PDA

View Full Version : Pulled from another thread... Stats!



Padium
Dec 11, 2010, 10:08 PM
Seeing as the Beast thread went so far off topic with stats, and how they should work, I figured I'd toss up a thread and see where it goes.

Currently, I'm a fan of DFP being a straight up reduction of damage dealt, and EVP focusing on evading attacks, along with integrating a near-miss (basically a critical strike in reverse), which halves damage dealt. Near misses could be governed by EVP, as when the evade isn't quite good enough for a full miss, but only grazed the character, it kinda makes sense it would hurt less. I can also see crits governed by EVP and ATA as well, I mean, you have to actually hit that weak point to massively damage the giant enemy crab, and if you can't hit it, its not a crit.

I also think EVP should be the primary defense for forces, and this setup would make that even more feasible, while still keeping it balanced.

Thoughts? Anything to add?

How about tech stats?

Anon_Fire
Dec 11, 2010, 10:45 PM
ATP - Amount of damage dealt with Melee and Ranged weapons
MST - Amount of damage dealt with Techniques
STA - Resistance to Status Ailments

Seth Astra
Dec 11, 2010, 10:57 PM
ATP - Amount of damage dealt with Melee and Ranged weapons

I disagree with this otherwise we get PSZ's problem where HUcasts outdamage RAcasts with guns. Also, I don't like the idea of the STA stat. I just... Don't...

Justyn_Darkcrest
Dec 11, 2010, 11:13 PM
I disagree with this otherwise we get PSZ's problem where HUcasts outdamage RAcasts with guns. Also, I don't like the idea of the STA stat. I just... Don't...

So long as PSO2 doesn't follow PSZ's idea of letting just about everyone use rifles then it would be fine. Originally it balanced well in PSO since Hunters had a very limited slelection of guns they could use, and even then at low lvls where as rangers could use pretty much all of them.

To the OP, I like the idea of evp allowing near misses as an opposed critical. I think it would definatly help balance the Force classes low hp/def and would allow Sega to maybe change the buffs and debuffs to make them more reasonable.

As for Force damage, maybe they could keep MST as both offensive and defensive for techs and have a tech stat to govern crit? (just brainstorming here) Might be intresting.

Seth Astra
Dec 11, 2010, 11:17 PM
Hrm... Critical hits with techs don't make much sense, IMO. I imagine crits as hitting a weak point on the target, and techs seem like they'd hit too wide of an area for that to happen...

Ceresa
Dec 11, 2010, 11:22 PM
Power - damage for melee / ranged / tech
Defense - damage reduction for melee / ranged / tech
Luck - chance to crit, chance to take half damage
HP
PP

Cast/Beast/Human/Newman - 100% power / defense modifiers for all
Hunter - 130% power bonus when using melee
Ranged - 130% power bonus when using guns
Force - 130% power bonus when using techs
Hybrid - 115-120% power bonus to all

Nice and simple + homogeneous races so you don't have to sacrifice ear style for some arbitrary racial balance.

Dongra
Dec 11, 2010, 11:28 PM
That kind of kills the idea of trying out different races. Pretty boring if you ask me.

Justyn_Darkcrest
Dec 11, 2010, 11:36 PM
True, I completely forgot that PSO didn't have crits for techs, and come to think of it they probably should go back to that.

Seth Astra
Dec 12, 2010, 12:16 AM
The concept of hitting a weak point with techs is only applicable to large enemies, e.g. bosses. And they do that already (or at least they did in PSZ) by giving different target locations different restances.

Padium
Dec 12, 2010, 12:49 AM
The concept of hitting a weak point with techs is only applicable to large enemies, e.g. bosses. And they do that already (or at least they did in PSZ) by giving different target locations different restances.

That existed to some degree PSO as well, but could have been implemented better.

Darki
Dec 12, 2010, 01:44 AM
I already stated my point in the other post, but I'll condense it here.

I consider PSO/PSU an Action-RPG. I don't understand where is the need to having an "evasion" stat, when the game already allows you to dodge attacks just by moving your character. In my opinion evasion should be REAL evasion: Evading and blocking movements that would allow you to dodge attacks in real time. Why does a bullet from a grenade launcher need accuracy and evasion, but a fireball from Foie not? Why the fireball damages ALWAYS the target when hit, and a bullet from a grenade launcher not? In mi opinion, stats such as ATA or EVP are stats from normal MMORPGs, take Ragnarök Online or Lineage 2 if you want, where you click and the character does the work. If any, we could talk, as it was previously said , about "Critical rate" and "lucky dodge" that would be the abilities to land a critical attack (even being an ARPG we can't still aim ourselves for specific weak body parts, that would be too complicated so we can admit a critical attack instead) and to avoid being hit in a critical spot as oposing the previous stat.

"Accuracy" and "critical rate" could be the same, but I still think it would much simpler if "accuracy" were used for ranged damage and "critical rate" for the abbility to land a tougher hit than normal. I mentioned also using an independant stat, such as EVP, as the modifier for ranged defense but it seems the idea wasn't to liked... Anyways, I still believe using different sources for both damage types is something much easier and clean, that would make balancing issues much simpler. And duh, seriously, I'm not trying to bring "real life" to a game, but why on earth a character's physical strenght should affect the damage of a bullet? Are you throwing the bullets with your hands, then...? What makes a bullet harm is actually where you aim, you shoot someone in the hand and it will hurt, you shoot someone else in the eye and you'll blow out his brain.

But I don't like in an ARPG a stat that serves for getting an automatic and random chance of completely nullyfing the damage just by God's grace. It doesn't make sense in this type of game, and it would make it much more dinamic if we could get a new tier of "PAs", for example, that were actually deffensive maneuvres. Those movements, instead of using ATP or TP as modifiers, would work over EVP, granting when you will block an attack or when the monster will bypass your blocking anyways and harm you. Another reason for this to be better IMO is because if we're going to have a game with more dinamic attacks like PSU and not the short repeated combos from PSO, I don't really think blocking should become actually a bother and not an advantage. In PSU EVP is a SHIT for almost any fighter when they cut your combos at half. I think for a game that aims for combat dinamics similar to PSU shoud also grant you the choice to block and break the combo, or not to block, eat up the damage and finish the combo. In any case, there will still be knocking and flinching attacks so it's not like you won't be interrupted sometimes, but seriously, I don't want evading attacks to be a negative aspect of my character. I had enough in PSU.

If you want another stat to make non ATP based races worth something as fighters, why don't you make a stat like "agility"? You could make a stat to influence your attack and dodging speed instead of making that dependant on the class you are like Acro classes in PSU, that doesn't make too much sense at all. That way you could have, for example, Beasts being brute force fighters, CASTs being critical fighters and Newmans being pure speed fighters.

Finally, about TECHs dealing critical attacks... I think that should be managed by specific weapons and/or abbilities and not by general damage classes. A Grenade Launcher is pretty much like a Rafoie, same with Jabroga, if we take the example of PSU. Those attacks shouldn't be able to land critical attacks, but same than a shot from a handgun should be able PSO's Zonde which is some kind of aimed bolt, should be able to do criticals too.

Kent
Dec 12, 2010, 01:53 AM
What to do with stats kind of depends on the direction they want to take with the game, really.

As was brought up in the other thread, EVP is an interesting case - even if we have things such as manual blocking, dodge rolls and whatnot, there's no reason we couldn't have EVP still allow the player to get a random auto-block in if they're caught off-guard or in the middle of a combo. In fact, being that getting hit would probably interrupt your combo in the first place, it's basically a chance that, since you're already getting hit and your combo stopping, you either get to take damage or block it.

That, and that's not to say that getting auto-blocks (or properly timing your manual blocks) can't open up opportunities for counter-attacks or knocking the enemy off-balance.

That said, if EVP is still going to be the determinant stat for such things, it'd make sense for it to have a general benefit for manually-blocking attacks, too - for example, barriers may only be able to take a certain amount of a beating before they "break" (as in, run out of energy temporarily and need to recover), and EVP could serve to reduce the energy drained when manually-blocking. Of course, properly-timed blocks and auto-blocks could easily have the benefit of not draining it, or have minimized drain. Opening up an opportunity for counter-attacks is another possibility.

Similarly, I don't think I'd be against changing damage dealt with melee weapons and with ranged weapons to being dependant on different stats - after all, being stronger, physically, doesn't really make any difference on how much damage something takes from being shot by you. What makes a difference, is how accurate the shooter is. Naturally, this split would also make much more sense if we abolish the idea that having low ATA causes misses within any context - make players and enemies simply have to make their attacks physically contact in order to score a hit (save for the above auto-blocks happening, for both players and some enemies capable of doing so - perhaps with a much lower chance, if possible at all, to happen on attacks from behind).

