Suggestion for Omniframe "Class" System: Combing the Tech Tree with Limitless Choice

[NightStroke]

First off, I couldn't really figure out what to call this. It isn't a class system because there is no actual limitation on what any player can equip. Whatever, let's just get into it.

There are FIVE archetypes; You all know these as the recon, engineer, biotech, dreadnaught, and assault. There is one tier 1 "kit" for every archetype. A KIT is a set of 1 weapon and 2 abilities built to be used together(hypothetically lets say every omniframe can have 1 weapon and 3 abilities equipped).
For example, lets create the kit of the t1 recon:
Weapon: R36 Assault Rifle(Scope on Alt-fire)
Ability 1: Mark Target- Mark a target that will take bonus damage from all sources; ability doesn't have a cooldown
Ability 2: Precision Rocket- Fire a tiny-AoE missile that deals VERY heavy damage on direct hit

If a player equips all 3 items from a kit, they get a bonus perk. In the case of the t1 recon, the "kit bonus" might be "Critical Shots do not consume ammunition". With the Kit Bonus system, players are encouraged to stick to certain playstyles rather than become invincible healing snipers. If certain loadouts become a part of the meta, kits can have their Kit Bonuses buffed or nerfed to establish balance.

Basically, kits would promote power in one specific role but still allow for unique loadout designs that won't solo content. Even then, if a player uses a full kit, their loadout still has space for 1 ability that offers the potential for hybridization(e.g. a sniper that can place a single turret down).

This is where the tech tree comes in:
There are 2 tier 2 frames per archetype and 3 tier 3 frames per archetype. As you use the items of a certain kit, you unlock experience with that kit(this could be in the form of item breakage or something along those lines, depending on how much emphasis is placed on crafting). The experience/currency earned from kit item usage goes into unlocking items, blueprints, crafting tools, and eventually higher tier frames within the archetype.

In the tech tree space in between related kits players can unlock kit items with different stats, general items(servos, jumpjets, movement ability stuff, grenades, etc), crafting tools, and special items. Players can only use items from higher tier frames once those higher tier frames are unlocked through playtime with lower tier frames within the same archetype.

TL;DR: Take Firefall's tech tree, allow free equipping of any unlocked items, create item "kits"(instead of battleframes) that provide a "kit bonus" when all kit items are equipped, and provide xp/currency to unlock items within tech trees when corresponding kit items are used.

 

[Bl4ckhunter]

i don't know, it reminds me of getting bonuses for having complete armor sets is other games and i don't have a positive memory of that, i don't see it being necessary really.

 

[NightStroke]

i don't know, it reminds me of getting bonuses for having complete armor sets is other games and i don't have a positive memory of that, i don't see it being necessary really.

What's the con of armor sets? My goal with this is to take the tech tree, allow free usage of abilities as per the omniframe description, and avoid the creation of invincible jack-of-all-trades loadouts.

 

[Bl4ckhunter]

What's the con of armor sets? My goal with this is to take the tech tree, allow free usage of abilities as per the omniframe description, and avoid the creation of invincible jack-of-all-trades loadouts.

that they're either worthless or become mandatory in meta builds, so you either have players say "f*ck the kit" and still have the "invincible jack-of-all-trades loadout" problem or you've got everyone running around in the same cookie cutter build.
The problem of "the invincible jack-of-all-trades loadout" is a problem that only occurs if abilities aren't balanced anyways since if abilities aren't too rendundant and are balanced they shouldn't become magically unbalanced in combination, "group" balance ultimately only results in having one or two uber powerful abilities and everything else being crap to balance.

 

[Wyntyr]

http://www.pathofexile.com/passive-skill-tree
This is what I would like to see for character improvement in Ember. I think it goes along better with what you're proposing.

