The Issue of the 10%-20% Power Differentiation

[Tatwi]

Originally Posted by Higby

I know lots of experienced FPS players who go 1:20 their first few sessions of planetside and I'm sure you all do too, right?

Yeah, but that's a given man; People generally accept that they're not going to be masters at something the first time they try it, or even right away. What pisses new people off though is when they don't actually have time to play the game between deaths, because others are able to insta-gib them (nothing is worse than waiting 30 seconds to spawn and then walking out a door only to get an artillery shell in the face). What's the point of playing when you really have no chance at all of winning, no matter how hard you try?

Most of the my time in WoW has been on PvP servers and the biggest complaint about "world pvp" has always been that the low level character don't have any chance at all against the high level ones. And I mean none - there's a miss chance that grows exponentially when attacking enemies higher level than you. People never cared so much when they were killed multiple times by someone around their own level, because it was a fair fight.

"Options are awesome", I always say. With that in mind, it's good to know that your 20% did not mean "we'll give players up to a 20% damage bonus", because that would overpower any other options out there.

[Dr White Glint]

I personally disagree with power advancement in games like Planetside.

I personally would rather see that specialising lets you have more options when you're loading up. For example:
A player chooses to specialise in a career of sniping and long range combat.
They progress over time in this long range tree and each section of the tree they unlock they get an additional item (Think Battlefield 2142's weapon unlock system). Also since they're in an outfit that is also specialised in long range combat they also get access to extra equipment, that they wouldn't have if they were solo or were in an outfit that were specialised for say aircraft.

I personally don't mind too much if they add stat differences but as long as they remain small enough that the difference isn't too big and large enough that a player feels like they have progressed each time they get to their next Battle Rank I will be fine with it.

I just hope that no matter which way SOE decides to go that it remains fun for both old players and new players alike.

[Raymac]

C'mon people. Balance issues will be worked out. For me, the devs have certainly earned enough respect to not worry about that. Plus does anyone honestly think the game will be perfectly balanced Day 1 of Beta? Of course not. It will be part of the process, but the devs arn't going to just stab their eyeballs out and ignore balance. I can understand being cynical, but c'mon.

[Soothsayer]

I want to specialization to mean something, the time I've put in to the game should translate to a meaningful increase in whatever abilities I choose to develop.

To the people who are saying that having vets who are specc'ed into whatever will be a deterrent to new players, I've heard the same argument from people who haven't tried EVE. Its the first two weeks that really matter, once you're in and you have a good time you don't leave for a while... then you come back for more later. The main reason you don't have a good time is when you try to play it like a single player game. If PS2 has engaging gameplay for all levels of player, people will like what they see and stick around longer.

Due to the transient nature of achievement in PS, the PS2 skill system offers something that lasts longer than capping a continent. A record of achievement or advancement that can't (and wouldn't) be wiped out with a "reset all" cert button.

Sorry to keep going on about EVE Online, but we're talking time base skill training and that's the current model we have to base this on.

Best way to shut down a person arguing that a 6 year vet in EVE Online always having an advantage is this... that 6 year veteran can only fly one ship at a time. You could be on an equal playing field with that vet within a couple of months. So it comes down to skill. That 6 year veteran may have been mining asteroids for the last six years, the guy playing for six months may have just spent all that time flying cheap ships, getting blown up and learning how to pvp effectively.

In PS2 you'll only be able to fire one weapon at a time, may not even have that many more weapons than that (we don't know what the inventory system is like). The difference is that the skilled up vet will have different options.

The skill system offers versatility within a specialization, how can you say that a BR1 player has the same level of power as a BR20? PShield, med apps, BANKs, Rexo w/extra medkits and ammo... The BR20 has significantly more resources at his disposal than a BR1. They are equally matched in terms of damage per shot, but survivability is nowhere near equal.

I have no issue with the skill tree because power differentiation is not solely about having a more powerful weapon, but the ability to customize that weapon to suit your playstyle/situational needs.

[Raymac]

Originally Posted by Soothsayer

Due to the transient nature of achievement in PS, the PS2 skill system offers something that lasts longer than capping a continent. A record of achievement or advancement that can't (and wouldn't) be wiped out with a "reset all" cert button.