Naturally, melee damage includes anything that hits in melee range - which is basically all of the "Hunter" weapons and "Force" weapons. I would say Slicers should be included in this group, too, being that they're actually flung at enemies. Things like Cards could be, too, but that really depends on their implementation (PSO cards vs. PSU "fans"). Though, these thrown weapons, it'd be interesting if they used both ATP and ATA in their calculations...

As for damage incurred by these... It's kind of nonsensical to say we should have a different stat for taking ranged damage than for taking melee damage. It's all physical damage, so just using DFP for that makes sense, and has no balance implications that we need to actually worry about.

For techniques... Well, TP is the pool from which techniques are cast. MST increases your damage/healing output with all techniques (though perhaps with some better scaling than we saw in PSO - you end up having to put a lot of MST on your character, for a little bit of damage difference). I think I would be in favor of separating these two stats - to where increasing your MST doesn't increase your TP, but it makes up for no longer doing that by simply having more of an impact on your techniques. Naturally, Force weapons that increase MST shouldn't make immense differences - it'd make more sense if some of them made a difference (such as wands) that would make sure you did a bit more damage with your techniques, but it should never get to the point where you absolutely must equip them in order for your techniques to be effective.

For defending against techniques... I think resistances are all we really need here - with different enemies having whatever elemental weaknesses they may have. Different pieces of equipment will also have different amounts of resistances on them, perhaps even trending more toward Frames and Barriers favoring resistances more, while Armor and Shields may favor DFP and EVP more. I think that would make sense (not a hard rule, mind you, just a sort of trend amongst the types of equipment).

LCK should probably stop existing. I think critical hits should be determined by where you hit the enemy - not by simple random chance. This would stand for enemies with multiple target points, because I'm not talking about different target points on an enemy causing critical hits, I mean if you shoot a Rappy in the head with your Handgun, it inflicts a critical hit. This would mean that in melee combat, since the actual attack animations wouldn't be so easily-aimable like guns could be, that you need to know how to attack enemies properly in order to inflict critical hits. This could mean that you need to properly time attacks to intercept a weak point that's only exposed while it's attacking, or it could mean that you can only really get critical hits from in front of an enemy - it's simply a system for properly rewarding the player for making attacks that may otherwise be very risky or difficult to actually pull off; something that rewards player skill with better damage output.

I don't really see a reason to prevent this from happening with techniques, it's just that the nature of techniques themselves would probably just make it incredibly-difficult to do - except in cases of enemies (such as bosses) who get their weak points exposed easily... In which case, why punish someone for wanting to deal damage with Techniques when they have the chance?

So, the basic rundown would look something like this:

ATP: Damage output with melee weapons.
ATA: Damage output with ranged weapons.
DFP: Lowers physical damage taken.
EVP: Increases chance to automatically block physical attacks and reduces temporary durability loss of barriers/shields while blocking manually (running out disables your barrier temporarily while it recharges).
MST: Increases damage dealt by techniques, no longer affects TP pool.

Critical hits are determined by locational damage, where enemies have weak points where they receive critical hits. Any damage incurred by any type of source that hits these points, will deal critical damage (even techniques).

Darki
Dec 12, 2010, 02:07 AM
I still think EVP shouldn't grant automatic blocks. If you want, in the case of enemies that could be a random modifier since they won't "manually" block as they're not sentient players, but IAs, but in case of characters, blocking should be completely manual, AND the chance wouldn't be the act of blocking, but, in case of you manually block, if the block will be successfully or the monster will anyways break your guard. And yes, I think you should be able to block techs, if you can block a bullet why not a fireball? In theory you block with an energy field, blocking even lightning should be totally possible.

Having a stat that randomly nullifies the damage you get doesn't make sense at all in games like PSO.

And as for critical rate and luck I was talking about it because I don't believe the game will reach the complexity to be able to aim at different body parts in a "normal" monster, but if that's the case, then yeah, luck wouldn't be needed, all would take would be skills with the gamepad and aiming well.

Oh, and by TP I meant "technic power", the stat that modifies technic damage in PSU, not the "energy pool" of the character in PSO. sorry if I wasn't clear but I didn't remember that in PSO was called in a different way, in PSU MST is actually the stat that defends against techs. In this matter I'd prefer ranged weapons to have their own energy pool each, while melee and technics could share a common character pool, or maybe technics use a different energy than melee, but all weapons of the same type draining the same bar (such as a "technic points" for techs and "physich points" for melee). It's just that a gun draining your energy doesn't seem right to me.

Wayu
Dec 12, 2010, 03:11 AM
Sorry if I mentioned this elsewhere, but Darki, try playing PSPo2.

-Wayu

Dongra
Dec 12, 2010, 03:15 AM
How did they handle evp in that game? All I know is that it's been useless in PSO and PSU.

Allison_W
Dec 12, 2010, 08:52 AM
How did they handle evp in that game? All I know is that it's been useless in PSO and PSU.

Supposedly in PSP2 they kind of, uh, overcompensated for its past lack of utility. By which I mean phrases like "weapon immunity" get thrown around with regards to certain EVP thresholds.

Padium
Dec 12, 2010, 03:11 PM
I still think EVP shouldn't grant automatic blocks. If you want, in the case of enemies that could be a random modifier since they won't "manually" block as they're not sentient players, but IAs, but in case of characters, blocking should be completely manual, AND the chance wouldn't be the act of blocking, but, in case of you manually block, if the block will be successfully or the monster will anyways break your guard. And yes, I think you should be able to block techs, if you can block a bullet why not a fireball

It's not about blocking techs, and foie is not simply a fireball. going into the general concept of magic, magic is the emotion of the castor being challed through available energies in a helpful or harmful form. The degree of strength a spell has is based on two things, the potency of the emotion behind them, and their capacity to channel that emotion. In that respect, a low level foie could easily be absorbed in a block, but should the castor be more powerful, that foie will burn through and melt whatever is being used to block it. This is where resistances come in. So instead of random blocking, you have a material which is designed to resist a particular type of energy, in the case of surviving the foie, its fire resistance, as you don't want to be cooked, burnt to ashes, or melted into a pool of steel. In the case of megid, it would be darkness/hatred resist, and the higher the level of the megid, the more potent the hatred behind it, and the better the castor can channel it, so you need something that can resist that, which is harder to do. Grants? Same story, but its the opposite of hatred/darkness, being light/purity. The two both effectively cancel each other out, so I would say a piece of armor could not have both light and dark resist, monsters, sure, if they are void, which effectively just reduces spells in general. Megid and grants, being both extreme hatred and extreme purity, should then be rarer than other techs.

As for the AI, AI is simply a computing term used to mean artificially recreating what the brain does using computers. They are monsters, not AI, yes their actions are governed by AI, but that doesn't change that if it weren't a game,they'd have a measurable intelligence. Now, as far as monsters go, no dog has a sense of self, but all dogs are capable of showing emotion, however primitive it may be. Monsters should be just the same. Some animals do have a sense of self, mostly certain apes, and possibly dolphins. The most intelligent monsters are those capable of casting spells. No, breathing fire is not casting a spell. It's then perfectly reasonable for an enemy to dodge because it fears pain, or to block to reduce the impact of a hit.

Yeah... Not anticipating seeing my major being used to compare things in a game to psychology XD

Back to the spells though, I completely agree that you can block, but its not really blocking in the same sense, its absorbing the damage, just sometimes it can be fully absorbed. Because of how spells are just emotion, I don't think it should be possible to dodge all spells, like grants for instance, you are purifying the target, its cast upon the target, not towards it.

I also think that blocks shouldn't block an entire hit, it should block up to the capacity of the person and armor, that is to say, a full block (0 damage) is possible, but for the most part, it would just be significantly reduced damage. Heck, its even possible to parry if you are melee, and its possible to take slight amounts of damage in a partially failed parry. A parry would be more of a total block, as it is literally deflecting a blow with your weapon. The best defense is a good offense after all, isn't it ;)

Kent
Dec 12, 2010, 06:17 PM
I still think EVP shouldn't grant automatic blocks. If you want, in the case of enemies that could be a random modifier since they won't "manually" block as they're not sentient players, but IAs, but in case of characters, blocking should be completely manual, AND the chance wouldn't be the act of blocking, but, in case of you manually block, if the block will be successfully or the monster will anyways break your guard. And yes, I think you should be able to block techs, if you can block a bullet why not a fireball? In theory you block with an energy field, blocking even lightning should be totally possible.

Having a stat that randomly nullifies the damage you get doesn't make sense at all in games like PSO.
Okay, but now you have to explain why it doesn't make sense. Probably one of the better ways of looking at this problem, is to look at how similar games deal with it.

