[Gear] State Stabilization

[blaqwar]

Spoiler:

Because taking away WAR's gear progression is essentially neutering all progression, leaving a shell of a game..

I dont think that character progression is 100% linked to get gear progression. When grow in RR u hace access to new RPS to train new abilities.
My first MMORPG (and the best fun i ever had playing) was DAOC, and there was no gear progression through pvp rank, usually u run with the same gear at level 50 once u get a good template (always through pve/craft). The "only" thing u get doing rvr was RPS to train abilities (and ofc a bunch of fun doing it), and ppl keep going out rvr every day without complain about "rewards". well, there was a power gap between low/hig RR ranks, not in gear/stats but yes in abilities (mostly with very high cooldowns-like 30 mins)....well that was the "old times" and maybe the things works in a different way right now...

You're right it's not inseparably linked but without it you need to have other features that make a game interesting (engaging combat, immersive story, etc.). Things which WAR doesn't have in abundance and would need to be remade from the ground up to be able to function with no gear progression.

Enough with progression. Some are against OP's proposal because they want to feel progression (valid argument). Some people gave their counters to this (there are other ways to give us a feel of progression, there are other reasons to play the game besides progression, etc). Let's move on - Penril

[Stmichael1989]

Spoiler:

MMORPGs - Notice the RPG part, the acronym stands for Roleplaying Game. Do you know what roleplaying entails? Character progression. Are you claiming MMORPGs don't need character progression? Because taking away WAR's gear progression is essentially neutering all progression, leaving a shell of a game. Or are you claiming that WAR isn't an MMORPG?

What about XP progression? Or renown rank training? Gear disparity isn't the sole form of progression. For that matter, there needn't even be disparity to allow for progression. Customization options while maintaining the same relative stat level allows both fair competition and progression.

Enough with progression. Some are against OP's proposal because they want to feel progression (valid argument). Some people gave their counters to this (there are other ways to give us a feel of progression, there are other reasons to play the game besides progression, etc). Let's move on - Penril

[blaqwar]

Spoiler:

MMORPGs - Notice the RPG part, the acronym stands for Roleplaying Game. Do you know what roleplaying entails? Character progression. Are you claiming MMORPGs don't need character progression? Because taking away WAR's gear progression is essentially neutering all progression, leaving a shell of a game. Or are you claiming that WAR isn't an MMORPG?

What about XP progression? Or renown rank training? Gear disparity isn't the sole form of progression. For that matter, there needn't even be disparity to allow for progression. Customization options while maintaining the same relative stat level allows both fair competition and progression.

What kind of progression do you get with just the customization options if you forego any kind of disparity (which in my mind would mean the ramping up of power, if that's what you mean)? Career ranks, renown ranks, appearance and sideways (instead of vertical) power progression, maybe ToK progression. But foregoing disparity those wouldn't be allowed to give you any kind of power increase, as that is disparity?

At CR40 you'd be farming renown ranks for appearance and diversifying what your character can do and that's about it? I'd love to see that happen but I don't think the game's combat and ORvR system is deep enough to hold players with just those features.

Enough with progression. Some are against OP's proposal because they want to feel progression (valid argument). Some people gave their counters to this (there are other ways to give us a feel of progression, there are other reasons to play the game besides progression, etc). Let's move on - Penril

[Tesq]

Spoiler:

Allow renown to grow up past 80, at very slow rate with cap for renown each days with a very few rp gain only x level. Leave sov the last set so you both have a kind of gear progression and infinite progressio with renown which is actualy for play what you like.
Fix sets till sov and avoid enter in the infinite circle of new set which (by this thread) will bring a no real progressions as the dmg balance etc between the same new sets should remain the same between each new set relase.
Allow a gear infinite progression just for the sake of progression itself but block any actual power creep progression because it bring imbalance is dumb for me. Focus on balance till sov and work around renown or alternative stats, permanent stats buff after x in game achivement (long run achivement), etc. Appereance stuff etc

This is not about progression - Penril

[porkstar]

Spoiler:

b) If relative balance between top gear sets in same for new tiers of gear like it was between previus tier of gear - then acquiring new set of gear is becoming more of a chore. Because you need to grind out gear after it's release only to came back to pre-patch situation vs other well geared players without added benefit of discovering and exploiting new balance.

I don't understand how normalizing gear sets in a "balance state" will cause stagnation. Take a look at some real hard-core science with this graph below. No matter which potential future we choose, points in time will exist where something new happens. These are represented by F(x) and also contain a smiley emoticon since, at least initially, people will be happy for something new. These smileys may turn to angries or sads or etc. Each timeline begins or ends with a WTF emoticon representing "We don't exactly know what we're doing yet but we're gonna try something!"

Blue Pill (future #1) Balanced State - we have input regarding balance changes, balance changes will proceed as normal, gear is less of a factor in combat outcome, many smiley faces, gear and content comes less frequently.

Red Pill (future #2) Screw it - We have new gears and content more frequently, gear is a huge factor in combat outcome, many smiley faces, no input regarding balance, balance comes less frequently.

(And goddammit yes I know I assigned the wrong color pill to each timeline

In either timeline we have big changes. People come back or they don't. Some will, some won't. IMO neither timeline will crush game population.

DISCLAIMER: The below graph is not an accurate or informed timeline and is purely conceptual. Graphical length of timeline is not representative of actual time.

Spoiler:

[Tesq]

]it will cause stagnation if :

sov vs sov do 300 dmg, the same is doing inv vs inv or warp vs warp; what's the point of new sets if there is always the same proportion between dmg taken and dmg done?

