We consider the system broken, that's why we're trying to fix it.
I'm afraid this is why we're going to continue to disagree.
So to you there is no power gap issue to fix and no unbalance?And more importantly, can you affirm with certainty it is impossible to create a better meta?Edit: We came up with an analogy for our feelings regarding combat mechanics and meta game.Combat mechanics are like an engine and skills are the fuel components. The meta game is the mixture of all skills to produce the fuel.For us, Darkfall has the best engine there is. However it has been operated with bad fuel which lowered its performances. A great car will still be fast even if it was using bad quality fuel.Experimenting with a more balanced mixture would make the combustion more efficient and the car faster.
The combat META is the main thing that kept people around. Not just the mechanics.
Quote from: Aristos Giannes on October 22, 2015, 04:21:37 pmThe combat META is the main thing that kept people around. Not just the mechanics. Jack of all trades keep people playing? Are you on drugs? Is the exact opposite. How much people left to play Darkfall after the magic era till the end? 200-300? If it was a system so loved why people costantly leave the game week after week?Read my history in the video section, my experience was competely different from yours, when people start to macro and grind for magic, force this playstile into everyone else to compete, the damage began to be irreversible..Changing the meta is necessary to create diversity and please more RPG players, i don't get why you old vets continue to no understand this simple concept. I understand that you guys like Df for what it was, but it failed, hard, DF with melee/magic/archery/crafting characters all in one is simply a fail concept, this was a proven fact not just my personal opinion.
The prime time of Darkfall was right after the hellfreeze expansion. The game didn't begin to lose population until people realized AV wasn't going to do anything to update the game and add more content.
The PvP was amazing, but PvP alone isn't enough to keep people actively playing, they need sandbox content.
I don't know why I even bother telling you this though because no matter how many times people show you reason or give you straight evidence, you just plug your ears and ignore them and spout the same repeated bullshit over and over again.
Literally everyone at the RoA forums can't stand you because all you do is spam the same sentences over and over again in every thread, in every post.
New people reading your poorly written, incoherent spam EVERYWHERE is probably going to drive tons of people away
I think the best thing for your vision is to just let the players try out the new changes themselves in the beta. Despite how many vets claim they are turned off from this project, I guarantee you every single one will still check it out and see if they were wrong. The best feedback will come from actually experiencing the changes.
Of course, we will have to prove that we can create a balanced meta game, and the doubt and push back from the community is understandable, but have we at least convinced you that what we are doing is a necessity?
A few additional questions now:- How would you feel about an interrupt?We are not a fan of the idea, but an action that cancels damage on both end could have its place.Imagine you get seized, you have the choice to "power through" it, or hope to be faster than your opponent. Use the "interrupt", then unbalance, then a block rebuke combo / parry riposte combo and the seize effect will be over. A skillful player could reduce the incoming damage and dish out even more damage. - How would you feel about removing whirlwind?Whatever happens, we'll add a global cooldown to melee abilities to avoid switching to other weapons for multiple whirlwind or power attacks in a row. It is part of the "lesser grind to be viable" changes.We feel that whirlwind was too central to the meta game. Players would stay mostly in ranged, and just do passes at each other. In a sense, it was an hybrid/mage tool more than a melee tool. We wonder if it would not invalidate a lot of the changes a melee overhaul would bring by having an almost guaranteed hit ability.Perhaps nerfing its damage would be enough, or give it a longer build up animation so that the weapon switch+whirlwind macro becomes useless.Opinions?- What do you think of making all weapons usable on mounts?This would help the time to viability by making players only need to level one melee weapon mastery.In this case, there will be a choice that would impact what kind of rider the player is.Polearms would have a "jousting" or "lancing" style. Go straight, do one high damage pass, and move back in but suck at staying around people on foot.2 handers would have a decent reach on the sides, a bad one at the front/back and would be great to stay around people on foot, but will have less defensive abilities.1h and shield would be a more defensive approach. it would be able to do better against polearms charges but also hold its own against people on foot, despite a lower reach than 2h, due to higher attack speed.Daggers would be less encumbering so the front and rear mount attacks would be faster and easier to do, but there will be no side attacks reaching the ground, but could be good against other riders to get 2 hits in when they get only one.For all those, the rider title would be useful.- Any opinions on our shield/spear walls ideas?