The Diablo series is a good example - Diablo II the most similar game we've had to the original PSO, in quite a number of ways. Once you look past the difference in viewpoint, the level of similarity between the two is very much similar.

To drive my point home: They're both action-RPGs. They both allow the player to move around in real-time to the purpose of dodging enemy attacks. Some classes have character skills that are specifically-designed to afford the player some active mobility to allow them to get out of the way of attacks better (be it by teleporting, jumping, or merely a run speed increase). Yet, the game has automatic blocks at the same time - they simply afford you a random chance to nullify damage taken from physical attacks.

I'm still wondering why you think such a system has no place in a game like this. I'm not talking about blocking happening as a random chance being your only method of defense: I'm talking about it putting a defensive stat to additional use, that gives you a chance to not feel your mistakes quite as hard. I don't think the "I don't want my combos canceled" argument really applies in the first place, because it can be logically-assumed that if you get hit during a combo, your combo is going to stop, regardless of whether or not you actually block the attack (which is what should happen, really).

What, exactly, is the problem with having an additional layer of defense that has a random chance of happening when you, as a player, are caught off-guard? It's not something that takes away from the skill of the game, and it's not something that's going to supplant the need for manual defense and evasion - it's only there to give a supplemental amount of defense, that you can't always rely on.

If you're worried about people getting to a point where they're blocking every hit, then there are quite obvious and widely-used methods for solving that - diminishing returns on EVP for the purposes of this and a hard cap on the maximum chance to automatically-block something (which could be determined by level difference) are both very commonly used in games for this kind of thing. Being that there's nothing actually wrong with a system like this (obviously, assuming that it's implemented in a way that doesn't make it overpowered), I'm really curious as to why you'd be so actively against something that's literally harmless.

Seth Astra
Dec 12, 2010, 06:46 PM
Just to respond to a point a ways back, on the subject of cards (and bows, if they make it in) I like the idea of them being a force weapon, based on MST and ATA (not quite sure how the formula would work, though). Here's how I imagine it:

Technique boost:

Rods > Wands > Cards > Bows

Regular attack potency:

Bows > Cards > Wands = Rods

Note that wands and rods are equal in melee because I am assuming the ability to dual-weild will be included, so you can equip a wand with another weapon.

Darki
Dec 13, 2010, 04:19 PM
@Padium: If I remember well, TECHNICs are not "magic", TECHs are the effect of the manipulation of the photons in the atmosphere by your psyche. So it IS a fireball, the only thing is that the energy used to form that fireball out of nothing was gathered using photon energy and your mind power.

I understand that in a game based on some kind of medieval theme, you wouldn't be able to stop a fireball or a lightning bolt with just an armor or a metal shield specially when magic is "magic", but the thing is that in PS series, the "shield" is an energy field based on the very same energy (photons) than what's used to create those TECHs, so, in theory, a line shield and/or a photon barrier should be able to block a TECHNIC if we use the game's "logic". Another thing is that the TECH was strong enough to break your defense, same thing as I was saying with other kinds of attacks.

@Kent: If you want an explanation for why it makes or not makes sense for me, I can try to explain to you. For me, a game such as PSU, an ARPG, is supposed to give you as "realistic" combat as possible. Yeah, is not exactly an action game as Zelda where attacks aren't measured as HP and your character doesn't rely on stats, but the thing is, that the main idea of an ARPG is that your character strenght and other characteristics are measured in stats, while the game is played in a completely free way and not by turns like if you were playing FFs or Pokémon.

So, why should it be a stat that makes you block unintentionally? My point is simple, you can dodge manually, why do you need a stat that makes you dodge automatically? that's just "easy mode", same way that I don't really like the idea of a stat that makes you aim automatically (ATA) when you have to aim manually too. Is like saying "trollolol you took time to aim at the monster in 1st person camera but you'll miss anyways". You will already have a deffensive stat that will cut your damage: DFP (and probably racial/elemental attribute defense).

Because, using the same logic as you're using, then why don't we have a stat that makes us attack automatically a monster randomly when it's in front of us? It's just the same.

I'm not "strongly" against this, I'm just saying that for me, it would be a real advancement that the game decided to give us manual blocking and dodging, and use EVP as the "block-bypassing" stat instead of the "lol I dodge without moving a muscle" stat. I will play and enjoy the game even if it had PSU's ol' EVP, but I think what PSO2 should aim to is to give as much freedom in combat as possible, and for that, doing stuff automatically is a bit out of theme. I know it's harmless, but I also like the "challenge" of doing it myself.

In the other hand, as I suppose the game won't reach the realism in combat as other type of games as to be able to manually strike different parts on the body of all monsters, I wouldn't say that's bad to use ATA and EVP as means to do a "random" increase or decrease (but not nullifying) of damage as "critical" attacks and "lucky dodge", leaving to "luck" and randomness the idea of striking a critical point for damage. But if happened that the game will have that advanced kind of combat style, I wouldn't like too much that they added this too, then.

MAXrobo
Dec 13, 2010, 04:39 PM
I think ATP should return to how it was in PSO. a hunter SHOULD be able to do more damage with a gun than a ranger, thats there job, to do damage. but it is balenced in that they cant uses very good guns and that they would only hit one in every three or four shots due to bad ATA. and i dont think force weapon melee attacks should use MST eather. if a force character can do as much damage as a hunter at close range something is very wrong. forces are ment to use TECHs, and there weapons should encourage it.

Darki
Dec 13, 2010, 05:41 PM
Lol, a swordsman should do more damage with guns than a gunslinger. Great idea, dude. xD Then they should do more damage with TECHs too, as their job is do damage, as you say. xD

MAXrobo
Dec 13, 2010, 06:27 PM
@darki you obviously didnt read my post very closely. i said its balance by having them not hit very much, so even if they do more damage per shot they do less damage over all because of poor ATA. and if you havent played PSO, TECH damage is determined by MST, not ATP. Hunters did more physical damage, while forces did more TECH damage.

Dongra
Dec 13, 2010, 06:46 PM
Even though tech damage was incredibly weak in comparison to melee and ranged damage.

Padium
Dec 13, 2010, 10:59 PM
As a note, I know techniques are not magic, but they are derived from the same basic principles. If you look at the expanded universe, in one of the PSO quests, it is actually explained that techniques don't just manipulate the photon in the air, they convert the photon to different forms of energy, that's where the elements come in. The potency is based on mental strength, which is another phrase psychology uses for intellect, and intellect is the stat that governs magic strength. Coincidence? I think not. How about photon blasts, in another series of quests, it is revealed that photon blasts are an empathic response in mags, that is to say, mags respond to your emotion, they feel what you feel, and experience the stress, and it causes them to build up the photons which, when stressed to an absolute limit, is converted to a more useful form based on your emotional desire, whether that be healing, buffs, or a powerful non elemental attack (converted to a non elemental via the D-Cells).

Techs are like this as well. They are the emotion driving the conversion of photon into more useful forms via equipment, the equipment understands how to convert the photon via a combination of the disks installed (interpreting emotion), the potency of the emotion (MST), and other factors, including equipment that enhances the ability to convert photon, etc.

To link the bridge of emotion and intellect, that's actually rather simple. Going back to psychology, lower order animals feel more basic things, such as pain/hunger. Higher level animals experience more advanced emotion, and it generally increases capacity wise with intelligence. In fact, emotional intelligence is actually recognized as existing! Rant aside, it takes an intelligent (high MST) being to channel emotion in ways that don't destroy the castor and allies. This is why the highest level techs, as well as megid, aren't available to hunters and rangers. Grants is purity tech, and it takes a lot out of a force to cast, more than a hunter or ranger is capable of without being drained, using it would be self destructive. Its risky enough for a force to pop grants.

PSZ is a bit different, and their techs are messed up. Its canon in some ways, and an explanation for techs exists, but thats another, even longer winded, rant.

Dongra
Dec 13, 2010, 11:59 PM
So who is to say that a character can't manipulate the photons from shields and armor with emotion to counter a tech?

Darki
Dec 14, 2010, 01:59 AM
^ That's the point. In PSU Line shields also add you MST (which is the "mental defense" in PSU, I don't remember this stat name in PSO). Why someone can strike me with "emotions" but I can't block that with my own "emotions"? The same principle comes with melee then, if I put all my "willpower" to slash an enemy, seeing as weapns are photons too and some fighting classes (as HUmar and HUnewm) can also use TECHs, they could also override any defense by the same theory you're pointing.