That may be one of the most eloquent arguements for it yet. Very well said.

[MasterChief096]

Originally Posted by Soothsayer

I want to specialization to mean something, the time I've put in to the game should translate to a meaningful increase in whatever abilities I choose to develop.

To the people who are saying that having vets who are specc'ed into whatever will be a deterrent to new players, I've heard the same argument from people who haven't tried EVE. Its the first two weeks that really matter, once you're in and you have a good time you don't leave for a while... then you come back for more later. The main reason you don't have a good time is when you try to play it like a single player game. If PS2 has engaging gameplay for all levels of player, people will like what they see and stick around longer.

Due to the transient nature of achievement in PS, the PS2 skill system offers something that lasts longer than capping a continent. A record of achievement or advancement that can't (and wouldn't) be wiped out with a "reset all" cert button.

Sorry to keep going on about EVE Online, but we're talking time base skill training and that's the current model we have to base this on.

Best way to shut down a person arguing that a 6 year vet in EVE Online always having an advantage is this... that 6 year veteran can only fly one ship at a time. You could be on an equal playing field with that vet within a couple of months. So it comes down to skill. That 6 year veteran may have been mining asteroids for the last six years, the guy playing for six months may have just spent all that time flying cheap ships, getting blown up and learning how to pvp effectively.

In PS2 you'll only be able to fire one weapon at a time, may not even have that many more weapons than that (we don't know what the inventory system is like). The difference is that the skilled up vet will have different options.

The skill system offers versatility within a specialization, how can you say that a BR1 player has the same level of power as a BR20? PShield, med apps, BANKs, Rexo w/extra medkits and ammo... The BR20 has significantly more resources at his disposal than a BR1. They are equally matched in terms of damage per shot, but survivability is nowhere near equal.

I have no issue with the skill tree because power differentiation is not solely about having a more powerful weapon, but the ability to customize that weapon to suit your playstyle/situational needs.

But no one explains why "a record of achievement or advancement" absolutely no questions asked has to be in the form of power. Merits, battle rank, etc, all contribute to character achievement do they not? Also, I fail to see how a forget all button wipes out any achievement you've gained, in fact it does the exact opposite. If you are BR25 and you use a forget all, you can respec to an ENTIRELY different play style, whereas if a BR1 did a forget all it would be pointless... this does nothing to "wipe out character achievement".

Plenty of FPS games have character achievement via cosmetics, ranks, stats (like how many kills stats, not stats for weapons etc), and stuff of that nature.

There are already plenty of MMO aspects to PS2 without adding power advancement into the fray. Besides the focus of FPS games usually is never around character advancement, its around the battles, and how you prefer to play. Character advancement in PS served to allow you to more closely follow your play style by giving you more options without increasing power, I see no reason why PS2 should be any different. It was one of the few things PS actually did completely right that was different from other games.

[Raymac]

Originally Posted by MasterChief096

Character advancement in PS served to allow you to more closely follow your play style by giving you more options without increasing power, I see no reason why PS2 should be any different. It was one of the few things PS actually did completely right that was different from other games.

You know, when the Creative Director who is making the game says nearly verbatum the same exact thing as you just did, I have no idea why you are so worried.

[CutterJohn]

Originally Posted by Higby

Also, medical certs will be replaced with using various roots, meditation and acupuncture to cure combat wounds.

Can we also solve mysteries by studying the interconnectedness of all things?

Originally Posted by MasterChief096

Character advancement in PS served to allow you to more closely follow your play style by giving you more options without increasing power, I see no reason why PS2 should be any different. It was one of the few things PS actually did completely right that was different from other games.

Options are power. You suck less frequently. You spend less time running around with the wrong equipment being ineffectual and getting killed because you have fewer hitpoints and can't drop back every time you take damage for a quick heal or whatever.

And PS gave straight up power with levels. Pshield, second wind, melee booster, surge, etc. These are not available to newbs. How is 100 extra hitpoints that a newb cannot possibly get in any way until they level not increasing power with levels?

And it had command ranks. Gave you an emp, radar scan, and OS. What are these if not increased power?

[Senyu]

Theres some long paragraphs in this thread. Guess thats good.


