@boogis said in Idea. Holy trinity:

@Stacy555 63 yo kid who started playing rpgs from 2005. tank/heal/dd is newer version of what im saying.

Actually, Tank, Healer, Damage Dealer were terms used in Ultima Online, and EverQuest, arguably the first MMORPGs out there, and they had already started in use in TTRPGs before it went digital...This coming from a TTRPGer since 1978.

Your Classic Trinity was actually Magic-User, Fighting Man, and Thief (OD&D, 1974 white/beige booklet edition)

It has evolved over the years, but it got boiled down to Tank (Damage Sponge), Damage Dealer, and Support (Healer/Enchanter, Buffer, Skill-jockey)

It actually changed to a 4 part system really, not in direct link to the Rock-Paper-Scissors analogy, in fact, as they quickly differentiated between the Healer-Support person and the Skill-Jockey Support person. That goes to when they added in the Cleric to D&D. The 4 ultimate CORE classes thus were Fighter, Cleric, Wizard/Mage/Magic-User, and Thief/Rogue and all other classes were built around the roles those played. It finally really got highlighted in an actual D&D edition in 4th edition, and players were up in arms because they believed that D&D was devolving into an MMO clone, forgetting that MMOs came from D&D in the first place, and all they were using were different terms than SOME might have been used to. In 4th Edition, it was the Defender (Tank), Striker (DPS), Controller (Blaster, Mage, Area Attacker), and Leader (Healer, Support, Strategist)

So no matter how old someone is in the game, don't go throwing your age around and degrading others for being newer than you. Stacy555 had a valid argument, and your dismissal was not exactly good form.

As to the Rock-Paper-Scissors mechanical theme, no thank you, I like every character to try to be dynamic, by how a person plays that character, and if someone wants to start an Arcanist, and then unlock a bunch of Melee skills to switch-hit at times, good on them! That's why this game is built around the Pre-Set system for Skills/Spells and Talents

Dropping Citizenship should be an official act requiring you to go to the town hall of the City your dropping. This makes it official and serves notice that you are no longer bound to a city. Just being able to toggle it on or off in the wild makes no sense. It also doesn't fit with the story aspect of the game.

Actually, Prometheus and Co are going over and above the call of duty to keep us informed of things. They are of course forced to back-burner some things when immediate bugs must be addressed, like for instance the Server crash on the 2nd day of the Alpha.

I would much rather have them working hard on the game and the various elements, than taking time out to give us ETAs when they are unsure after dealing with bugs, how the cascading affect of the patching will affect the new expected features.

Feel good, in most games, any new features like that would be held until the next alpha altogether, but the gang is trying to hot patch some stuff in that they have primed to launch, and so far, they look like they are going to go full steam ahead forward with those plans.

As @spoletta said, there are actually far more small groups/solo players than Guild players who play MMOs so the major faulty reasoning that the "Multiplayer" in the name means the games are set for big groups is actually detrimental from most Developers' standpoint.

Developers shouldn't specifically cater to either group to the exclusion of the other, however, they need to make a balanced approach that allows both groups to benefit from their particular playstyle, as well as paying certain disadvantages for said playstyle.

My own suggestion for the City Resources to balance things out is as follows:

1. A City's Coffers gets a share of the 2000 gold used to buy Resident parcels in an area....not saying they get the whole nut, but some of it needs to go their way, 10-20% so 200-400 would be good.
2. All Resource Processing facilities in town are open to use by anyone, however, all of these resource processing centers include a small fee for usage. The fee would vary from processing plant to processing plant, but again, this makes it so if your enemies want to use your resource development systems, they have to pay into your upkeep to do so.
3. As with part 2, Make visitors pay for use of the Inn, the Stables, maybe even pay a small tithe to enter the city beyond a certain tech point. Once there's a wall and guards, many medieval cities charged a Tax or Tithe at the gate when you entered a city unless you could prove you were on Royal Business.
4. Citizens of a city, those with their actual citizenship set to that city and who are in open support of the city, internal or external plot not withstanding, either waive the fee at the resource places, or get the fee reduced. (ie: In-Town Citizens get the use for free, Resident Citizens living out of the town walls pay 1/2 the normal fee to use the processing centers)

These are only minor changes that can be made to the city, specifically affecting resource conversion, but these would allow for both the Solo/Small group players to thrive in the game, AND the Big Guild/City-centric groups to profit from these hangers on to help defer their own upkeep costs. Want to use a city's resources, you should help the city pay to maintain them afterall.