In the end, everything is too complicated to use so many "IRL" tems as you're trying to use to justify that techs are unblockable, thhen I could find many justifications for ATA and EVP not to exist in an ARPG. xD

@Maxrobo: The thing is that hunter's job is not "deal damage". hunter's job is to slash enemies. Ranger's job is to shoot them. Why a hunter should be better than a Ranger at it's job? I understand that a Hunter could do more damage with lower class guns than a Ranger, but balance it with high ranked guns so the Ranger does a lot of damage too...

... but by the same principles, then a ranger should do more damage with melee than a hunter, and balance it as rangers would use less melee weapons. Does it make sense? No.

In case of forces this is something more likely to discuss, as Forces have the ability to support themselves as well, so they might be a bit weaker than other damaging classes, but then, that would be fine if they DON'T implement healing items that just "heal all your HP" like trimates in PSU, or that buff you at higher/same levels than some techers, because then, to use support techs become a hindrance when it's just faster to pop a Star Atomizer.

My point is simple: don't shit in my backyard. If you're a hunter then excel at hunter weapons, and leave other weapon classes to it's real user to be the best at them. I understand that a hunter should be a bit more DPS than a ranger as hunters risk their heads going close-range, but the difference SHOULDN'T be that much as, for example in PSU, where a FM with Jabroga owns a boss in 2 attacks (or 1) and the rest of the classes suck balls while watching. That's not fair.

Dongra
Dec 14, 2010, 03:14 AM
>"IRL" tems
>Magic

Can you guys do something that I don't know about?

Darki
Dec 14, 2010, 03:16 AM
What I meant is that trying to find so complex explanations such as psychology in a game is really nonsense unless the game specifically takes those terms in account. In the game, TECHs are athmospheric photons gathered by psychic influence to form an attack. Is not a "different kind of energy", because we can say that a Foie fireball isn't more than a bunch of ban-photons gathered from the air, put together and thrown to your enemy. In essence, a fire saber strike is nothing more than a hit by an edge made from the same ban-photons, but solified by tecnologic means. There's no much more psychology involved here unless you wanna go fanboy. If we use the terms we know from the games, which are the valid ones, then there's no reason for a Line Shield/Photon Barrier to not being able to block a TECHNIC.

Also, if I remember well, magic =/= TECHNICs in PS universe. If I recall well, both abilities have existed together as different things in classic games. We could say that TECHs are something more... physic than "magic".

And about IRL terms I meant that trying to use "real life logic" in the game to justify why a foie can't be blocked and a lightsaber hit can, can give me room to say that for real, people don't block attacks without willing to unless you're a fucking martial arts master with 80 years of experience as in films, and even that, I'm sure they block willingly, so then EVP shouldn't exist; and if I shoot someone aiming to their chest, bullets don't dissapear randomly in the air or change their trajectory randomly to make me miss the shot, so ATA shouldn't exist either.

By the same principles, a Force should excel also at any kind of fighting style, because, if they can manipulate photons from the athmosphere, why can't they just manipulate the edge of a saber or the bullet from a bow and turn them into a chainsaw or a fucking bazooka?

Keep it simple, dudes.

Dongra
Dec 14, 2010, 03:55 AM
I wasn't being serious.

Darki
Dec 14, 2010, 04:09 AM
Lol I know, I just wanted to explain it better. xD

Wayu
Dec 14, 2010, 05:02 AM
Well, this is fantasy. Not real life. That belongs in Battlefield, and NOT in PS or Call of Duty.

Especially Call of Duty...

-Wayu

Darki
Dec 14, 2010, 05:04 AM
I didn't get well what you mean. >_>

Wayu
Dec 14, 2010, 05:08 AM
Real life logic doesn't really apply to fantasy games, just because they're fantasy. That and Call of Duty teaches little kids that there is no such thing as gravitational pull on bullets and that all guns fire at light speed.

-Wayu

Darki
Dec 14, 2010, 05:12 AM
Lol. xD

Well, I understand that, not "IRL", but "game logic" has to be used a bit to make the game have some kind of logic basis, if not our brains will go WTF. In the game it was stated what TECHs are, we can try to do some roleplay around that (as I did with the fireball / saber edge), but not to the extreme as going to real life plsychology to explain stuff.

Wayu
Dec 14, 2010, 06:12 AM
It real life truly did apply to PS it would be fucking Inception.

Inception.

It would mindfuck us all and destroy our consoles to boot.

-Wayu

Padium
Dec 14, 2010, 09:53 AM
It real life truly did apply to PS it would be fucking Inception.

Inception.

It would mindfuck us all and destroy our consoles to boot.

-Wayu

You sir, just won the game!


Anyways, as far as utilizing a shield for blocking techs with MST, that would become very broken very fast. Forces would take very little damage from them compared to hunters and rangers, and forces are meant to be squishy, its a mage thing. With the hunters and rangers, they wouldn't need as much in the way of resistances. Forces could become overpowered in pvp (I actually really like the sounds of that, being a diehard fonewearl and all), which they already are, if they don't get hit with a physical attack first. PVP as it is is a rock paper scissors thing, its not balanced, and I'd like to so it more balanced out. How do you do that? Well... For one, being able to take more than a two hits, being able to counter would help as well.

Darki
Dec 14, 2010, 02:14 PM
For what I recall, in any MMO mage-type classes are "squishy" in exchange to being able to mass-murder hordes of monsters with b0rken spells, while fighter classes excel at 1vs1 combat. So, assuming that PS series is not meant to be that way seeing how Forces are crap even at killing mobs compared to hunters (at least in PSU), I wouldn't say that they should neccesarily be "squishy", y'know.

Now, taking it more seriously, why would it be overpowered for a FO to block TECHs? I mean, they're forces' stuff. Who would be then the class that have defense against TECHs, hunters? As you say, usually are the mages the ones that resist better their own strike. I wouldn't see overpowered that forces had better defense against TECHs than other classes. That would mean that fights FOvsFO would be slower, but that wouldn't affect in any way against hunters or rangers, because defense against bullets or melee is not the same than for TECHs, isn't it? They could still smash their asses good.

I mean, I have nothing against FO being phisically weak, as you say, it's a mage thing, but they should be the ones with the highest deffensive stats for TECHs, think it the other way: how would it be then if hunters, who are usually the ones with the highest DFP, had also the highest deffense against TECHs? that would make them tanks and nobody would take them down, a bit OP too, isn't it?

I understand if you don't like my idea about blocking TECHs, but don't use random reasons against it...

MAXrobo
Dec 14, 2010, 04:47 PM
maybe there could be a TECH to defend against TECHs? like a TECH that gave you a temporary photon shield that lowerd damage from TECH attacks. its strength would be effected by your MST, so force characters would generaly have better TECH shields then hunters or rangers. but a FOmar may have less than a HUnewm so hunters could potential have decent shields aswell.

Darki
Dec 14, 2010, 05:08 PM
A TECH to defend? Well, that's like Dizas and Rentis, but I dunno. TECHs could be blocked and dodged normally using ATA and EVP, seeing as they can be aimed when you swing the wand, why not?

In this matter, then, newmans could take advantage of this, they could have a good amount of ATA and be good rangers (if the game is made as PsPo2, with ATA being the source of ranged damage), which seems fair as CASTs have good stats for two classes as well and beasts can be good rangers even with the low ATA because of the high numb4rz they pull. The problem would be humans, that would suck more in general, but well, they would still be good forces, even better now because beasts would suck much more if TECHs used ATA (and I don't like this too much because my favorite combo is beast WT, or something similar).

If they add shields as a weapon type that you can equip and use to block, it would be cool if they added some kind of "reflect shield" ability that could give the chance to kick back techs, bullets and even hits to it's "owner", too.

But I still think that it would be nice to be able to block and dodge manually. Maybe every weapon could have it's own "dodging/blocking PA", depending on the weapon, for example a rod or a sword would use blocking movements while handguns and daggers would dodge instead. Or, there could be even more: every weapon would have a slot for defensive skill apart from the normal attack ones. Some weapons could have dodges and blocks, some could have only blocks and some could have only dodges.

Kent
Dec 16, 2010, 01:52 AM
What I meant is that trying to find so complex explanations such as psychology in a game is really nonsense unless the game specifically takes those terms in account.
You might be surprised as to how many games incorporate psychological considerations into their designs.

Hint: It's basically all of them, to some extent - if you understand how players think and how their minds work, you can design experiences around them that end up being fuller, richer and more meaningful experiences because of it. This can be as simple as "stay away from things that are glowing red," to some convoluted and/or deep Jungian concepts that make up the entire unstated storyline of games like NiGHTs.


By the same principles, a Force should excel also at any kind of fighting style, because, if they can manipulate photons from the athmosphere, why can't they just manipulate the edge of a saber or the bullet from a bow and turn them into a chainsaw or a fucking bazooka?
That's called Shifta.

