Jump to content

  •  

Attributes


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
137 replies to this topic

Poll: X-Attribute PP Selection (58 member(s) have cast votes)

Would you like to see this tested?

  1. Yes (48 votes [82.76%])

    Percentage of vote: 82.76%

  2. No (7 votes [12.07%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.07%

  3. I don't know (3 votes [5.17%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.17%

How many PPS should be gained per level with this system (will be tunable, this is what you expect will work best)?

  1. 1 PP per level (7 votes [12.07%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.07%

  2. 1.5 PP per level (3 every two) (8 votes [13.79%])

    Percentage of vote: 13.79%

  3. 2 PP per level (35 votes [60.34%])

    Percentage of vote: 60.34%

  4. I don't know (8 votes [13.79%])

    Percentage of vote: 13.79%

Should Carry Capacity be put into it's own X-Attribute with this sytem instead of being part of Might?

  1. Yes (21 votes [36.21%])

    Percentage of vote: 36.21%

  2. No (23 votes [39.66%])

    Percentage of vote: 39.66%

  3. I don't know (14 votes [24.14%])

    Percentage of vote: 24.14%

Do any X-Attributes need to be weakened with this sytem (include comment also)?

  1. Yes, weakened a lot (2 votes [3.45%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.45%

  2. Yes, weakened a little bit (10 votes [17.24%])

    Percentage of vote: 17.24%

  3. No (20 votes [34.48%])

    Percentage of vote: 34.48%

  4. I don't know (26 votes [44.83%])

    Percentage of vote: 44.83%

Should we consider Magic X-Attributes be added that affect Attack & Defensive spell strength with this system?

  1. Yes (35 votes [60.34%])

    Percentage of vote: 60.34%

  2. No (11 votes [18.97%])

    Percentage of vote: 18.97%

  3. I don't know (12 votes [20.69%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.69%

Vote

#1 Hades

Hades

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 380 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 09:44 AM

The introduction of a new attribute system was number one on the TO DO list for a while now. Introducing a new system is, however, very hard and requires a lot of tests beforehand, tests in which not many people take part in. Right now, Korrode's attribute system runs on the test server, yet nobody is there to test it. Reasons for this are plenty, one reason that stands out from the others is that the system takes time to analyze and decide what build you are going for; another reason would be that the system isn't flawless, and most have given up on it.

I come with another proposition of a 'system', one that doesn't require so much analyzing, nor does it require so much tests.

I propose the removal of attributes completely, letting people choose from cross-attributes directly, along with giving players 2 pps/level. This means you will no longer choose coordination or physique, you will be choosing dexterity, matter, might, and so on directly, without having to end up with cross attributes you do not desire. The reason for the 2 pps/level is that, right now, if we add 2 pps to lets say coordination, we are rewarded with 3 cross-attributes increments, meaning 2 pps = 3 cross-attributes, so 1 pp = 1.5. I went along and raised that to 2 pps, so that we can tackle stronger mobs faster, not being stuck on the same mob from 60s to 90s.

If such a system were to be implemented, or at least tested, I propose that the cap put on cross-attributes be removed, so that the difference between players will be higher. At end game you'll have 190~ pps to spend, and you'll want those spent on cross-attributes that help your type of player, you don't want to be forced to spend them on cross-attributes you dont actually need. We might get some really interesting builds, some extreme ones too.

Below I have attached an excel spreadsheet which allows you to browse through such a system, and maybe even add to it. I have added a new cross-attribute as well, Restore, which increases defensive magic power, to differentiate mages from healers.

Attributes
Alternative download:
Attributes

* Sponsored Poll *
Scarr & Hades

Edited by Learner, 12 January 2013 - 09:55 AM.
added poll sponsorship


#2 Learner

Learner

    God

  • Administrators
  • 2646 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 09:52 AM

Being stuck on the same mob for so long has nothing to do with attrs. It's the mobs at fault.

#3 Hades

Hades

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 380 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 09:58 AM

View PostLearner, on 12 December 2012 - 09:52 AM, said:

Being stuck on the same mob for so long has nothing to do with attrs. It's the mobs at fault.
Its not just that Learner, but as you saw on test server with korrode's system, I made a fighter build, and saw I had 36 rationality, which I didn't aim for. Keeping the attributes, even in the current EL system, will eventually give you cross-attributes which you dont even need, and thats actually wasted pps. At least with what I proposed, you could make your own build, and not waste any pps.

