what can be thought of with regards to rewarding skill in open-world PVE. Em8-er's supposed to break ground here-let's keep doing that.

 

[Dreamin]

If there will be such a thing as agro, how is your plan supposed to work? It does not seem like you have put any thought at all into this.

-it is a stupid idea anyway, because there is no reason for an enemy to focus on a player that is not very dangerous, just because he has a special gun in his hands

A waste of resources, especially when it is not a game for console.
Your computer can multi task, so you should probably just use your own playlists.

Dude, We've been thru this on the firefall forums already;
DO NOT TRY BULLYING ME WITH THESE PERSONAL ATTACK REPLIES, DO NOT MAKE ANY ASSUMPTION ABOUT ME AND MOST CERTAINLY DO NOT COMMENT ABOUT ME, ON WHAT MY THOUGHT PROCESSES MAY BE, MAY HAVE BEEN OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN. THERE IS NO POSSIBLE WAY, IN EXISTENCE TODAY ON THIS PLANET, THAT ANYONE OTHER THAN MYSELF COULD HAVE THAT KNOWLEDGE. IN ADDITION, STATING ANY ONES IDEA IS STUPID IS CALLING THEM STUPID AND I FOR ONE DO NOT NEED THE NEGATIVITY AND CHILDISH NAME CALLING.

P.S. I was polite and used expanded size text for emphasis as you have noted previously color coding text is not an effective method to communicate to you. Be well.

 

[BunnyHunny]

Short version:

...

Great job ignoring all the other things i said and putting the stuff you quoted out of context.
Instead of getting triggered, you could address the points i made and show how wrong i am.

 

[BunnyHunny]

Long version:

Dude, We've been thru this on the firefall forums already;

Then why do you repeat it?

DO NOT TRY BULLYING ME WITH THESE PERSONAL ATTACK REPLIES, DO NOT MAKE ANY ASSUMPTION ABOUT ME AND MOST CERTAINLY DO NOT COMMENT ABOUT ME,

I did not personally attack, or bully anyone. And i did not try to.
I addressed what you said.
I asked multiple questions and brought up some criticism towards your
"agro depending on equipment worn, not depending on damage done"
idea.
Sadly, you preferred not to answer a single one of my questions and address even a single one of my points.

Me criticizing your suggestions and pointing out potential flaws in them, does not mean that i am insulting or attacking you, but it seems that you think it does.

ON WHAT MY THOUGHT PROCESSES MAY BE, MAY HAVE BEEN OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN. THERE IS NO POSSIBLE WAY, IN EXISTENCE TODAY ON THIS PLANET, THAT ANYONE OTHER THAN MYSELF COULD HAVE THAT KNOWLEDGE.

Which is exactly, why i asked you.

If there will be such a thing as agro, how is your plan supposed to work?

But you preferred to be offended by something i said (or did not actually say), instead of answering that question. Or any of my questions.

IN ADDITION, STATING ANY ONES IDEA IS STUPID IS CALLING THEM STUPID AND I FOR ONE DO NOT NEED THE NEGATIVITY AND CHILDISH NAME CALLING.

No it is not the same.
Stupid people can have good ideas and smart people can have stupid ideas.
That is why in one situation, THE IDEA is called stupid, and in the other, THE PERSON is called stupid.

Didn't you just say something about how nobody except the thinker can know about the thought process?
Now, you did not only claim to know what i thought, when i wrote this, but you claim that i meant something that stands in direct contradiction to what i actually said.

If you do not want any negativity and childish behavior, i would suggest to look at yourself, because you are the one behaving like that.
Unlike me, you did not bring up valid questions or points about my ideas, which would belong into this discussion.
Instead, you made wrong assumptions about my intentions, changed the meaning of what i said, in order to make it look like i personally attacked you and now claim that i am the childish one, when all it takes to insult you, is reasonably criticizing your ideas.