Darki
Dec 16, 2010, 03:09 AM
Not really, unless shifta made forces and ONLY forces to b able to slash and shoot beetter than a hunter and a ranger, which is not the case. But that's not my point.

About the psychological thing, one thing is the concept behind the game, what the developer wants to make the player experience, and another thing is the ingame descriptions. In the games, nobody said nothing about psychology in the description of what TECHs are, just that they're photons gahered from the air to form an attack, so looking for any other or further explanation is just theorizing.

Now, to move on in this post a bit, another thing I'd like to see is a stat that was used to modify character speed. I've seen how it was in PSO and PSU, and I'm not too convinced. Rather than an unit or a class modifying the speed, wouldn't it be more logic that it was something natural to the player? A stat called, I dunno, ASP (like "Attack SPeed"? lol) that would modify how fast a character fights, or even walks. There could be even another stat, TSP (for "TECH SPeed") that ruled over casting speed in the same manneer.

This way ther could be further differences between races/classes. A Newman fighter could benefit from a much higher attack speed than a Beast or a CAST, balancing the race in a way that it would be still a weak fighter, but there would be a factor that would make it excel at something and not to "suck" that much at the class. The same way, casting speed could be used to make more differences between races allowed to use them: Newmans could be the nuking machine of the game, with relatively normal casting speed, while beasts (if they exist, or humans in case they don't) could be the fast casters, making them more suitable for buffing and crowd control techs without being killing machines.

We could treat this stuff more as a racial trait than a stat, for example making newmans "fast fighters" by default, beasts "fast casters" by default, but I believe using a stat would make it much more complex, because each race would develop a different speed depending on the combination between race and class, and further differences could be used in terms of buffs: Shifta (or Zodial in case they add that) could buff attack speed, Retier could buff casting speed.

Padium
Dec 16, 2010, 09:14 AM
ASP and TSP could be merged into a single stat called HST (haste), which, based on a character's class would modify attack speed and tech speed differently via modifiers (remember, PSOBB had 12 classes, not 3).

Modifiers are not something I think people understand too well, what they are is a hidden constant that is a stat is multiplied by to calculate something (formulas can be constants too!). Modifiers have been used since the earliest RPGs, and were in use before digital RPGs existed (fuck yeah, I rolled a 19! With my character's racial ability as a modifier, I get a +2 bonus to all rolls! It may not be a natural 20, but its still a 20!). Anyways, between hidden boolean variables and modifiers, you can have less stats that do more while still remaining balanced.

Example of modifiers in action: I play a shaman in WoW, I have a haste stat of something like 300. It lowers my weapon speed by 30%, meaning a 1s attack speed is now 0.66 repeated attack speed. That same haste stat also governs my spell casting time, via a different modifier. My spell casting time is reduced by only 20%, as I am primarily a melee damage dealer, and spells are a secondary source of damage. The same haste on a priest may reduce their casting time by 33% but their melee by only 12%. This again is because of hidden constants called modifiers. Often you do have stat caps and diminishing returns, so modifiers tend to be formulas that govern how things work on one end, they are an attribute of an object. The object in my shaman's case is the shaman class that she is an instance of. In the case of a monster defending my attacks, the modifiers are attributes associated with the monster object that that monster is an instance of. Please note that that is object oriented programming terminology in terms of objects and instances.

Darki
Dec 16, 2010, 01:43 PM
Well, I used two stats for simplicity but I guess you came with something. Anyways, my intention is simple: I don't think there should be any combination that "sucked". I don't like that in a game where there are many options (at least in PSU) there are combinations favored, such as beast fighters, CASTs gunners, etc.

I understand that each race should excel at something, but I still believe there could be a way to balance every race/class combination to make ALL of them unique and interesting. In this case, for example, a Newman could be just as good fighter as a Beast. The only difference is that the newman DPS would depend on the attack speed while the beast would be based on raw power. Of course, making a beast hunter would always have higher benefits than a newman, and making a newman techer would have its benefits compared to a Beast, BUT, these benefits wouldn't compromise the performance in an abysmal way.

About shooting speed, at first I though it to be like attack speed, but then, guns firing rate doesn't depend on the person who shoots but on the gear, so for this, I would see more fit that the firing speed were modified by armor units.

I know that this "nothing-should-suck" stuff isn't liked by everybody because there will always be those who wanna have always the best class/race combo and be da bezt so they can laugh at poor lil' newman fighter, but I believe in a MMO every class/race combo should be encouraged to play for the sake of game diversity.

TheAstarion
Dec 16, 2010, 05:23 PM
PSO's system gave us specific race/class combos and the only customisability was in materials usage, mag levels and equipment, because other than that, your RAmarl was the same as anyone else's RAmarl. This is still a lot more diverse than pre-GAS PSU which had every single male CAST gunmaster have the same stats, and PSU's fixed slots meant you couldn't just sacrifice a bit of evasion, health or all-round defence for that extra power to your punch.

I think that characters should be completely customizable but only in balance. Growth should be fixed for the race, but the total of % modifiers should be constant for everyone.

Melee, hence Hunters, should be attack-defence based
Guns, hence Rangers, should be accuracy-evasion based
Spells, hence Forces, should be tech-mental based.

These will be your main focal points of the three classes.

I liked the idea in PSU of levelling up classes, but it was just a way to unlock a new class. How about if we go with something where the thing that matters most is your main class, like in PSO, then your race, then your subclass?

So, Hunter CAST with ranger sub would be very hitty and a bit trappy and have more ranged capacity than a normal hunter, less than a full ranger, and more than, say, a Beast due to CAST-ness.

Force Newman Hunter would be what PSU likes to think Wartecher is supposed to be, a primary spellcasting race doing a primary spellcasting job but with a bit of defensive power to survive close quarters fighting when need be. Newman adding to the elemental abilities maybe?

And for all these, perhaps the other thing to level is your character's elemental affinities. Like, a Newman might be naturally proficient with light damage and healing techs, can learn others but since they've got this light affinity already their light gets a boost. As they go along they can choose another, say ice or dark... ice would give another set of strengths and weaknesses, while dark would make them a yin yang specialist with all the strengths and none of the weaknesses... but nothing especially standing out when facing other elements. This could work with other things too, like if a Duman was dark proficient, its dark weapons would do more against everything than its other elements, doubly so against light dudes.

Another thing to bear in mind in hybrid styles are split stats. A beast with higher attack and lower accuracy shouldn't be too gimped against an evasive enemy; the evasion should be randomising the damage rather than neutralizing it completely, just like any other defensive stat reduces damage. Or you could use, say, a slicer, which might be attack/tech based, and have its "accuracy" governed by a tech-based form of concentration. IMO, stat-based evasion negating attacks is an unrealistic interpretation compared to physical evasion where an enemy just isn't where it used to be by the time your attack goes where you aimed it. Newman Hunters would be more accurate with these kind of soulsaber styles, for instance, while CASTs would be able to supplement any magical ability they lack with a technological crutch (machine magic, magic bullets, whatever).

This is all just wild guessing and "it would be cool if", mind you.

So, stats.

HP & TP/PP/AP/SP/whateverP - health and special action points. Hunters have the highest HP, forces have the highest action points, rangers are in between.

Attack - main stat for melee, also governs melee accuracy to a degree. Reduced by defence.
Defence - resistance to physical attacks that hit you. How hard are you to kill? Defence governs this with a significant damage reduction. Percentage and numerical based.
Accuracy - main stat for guns, high accuracy reduces variance for non-guns due to overcoming enemy evasion.
Evasion - how you can react to attacks that you just can't get away from in time, twisting your body to minimise damage to vitals. Reduces damage by random amounts with the trend being such that inaccurate attacks are reduced highly but accurate ones are generally not affected.
Tech - your power and focus with magical weapons and techniques, can affect soulsaber weapon accuracy. Could be your direct elemental connection too, higher tech people will rely on nailing weaknesses rather than ignoring resistances like pure attack people tend to do. Magic corrosion bullet vs. armor piercing rounds; different ways round, same solution against robots, different effects against other guys.
Mental - resistance to techs and elements, could affect status resistance too. Why not? Who gets the most screwed by status? Those who can't survive long enough for them to wear off. Forces, that's you to a T. High mental can help with that, and provide the sub-FO incentive to other main classes.

As for individual characters, there should be like a focus slider. End the male-female stat dichotomy in practice, just give a suggested starting proportion and let people take it from there.

Human, starts with 100% in everything, can take up to 10% away from one stat to add it to another, racial ability is the ability to use both non-main classes as sub-classes, effectivelly opening up all basic equipment, like having an A-rank proficiency in everything other than your class's S-ranks in PSU terms. Doesn't help with the stats for usage, but it's there if you fancy being a support force first and foremost, but go mad with a gunblade when you finish buffing.