EDIT: and obviously, you allow the Governor to set the pricing on resources, tithes, taxes, etc... but have an upper cap they can't set it above to make sure they aren't trying to make their city totally exclusive by overcharging and then just giving use to their Citizens for Free

I've been playing MMOs for years. I played Ultima Online, Beta-Tested EverQuest, and I'm back to playing Old School RuneScape now, just to name a few.

You play MMOs to have a huge open, ever changing world. Some of us, myself included, prefer to 99% of the time, tackle that world and its various tasks solo. I want to see other players playing, interact with them, trade, and yes, even group on occasion, but I feel the best MMOs out there make sure that the entire content of the game can be enjoyed whether you enjoy playing as a group or a solo player. This is one reason I was not a huge fan of WoW. Besides being quest driven, it also had several specific quests/raids that necessitated a minimum number of players go in to take on the baddy. This could be ignored, if taking on said Baddy wasn't part of an almost mandatory quest chain to get past a certain point in your character development, but in WoW, that wasn't the case.

Now, EverQuest did it pretty good when they brought in the Dungeon Instances, were you could do a short term looking for group raid of a specific dungeon, but the dungeons themselves were extras, and not required in order to progress your character along.

A great MMO needs to remember there are both Solo'ists and Raiders out there, and cater to them both. If someone just wants to sit and craft all day long, they should be able to do just that. If they want to take on the monsters of the world, on their own schedule, without having to group to do it, that is also viable.

@Roccandil said in Death Penalty of losing all gear and inventory: WORST IDEA EVER!!!:

Exactly: that's a design principle, not an artifact of Alpha, and I disagree with their approach.

The developers have been clear from the very beginning about their design philosophies. Although they are calling for player feedback on ideas on how to improve the game, they have also said they will NOT BE compromising their design principals to do so. They want to make a game unlike other games, and one of the ways that they will do that, and one of the things they need to be sure of, given how they brought their backers into the fold, is by NEVER compromising their design principles.

Suggest new avenues of exploration, new ways to do things, new approaches to gameplay, BUT in this case, design principles stated from the very beginning are effectively sacred cows, AND THEY SHOULD BE! These are the things that drew most of the backers to this game in the first place. These are the things most of the backers actually fear that the developers will cave to and compromise their vision on.

I'm all for improving this game, I love the whole idea behind it, but I want the end result to still be the game I wanted to back in the first place. Its great that you have ideas that are different than others, but realize where there is room for compromise, and where your changing the game intrinsicly.

@grofire said in shitty game:

if that true why no developer say it?

Well, for one, as a serious Developer, i wouldn't even bother checking a forum that was entitled "Shitty Game" when there are so many threads to keep track of as there is. Shitty Game just pretty much says "I'm not even going to give this game a chance to grow, I'm not offering any constructive criticism, so go ahead and ignore me for more engaging patrons"

@David353 said in Pet Companions:

This creature is cosmetic only and doesn't engage in battle."

As the words state, Pets are purely cosmetic. One of the founding principles of Fractured is you cannot 'Pay to Win' and that means perks do not get a mechanical advantage of any kind, at least those perks you can get from higher backing levels and such.

Sorry about the cold water bath, but that's the name of the game here

@Ostaff Yes, because most of those games encouraged the Large Group mentality, even if the player base didn't always want it. They ended up joining Guilds out of necessity, and that's really not the reason I would want to join a guild in the first place. Most Solo-centric players join a game, and explore as much of the solo content as they can solo, while feeling out some of the people around them so that they can make short term alliances that may eventually lead to joining a more open minded guild. I mean, we all know that End Game content, certain bosses for instance, usually require more than just one person to take them down. Alliances of the moment, repeated a few times, sometimes leads to guild formation and all is good then, but the Solo player shouldn't feel like the majority of the game is forcing them in that direction, because the fact of the matter is, there are a whole bunch of people out there who play these games mostly to kill time by themselves or in small groups of circumstance...others who play to join up with friends and family for a few hours on a rotating basis, maybe Bob plays with his sister Jenny on Mondays, has a couple co-workers who might ask him to hit a Raid on the weekend, and the rest of the week, he mostly works on his own things, mainly being Skilling and Exploring. These are the players the game wants to target and encourage to keep coming back. It's just like Micro-Transactions vs Pay to play, sure, pay to play gets a bigger chunk of money guaranteed each month, and a big group comes together and all puts a bigger chunk of money/time/etc... in the game compared to the little groups and solos, however, just like how hitting players with a free game, but micro-transactions to get little things like boosts and stuff, often end up making the money made from the game skyrocket, so having a ton of Solo/Small group players coming back day in and day out will profit the game overall more than the big groups., or at least has the potential to do so...when you figure you might have 10 guilds playing, each with say an average of 100 players, that's 1000 players invested in the game...but for each of those sets of 10 guilds, you may have 5,000+ solo/small group players...sure, they may not even ever do the boss raids and end game content, but the Devs care about players logged in more than if they are consuming every inch of content, AND those solo'ists often will find all kinds of little things in the lower level parts of the game that the big boys ignore in their rapid rise to power.

