I just got city of heros

[jedi]

Originally Posted by BIGTROJANMAN

Corrosion play it for like 2-3 hours then tell us what you think.

I suggest more like 2-3 weeks of playing because then you get more into the game. Someone's who's played CoH for 2-3 hours might have a different opinion as opposed to playing it for 2-3 weeks.

[keam02]

Originally Posted by EineBeBoP

Watching somebody play and playing yourself are 2 completely differant things.

yes, very true. I showed my friend everquest and he said it looked stupid and that he would hate it. We let him play and create a character and he played for 2 years after I quit, had a lvl 60 (back when that was the cap). He introduced it to another friend who had the same idea, and the other friend was playing till his account got hacked about a month and a half ago.

[TekDragon]

Originally Posted by jedi

I suggest more like 2-3 weeks of playing because then you get more into the game. Someone's who's played CoH for 2-3 hours might have a different opinion as opposed to playing it for 2-3 weeks.

Really? I played Lineage 2 for all of 3 hours and I realized it was a horrible game.

I think if you've been playing MMORPG's for long enough (like played everything from UO, AC, EQ to SWG, DAoC, AO, and SB) you can easily tell if a MMORPG is going to be good simply by reading the FAQ.

CoH has nothing I find interesting enough to keep me involved in it.

Tribes: Vengeance looks like it has more depth.

[EineBeBoP]

Lineage 2 sucks tho.

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by TekDragon

I think if you've been playing MMORPG's for long enough (like played everything from UO, AC, EQ to SWG, DAoC, AO, and SB) you can easily tell if a MMORPG is going to be good simply by reading the FAQ.

I'd disagree here. I've been Beta testing World of Warcraft since the public Beta started, and based on the FAQ you'd assume there's really nothing special about the game. However, the important stuff isn't even in the FAQ, or is in the FAQ but we've all heard companies say they'll achieve X and so disregard it. Based on the FAQ WoW looks mediocre. Based on my, what, month and a bit of playing it's easily the best MMO out there.

[TekDragon]

Originally Posted by Warborn

I'd disagree here. I've been Beta testing World of Warcraft since the public Beta started, and based on the FAQ you'd assume there's really nothing special about the game. However, the important stuff isn't even in the FAQ, or is in the FAQ but we've all heard companies say they'll achieve X and so disregard it. Based on the FAQ WoW looks mediocre. Based on my, what, month and a bit of playing it's easily the best MMO out there.

Well, all i know is that the FAQ of WoW told me that it was a level based system and not a skill based system.

The impression i got was that you could swing your sword 1 million times and not get one bit better at swordsmanship, but as soon as you level up your more powerful.

That's the impression I got, and I refuse to buy any MMORPG that used that kindergarden level system instead of a skill based system (use a sword, get better at using a sword).

[Madcow]

By the way, my main (Gravedigger) on Freedom is now level 12 so anybody level 7 or below feel free to send me a tell and I can sidekick you to get you some easier xp. Or, I can sidekick you and take you into my missions and see if you make it out. One of those two would probably be more fun for me than you, but hey.

[Gigabein]

Originally Posted by TekDragon

CoH has nothing I find interesting enough to keep me involved in it.

Have you tried it?

[TekDragon]

Originally Posted by Gigabein

Have you tried it?

Have you read anything I wrote?

[Gigabein]

Originally Posted by TekDragon

Have you read anything I wrote?

Yes, you have some experience with MMORPG's and you don't like the concept of a level-based system. But guess what? CoH uses level-based system AND it's fun. The two don't have to be mutually-exclusive unless you really are a numbers-obsessed individual.

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by TekDragon

Well, all i know is that the FAQ of WoW told me that it was a level based system and not a skill based system.

The impression i got was that you could swing your sword 1 million times and not get one bit better at swordsmanship, but as soon as you level up your more powerful.

That's the impression I got, and I refuse to buy any MMORPG that used that kindergarden level system instead of a skill based system (use a sword, get better at using a sword).

WoW uses a mix. As you use something, you gain skill in it similar to UO. As you level, your maximum skill cap is raised. So at level whatever you can have One-handed Swords at 60 max, but at level whatever + 1 you can have One-handed Swords at 65 max, and so on. Your effectiveness with a sword is totally dependent on your skill with it, and of course your attributes and Talents. Your level has no role in determining your combat capability in itself, merely the potential your combat related abilities may reach (which is the exact opposite of how, say, Dark Age of Camelot works).

So I think we can now both agree that FAQs are misleading. Out of curiosity, though, why do you believe a level system is inferior to a purely skills based system?

[TekDragon]

Originally Posted by Warborn

WoW uses a mix. As you use something, you gain skill in it similar to UO. As you level, your maximum skill cap is raised. So at level whatever you can have One-handed Swords at 60 max, but at level whatever + 1 you can have One-handed Swords at 65 max, and so on. Your effectiveness with a sword is totally dependent on your skill with it, and of course your attributes and Talents. Your level has no role in determining your combat capability in itself, merely the potential your combat related abilities may reach (which is the exact opposite of how, say, Dark Age of Camelot works).

That is extremely interesting.

Tell me, is there a limit to the amount different things you can get points in? Like.. if say I get 60 points of 1h sword, will that count towards my cap, meaning I can't max out 2h sword, archery, and 5 different types of magery as well?

Out of curiosity, though, why do you believe a level system is inferior to a purely skills based system?