P.S. I was polite and used expanded size text for emphasis as you have noted previously color coding text is not an effective method to communicate to you. Be well.

Using proper communication skills, reading (understanding) and writing (expressing) what is actually meant, would be a good way to communicate with me.
Being reasonable also helps big time. Especially in a discussion.
Expanding text size, using caps, or similar things are useful, when you want to put emphasis on a few specific words, or a passage, but become pretty useless when applied to the entirety of your text.
Writing your entire text with caps lock just makes you seem angry.

Why don't you try addressing my points (which you left out, when quoting me and which did not mention so far)?
Tell me why all my criticism was unjustified and why realizing your suggestion would not be a STUPID IDEA.

 

[Thunderstrike]

Dunno about anyone else, but I'm not a fan of drama. Keep it in PM's people, or report the person and move on before a flamewar starts.

My statement was about the impact of a single person, depending on how many other people are around. And as i already said (in the passage that you pulled this statement out of), if only 5-20 players with average skill are in the fight, the failure and death of one player cause the party to lose 5-20% of their power. It is relevant. When one player fails, it can mean to lose the fight.
When 200 players are involved in the same fight, the failure and death of an individual causes a power loss of 0,5%.
Even if a player is twice as good as the average player, his failure will still have a marginal impact
At that point, regarding the outcome of a fight, INDIVIDUAL SKILL does not matter anymore.

Mmhmm. First of all, when accounting for "power lost" it's bad math in this scenario to say that when 1 player from a group of 5 has died they've lost 20% of your power. They've actually lost more power because 20% of the enemy's forces can now focus on their pick of the remaining four, which makes the overall loss of power much greater.

Second of all, it's not only bad math but it's simply bad logic. Some players are genuinely crap and others are godlike, some will be pulling their weight and some won't and both will "get the same reward" as you stated earlier in the thread. Even among professional CSGO players someone on the team will have a lower K/D ratio than everyone else; it's not even necessarily that they're a bad player as it is they're just not quite as good or lucky as the other people.

Third of all, particular enemies in Em-8ER will have their own stats boosted by killing an enemy player, meaning that the potential power lost in Em-8ER can become much higher.

Fourth, these 200 players are not part of the same team firing their guns through a tiny hole in a wall as if this were Overwatch with ten times the players. As I said before, players will be split into groups defending or attacking different objectives, some will stay in the base to protect against Tsi-Hu, others will strike out to destroy enemy Artillery, some might even take up positions around particular spawn points for Tsi-Hu. So while there may be an abundance of players in the region they each have their own separate objectives to take out, spread out into multiple smaller groups. Even if they were, power loss would be localized. Most players in the group may not feel it but the players near where someone dies would.

Fifth, the main skill-based encounter currently planned (instances will almost certainly be coming down the track for story purposes, as I have said before) is the THMPR encounter, which will involve significantly less players than an Invasion, which is what you have solely based your assumptions on. Even if skill doesn't matter in Invasions (which is blatantly STUPID thinking) the THMPR encounter, one of the main player activities for getting better equipment and building new bases most certainly does require skill.

Sixth, even ignoring everything I have just said you are basing your observations solely on player count and not individual players, to say nothing of enemy count. A group of 200 people may not feel the loss of a single person until the power loss compounds much later on, but it says nothing of the individual skill requirement of a player to be deemed "successful". Each player may have to face fifty enemies over the course of the fight to be successful, maybe one hundred, maybe all at once. The more enemies at a time, the greater the power loss will be.

Seventh, the 200 player number is entirely theoretical. Real battles in Em-8ER may be half as much as that, it depends on what the servers can handle.

Eighth. Your statement had the exact same context even when put into context. Don't blame me for your points being more porous than a teastrainer.

 

[BunnyHunny]

Dunno about anyone else, but I'm not a fan of drama. Keep it in PM's people, or report the person and move on before a flamewar starts.