Newman, starts with a 20% boost in Tech, 10% in evasion, 10% penalty in def, atk and HP. Has the same 10% leeway which can take them to 99% (90% + 10% of 90 = 99) in attack, for instance, which will functionally make them the same as an uncustomised human hunter, while FOnewmanfolk might dumpstat ATK to 82% and boost Tech to 132%. Racial ability is an inert FO-boost in the form of elemental affinities on creation; maybe select more elemental proficiency than a normal FO or sub-FO.

CAST, 10% more HP, 5% more ATK, 10% more Acc & Def, 10% less SP & Tec, 15% less Evade. Tank ability is there with the HP & Def boost. Racial ability could be to take a set damage reduction to their SP bar as a power shield in addition to their regular defences while they still have SP left. Could be turned off as they get up, rerouting power to something else maybe, or just not to run out of SP that could be used to do stuff. 10% leeway can never make them as evasive as a base human, but they don't need it in some ways, being made of stronger stuff. Have an innate bonus to accuracy-based weapons in the form of game-assisted lock-on, so physically missing enemies is more difficult unless they have anti-CAST systems. Possibly a later ranger ability for other races, but can stack with CAST one to defeat the antilock system enemies.

Beast: 5% more HP. 10% more ATK, 15% more evade, -5% to tec, -10% to SP, -15% to Acc - racial bonus could be to reduce variance due to acc/eva in close quarters with techs, melee and even point blank guns, though the guns would still do crap damage in comparison. May have affinity for buffs, receiving a slight boost to stats when buffed, as part of their wild nature, and may get a higher maximum for melee & run speed boosts than others.

Duman: 15% more ATK & TEC, -10% to DEF, RES & HP - glass cannons with the ability to make up for it. May rely on evasion, may dumpstat defensive stats to aid with their big-ass attack bonus. Racial quality would probably be something like takes their sub class more seriously, being true split classes so a HU/FO could use a sword and rod just as well as each other for instance, like a pure HU or FO would for any other race. Glass cannon Jack race.

This is, of course, assuming all 5 current races are around in PSO2.

Kent
Dec 16, 2010, 09:52 PM
Not really, unless shifta made forces and ONLY forces to b able to slash and shoot beetter than a hunter and a ranger, which is not the case. But that's not my point.
Forces can use Shifta better than non-Forces, anyway.

Also... Yeah, I really should've left the :wacko: into my post, so you would've gotten the joke.


Now, to move on in this post a bit, another thing I'd like to see is a stat that was used to modify character speed. I've seen how it was in PSO and PSU, and I'm not too convinced. Rather than an unit or a class modifying the speed, wouldn't it be more logic that it was something natural to the player? A stat called, I dunno, ASP (like "Attack SPeed"? lol) that would modify how fast a character fights, or even walks. There could be even another stat, TSP (for "TECH SPeed") that ruled over casting speed in the same manneer.

This way ther could be further differences between races/classes. A Newman fighter could benefit from a much higher attack speed than a Beast or a CAST, balancing the race in a way that it would be still a weak fighter, but there would be a factor that would make it excel at something and not to "suck" that much at the class. The same way, casting speed could be used to make more differences between races allowed to use them: Newmans could be the nuking machine of the game, with relatively normal casting speed, while beasts (if they exist, or humans in case they don't) could be the fast casters, making them more suitable for buffing and crowd control techs without being killing machines.

We could treat this stuff more as a racial trait than a stat, for example making newmans "fast fighters" by default, beasts "fast casters" by default, but I believe using a stat would make it much more complex, because each race would develop a different speed depending on the combination between race and class, and further differences could be used in terms of buffs: Shifta (or Zodial in case they add that) could buff attack speed, Retier could buff casting speed.
As far as technique and casting speed... If such things were based on race, I don't think it'd be too much of a problem, as long as the differences aren't huge and glaring - depending on the situation, and depending on how enemies act, we could end up seeing situations where certain enemies are just better to fight against as a Newman Hunter, just because they're able to get more attacks in any given opening.

If handled correctly, it could work, but at the same time, it'd be much easier to actually keep balanced if attack speed were static (including buffs, items, etc., save for perhaps equipping specific weapons). Adding a bunch of variables to determine various animation speeds is really just getting extraneous; basically adding things for the sake of adding things.

There's something that can be said for simplicity - I mean, adding things for the sake of adding things is how we ended up with PSU. I think things added to PSO, should be things that fill in gaps or otherwise round out the game itself, and wanton movement speed statistics seems a bit unnecessary.

Padium
Dec 17, 2010, 12:17 AM
Things in PSO were a lot different than in PSU... PSU introduced a lot of stuff that doesn't make much sense to me. The whole class change is nice, but I'll be honest, being a PSU force was a lot harder for me, as the targeting system sucked for techs. Also the level up system. I liked having disks for my higher level techs, even if lvl 30 disks never dropped. Grinding a tech up in PSU was sooooo boring... And there were far too many of them... Weapon arts? I think the PS0 style was nice, one art bound to the weapon on pickup.

Darki
Dec 17, 2010, 02:05 AM
For the arttack and casting speed... Maybe you could ad a slight modifier in speed for classes, and a base speed for races, so there's actually a speed difference between everyone and not one static speed for all. I don't think that should be too difficult, sorry, in PSU for example, quick units for casting modify the cast speed in different numbers, why not melee? I understand the idea of complexity, but as I said, I don't think there should be only "two speeds". Anyways, I don't see the complexity, after all, "attack speed" is just the speed the game plays the "attack animation", it whouldn't be that complex. But I understand what you mean about addingg things just to add things. Maybe a bit more simple would be better, but not THAT simple as to go again to just two speeds.

About the disks, well, if you ask me I would like both systems, but that would be a bit chaotic unlss done well.

I liked disks in PSO so you didn't need o be levelling, but, as you said, lv30 disks never dropped. So, the thing is: Why not to have both things...? I think it should be valid. So you can farm disks up to max level, but you can also level up each disk. To encourage both mthods, and not to focus on grinding, or dropping, each disk can be levelled only ten lvels. So you get a Foie disk at level 12, you can level it up to level 22. If you want a higher level Foie, you gortta get the disk somewhere. Max disk level would be that of ten levels higher than max disk drop, so if 30 is the max level a disk can drop, the level cap for disks would be 40.

I understand how disks worked in PSO, but I still think there should be a way to get a bit better abilities without the "luck" factor. After all, they're supposed to be skills, and you can improve skills through practice.

On the other hand, I liked how PAs worked in PSU. Skills that made you do cool moves with melee, elemental bullets, that crapload of techs... I like it. I would pay for it to be included in next PSO2. But maybe some concerns... First, they should do a way to make melee PAs to encourage the use of normal attacks. In PSU everything is much likely "normal attack - PA - PA - PA" just to get the Exact Attack. They could make like in PSPo2, some kind of chain feature, or simply, that each combo prior to the PA would modify the damage of the PA itself. For example, 1 normal attack then PA would make the PA cause only 80% of the damage. 2 normal attacks combo then PA, would lead to the 100% of the PA damage. The full 3 normal attacks combo would get the PA deal a 120% of the damage.

In case of the bullets, I don't really know. I wouoldn't care if gun PAs were elemental bullets, but if they leave that as they did in PSPo2, I didn't like what they did there, making bullets only to improve accuracy or attack. They could do real PAs, like move combos and stuff. And for TECHS, the thing is easy: make them full functional against multi-hitbox enemies. I liked how they were targeted in PSU. I don't like that RPG crap of "magic never miss", I like to aim a fireball and the possibility of my enemy dodging it.

Finally, I guess this is more personal, but I loved PSU class system. I LOVE wartecher class. I don't want that to get lost in PSO2. I don't want my WT to become just a class/race combination like a newman hunter, (sorry to newman lovers, but I don't like newmans). I want a class that itself gives me melee and magic, regardless of the race I choose, and that gives me both as main thing, not as a sidekick like being a newman HU in PSO. I loved the concept of hybrid classes, it is something almost unique. I want them back.

Seth Astra
Dec 17, 2010, 02:55 AM
@Darki: 3 points:

1. PSO did have units that boost attack speed. Continuing your idea, I envision that it could work this way: Every weapon has a "default" swing time. For the purpose of the formulas, this'd be 100% swing time. Based on race, the swing time would increase (become slower) or decrease (become faster). The same thing would happen with class, and then would be modified by units and anything else (what about some weapons that swing faster?).