#4 Learner

Learner

    God

  • Administrators
  • 2646 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:22 AM

I wasn't argue your other points, let the players discuss that. I'm simply saying that gaps in combat leveling are caused by mob related issues, not Attr's. No significant balancing of mobs has been done yet.

#5 scarr

scarr

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 744 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:37 AM

hmm, this could work i think

don't have access to excel tho, so can't check that

#6 Kaddy

Kaddy

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 347 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 11:23 AM

I actually support this idea. Adding to x-attribs just would allow interesting builds. (At least easier to understand and no extra work for the attribute changes and forcing people to research all the attributes again.)

-Kaddy

#7 Meneldor

Meneldor

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 145 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 11:57 AM

Interesting idea. I support it.

#8 Nova

Nova

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 315 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:37 PM

I think part of the fun of the game is choosing the attributes that give you closest to what you want.  If we just chose from cross atts that part of the depth of the game is totally gone.

#9 Learner

Learner

    God

  • Administrators
  • 2646 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:43 PM

View PostNova, on 12 December 2012 - 01:37 PM, said:

I think part of the fun of the game is choosing the attributes that give you closest to what you want.  If we just chose from cross atts that part of the depth of the game is totally gone.
But, it's possible offset by being able to be more creative in cross-attr assignment.

What are the potential abuses?

#10 Hades

Hades

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 380 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 02:43 PM

Its very hard, if not impossible to balance all attributes. Even if we manage that, we will always have to sacrifice, and in the end we get one or two extra cross attributes that we dont even want. In the current system, fighters will always aim for P/C, because they give fighting cross attributes. Nobody is going to look at Will or Vitality for example, simply because they gain too many cross attributes that suck  for fighting. This change would offer diversity, as with 190~ pps at end game, no build will be similar to another.

As for possible abuses, I can only think of the exp bonus from rationality, but even that can be fixed. Abuses don't really exist because we can always tune the amount of X a variable gives us(for example can always tune the amount of dmg we get from Might/rat/etc.). But of course we first need to test this, if people like the idea.

#11 Meneldor

Meneldor

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 145 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 05:07 PM

If we are talking about old attribute system. Only problem could be might which gives emu and dmg so dmg could be assigned to perception.

#12 bog

bog

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 172 posts
  • LocationEarth

Posted 13 December 2012 - 08:36 AM

View PostSoD, on 12 December 2012 - 09:44 AM, said:

Introducing a new system is, however, very hard and requires a lot of tests beforehand, tests in which not many people take part in. Right now, Korrode's attribute system runs on the test server, yet nobody is there to test it.

speaking on behalf of the Happy and Smiley but Slightly Dumb committee , I can say a HUGE way to increase people testing on the test server would be to give them a very clear indication of how to actually get on the test server. Or better yet, a perma sticky on forums in a very clear place to give clear and understandable instructions on how to get onto the test server.

I'm speaking plainly, by saying it would increase your test participants by giving them clear indication on how to get there.

If you would like to tell me '' ZomFg everyone should know how to do that by now and if you dont you shouldnt be testing '' then sorry, but you will forever encounter low numbers on the test server.

#13 Korrode

Korrode

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 417 posts
  • LocationMelburn, Strayamate.

Posted 13 December 2012 - 11:31 AM

TBH, i think people are probably just having trouble getting out of the EL headspace. EL players testing QEL attribs against EL mobs makes the mobs seem much 'harder' than what people are used to, so i'm guessing they can't help but feel as though it's "worse" and "bad".

My system (or really any 6 b-attrs each affecting 3 out of a total 9 x-attrs) is just not that hard to deal with. I hardly think it's setting the intelligence requirement bar too high. In fact, in previous combat system related discussions people have often suggested implementing even more variables to combat that the player is to select from; increasing the requirement for carefully considering one's build more so.