Spoiler:

If the aim is progression this is a false progression; you can just stop to sov at that point new stuff are actually exciting
but there are several things that can be implemented actually bring new ppl or make old one re join the game (while actually don't disencourage new player to play with very long level /set grid).

The aim is not progression, at least not in this thread - Penril.


If the aim would be balance t4 sets road from anni to sov im all for it, tough it was not so bad as inv to warpforged. Also progression after a set cap should be harder for very low benefith (this is a sense of progression which do not creat power creep and also don't disencourage new ppl to reach t4 cap)

[sotora]

Spoiler:

b) If relative balance between top gear sets in same for new tiers of gear like it was between previus tier of gear - then acquiring new set of gear is becoming more of a chore. Because you need to grind out gear after it's release only to came back to pre-patch situation vs other well geared players without added benefit of discovering and exploiting new balance.

I don't understand how normalizing gear sets in a "balance state" will cause stagnation. Take a look at some real hard-core science with this graph below. ]

Why then continue to release further armor sets with bigger numbers of them in first place?

[Stmichael1989]

Spoiler:

MMORPGs - Notice the RPG part, the acronym stands for Roleplaying Game. Do you know what roleplaying entails? Character progression. Are you claiming MMORPGs don't need character progression? Because taking away WAR's gear progression is essentially neutering all progression, leaving a shell of a game. Or are you claiming that WAR isn't an MMORPG?

What about XP progression? Or renown rank training? Gear disparity isn't the sole form of progression. For that matter, there needn't even be disparity to allow for progression. Customization options while maintaining the same relative stat level allows both fair competition and progression.

What kind of progression do you get with just the customization options if you forego any kind of disparity (which in my mind would mean the ramping up of power, if that's what you mean)? Career ranks, renown ranks, appearance and sideways (instead of vertical) power progression, maybe ToK progression. But foregoing disparity those wouldn't be allowed to give you any kind of power increase, as that is disparity?

At CR40 you'd be farming renown ranks for appearance and diversifying what your character can do and that's about it? I'd love to see that happen but I don't think the game's combat and ORvR system is deep enough to hold players with just those features.

You got the gist of it, but it can absolutely work in WAR, especially when you consider the idea of alts as a form of progression. One of the biggest deterrents to leveling and gearing an alt is the fact that you'll be playing as an under geared character with a severe disadvantage against people playing their main character with top end gear. Eliminating vertical progression makes it much easier to progress as a multi class player rather than focusing all your time and effort on a single character.

As for the scope of the horizontal progression, it goes much beyond cosmetics. I don't know if you've ever played team fortress 2, but certain classes play completely different depending on what weapon you're using. The engineer class in TF2, for example, normally has a turret which is slow to set up and move, but very powerful as a result. This makes the engineer very much a point defense class. However, when you equip the gunslinger, it exchanges your big heavy slow turret with a small quick one. Suddenly you're no longer a point defense character, but rather a mobile mid range class that still provides support in the form of teleports and supplies.

If I were to use a very basic example in WAR, imagine a WH/WE in defensive sovereign. Barring double set stacking for stat bonuses, they didn't even come close to the strength cap, much less weaponskill. But they gained a lot of survivability as a result. It wasn't as good for ganking or assassination as offensive sov, but if you got a guard, you were on par with WL/Marauder for melee train capability because you now had the innate survivability necessary as well as good damage. That doesn't mean that defensive sov was better than offensive (in reality it was, but that was due to the way game balance was), only that they had different focuses.

Now take that same concept, expand it to more utilities and niches, and spread it out over all the t4 sets. That in and of itself should bring depth to the combat and RvR system.

NOT talking about progression - Penril

[Tesq]

Spoiler:

TOK tactis are another form of progression really never implemented in the pvp side which is bad, there are so many things that reworked would give you a sense of progression with out force you into itiem grind or force any dev relase more and more gear(exept for appereance one we are hungry for those).

Power creep is also casued to stats secondary eff being ignored, such low value of wep skill which are basically ignored by all melee and most tanks and same goes with will power, if there is any plan to actually fix this then it should be made preferable first than the op suggestion.

Not talking about progression - Penril

[blaqwar]

Spoiler:

@Stmichael1989:

The issue with the argument of alts to me is that it's a double-edged sword. While you're right, it does give the game a lot of playtime and there are people who love playing alts, the thing is that in my opinion it includes progressing with your alts. It's sort of a completionist kind of a thing, having every char at 40, having them kited in decent gear, their professions leveled etc. So no gear would kinda hinder that. And if it's not a completionist playing alts then you're extending the game's life by counting the alts a person is prepared to roll. If it's not an huge altoholic they won't end up giving the game that much more playtime (maybe 4-5 characters?). Is it more time than a person playing a single character till Sovereign?

Your TF2 and AOR WH examples are what I meant with horizontal progression. It's not a straight increase in power (so not vertical) but it diversifies a character and turns it into a jack of all trades. Ironically enough this was suggested by Azarael as a response to my concerns about stagnation as a result of an implementation of his proposal. It's ironic cause we've come full circle.

To be honest I'm all for it but I'll remain skeptical until I see it working.

@Tesq:

I don't think weapon skill is a victim of power creep. I'd argue the fact that there are only two careers (they do exist, contrary to what you suggest) stacking weapon skill is a result of all others having an armor debuff or not relying on damage to do their job (tanks). Engineers would also stack weapon skill if their mastery tree's were more optimised (ilogically split between physical and magical damage). But all of that is beside the point I guess.

This is not about progression - Penril