 

[Luisedgm]

I don't understand why you guys are so afraid of a classless system
We do not need classes/roles/archetypes

 

[NightStroke]

I don't understand why you guys are so afraid of a classless system
We do not need classes/roles/archetypes

Having roles/specialities encourages group play(need to rely on other players)

 

[Vladplaya]

I voted Nay, because I am so sick and tired of this prebacked archetypes, characters, classes and similar trend that has been used by mmos for decades, and now is making its way through the shooters. I am sick and tired of it.

Without flashing this into a full blown detailed topic, here is quick and dirty what I would LOVE to see a game like this do.

1 character - And here is what defines your "class": three types of armor (Light, Medium, Heavy (also maybe specially heavy exo suit type)) divided into Helmet, Core, Lower Armor, so you can have Light helmet, Heavy core, medium legs), your weapons (AR, SMG, Heavy machine gun, Sniper Rifle, Combat Rifle, and whatever else variations and prototypes that devs can come up with), and finally Abilities, you pick three ( or whatever devs think is best), mix and match them as you wish as you play the game.

There we go, you got huge amount of variation for whatever situation you are going for. The point here is all those variations are based on horizontal progression which gives player more and more pieces to play and fine tune as they progress forward in the game. Its freedom, which matches perfectly to the idea of freedom that is the skill based shooter in an open world where you go and do whatever you want to do wherever.

Just start with a dozen of pieces or armor, weapon, and few skills that can be customised further with crafting, and you got yourself hundreds of hours of entertainment, exactly what this game will need.

This also will help with budgeting the game, its probably easier to push out pieces of equipment, weapons and abilities instead of a complete frame that has all of those made and balanced for it from the get go.

Classes and archetypes in mmo games are ancient af, time to try something different for this genre, and this is perfect opportunity for game like this.

For reference of what I am talking about check out game called Blacklight:Retribution, the customization of armor, weapon, gear and depot items is pretty sweet. Would love to see something like that in Ember.

Thanks for reading!

 

[Ammara]

Having roles/specialities encourages group play(need to rely on other players)

It can also discourage group-play
For example: A raid-platoon has 5/10 players on stand-by, and the leader goes: We require 5 more well-geared players having the hypothetical passive-healing kit. That will make it harder to recruit players and get things going because that is too specific. Players also have different tastes and play-styles.
______________________________________________________________________________

The idea isn't bad and I do like it myself, but I would have more fun if the game was more open to experimenting with what gear to equip and with which performance-stats, rather than have players combine specific recipes to get a bonus.

Irrelevant P.S: I think having more than 3 abilities at one's disposal would expand game-play and fun.

 

[t3hsquirr3l]

I'm very much in favor of a classless system.

If gear is designed well, most 'classes' will create themselves as players build around the challenges they face. Snipers, assaults, tanks, and healers will always be where they can be built.

Without the class restrictions, in addition to the expected roles you'll have the freedom to create very interesting hybrid roles or even traditional roles in a very interesting way.

Now that I think more about it, I do like the idea of kit bonuses. What about, instead of the kit being specific gear pieces, all gear was divided into archetypes? As you equip more pieces in an archetype, certain archetype traits get stronger. Say, accuracy or crit damage for recons, damage for assaults, and damage reduction for tanks, just for random examples.

So if you have four gear slots for example, and equip two assault and two recon gear items, you'll be some sort of aggressive marksman or crit-focused skirmisher depending on what gear you picked. Or three assault items and a tank item, so you hit hard but have a little damage mitigation to toughen you up. Or go all assault and wreck faces, but gotta watch that health bar. Go all recon, but better stay out of the melee, and etc.

The balance of jack-of-all-trades builds might need to be monitored, but should be good enough for solo players that need lots of flexibility while really rewarding those who specialize and synergize with a team.

Other than that I like your idea for the tech tree, just with more archetype gear instead of frames. Maybe bonuses like the 'crits don't consume ammo' you mentioned could be unlocked in the tech tree, but can only be used if a certain number of archetype gear is equipped.

Basically, I like your idea but want even more customization!