Of course, in EL, for a large part, the attribute system was quite pointless. Very little choice was actually made. For the budding young general fighter the only real decision they'd be making for their first many months (even years) of playing was "Vit or Will", of which the difference in outcome of that choice was relatively small anyway. I guess you have to decide if you actually preferred that; having a simple cookie cutter build that was obviously superior and everyone used.
(There are of course the exceptions of players who did specific multi-training builds and what not, but that was a niche and something already experienced players with a specific goal did. It's also less relevant with the OL exp system)

Regarding the comments about slow progression; QELServ had 30 mobs you progressed through while training from new char to ~100 a/d, and all of those mobs had their stats made from scratch with consideration for the amount of desirable cross-attribs a character of the appropriate levels would have within the QELServ attrib system. OL needs a similar re-working of mob stats (and not to mention spawn locations, amounts, etc.).
Seeing the level up animation is good but moving on to bigger badder baddies is better.


Anyways if most people just wanna be able to add exactly the x-attrs they want, go for it, hf with that, but seems pretty dull to me -_-

#14 Learner

Learner

    God

  • Administrators
  • 2646 posts

Posted 13 December 2012 - 11:51 AM

Actually, I've been taking the difference in mobs into account as well as the players are used to Coord being OP as well. The basic attr setup and how it's used for Combat is balanced fairly well and nobody has found a way to get OP yet.

Where the problems crop up is that the PP's have been going into 3-4 (usually 4) attrs just for vombat, which uses a lot of PP's as well as not leaving any real room in Attr'd to fit in Ranges & Mages without chars getting OP'd too easily when they go multi-class.

#15 Hades

Hades

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 380 posts

Posted 13 December 2012 - 11:52 AM

Few people will bother with a new system really, I've talked to a few and they said the game will die when a new attribute system will be in place, and I have to agree here. I keep looking over your system korrode, and can't help but notice how some attributes contain both fighting x-attri, as well as summoning/magic x-attributes(e.g. Coordination-Charm/Reaction/Ethereality). If i go for that attribute because I'm a summoner and need charm, I'll end up with Reaction too, which I dont really need. Same goes for Instinct-Reaction/Perception/Rationality, as a fighter its a good attribute, but I also get un-needed rationality. Tbh I dont think its natural for an attribute to contain both fighting x-attri as well as magic/summoning/etc. ones.
My proposal will surely get rid of all the trouble of researching a new system/build/etc., as well as giving you the freedom of choosing exactly where you want your pps spent.

#16 Korrode

Korrode

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 417 posts
  • LocationMelburn, Strayamate.

Posted 13 December 2012 - 02:38 PM

View PostSoD, on 13 December 2012 - 11:52 AM, said:

I keep looking over your system korrode, and can't help but notice how some attributes contain both fighting x-attri, as well as summoning/magic x-attributes
Well yeah, it's intended. If you are a summoner and you want Charm, you have 2 choices of attribute to get charm, those attributes also give other cross-attributes. You decide which of them you prefer (or at what ratio you're going to build both) based on the advantages of the other cross-attributes you're going to get.

For example, (assuming Charm is the only x-attr to affect summoning (which i think Rat should have some (lesser) impact)) someone may choose to play a 'pure' summoner style, where they don't intend to personally engage opponents, they just want really powerful summons and when they personally are being targeted they are just going to try to evade, running around, kiting their enemy. For this person the Dexterity on Will is useless because they personally are going to act defensively, so the chance of dodging some hits with the Reaction from Coordination is better, plus it gives a large mana pool for heaps of summon spam to hold up the enemy so they can evade. They'd likely stack a lot of Phys and Coord as combined they provide mostly what they need, likely some Vit too for more survivability.
On the other hand, a person may want to play in such a style where they engage opponents along with their summons and sacrifice defensive ability to press for as much damage burst as possible. For such a person Will could be a much more attractive option as their primary Charm source. They can go Will and Vit heavy, probably with a bit of Phys too for a personal damage boost and a bit more survivability.


If someone wants Charm, they can have it.
But they also get to choose between 2 sets of additional attribs to come with it.
Which set can they see themself making best use of? What ideas can they come up with to make use of them?

I think the way an attribute system like this makes you think about which 'extra' attribs you want and how to best use them is a nice dynamic to have.


EDIT: As for people you talk to saying they think the game will die with an attrib system change, yeah well, the server should never have gone live when something as pivotal to the game as the attribute system still completely undecided on. Way too much time has passed and people have gotten well settled into the current setup. Very big, core game changes are just going to be more and more discontent causing as more time passes.