If you are not a fan of drama, why do you try to cause it?

At least it seems like you are trying, because much (probably most) of your criticism is unjustified.

if only 5-20 players with average skill are in the fight

[…] it’s not only bad math but it's simply bad logic. Some players are genuinely crap and others are godlike, some will be pulling their weight and some won’t […]

Criticism unjustified. I specifically stated, under which assumption it would be that much.

I guess most people can guess that i said it because most people are somewhere around average and because it is just useful to make that simplification for a second, in order to talk about this topic and use somewhat reasonable numbers.

Everybody knows that losing a trash bag would be not as bad as losing the best gamer on the planet.

the failure and death of one player cause the party to lose 5-20% of their power. It is relevant. When one player fails, it can mean to lose the fight.

Mmhmm. First of all, when accounting for "power lost" it's bad math in this scenario to say that when 1 player from a group of 5 has died they've lost 20% of your power. They've actually lost more power because 20% of the enemy's forces can now focus on their pick of the remaining four, which makes the overall loss of power much greater.

In my example, i simplified the situation and talked about „power“ in general to make it easier to understand. That is what examples are good for.

By the way, these negative side effects, you talked about, work just the same. If 1/5 dies, it is a 20% loss, if 1/100 dies, it is 1% loss and doesn’t matter (loss in damage output and in players to get shot).
It does not change anything about my point.
Again, criticism not justified.

particular enemies in Em-8ER will have their own stats boosted by killing an enemy player, meaning that the potential power lost in Em-8ER can become much higher.

So, regarding that my initial point was „individual skill will not matter very much“…

You just told me that bunch of dying noobs will grief those who play proper, by making the enemies stronger.
What this means is: Only the average skill matters, individual skill doesn't.

[…] players will be split into groups defending or attacking different objectives, some will […], others will […], some might […]. So while there may be an abundance of players in the region they […] spread out into multiple smaller groups. Even if they were, power loss would be localized. Most players in the group may not feel it but the players near where someone dies would.

That might be the case. I never said otherwise.

However, depending on how popular the game becomes and how events are made, there might be many people very close to each other, quite often.

I specifically stated, that IF there are so many people involved in the same fight, THEN the individual skill or failure will not matter as much.
So don't tell me that i am wrong, because what i say would not be the case if the scenario is something entirely different.

Regarding how the game is advertised, at least to me, it does not seem like people are supposed to be running around with small squads most of the time.
It sounded like big fights are supposed to happen.

If people are split up most of the time, individual skill would matter more.

If that is the case, great.

instances will almost certainly be coming down the track for story purposes, as I have said before

When i asked MK about instances (multiple times), he said that he is not planning to put instanced content into Ember. Ever.

I would hope for him to change his mind, but thats what he said.

the main skill-based encounter currently planned […] is the THMPR encounter, which will involve significantly less players than an Invasion, which is what you have solely based your assumptions on.

How do you know?
As long as people are not locked out, or get insignificant rewards for participating, why should there not be a bunch of people fighting around the same (THMPR) encounter?

Even if there are fewer people fighting around a THMPR than at an Invasion, how would you know that the number of players is low enough to make individual skill actually relevant?

I did not base any assumptions on any specific events.
I did not say that these fights will definitely happen and i did not say that specific encounters would (exclusively) cause those fights.
I simply said IF there are many people in the same fight, THEN individual skill becomes nearly irrelevant.

Even if skill doesn't matter in Invasions (which is blatantly STUPID thinking) the THMPR encounter, one of the main player activities for getting better equipment and building new bases most certainly does require skill.

Expecting individual skill not to matter very much, when huge battles are supposed to happen, is reasonable.
That is intelligent thinking.

The reason why individual skill would actually matter in an invasion is based on your own assumptions (which are less reasonable than the expectation of big battles), so what is your point?

If the THMPR encounter is so important (and afaik there are certain areas where especially rare resources can be mined), why would you make the claim that there will never (or not very often) be very many players involved in the same encounter?