You quoted a prime example: DAoC.

In games like EQ and DAoC where level based systems are used you can have 2 different charachters:

1. A frail high elf mage that has never picked up anything heavier than a staff his entire life. He has never used a sword once. He is level 50

2. A human warrior who has used a sword since he could first lift one. He has used it, and nothing else. He is level 25.

That high elf mage could pick up a rusty sword and proceed to beat the living shit out of that level 25 warrior who is using the best sword he can find.

This makes ZERO sence and I hate it.

[TekDragon]

Oh, and one other thing I didn't like was that WoW seemed to be a class based system, unlike SWG or UO which were TRUE skill based system.

In SWG or UO you could mix and match skills, creating infinite possibilities of charachter types.

In a class based system, even one that involves skill advancement, all the warriors will be very similar. All the rangers will be very similar. All the mages will be very similar. The differences would be small - 1 warrior uses a sword, another uses a mace. One mage uses fire magic, one mage uses ice magic.

In a skill based system I could choose to advance my sword skill, have some archery, have a decent amount of buffing magic, and have a bit of hide skill too. No class based system can allow you to do anything REMOTELY close to that level of charachter customization.

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by TekDragon

That is extremely interesting.

Tell me, is there a limit to the amount different things you can get points in? Like.. if say I get 60 points of 1h sword, will that count towards my cap, meaning I can't max out 2h sword, archery, and 5 different types of magery as well?

It's a mix, but it's a little from column A and a little from column B. A Warrior, for instance, cannot learn magic. And the skill caps are per individual skill, but you usually need to acquire new skills by spending skill points, which are gained through hunting (600xp gets you 1 skill point). Right now there isn't a cap on the number of skill points you can get, but they plan on changing it later.

You quoted a prime example: DAoC.

In games like EQ and DAoC where level based systems are used you can have 2 different charachters:

1. A frail high elf mage that has never picked up anything heavier than a staff his entire life. He has never used a sword once. He is level 50

2. A human warrior who has used a sword since he could first lift one. He has used it, and nothing else. He is level 25.

That high elf mage could pick up a rusty sword and proceed to beat the living shit out of that level 25 warrior who is using the best sword he can find.

This makes ZERO sence and I hate it.

A 25 Warrior using the best weapon he could find would beat the shit out of a 50 Mage (I'm a Mage in the Beta, level 33, so I know how we stack up). No artifical level modifiers means it's a raw calculation. Mages don't get much more armored as they level up, especially compared to Warriors, so I can't soak the hits or avoid the hits at all really. That coupled with the fact that we gain very few hp per level (at 33 I have 700hp, at level 1 I had 100hp) means the Mage will be taking the hits, feeling them, and not able to withstand that many of them (though compared to other games Mages can tank far better; for instance, at level 33 mobs generally do 40hp per hit or so, giving me some slack if I get aggro). So yeah, a 25 Warrior would win, but he'd be hurting, because Mage staves are nothing to sneeze at, even though we've no melee abilities, and Mages can pay skill points to learn One-handed Swords, letting us get more combat-oriented weapons.

It should be mentioned though that a 25 Warrior vs a 50 Mage in a regular fight wouldn't stand a chance. In a PvP situation the 25 Warrior could absolutely contribute, but you wouldn't want to attract any attention to yourself.

edit:

Oh, and one other thing I didn't like was that WoW seemed to be a class based system, unlike SWG or UO which were TRUE skill based system.

In SWG or UO you could mix and match skills, creating infinite possibilities of charachter types.

In a class based system, even one that involves skill advancement, all the warriors will be very similar. All the rangers will be very similar. All the mages will be very similar. The differences would be small - 1 warrior uses a sword, another uses a mace. One mage uses fire magic, one mage uses ice magic.

In a skill based system I could choose to advance my sword skill, have some archery, have a decent amount of buffing magic, and have a bit of hide skill too. No class based system can allow you to do anything REMOTELY close to that level of charachter customization.

Skill based just degenerated into templates. UO had its tank mages, dex monkies, and so on. There was actually very little difference when it came down to it, because players recognized the good skills from the bad and capitalized on them. Commandos in SW:G for instance had their commando stuff, and then usually took a couple lines of Teras Kasi for the big modifiers it gives.

WoW, in fact, has more individual customization. Or, had, anyway. The Talents system we had before let you do all kinds of stuff, but it was removed to be reworked and will be in the next patch (this week hopefully). Basically, Talents let you buff certain attributes, or specialize in certain weapons, or specialize against certain enemies (Undead Slayer), get even more in-depth against certain enemies (Undead Tracking), enhance your resistance against stuff, and increase your damage or lower your mana cost with whatever spells you may have, assuming you have any. The new Talents system will reportedly kick the crap out of the old one, having all that plus more distinct specialization lines, with spells and abilities that can only be unlocked through the Talents system. It's difficult to describe, but the old system plus the new one will ideally make characters extremely unique. Moreso than the skill based games.

[TekDragon]

So lemme see if I understand this. You get skill points, which you use to unlock a skill, which can then be raised by using the skill and gaining skill xp? In addition, certain classes can only unlock certain skills?

Sounds decent, although i don't like the limiting effect from classes. I'd rather be able to have the option of doing anything and using my skill points to unlock the skills i want to make the charachter i want to make. Like AC, UO, or SWG.

As for your second part, i'm glad that levels don't affect combat as they do in DAoC and EQ.