#17 Wizzy

Wizzy

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 199 posts

Posted 13 December 2012 - 03:12 PM

View PostKorrode, on 13 December 2012 - 02:38 PM, said:

View PostSoD, on 13 December 2012 - 11:52 AM, said:

I keep looking over your system korrode, and can't help but notice how some attributes contain both fighting x-attri, as well as summoning/magic x-attributes
Well yeah, it's intended. If you are a summoner and you want Charm, you have 2 choices of attribute to get charm, those attributes also give other cross-attributes. You decide which of them you prefer (or at what ratio you're going to build both) based on the advantages of the other cross-attributes you're going to get.

For example, (assuming Charm is the only x-attr to affect summoning (which i think Rat should have some (lesser) impact)) someone may choose to play a 'pure' summoner style, where they don't intend to personally engage opponents, they just want really powerful summons and when they personally are being targeted they are just going to try to evade, running around, kiting their enemy. For this person the Dexterity on Will is useless because they personally are going to act defensively, so the chance of dodging some hits with the Reaction from Coordination is better, plus it gives a large mana pool for heaps of summon spam to hold up the enemy so they can evade. They'd likely stack a lot of Phys and Coord as combined they provide mostly what they need, likely some Vit too for more survivability.
On the other hand, a person may want to play in such a style where they engage opponents along with their summons and sacrifice defensive ability to press for as much damage burst as possible. For such a person Will could be a much more attractive option as their primary Charm source. They can go Will and Vit heavy, probably with a bit of Phys too for a personal damage boost and a bit more survivability.


If someone wants Charm, they can have it.
But they also get to choose between 2 sets of additional attribs to come with it.
Which set can they see themself making best use of? What ideas can they come up with to make use of them?

I think the way an attribute system like this makes you think about which 'extra' attribs you want and how to best use them is a nice dynamic to have.


EDIT: As for people you talk to saying they think the game will die with an attrib system change, yeah well, the server should never have gone live when something as pivotal to the game as the attribute system still completely undecided on. Way too much time has passed and people have gotten well settled into the current setup. Very big, core game changes are just going to be more and more discontent causing as more time passes.

Yes, you are correct, however, if these changes are not made, why not just go play eternal lands? Because honestly, in a few years OL will be exactly like EL, with the same pitfalls and band aids.

#18 bog

bog

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 172 posts
  • LocationEarth

Posted 14 December 2012 - 06:14 AM

Wizzy, I sincerely hope you are wrong and that Learner will succeed with this. He has put a lot of effort in so far

just seems to me that we might be needing to force the realism , that truly what will be needed at some point is what you and some of the other oldbies have been saying, considering this is a rolling test - at some point a re start would be needed

only being real

#19 Wizzy

Wizzy

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 199 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 11:51 AM

View PostaTeh, on 14 December 2012 - 06:14 AM, said:

Wizzy, I sincerely hope you are wrong and that Learner will succeed with this. He has put a lot of effort in so far

just seems to me that we might be needing to force the realism , that truly what will be needed at some point is what you and some of the other oldbies have been saying, considering this is a rolling test - at some point a re start would be needed

only being real

I have no doubt in Learners ability, it is not learner that needs to be convinced. It is the others that do not see the whole big picture.

Ever hear the expression "can't see the forest through the trees"? This is the biggest issue I have seen so far, there has been many suggested changes on these forums, but none of those suggestions have taken in account that these changes need to start from the very bottom, and go to the very top.  I think the game needs a plan, and will certainly need a restart.  Games should be launched anyhow.

Wizz

#20 Meneldor

Meneldor

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 145 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 12:11 PM

View PostWizzy, on 14 December 2012 - 11:51 AM, said:

View PostaTeh, on 14 December 2012 - 06:14 AM, said:

Wizzy, I sincerely hope you are wrong and that Learner will succeed with this. He has put a lot of effort in so far

just seems to me that we might be needing to force the realism , that truly what will be needed at some point is what you and some of the other oldbies have been saying, considering this is a rolling test - at some point a re start would be needed

only being real

I have no doubt in Learners ability, it is not learner that needs to be convinced. It is the others that do not see the whole big picture.

Ever hear the expression "can't see the forest through the trees"? This is the biggest issue I have seen so far, there has been many suggested changes on these forums, but none of those suggestions have taken in account that these changes need to start from the very bottom, and go to the very top.  I think the game needs a plan, and will certainly need a restart.  Games should be launched anyhow.

Wizz

Nicely said :D.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users