When thumping is required for crafting and certain rare resources are limited to certain areas, i would expect more people to be drawn to those encounters.

[…] you are basing your observations solely on player count and not individual players, to say nothing of enemy count.

Yes i am basing most of what i said on player count.
Which makes sense, since that was my main point of argument and since it is the main reason for individual skill becoming irrelevant.

I am talking quite a bit about individual players (individual skill).

Enemy count is not of relevance for this topic.

If the game is successful, there will be a high player count.
If the game being successful, causes the game to become bad, that would not be very nice.

A group of 200 people may not feel the loss of a single person until the power loss compounds much later on, but it says nothing of the individual skill requirement of a player to be deemed „successful".

To be honest, i do not understand what you are trying to say here.

the 200 player number is entirely theoretical. Real battles in Em-8ER may be half as much as that, it depends on what the servers can handle.

Yes it is. And it also is a number that i used for an example, in order to show that individual skill becomes less relevant with higher player numbers in the same fight.

That does not matter.

We simply do not know how many people will be involved, but as long as there are even 50 involved in the same fight (which should be expected, assuming that the game is at least a little bit successful), individual skill will -most likely- barely matter at all, which is what my post was about.

If there is a good solution for this problem, great.
I just do not know, how individual skill is supposed to be made relevant in a huge open world event, without enabling people to actively grief others.

Your statement had the exact same context even when put into context. Don't blame me for your points being more porous than a teastrainer.

Here is what this is about:
—————————-

When the fight is in the open world, what are the numbers that the enemy strength, number and HP are balanced around?
Independent of that, when 1 player in 200 dies, nobody notices that.
The IMPACT OF SKILL/FAIL is low.

How is the death of one player not being immediately felt in the gut of every player related at all to the issue of skill and failure?

—————————-
I was talking about INDIVIDUAL skill the entire time. You picked this passage, where i for once left out the „individual“ because i expected people to understand what i mean, after reading „individual skill“ for quite a few times.

You might not have noticed, but by taking this out of context, it is not so clear anymore.

It should be pretty obvious, why individual skill or failure has basically no impact in a fight with 200 players involved.


If you want to have a reasonable discussion, be my guest.
But be reasonable and do not argue with me, just for the sake of arguing with me (which -to me- seems to have been your reason to make this post).

 

[Dreamin]

Whatever BunnyHunny.
The communications exibited in the posts from the account BunnyHunny both on the firefall forums and now the Em-8er forums are that of a cyber-bulley.
Please refer to my last post and don't waste time responding to anything which comes from my account, the BunnyHunny account is now blocked(Ignore) from my view and I encourage others to limit the hate and negativity in their lives and do the same.
Be well.

 

[Thunderstrike]

the great wall of text-a

Pretty much everything you've said in this post is already refuted by a different point in my previous post. If you want an actual discussion then actually refute my points in context instead of taking picks at what you do and don't like and changing your argument for each one so that on a case-by-case basis you've done all you need to, but haven't actually addressed anything I've said at all.

If you want out of this argument then close the browser tab and walk away. But you're not going to, because you need to win this argument. So prove me wrong: either address the arguments in my previous post without making points already countered by said arguments, or walk away and "prove" that you're the bigger man and that I've been unreasonable and unfair this whole time.

 

[BunnyHunny]

If you want to have a reasonable discussion, be my guest.
But be reasonable and do not argue with me, just for the sake of arguing with me (which -to me- seems to have been your reason to make this post).

I did not bully anyone.
I addressed points and tried to have a reasonable discussion.

The communications exibited in the posts from the account BunnyHunny both on the firefall forums and now the Em-8er forums are that of a cyber-bulley.