 

[DeyjaVou]

I like the idea of gear working in tandem, but having predefined special effects as set bonuses will likely be a negative thing. In order to not make it feel too weak, the kit bonuses must be strong enough to incentivize their use, but not too weak as to be pointless. Either way, it requires careful balancing from the design team to avoid creating a metagame that sterilizes play.

Ultimately, if every 'build' is fun to play, and effective in its own right, there won't be a significant metagame except in ultra-endgame and hardcore guilds.

Perhaps a constraints system, where abilities and frame stats are given category weights, and specializing into one area inhibits your ability to equip other abilities effectively. For example, if you create an extremely bulky, tank frame, and try to equip afterburner, it'll have its effectiveness cut dramatically. Likewise, if you make a lightweight mobile frame and give it a ramming charge type ability, it won't have the mass necessary to do damage. Organic constraints that make use of logical internal mechanics instead of structurally defined rules or class systems.

 

[Squid Boss]

It can also discourage group-play
For example: A raid-platoon has 5/10 players on stand-by, and the leader goes: We require 5 more well-geared players having the hypothetical passive-healing kit. That will make it harder to recruit players and get things going because that is too specific. Players also have different tastes and play-styles.
______________________________________________________________________________

The idea isn't bad and I do like it myself, but I would have more fun if the game was more open to experimenting with what gear to equip and with which performance-stats, rather than have players combine specific recipes to get a bonus.

Irrelevant P.S: I think having more than 3 abilities at one's disposal would expand game-play and fun.

Restricting the depth of the content that is created and can be created happens when you remove roles. You have to make it so either health is irrelevant and your players die quickly and a penalized for mistakes, or make self healing more important, but that will risk simply promoting the 'The A+B+C+D=Best' game play forever.

The Division is a bullet sponge insta-death frustration machine with mechanics that consist mostly of: "Shoot that guy." and "Shoot that guy more this time." It's also built in such a way that nearly every player uses the same abilities for the hardest content, the same sets, the same weapons, the same weapon mods, etc.

It also will not make recruiting difficult at all. The system if open enough and made with very simplistic and modular frames and abilities it would simply allow any player at any time to switch from DPS or Tank to Healer, or healer to Tank or DPS. That is the benefit. If you had a class system you'd run into this issue more because if I only leveled, in FF for example, a Mammoth, I could never heal unless I rolled a completely new frame and built it slowly over time.

To hit the OP:

Fluidity is key. Item sets can be useful and can be useless. A slippery slope. If it effects a players output so dramatically that it defines the role it isn't worth while. You'd never be unable to remove any single piece of it for fear of losing the only source of a benefit typically better than anything else you can do without the set. Gear sets are often best when subtle increases or done in such a way that the play style changes around the use of an ability that may not see as much use without; you want item sets to change the experience but not be a necessity to perform a role. Ultimately the role need to be chosen by the player and this is made better when you can make that choice at any time. FF was close to this originally, being able to change frames on a whim with no levels, restricted only by gear level, which would work wonderfully if we took all the redundant frames in FF and smashed them into a single Tech Tree with a clear visual representation of how a path drives you to the role of DPS, Tank or Support.

A: Design the player experience.
B: Visualize the game play experience.
C: Design a single character that can fit both A and B.
D: Profit.

I've seen so many ideas floating around and they are all starting too large. You have to start at the 1's and 0's. You can't create frame types/roles, weapons, and abilities, without creating first an environment suitable to hold them.

I'll bring up Division a lot because it had all the right building blocks but they did not have a matching formula between character and content. Just like Firefall did not have content that fit its classes.

 

[Ammara]

Restricting the depth of the content that is created and can be created happens when you remove roles.

The Division is a bullet sponge insta-death frustration machine with mechanics that consist mostly of: "Shoot that guy." and "Shoot that guy more this time."

