Tier Replacement #2: Infinite Progression With Per-Continent Randomization

[tigersfan]

Okay, I've completely rewritten the OP: http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,9561.msg88299.html#msg88299

If it's not noted in the OP, then it's not currently being considered a difference between the proposed model #2 and the current system in the game.  So in other words, all that stuff about changing how things work when dropped, and making the inventory smaller, are no longer part of it.

So, to be clear after the re-write, all spells would be available eventually on all continents, correct? So, if my favorite spell is locked during on a new continent, I can still get it. I may have to put some work in w/ quests and what not, but, I can focus my efforts towards getting that spell on every continent.

If my assumption is correct, then I'm all for this plan.

[keith.lamothe]

So, to be clear after the re-write, all spells would be available eventually on all continents, correct? So, if my favorite spell is locked during on a new continent, I can still get it. I may have to put some work in w/ quests and what not, but, I can focus my efforts towards getting that spell on every continent.

If my assumption is correct, then I'm all for this plan.

That's correct.  It was actually correct with the original #2 OP proposal except that then you were unlocking specific spells instead of getting the materials.  The difference is that with this one you have more control (but not unlimited flexibility at all times) over what exactly you do unlock.  And it's much cleaner than my original idea in a lot of ways (not ditching crafting is kind of nice, you know?)

[x4000]

So, to be clear after the re-write, all spells would be available eventually on all continents, correct? So, if my favorite spell is locked during on a new continent, I can still get it. I may have to put some work in w/ quests and what not, but, I can focus my efforts towards getting that spell on every continent.

If my assumption is correct, then I'm all for this plan.

Yep, exactly.  You "go back to a default set plus a little extra" with each new continent you visit, but eventually everything is unlocked on that continent and you move on to the next, etc.

I think this is our model, too.  And I actually have a really simple plan for how to redo the entire crafting interface in just a couple of hours to fit this better, too.  I'll be adapting over the reference info screens to do that, and making some expansions to them that I'd already wanted to make anyhow,

[zebramatt]

Question: In this model, what are the restrictions on your loadout? Are there any? My reading is that it'll work just like now: i.e. you can take that 70%-of-current set of spells everywhere with you in your personal inventory. Is that right?

[Hearteater]

I think I'm overall not in favor of this largely because of the negative listed in the OP.  If I move to another continent, I might have tools I've earned taken away.  Why are they taken away?  Just because.  It would be like going into a new zone in WoW and having your Hunter's Bow taken away.  But the Warrior gets to keep his sword.  Why?  Why not.

I understand the desire to create a system whereby a player improves his character that doesn't feel grindy, but I don't feel this system does that.  Look at it like this:  In the current system your gems become worse slowly as the Civ level goes up.  But in this suggestion your gems can become instantly worthless when your Civ level goes up.  It kind of is like the current situation, but instead of gradual it is sudden, and instead of all gems, it is 30% of gems.  That and you now can't just go pick up the gems you need, you have to find a mission that offers a reward of the gems you need to unlock.

So it kind of is what we have now, but 70% less annoying.

[keith.lamothe]

So it kind of is what we have now, but 70% less annoying.

Which is quite possibly the best we can do while still having any form of obsolescence.  Removing that entirely is tempting, but then we're into a bunch of other problems that prompted us to do tiers in the first place.

[Bluddy]

I like this system a lot.

I think it's really good that players are forced to lose spells. Player attachment to their favorite spells is not a good thing in an infinite game. Sometimes the loss of something important to you is a good experience -- it forces the player to rethink their strategy. Games do this all the time by presenting you with new challenges -- your old strategy doesn't work and you have to let it go. Or think about how FPS games so often use the cliched 'lose all your weapons' trick to get you to re-experience that feeling of building up your weaponry -- and that's in a non-infinite game!

Perhaps as an addition to this, you could have some really rare bonuses that attach to your character that allow you to take a spell to one new continent.

The one thing I'm unsure about is why keep the old spells in your inventory at all if they're disabled. Why not just erase them? The oceans could neutralize spells or something.

[Gallant Dragon]

what do people think of this:
http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,9556.msg88386.html#msg88386

[Hearteater]

So it kind of is what we have now, but 70% less annoying.

Which is quite possibly the best we can do while still having any form of obsolescence.  Removing that entirely is tempting, but then we're into a bunch of other problems that prompted us to do tiers in the first place.

I'm inclined to think something better than 70% less annoying can be reached while still maintaining obsolescence, but I also think without play-testing the system a lot of the little details aren't going to come out.  With so many changes coming, like health and mana, I feel that it is really hard to evaluate the full impact of another massive change on top of those.  For example, how good or bad point #5 feels (gems only found in side missions) will depend a lot on other new systems we haven't experienced yet.

[keith.lamothe]

I'm inclined to think something better than 70% less annoying can be reached while still maintaining obsolescence, but I also think without play-testing the system a lot of the little details aren't going to come out.  With so many changes coming, like health and mana, I feel that it is really hard to evaluate the full impact of another massive change on top of those.  For example, how good or bad point #5 feels (gems only found in side missions) will depend a lot on other new systems we haven't experienced yet.

Yea, Chris and I are in the process of planning the next week or so so we can get through a lot of the stuff we've been brainstorming/redesigning so that you guys can have a playable situation again from which you can give more feedback.  For instance, on how to do better than 70% less annoying

[zebramatt]

I think it's important at this point to highlight the fact that the 70% refers to "70% of what we have in the game right now" as opposed to "70% of the eventual launch content". Given that there are a relatively small number of spells in the game presently (10/20% of intended?) that 70% will eventually be 10-15% of all spells.

Assuming I'm reading that correctly!

[Bluddy]

BTW you could combine the continent system with the permadeath system.

A character brought in from a previous continent would already know the spells that aren't present on this continent. But once this character dies, other characters on this continent only know what's known on this continent + what's been researched (via missions).

Then you just have to make sure death rates aren't low enough that players could cover several continents with one character. Maybe you could check for this scenario and have the player character attacked by some really bad wind demons who'd cause him/her to lose some of his/her knowledge every 3 continents or so.

[zebramatt]

BTW you could combine the continent system with the permadeath system.

A character brought in from a previous continent would already know the spells that aren't present on this continent. But once this character dies, other characters on this continent only know what's known on this continent + what's been researched (via missions).

Then you just have to make sure death rates aren't low enough that players could cover several continents with one character. Maybe you could check for this scenario and have the player character attacked by some really bad wind demons who'd cause him/her to lose some of his/her knowledge every 3 continents or so.

That does encourage save scumming, however.

[Hearteater]

Just wanted to mention to you guys at Arcen, you are doing an amazing job.  So please don't take any of my brainstorming at all negatively.  I have a ton of respect for your games, how you handle customer feedback, and how incredibly you use that feedback to make your games exceptional.  Keep up the good work.  And don't forget to sleep a little, and maybe at least wave at the family on occasion.

[Bluddy]

BTW you could combine the continent system with the permadeath system.

A character brought in from a previous continent would already know the spells that aren't present on this continent. But once this character dies, other characters on this continent only know what's known on this continent + what's been researched (via missions).

Then you just have to make sure death rates aren't low enough that players could cover several continents with one character. Maybe you could check for this scenario and have the player character attacked by some really bad wind demons who'd cause him/her to lose some of his/her knowledge every 3 continents or so.

That does encourage save scumming, however.

It does, but so do character bonuses and yet they're a really cool element that will hopefully be implemented. Anything that gives characters any advantage encourages save scumming.