Dude, We've been thru this on the firefall forums already;
DO NOT TRY BULLYING ME WITH THESE PERSONAL ATTACK REPLIES, DO NOT MAKE ANY ASSUMPTION ABOUT ME AND MOST CERTAINLY DO NOT COMMENT ABOUT ME

cyber-bulley [...] the BunnyHunny account is now blocked(Ignore) from my view and I encourage others to [...] do the same.

I FOR ONE DO NOT NEED THE NEGATIVITY AND CHILDISH NAME CALLING.

<<<Forum Rules:
You agree to not use ad hominem or personal attacks. Any post containing them is subject to editing by the moderators, and may result in a warning. Multiple warnings can result in an account ban.
You agree to not use the Service to submit or link to any Content which is defamatory, abusive, hateful, threatening>>>

cyber-bulley [...] the BunnyHunny account is now blocked(Ignore) from my view and I encourage others to [...] do the same.

<<<Victim playing (Wikipedia)
Manipulators often play the victim role ("poor me") by portraying themselves as victims of circumstances or someone else's behavior in order to gain pity or sympathy or to evoke compassion and thereby get something from someone. Caring and conscientious people cannot stand to see anyone suffering, and the manipulator often finds it easy and rewarding to play on sympathy to get cooperation.[3]
While portraying oneself as a victim can be highly successful in obtaining goals over the short-term, this method tends to be less successful over time:>>>

Where does the negativity and childish name calling come from again?
If anyone has the time/interest to do so... feel free to read through my communication with him.
He seems to have issues, dealing with any kind of criticism and feels insulted and bullied by every question asked and mistake pointed out.

If you can not deal with criticism and try to cope with it by claiming that i am a bully who insults you, feel free to lie to yourself and ignore me if it makes you feel better, but fucking hell... why would you try to force your personal hate against me on other people and make them ignore me for things you made up?
That is pretty negative and seems like something a cyber bully would do.
Keep your hate to yourself.

 

[BunnyHunny]

Pretty much everything you've said in this post is already refuted by a different point in my previous post.

Not really.
Everything you used to "refute" my points is either part of the point you are trying to refute, not true, or based on assumptions (which might be true or false).

If you want an actual discussion then actually refute my points in context instead of taking picks at what you do and don't like

I did not take picks. I simply cut out some stuff WITHOUT CHANGING ANY OF THE MEANING OR CONTEXT in order to make the post not even longer.
Probably you do not understand the difference between "pulling something out of context" and "pulling statements out of a bunch of text, without changing their meaning".

and changing your argument for each one so that on a case-by-case basis you've done all you need to, but haven't actually addressed anything I've said at all.

I never changed my argument. And (afaik) addressed everything you said.


I was hoping for the Ember forums to be not as stupid as the FF forums, but it seems they are the same.

People are unable to discuss properly and "feel" insulted by anyone who criticizes anything they say.
People are unable to actually discuss at all and just try to turn other people's arguments against them (when it simply makes no sense) and then shut them down.
People are making general statements about those who criticize them, claiming all kinds of things, without ever being able to point out even a single occasion where it actually happened.
People are derailing threads by claiming to be insulted, instead of sticking with the truth and addressing the points made against them.

Some people did the same back in the FF forums.
Inventing insults being thrown at them and claiming to be "against negativity and childish behavior", trying to make themselves a victim and a white knight, while behaving incredibly immature themselves, causing the negativity and trying to turn others against those who commit the crimes of disagreement and criticism.

If you are too weak to deal with actual criticism and can not handle your opinion being challenged, you should stay away from actual life (and the internet) and try to find yourself an echo chamber, filled with people like you.

 

[Thunderstrike]

Not really.
Everything you used to "refute" my points is either part of the point you are trying to refute, not true, or based on assumptions (which might be true or false).

Everything we have right now is assumptions. I do believe earlier in the thread you said:

If it isn't hard, why don't you tell me how to balance open world multiplayer PvE content?