It also will not make recruiting difficult at all. The system if open enough and made with very simplistic and modular frames and abilities it would simply allow any player at any time to switch from DPS or Tank to Healer, or healer to Tank or DPS. That is the benefit. If you had a class system you'd run into this issue more because if I only leveled, in FF for example, a Mammoth, I could never heal unless I rolled a completely new frame and built it slowly over time.

Exactly ♥

 

[Torgue_Joey]

Hard to say what to vote. But a lil bit of both I choose.

I might hate this game if it has classes as sooner or later a bunch of group will try to force other to play this and that, MUST have this skill and build, everything outside that box is *bleep* and an utter noob. Despite crixia saying "play however you like"

I'm was more a roleplayer, not a powerplayer.

But, what if I'm not in the mood for combat
*BOOMSATION: this Joey here got bored of bombarding red blips*
But would like to chill around as a miner (boosting mining abilities) or technician (repairing and boosting shield/energy regeneration) ?

 

[TankHunter678]

But, what if I'm not in the mood for combat
*BOOMSATION: this Joey here got bored of bombarding red blips*
But would like to chill around as a miner (boosting mining abilities) or technician (repairing and boosting shield/energy regeneration) ?

Perhaps start a thread asking about that.

What non combat things should one be able to do in Ember?

 

[Squid Boss]

Hard to say what to vote. But a lil bit of both I choose.

I might hate this game if it has classes as sooner or later a bunch of group will try to force other to play this and that, MUST have this skill and build, everything outside that box is *bleep* and an utter noob. Despite crixia saying "play however you like"

I'm was more a roleplayer, not a powerplayer.

This sort of issue falls into the hands of the developer. The top 1%, the hardcore elitists, are and should be, the only ones concerned with maximizing their output in each and every inch of their character.

What happens, which I presume you've experienced, is that sometimes in a list of choices there are obvious and clear winners that rise far above the rest and everyone knows it. Picking anything else is easily questioned. Why do it harder when the easier route is right there?

Developers need to manage each and every option to calculate its usefulness and align them as best they can. WoW battles with this in its talents every single day. There's always a 'Best in row' talent these days but it has gotten more and more close over the expansions and patches so that those of us not hardcore number crunchers aiming for world first can pick whatever we want and still be effective team players in current content.

 

[TankHunter678]

WoW battles with this in its talents every single day. There's always a 'Best in row' talent these days but it has gotten more and more close over the expansions and patches so that those of us not hardcore number crunchers aiming for world first can pick whatever we want and still be effective team players in current content.

And then you look at Legion...

They gutted the kits of the classes and tossed large swaths of the skills into the talent system. So it became "pick these talents for single target" "pick these talents for multi target" "pick these talents to deal with this mechanic" but at the time you could swap talents any time you were not in combat. Then they removed dual spec for taxed spec changes. The community was rightfully angry so they demanded for the spec change tax to be removed.

Which Blizzard removed the spec change tax... in favor of making talent changes require a crafted item aimed at raid group content, unless in a zone where you can get rested xp. Eventually they put in a lesser item (still had to be crafted) for individuals to use to change talents unless in a zone where you get rested xp.

Made for the funny situation where it was better to play pure classes and simply change spec to deal with single (boss) or multi target (trash between bosses) situations. Because the classes themselves no longer had the kits required to be flexible because blizzard changed the talent system again (that players praised) then put in a restriction that completely invalidated why the talent system was changed to begin with.

 

[Squid Boss]

And then you look at Legion...

They gutted the kits of the classes and tossed large swaths of the skills into the talent system. So it became "pick these talents for single target" "pick these talents for multi target" "pick these talents to deal with this mechanic" but at the time you could swap talents any time you were not in combat. Then they removed dual spec for taxed spec changes. The community was rightfully angry so they demanded for the spec change tax to be removed.

Which Blizzard removed the spec change tax... in favor of making talent changes require a crafted item aimed at raid group content, unless in a zone where you can get rested xp. Eventually they put in a lesser item (still had to be crafted) for individuals to use to change talents unless in a zone where you get rested xp.