@spoletta @TheShawn

As spoletta said, it is better if you buy a lower package first, then upgrade if you like it. This is especially true as VIP and other Package perks don't kick in until full game launch. The main perk you want right now is the ability to join in the Alpha test. Anything else is gravy and you want to try the game out before you pay for the upgraded plan. You may decide Fractured is not for you at all, and then what? your stuck having paid for VIP for life that you never even use.

The main ??? that most of us I think have about VIP overall is the one not addressed, which is the Extra Study Slots. How exactly is that going to work overall is I think the biggest advantage VIP will bring overall. Does that give you a 9th and 10th preset, perhaps? Or does it give you a 6th or even more Pre-set on Abilities and Talent Tree selection?

If you don't know, as you have never played, each character you have gets 5 pre-sets in the game, so you can quickly swap between builds at an Inn or your Home resting at the fireplace. These Pre-Sets use the same pool of Knowledge Points, you just pick different active options in both categories. This is one of the chief strengths of Fractured, the ability to hot-swap your character roles before joining in a Raid with others. Got too many tanks and not enough DPS, swap your build around and become a DPS fiend with talents and skills focused on doing damage and ranged style attacks. Things like that are possible in Fractured, but not as easy in other MMORPGs out there.

@Mirgannel12 As far as I can recall, Moorcock didn't have the concept of Neutrality in his books, but it has been awhile.

The thing is, with D&D, which started the 2 axis Alignment system, since you could exist focused on any one of the extremes, without regard for the other axis, they needed a centerpoint to link the 2 axis together. A 0,0 coordinate if you will, thus was born Neutrality.

All games that came after have pretty much utilized some version of the D&D alignment system (or none at all).

In D&D, Neutrality represents those things in life that are not inherently leaning towards one of the extremes of an axis. Knowledge is Neutral, how you use it, and how you attain it can be Good, Evil, Lawful, or Chaotic, but the Knowledge itself is Neutral. Nature is Neutral, Balance is Neutral. Some might think that Balance is Lawful, however, Balance is also between Law and Chaos.

It's like a blade. It is a useful tool, and inherently neither good nor evil. Use it to build a shelter for the poor, it is Good, use it to murder someone, it's Evil. Use it with technique, like a Duelist, it is Lawful, and use it as a Brawler, it is Chaotic.

This is not to mention the fact that Good and Evil are considered based on the Morality of the individual. Different Moralities see these things differently. Law and Chaos, on the other hand, is based around Application. Is it Structured or Free-form. Is it Art or Science? Does a Lawful person always follow the Laws of the land, even if they disagree with them, and see the established government bodies as corrupt? Does a Chaotic person always ignore the laws of the land, and seek to supercede them, purely because they are laws?

Ultimately, everyone generally falls somewhere on the Spectrum between the 2 Axis. Not only that, but generally speaking, their point on the spectrum is generally not stagnant.

@BitterLoD Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the time in jail, myself, but the community already had a major conniption about it before.

As to the whole "How about restricting it to just Lost Tales" for the KP loss...but what if the PKer in question hasn't done any Lost Tales yet. They still can only get 1 of each Lost Tale (unless as you mentioned, they had to redo 1) but they would need to lose KP from one of the other sources they got their current KP from. I guess you could make it so Lost Tales had no limit, but the Devs already said they don't want to do that at all. They specifically don't want to build the KP system as just an alternative to Exp, so I don't see them doing another Exp based penalty and painting it over KP.

@BitterLoD Exactly. I've been a Solo player 99.9% of the time since the late 90s when MMOs came out, and if anything, that's the main draw that keeps getting handicapped by MMOs as new expansions and games came out.

I was a member of a Guild in EverQuest with one of my characters. They were fun folks, and from all over the globe...shoot, we even met up in Florida for a Camp-out and picnic experience one weekend with people coming from as far away as Germany. That being said, that is more like the exception to my experience, not the be all, end all of it.

@BitterLoD Because of how Knowledge Points work, I don't see a KP loss as a viable option.

Each creature only provides a finite number of KP. Once at 100%, they are done. Each discovery is worth only a 1 time KP award, then done, and each Lost Tale is worth a 1 time KP award then done. So, unlike Experience, a KP loss would be permanent, or some kind of arbitrary roll back of beasts or something would have to occur.