I have written over 4,000 words solely in response to you to show how the Em-8ER team is planning to balance the game so that skill would matter. I've given you examples and reasons for why making expectations solely off an arbitrary number (which was an assumption by the way) is bad, how power loss is localized, how not all of these players will be in the same group, how it may not even be 200 players per fight, etc. You demanded theoretical examples that you knew may or may not come to pass, because I told you that and it was the reason why I initially refused. And all of my examples were rooted in at least some prior history be it with Firefall or how a shooter usually works. And now you turn around and slap the examples away because "they're assumptions" and "they might not happen".

I did not take picks. I simply cut out some stuff WITHOUT CHANGING ANY OF THE MEANING OR CONTEXT in order to make the post not even longer.
Probably you do not understand the difference between "pulling something out of context" and "pulling statements out of a bunch of text, without changing their meaning".

Mate, the quote system automatically collapses a quoted post to avoid that problem. Length of a post is the least of your concerns.

I never changed my argument. And (afaik) addressed everything you said.

You did not.

I was hoping for the Ember forums to be not as stupid as the FF forums, but it seems they are the same.

Then leave. No one is forcing you to stay on these "stupid" forums. Facepunch, 4chan and Neogaf have much broader and varied discussions and you'd fit in well in at least 4chan.

People are unable to discuss properly and "feel" insulted by anyone who criticizes anything they say.
People are unable to actually discuss at all and just try to turn other people's arguments against them (when it simply makes no sense) and then shut them down.
People are making general statements about those who criticize them, claiming all kinds of things, without ever being able to point out even a single occasion where it actually happened.
People are derailing threads by claiming to be insulted, instead of sticking with the truth and addressing the points made against them.

Some people did the same back in the FF forums.
Inventing insults being thrown at them and claiming to be "against negativity and childish behavior", trying to make themselves a victim and a white knight, while behaving incredibly immature themselves, causing the negativity and trying to turn others against those who commit the crimes of disagreement and criticism.

If you are too weak to deal with actual criticism and can not handle your opinion being challenged, you should stay away from actual life (and the internet) and try to find yourself an echo chamber, filled with people like you.

Your point here isn't bad, it's just completely unrelated. Beyond that, you've gone beyond criticism at times and that's why people dislike you. The disagreement is not what causes the reaction, it's the words you use and the way you make people feel. You antagonized Dreamin after it was clear he was upset with you, you went out of your way to insult me simply for thinking you already had insulted me, and in this very post you've insulted the people of the FF and Em-8ER forums. If you don't want people to think you've hurt them, then please, think about the actions you make and the words you say and how people could interpret them. No one here wants to dislike you.

 

[BunnyHunny]

Everything we have right now is assumptions.

Yes. That is true.

I have written over 4,000 words solely in response to you to show how the Em-8ER team is planning to balance the game so that skill would matter.
I've given you examples and reasons for why making expectations solely off an arbitrary number (which was an assumption by the way) is bad, how power loss is localized, how not all of these players will be in the same group, how it may not even be 200 players per fight, etc.

If i remember correctly, the main reason why skill (being far above average) would actually matter, would be a reward system that gradually gives a player a higher amount of stuff, depending on how valuable the player's contribution to an event was.

While that would reward skill in some way, and be a good thing, it would not make skill really matter in a way that i would like to see (properly poorly communicated so far).

<<1>> I would like to see skill being rewarded with something exclusive.
Overall playtime should not be something that can "buy" you the same things as skill can.
One option would be exclusive resources, which can only be obtained by being top contributor (highest overall impact, or highest impact/contribution-time) in an event with at least x participants.

<<2>> I would like to see individual skill having a general impact. Not only on personal rewards, but also on the overall battle.
When playing in smaller groups (instanced), one person failing can cause the entire mission to fail. That is a good thing. Everyone is important. If people deliberately try to make the group fail, they can be kicked and replaced.