2. On adding real bullet PAs, they did so in PSZ, and I do hope they do this again.

3. As much as it pains me to say this, but if we use the PSU class system, I'd have to agree with Ffuzzy-Logic's idea of removing racial stat differences. PSO/Z's balancing, IMO, made each race/class different. Each race played a class differently. By looking at it (note that I've only played PSZ and PSP2, so this is all speculation) it would seem that PSU's system would merely limit things so that races become almost regulated to certain classes, at least if one wants to be decent. Only the few hybrid classes seem like they'd show any real difference between races other than a simple, all-encompasing, good/bad.

Darki
Dec 17, 2010, 03:47 AM
As I agree with your two first points, I'll go directly to the third:

I don't mean that we gotta neccesarily to use direct PSU classing system. But same that you could make a HUnewearl and a FOnewearl in PSO, as you said, with real differences, they can do the same but with the "freedom" factor they used in PSU. What I mean is not to use PSO or PSU system but something based on both and better than both. So you make a newman, this newman will be able to choose any class he/she wants, but those classes will have unique features for that newman that won't exist for humans, beasts or CASTs, who will have their own set of "uniqueness".

My point was simpler: I like, no, I love hybrid classes. The main reason (among others) for me to be playing PSU right now and not Ragnarök Online, Okami, Metroid Prime Trilogy or doing something useful with my life instead, is because PSU has hybrid classes. I don't want a game that has only FO, RA and HU, no matter how "unique" is going to be a newman HU compared to a beast HU. I want a class that, no matter what race you are, it's supposed to be a gun & sword hybrid, or a sword & tech hybrid. A REAL hybrid. Because, simple as that, if I don't have this in PSO2 and the only way for me to play a WT-like thing is going to be a newgayman HU, then the game is going to be, probably, very boring to me, as bassically all other MMOs I've tried.

Seth Astra
Dec 17, 2010, 03:59 AM
Ah. Ignoring your feelings on newmans *points at title*, lots of ideas to provide something like that have been mentioned on here, and, frankly, I like most of them. I like the idea that someone posted of having a "secondary class." That way, if you want your wartecher, you could pick Force or Hunter, whichever one you want to specialize in, and make the other your secondary. Or, with some races, I suppose you could make whatever one your weaker point is into the main type, so your stats would be be more balanced.

Darki
Dec 17, 2010, 04:14 AM
I still like the multi-classing system in PSU more than the fixed class-plus-race combo in PSO.

In my oppinion, the best option would be to make a set of classes similar to PSU, for example. Hunter, Ranger, Force, Fightmaster, Gunmaster, Masterforce (I picked the names, not the whole class idea. The "four-weapons-wonders" don't seem really interesting to me), Wartecher, Fighgunner, Guntecher. Maybe you can add Vanguard/Acromaster as a full "light" hybrid (focusing on twin and single handed weapons, "light" guns and single handed tech weapons), and Protranser as the heavy hybrid with access to all huge two handed weapons and guns and rods like in PSPo1. I'm not asking for a crapload of them (In my oppinion, Acro and Master classes in PSU were just an useless filler that could have been completely avoided, and their "flashy" unique features used to further improve existing expert and hybrid classes instead), but it would be really nice to have some sort of class advencement like that.

To add some of the PSO features, as you pinted before about the uniqueness of each class/race combo in PSO, that isn't the opposite of the idea of multi-classing, it could be an advancement. So we have all these classes. This would mean more job to SEGA but screw it, that's gaming for you, although I doubt they would do it; make each class and race combo completely from-scratch. So make unique stats and features for beast WT and for Newman WT, even being the same class, having things in common like for example TECH and skill abilities caps, but for example, different proficiencies at some weapons.

But of course, for SEGAC is just easier to make all races with a predefined set of stats, then make modifiers in each class instead of "hand-modelling" each one to it's max originality.

Padium
Dec 17, 2010, 09:24 AM
@Darki: I've done a bit of coding over the years, and a stat modifier is actually easier to use (because it is more in line to how people think when you get into complex systems) than two different stats.

Multiclassing was actually possible in PSO, although very difficult to do. It required careful planning of how to use materials, how to grow your mag, what units to carry, etc. Building a battle mage was extremely difficult, required a lot of planning, and quite fun.

What I propose is a system closer to some KMMORPGS I've played, such as Maple Story, where you build a classless character, who enters the world as a novice or beginner class. Once in the world, she would do quests, and learn the basics of the different classes available. Then she would get a choice of, in this case, 3 quests, each corresponding to one of hunters, rangers, or forces. Once the quest is completed, you are now locked into that class. Stats becomes realigned to that class.

Later in the game, when you reach a new difficulty level (lvl 20, 40, 80, based on PSO), and maybe each time you reach a new difficulty level, you would be given a new choice of class related quests. These quests would correspond to different attributes that could be added to your base class. Quest rewards could include something like the ability for a force to use partisans, or equip armor and shields, rather than just frames and barriers, or a boost to the forces ATA for gun weapons. They could also involve reinforcing the core class.

I think this system would combine all class related details and customization in a way that is balanced, as well as providing a good amount of variety without the risk of locking people into a common build. I like the idea of building a close combat battle mage. How I want to do this is with weapon enchants, and a high ATP medium ATA force.

Darki
Dec 17, 2010, 10:25 AM
I don't really like the idea of classical MMO class advancement. I like what PSU offered, not in stats but in concept. In PSU you're a guardian, in PSO you're a hunter. In both games you're some kind of bounty hunter or soldier, is not like you were a "novice" thrown in the world with no affiliation till you chose one.

Of course they could do that, but I think one of the aspects that gave PSU more fun was the fact that anyone could switch classes anytime. You reach the cap in your class and level up, but then you have another eleven classes to master. I like that.

Another thing, as you're talking about battle mages, is that in PSU and PSO the "battlemages are THE SAME than any mage, just weaker in "mojo", but not a different "type" of magic. I don't like those games where the so called "battlemage" is nothing more than a fighter with "magic" buffs that make him hit harder with the sword. I like the fact that in PSU you can use exactly ALL the spells a Masterforce can use, no matter what kind of mage you are, even if you do it weaker. Same with the melee side, of course.

If in the new game characters are supposed to be affiliated at some kind of corporation/army/police as they are in previous games, I don't really see the development in old MMO style too justified. Of course we could all start as "unnafiliated" and then first given the choice to join one or two factions, but anyways, I do prefer PSU's style.

Seth Astra
Dec 17, 2010, 12:20 PM
@Darki's first post since I last posted: My only arguement with that is that it'd be absolute hell to balance. Also, mind explaining the point of both the "master" classes and the regular 3?

@Darki's second post since I last posted: I agree when it comes to battlemages. I played a HUnewm in PSZ, only to find out that all my high MST is good for is a bit better resta. Also, on the ability to change classes, I had previously thought up the idea that by leveling one class, you would get a minor boost to the class's key stats given to the other classes. It wouldn't be enough to be game-breaking, but it would be enough to give players reason to play every class, or at least most of them.

Darki
Dec 17, 2010, 04:01 PM
I don't care if it's absolute hell to balance. There are dozens of games that have twice the "classes" as those, and they're balanced. It's not my fault that SEGA's ineptitude has gotten us the wrong idea that games are made the worst possible way.

They don't need to balance that much, fuck. The idea of having both basic and Master classes is just to give a sense of equality between hybrid and non-hybrid classes. Fighmaster would be the "real" Hunter, Gunmaster the "real" Ranger. As I said, I don't like how PSO handled the classes, with fixed characters and classes that couldn't be changed. Using some of PSU, the idea would be that to be a Fighmaster you'd need to be Hunter first, to be a Wartecher, you'd need to previously be both Hunter and Force. To be a Vanguard, you'd need to be all three basic classes. But hey, you can bring the classes directly from the beginning and not to put the kind of requirement system that PSU has, It's just that I liked it. In that term it would make more sense to keep the three basic classes as "newbiee" classes and the other ones to be the real deal along with hybrids.

So, is that much to balance? You wouldn't need to balance HU, RA and FO "basic" classes for real, just use the "master" class pattern and weaken them as they would be just a "requirement class", then you'd have 8 classes. Plus 4 races. 32 possible combinations. In Ragnarök online, game that is supposed to be a SHIT compared to PSU, they have a total amount of FIFTY-SIX fucking classes. And they're pretty well balanced, and not only in the case of killing monsters but also for PvP options.

Now tell me why SEGA shouldn't be able to do that with a bit more than half of that. Is not that they put too much effort designing game content, seeing as half of the weapons we get in PSU updates weren't even 3D modelled. And they don't need to do all before the game release, that's the idea of maintenances, not to put premium content to vampirize our money, they can fix things when they get fishy.