As to the time in jail, as has been stated, taking people out of the game for long periods of time is not going to go over well. As I'm not a PvP player, I'm okay with the system, but almost all the other PvPers were up in arms when it was suggested.

@Mirgannel12 As far as visitation to other planets go, since the visitation time window is soooo short, I don't really see any visitors participating in the steps it would take to summon, and defeat the Legends of another planet (if, as you so rightly asked, the other planets will even have Legends)

@spoletta actually, they specifically said ONLY neutral characters.

@Mirgannel12 as to previous remarks...Knowledge itself is inherently neutral. How you might need to acquire that knowledge and the use of that knowledge couled be typified as Good or Evil, but the actual knowledge itself is grey.

Example: Knowing how to kill something is neither good nor evil. Utilizing that knowledge may be evil, depending on the circumstances, or it could be good, but knowing how is neither. Same thing with Raising the Dead. Knowing how is not inherently evil. In most cultures and situations, however, using that knowledge is almost always considered moralistically Evil. That being said, there are situations where judicious use of the knowledge could be interpreted as Good or at least Neutral and Justified. For instance, if the last person to see a child alive was his/her kidnapper, and he is known for locking them away until they starve to death, if the only way you have to find the child is to question a corpse, you might need to raise that corpse sufficient for it to either tell you the child's location, or lead you there.

Another note:

With the 3 Planets, each one pretty much represents one of the 3 Alignments on the Axis, Tartarus is Evil, Syndesia is Neutral, and Arborea is Good. This being the case, you might have to be of the alignment of your planet to summon Legends there, who knows.

As to the other Alignment Axis, not all games want to borrow from the synergy of Alignments that Dungeons & Dragons started when they took the classic Good vs Evil and combined them with Michael Moorcock's Law vs Chaos. The 9 Alignments might be iconic right now, but that doesn't mean that they, as game developers, want to have people define their characters so exactly. Most people aren't purely any one alignment anyway, which is why even Dungeons & Dragons started to simplify and de-emphasize alignments in later editions.

@Mirgannel12 The Neutral Alignment requirement for summoning Legends and Collecting Lost tales is to discourage Evil Aligned players. Obviously, once the implement the Demon World, things will probably be different there, but on Syndesia, they want to make sure that you have a Neutral party member with you when you go after a legend. As for getting awarded Lost Tales, I believe part of this is so that an Evil Band can't come in, kill-steal a Legend and reap the full reward for it.

Good players can't summon a Legend either. You must be Neutral to do so, so the game is encouraging people to ride the middle line if they want to attain all the knowledge they can, because the pursuit of knowledge is itself a neutral act.

@Alexian Just because I don't interpret what you say directly how you mean it doesn't mean I don't read it.

For any kind of charter system to work, they would need to limit the number of charters a city would have available. That's just a fact of the matter. Otherwise, every city would try to sign up everyone they could. Now, granted, in your interpretation, it is the Guild/Group that is limited on how many they can accept, and that would create some competition for charters, with the Cities trying to sign the biggest and most prolific guilds out there before anyone else fills up their quota. Again, ,Solo'ists would become an afterthought. They would get the few remaining places, maybe, but would have a hard time to compete.That is if they can even get a response in from the city Governors so focused on landing the big guilds.

The big thing is, this system still would incentivize Guilds. Big Guilds become so much more attractive for Cities to sign charters with. Solo'ists become afterthoughts. Sure, they can sign as many solo'ists as they want, but it really won't help them compete in that kind of market.

@Alexian said in Markets and Merchant Guilds - A Reimagining of the Current System:

And such players could be eligible for a city charter as well.

Mayhaps eligible for one, but hardly likely to be offered one. It was talked about limiting the number of charters that a town can have. With that being the case (and it pretty much would have to be for the system to work) any town would be insane to offer charters to solo'ists over groups. Groups give them several merchants to partner with for only 1 charter slot, as opposed to a 1 for 1 exchange with a solo'ist. This, thus, incentivizes Guilds/Groups over Solo'ists again, over and above the natural advantages they already have.

Additional perks/systems that favor Guilds are not needed. What would work better is to come up with a couple perks that would favor the Solo'ist. I, however, can already hear the outcry if the Merchant Charters were only made available to Solo'ists, and not to Guilds.

[Edit]I always read every word of a post before commenting on it. You never know if there might be a kernel of worth in even the worst posts, or a phrase that invalidates some good idea, so you have to take them in, in their entirety.