Even though open world events could cause people to split up in some way, open world content can not be made in a way that every single person can cause the event to fail. If that would be the case, no event would be successful.
Of course, individual players can be of some relevance for the outcome, but they can never be of as much relevance as in an instanced mission with limited participants, without allowing people to grief the entire community.
That is what i meant.

You demanded theoretical examples that you knew may or may not come to pass, because I told you that and it was the reason why I initially refused. And all of my examples were rooted in at least some prior history be it with Firefall or how a shooter usually works. And now you turn around and slap the examples away because "they're assumptions" and "they might not happen".

Maybe it seemed like it, but my reasoning against your arguments was not supposed to seem that ignorant.
What i meant to say (probably didn't say) is, that high player numbers have to be expected and that many people running around in the same area have to be expected as well.
While you brought possible solutions, they would only somehow work under specific conditions, which can not be expected.
These solutions are not failsafe, because they depend on specific behavior of the player base, which can not be expected.

Mate, the quote system automatically collapses a quoted post to avoid that problem. Length of a post is the least of your concerns.

I know that. Probably i communicated my intention poorly.

When quoting, i usually try to respond as directly as possible to what is being quoted.
Context matters, so it makes sense to read both, the quote and the response.

Sometimes there are passages with lots of information that is unimportant for the moment, so i try to reduce the time requirement to read into the context, by highlighting the most important parts and shortening the quote as much as i can, without changing the meaning of the addressed point.

Even though shortening the quote does not necessarily reduce the overall size of the post, it does reduce the time it takes to read through it.
That is what i meant.

You did not.

Adress everything you said? (what did i not address)
Or keep the same argument? (where did i change my position)

Then leave. No one is forcing you to stay on these "stupid" forums. Facepunch, 4chan and Neogaf have much broader and varied discussions and you'd fit in well in at least 4chan.

By calling the forums stupid, i obviously did not mean the forums themselves, but (the behavior of) some of the people on here.

I have a better idea.
I want to discuss Ember, so i discuss Ember on the Ember forums.
As far as i know, the forums are there to share opinions and exchange criticism.
If other people do not want their opinions to be challenged, do not want to actually discuss the given topic
and prefer to lie and post defamatory content about me, they are the ones who should leave.

Your point here isn't bad, it's just completely unrelated.

It was not directly related to your post. It was more of a general criticism.

Beyond that, you've gone beyond criticism at times and that's why people dislike you.

Please point it out.

The disagreement is not what causes the reaction, it's the words you use and the way you make people feel.

Some people care too much about their feelings and not enough about facts.
I did not find my wording exceptionally aggressive or offensive.
Please point out, where my wording seems to be that.

You antagonized Dreamin after it was clear he was upset with you,

I antagonized him after he
-posted defamatory content about me
-lied about what i had written
-made wrong conclusions about the meaning of what i had written, in order to make it look like an insult
-made an exceptionally aggressive post as a reaction to me pointing out flaws in his ideas
-did, what he wrongly accused me of doing

When he invents insults and actively changes the meaning of what i say, in order to be able to feel insulted, that is not my fault.
When he gets upset by his ideas and opinions being (rightfully) challenged and criticized, he is in the wrong place and should grow up or look for an echo chamber.

you went out of your way to insult me simply for thinking you already had insulted me,

Where did i insult you? Please point it out.

and in this very post you've insulted the people of the FF and Em-8ER forums.

By calling the forums stupid? Come on...
1. "stupid" describes the great lack of intelligence or common sense.
It is a descriptive word and should not always be taken as an insult.

2. I did not specifically call anyone stupid. When specific people feel addressed... that probably means that they think they are stupid, which means they have no reason to take it as an insult (unless they lack the intelligence to understand that).

If you don't want people to think you've hurt them, then please, think about the actions you make and the words you say and how people could interpret them.

I want people to do one simple thing:
Be objective.
Learn to read/hear something without adding all kinds of personal meaning to it, depending on what you feel (for the person who wrote/said it).