Sorry I didn't read everypost in this thread but my understand of the 20% power increase took EVERYTHING into consideration. Its not 20% stronger for your rifle. But is actually the 1% or less adding to the total 20% a long term player would have over the new player

[DviddLeff]

I am perfectly happy to see players modify their equipment to make it better in certain ways, as long as their is some trade off. For example, having a silencer would decrease the range of the projectile, having a under-slung grenade launcher would make the primary weapon more difficult to aim, etc

Also any alterations should cost more resources to acquire each time.

Now the 20% increase I am fine with, as long as there are trade off's. For example if you have the Reaver focused outfit as has been suggested, lets say they decide to specialise in particular on speed over anything else; a 20% speed increase would require the outfit and the individual to sacrifice armour or ammo space to get that 20% in that area.

[altminus]

Actually it remember me the time I was frustrated by being systematically killed in 1on1 battle until I discovered implants !

[Coreldan]

I don't really want this. APB had a ~20% power upgrade for vets in comparison to new players and it was totally unnecessary for few reasons:

1) Vet against vet and the netgain was 0 cos both had the same upgrades.
2) vet against noob, you had a huge benefit you didn't even need cos you will just about always beat the new guy with map knowledge (maybe not in PS2, but in APB yes) and gameplay experience

It was extremely bad design for an online shooter and I never wish to see it come back.

Given, PS is a little bit less personal game when it comes to 1v1s and the likes cos of the huge amount of players, but still.

Then again, if we take away all direct upgrades, I'm not too sure what that leaves for people who will fe. cert something very deeply. If the veteran who spent a year learning Vanguard skills still isn't any better than the new player with 2 cert points in the Vanguard, what's the point? There's a limited amount of "different stuff" you can have and do (like say, a skilled gal pilot would be able to hot drop players or spawn people in to the galaxy, while low-certed player could only pilot it to transport people)

EDIT: Reading Higby's replies (it's great that you guys actually join in on this kinda things!) makes me less worried, as it doesnt seem to go the APB way where every vet had their weapon do 15% more damage, 10% faster while taking 10% less damage themselves out of everything.

[Trolltaxi]

That total 20% benefit on a weapon that you focus is no more than a bait for players coming from other MMO-genres.

The benefits will equal in a vet vs vet situation. A vet will overcome a noob 99% of the time without even the benefits. And the noob won't even understand how he dies so fast. So they don't really matter. And think about implants, they do give you significant advantage (Pshield or audio amp for ex.).

That 20% top benefit is just an illusion so players have a false illusion of improvement (by weapon stats). In other words, "The cake is a lie.".

And if you really are a PS1 vet, you know that 1 vs 1 won't matter that much. It is always about the group you are playing with. And no matter how good you are at shooting, you will be beaten when a stronger group arrives.

Your squad's, outfit's, empire's progress will depend on supporters, tactical and strategical leaders - if you focus on shooting things with a badass weapon, you will probably lack skills in leading, so no matter how good you shoot, you still won't be able to issue orders, and you will be the one whom THEY tell where to go.

Killwhores win firefights, but AMS-s win the war.

[Coreldan]

Originally Posted by Trolltaxi

The benefits will equal in a vet vs vet situation. A vet will overcome a noob 99% of the time without even the benefits. And the noob won't even understand how he dies so fast. So they don't really matter. And think about implants, they do give you significant advantage (Pshield or audio amp for ex.).

While true, it will most likely be a thing a lot of new players (and reviewers) will complain about, without realizing they would've been owned just as much even without the extra power.

People need scapegoats. That's a good one.

[Crator]

Just something that popped into my head, what if there was a newb suite that protects new players from being affected by things such as power ups for higher level players? It would last so many levels based on % differences in damage so you will never have the 20% maxed vet issue againsts newbs. More like 10%.

Also, didn't they say there was a company wide initiative to have in-game cash markets? Couldn't they offer the power-ups to new players on the in-game market to ease this problem? They could then offer free-to-play with a cap on level advancement, or leave the level cap out and give folks the option to stay with a F2P account with the ability to purchase the power-ups induvidually. Those power-ups won't be permenant like it is for a subscribed player so they would have to continue to purchase the power-ups from the in-game market.