Made for the funny situation where it was better to play pure classes and simply change spec to deal with single (boss) or multi target (trash between bosses) situations. Because the classes themselves no longer had the kits required to be flexible because blizzard changed the talent system again (that players praised) then put in a restriction that completely invalidated why the talent system was changed to begin with.

Yes, but I'm not talking about restrictions on being able to change and where to change and how to change. Obviously it can be done differently and to use past FF knowledge, Deployable Garage allows changing any and all Gear and Specialization points anywhere on the field so long as not in combat.

That doesn't have anything to do with the value of the individual talents. I'm not saying it's perfect over there or even right. I don't have Beta access and haven't played Legion to experience the full package.

It's a mechanical gripe I think you're on here. I find it incredibly stupid as well, despite seeing the logic of keeping a relevant item on Inscription professions list; let's face it that profession could be scrapped and nothing would be lost at this point. So, it's a pathetic and bad choice made from a bad choice of removing glyphs major impact to a bad choice of trying to save Inscription.

 

[Hyperg]

I'm somewhere in the middle on this one. On one hand, you do have some coordinates that you need to fix on order to define the gameplay: resilience (armor and health, combo of both, etc), movement (which is also tied in the armor factor, because of weight and form factor) and weapon. And no matter how granular you make the choices, on each of those coordinates, you need to balance the outcome around the idea that you can't really be good at all of them at once. So a form of specialization will occur at some point, be it in form of kits, special abilities that support a certain role or a perk, or a certain path that you take in a mega-tree of specs. I think that's where the "archetype" constraint comes into play, because someone that specs around the idea that his/her playstyle will be mostly to snipe ppl from afar (and be really good at it, through weapon and armor and movement and ability choices) will be in fact a sniper, archetype or not.

The drawbacks of such a system is that it's damn hard to fill that spec area where you're not really efficient at something, with some artificial incentive to stay there, just for the sake of having diversity. Because we can have a slightly heavy armor medic with a slight heal and a small turret. But rly? Is this enough to design encounters around? How loose can you spec before you feel the need to "measure" the group's ability to respond to certain situations, like high dps bursts from npcs, or Aoe-s, or deployables, etc..?

 

[Daynen]

Alright, lemme stop a particular train right here. We need to throw the concept of "T1 and T2, etc" out the window right now. Here's why:

I level a dreadnaught. Cool. I have a dreadnaught. I level a rhino. Cool. I have a Rhino. It's better. I level a Mammoth. Cool. It's also better.

I now have two frames which are uniquely specialized and customizable, but both superior to the basic dreadnaught in virtually every way. they have access to more abilities and have stats that lean more towards one role over the other to some degree, but neither sacrifices much of anything over the original frame. Why would I ever use my dreadnaught again?

The dreadnaught is now garbage and merely exists in my garage, completely stripped of gear. It has effectively been discarded and will never be piloted again. this is true of every basic frame. Effectively one third of Firefall's battleframes are nothing more than a gate that is left in ruins once passed. This is what I call "disposable gameplay" and it infuriates me for being so wasteful.

This is not a route Ember needs to go. Far too many games are full of disposable gameplay elements that exist only as training wheels to be discarded, when they COULD HAVE used those opening elements for a continuing purpose. Mark himself said it best: "90% of MMO real estate is wasted." I feel this applies to EVERYTHING in the game, not just the terrain. We need to break out of old conventions and start really utilizing everything in the game rather than just making something that's meant to be thrown away.

Also, we need to stop thinking in terms of "healer, tank, DPS." We really need to just full stop on that. It is, hands down, the single most limiting and chafing design choice one can make in this day and age. It answers a multitude of design questions before they're even asked, scripts out 95% of the game's content before it's even designed, and stifles out any chance of a more living, interactive world. It pigeonholes the entire game into a damage per second race where lifebars are the singular, mind-numbingly exclusive topic of the day. Firefall could have been more than that; Ember can be more than that. We need to think outside the box if we're ever going to open it.