When i say what i think, you should learn to hear what i say. Not what you think.

This is vital for any kind of reasonable discussion.

Saying "some people are just not very intelligent" in a room full of people is almost guaranteed to offend someone.
The reason for that is, people not properly listening to what is said, but adding all kinds of stuff to it, depending on what they want (or do not want) to hear.

No one here wants to dislike you.

Since one kind sir did invent stuff, in order to be offended by me, it seems to me that he wants to dislike me.
I might be wrong though.

 

[Torgue_Joey]

I was hoping for the Ember forums to be not as stupid as the FF forums, but it seems they are the same.

RIGHT. HERE I DRAW THE F*CKING LINE.
JUST BECAUSE YOU TWO ARE 'LIL B*TCHES, DOESN'T MEAN THE ENTIRE FORUM IS SH*T.
(2 People = Everybody. Lmfao. Who's the idiot now?)

YO @Ronyn, EITHER GET THOSE 2 GIRLS BACK IN LINE WITH THE ACTUAL THREAD TOPIC OR I DON'T KNOW, I GOT NO POWER HERE.

 

[BunnyHunny]

RIGHT. HERE I DRAW THE F*CKING LINE.
JUST BECAUSE YOU TWO ARE 'LIL B*TCHES, DOESN'T MEAN THE ENTIRE FORUM IN SH*T.

So now you are over interpreting my statements as well?
Great job m8.
Maybe my generalizing statement about stupidity was indeed justified.

Learn the meaning of the word "stupid", before calling people names.

"stupid" describes the great lack of intelligence or common sense.

It is a descriptive word and should not always be taken as an insult.

(2 People = Everybody. Lmfao. Who's the idiot now?)

To answer your rhetorical question: you are the idiot for inventing things that i did not say (2 People = Everybody) and misunderstanding and over exaggerating what i said.

 

[Torgue_Joey]

I was hoping for the Ember forums to be not as stupid as the FF forums, but it seems they are the same.

READ YOUR OWN SH*T AGAIN.
OH LOOK. I MADE IT BIG AND COLORFUL FOR EASIER READING FOR YOU.

COMPARING EMBER FORUM WITH FF FORUM AND MAKING THE "ASSUMPTION" THEY ARE INDEED THE SAME.

AND SAYING I AM EXAGGERATING?

 

[BunnyHunny]

READ YOUR OWN SH*T AGAIN.
OH LOOK. I MADE IT BIG AND COLORFUL FOR EASIER READING FOR YOU.

Did nobody teach you that repeating the exact same thing will probably not cause people to gain new insights?

Actually, i told you a while ago.

If i was able to find the answer to my question in the post i quoted, i would probably not have asked the question.
So what new information is this repost supposed to give me?

Here.

I also asked you a few questions in order to end the misunderstanding we had there, but you did not answer them for some reason.

COMPARING EMBER FORUM WITH FF FORUM AND MAKING THE "ASSUMPTION" THEY ARE INDEED THE SAME.

AND SAYING I AM EXAGGERATING?

Yes. You are exaggerating quite a bit.

I was hoping for the Ember forums to be not as stupid as the FF forums

Everybody.

Exaggeration.

as stupid as the FF forums

THE ENTIRE FORUM IN SH*T.

Exaggeration. You must really have hated the FF forums.

RIGHT. HERE I DRAW THE F*CKING LINE.
JUST BECAUSE YOU TWO ARE 'LIL B*TCHES, DOESN'T MEAN THE ENTIRE FORUM IN SH*T.
(2 People = Everybody. Lmfao. Who's the idiot now?)

Throwing around swear words like candy... Yes. Exaggeration.

Forbidden, according to forum rules:
Content which is defamatory, abusive, hateful, contains adult or objectionable content.

Changing one letter in a word to a "*" does not change the meaning of the expression and should therefore be within the forbidden content.