For the second "quote", my concern is not really the amount of classes, as I said some time ago to another person, I'm not going to make prejudices before seeing the game when we don't even know the opening song, so I'll wait. But one thing that really pissed me off in PSU and that doesn't make any sense in a MMO is the fact thet there are "best" classes and "classes that suck". Nobody makes a WT or a GT because "they suck" while every n00b there can make a FM and pull up nice numbers without effort. Why to make so many classes when at the end the only ones that are useful are three or four? I wouldn't like that on PSO2. If you make 3 classes, make each one as good as the others. If you make 13, same idea.

Seriously, I don't really understand what's the "hardship" about balancing things. You only need to play and see. Is it that difficult? they can make a godamn test server for free and let players to do the work for them, I'd be glad to if that helped make the game right.

Seth Astra
Dec 17, 2010, 04:13 PM
Well, the thing I disagree with that you just said, is having HU, RA, and FO as just stepping-stone classes. Unless you have another idea (in which case, please share) there wouldn't be any reason to play them beyond what you need to do to get access to the higher-level classes.

Also, on an irrelavant note, if they are included, I would like it if "fightmaster" was called "master hunter" and gunmaster "master ranger," or something to that effect. Not like it matters, I just think fightmaster and gunmaster sound lame.

Darki
Dec 17, 2010, 04:38 PM
You can call them however you want, I would say that Masterranger would sound better as Rangemaster, lol. I get your point about the basic classes. I don't really know what could be done for that, but it doesn't seem that bad issue for me.

In any case, and half-copying the idea from someone else, this just popped to my head:

Basic classes could be used as an "upgrading and training" step. On the upgrading side, the level achieved on previous classes would translate in further bonuses when playing with an expert/hybrid class: for example, a Wartecher that levelled up Hunter to the max would get a stat bonus in ATP and DFP, or maybe a speed bonus, or access to an extra melee weapon that WT class hasn't naturally. Same would happen if gets FO maxed: casting speed, or bonus in MST/TP, or maybe level cap increased a couple levels for TECHs.

Expanding the idea further, a WT that had Ranger levelled, too, could experience an extra bonus to the "foreign" features that Rangers manage: a bonus in ATA or for example access to a minor extra ranged weapon that WTs naturally don't use. Of course this bonus would be significantly less important compared to maxing WT's two real required classes, but would add even more variety.

On the training side, Hunter, Ranger and Force classes would use ONLY their respective weapon types. Not as extreme as PSU's Master classes, of course, but still the same idea. We could say that this would be a reminder for players that if you wanna play a Fighmaster (or Masterhunter) you gotta know how to play and not getting into the class at level 10 being a n00b at life as half the master classes rampant in PSU servers. They wouldn't necessary be a pain in the ass to level, they could actually be balanced and strong, but just enough for what we could consider "rookie missions". They could also have some boost on level compared to the other classes so you don't need to spend all your lifespan levelling them when what you wanna do is to be a damn WT.

Pairing both ideas, this would keep people stuck in these classes long enough, and have a real use for them other than as a level requirement. Still a step stone, of course, but a step-stone that would make a real difference between someone who did the homework and people that went the easy road.

But this is fantazising too much, I guess. As I said, I wouldn't care having those classes just as a minor step stone on the road.

Padium
Dec 17, 2010, 08:35 PM
If in the new game characters are supposed to be affiliated at some kind of corporation/army/police as they are in previous games, I don't really see the development in old MMO style too justified. Of course we could all start as "unnafiliated" and then first given the choice to join one or two factions, but anyways, I do prefer PSU's style.

Simple solution:

You want to be a hunter, at the time of hire, you are only a novice thrill seeking idiot trained in basic survival skills, capable of hitting an enemy with any weapon, although quite poorly if the weapon is for more than just bludgeoning things to death. Available spells are all quite crude and have a low maximum level. Your first mission is to acquire your hunter's license, and as a part of that, it gives you cross class training, and then requires you to dedicate yourself to a class (Hu, Ra, Fo). From there you can further customize your class, just without real class advancement, the advancement quests would be something that give you permanent boosts in sets of your choice. Sure, in PvP, everyone is just going to max out their class's relevant stats, but in PvE is where it will shine. You will have one type of battle mage, with several builds, and battle mage is not a class, but a build in the basic force class. A magic knight would be the same concept, with a hunter base class, focusing on weapon effects, close combat techs (gi techs), and buffing, but be first and foremost a melee damage dealer. For rangers, the battle mage would be built to focus on ranged attacks, keeping distance, and debuffing, while being first and foremost a gunslinger. Going back to the forces, the battle mage could take the hunter set or the ranger set, and would primarily be a magic castor but with the ability to use weapons from that set better, and rely less on techs, and be less squishy. Tech sets wouldn't change, but proficiency could (that means hidden modifiers being described in vague details, like the difference between shock, lightning and tempest).



I really don't like the ability to change class on a whim. I wouldn't mind the ability to rebuild a character, without being able to change the base class. But a multiple class system actually bothers me, as it means more focus on a character that can do everything, and those who grind the most, benefit the most, by having high levels in all classes. Logically, a jack of all trades should be a master of none.

Darki
Dec 18, 2010, 03:32 AM
Well, I guess it's a matter of oppinion. As I previously said, the reason I played PSU was because there is a class that IS a battle mage, not a force that uses swords or a hunter that uses techs. Sorry, but your "simple" solution is the same thing that "simple" solutions tend to be, they end being useless, entering in the cattegory of "for fun" builds, which means "crap builds that just some nostalgia 'tards play" (as I am).

With a specific hybrid class as Guntecher, Wartecher or Fighgunner, you can have an specific build (yes, specific, even being an hybrid) that would naturally develop the class talents. A Wartecher has less TP than a Fortetecher, and less ATP than a Fortefighter, BUT, it has much more ATP than the FT and much more TP than a FF. So, for making your idea possible, you'd have to allow Force class to achieve an ATP amount close of that of a hunter, and allow Hunter class to have a TP amount close to that of a Force. That would bring much imbalance to the game.

If what you mean is the use of materias or any other stat-improving system, and making the ATP or TP in each case to the max, then the class would still be pointless, because to make a FO acquire the ATP that a battlemage would benefit for, would require materia that a normal mage would use to raise it's TP to an astronomic level compared to us. This would render BOTH our TP and TP useless, because we wouldn't develop our TP so we can achieve a level of melee power, but our melee power wouldn't ever be significant because we're forces from the beggining, while a hunter can use materias on ATP, making the same situation. Same with a Hunter based "battlemage" but just with the opposite stats.

In the opposite situation, a truly hybrid class could use those enhancing systems to make itself stronger, not just "for fun" battle mage.

On the other hand, a specific hybrid class would have access to it's proper set of weapons that would justify the build, in the case of WT, for example, a set of single handed melee and tech weapons to focus on the hybrid style, plus some (minor) addition of stronger melee and tech weapons. In case of a HU based "battlemage", you'd be stuck with all those melee weapons and almost no tech ones. The opposite for the FO based one, many rods and wands, crap melee weapons.

With a REAL hybrid class it's possible to balance it to make it strong enough to be in par with the "pure" classes, while trying to twist a pure class into hybridation results only in some weakened abortion of hybrid. With this I don't mean that a WT has to be as stronger as a Force with techs and as a Hunter with melee, but of course, the power that a WT can achieve in both fields should be much higher than the opposite classes. A WT has to be much stronger melee-wise than a Force, much stronger TECh-wise than a Hunter, making both fields balanced so the overall result is a class that excel at both techs and melee in a way that it's total strengh is similar of a pure class.

Finally, I'd like to know what the fuck is the problem on adding hybrid classes. Having just 3 classes in the game is boring as hell. PSU's idea of having expert & hybrid classes for me was a success, even if they fucked it up in the late run.

On the other issue of your post, in what would benefit a multiple class system someone that grind the most? There's no benefit in PSU for someone who levelled all classes in one character other that he can switch classes when he wants. You can't play "all" classes at the same time. You can't even switch classes mid-mission. Currently I play PSU with a character and I never ever levelled any other class because I know which one I prefer, but what's so bad about that? I like the idea of being able to do that.

Padium
Dec 18, 2010, 09:37 AM
There are something like 8 classes in WoW, with a talent system to allow for customization. I like that system, each of the classes has distinct builds, and your hybrid classes have more than one distinct role, depending on build. A hybrid has to suffer somewhere for balance. A play a shaman, which is hybrid in that it can be a healer, or, a melee or castor DPS. They also added a system to allow for people, like myself, who enjoy multiple roles, that is, where you have two different builds, and can swap between them any time while not in combat. This does mean I take up 16 inventory slots with healing gear as I am primarily a melee.

All your wartecher is is a true cross between a hunter and a force, limited in the upper ranges of either weapon sets. It's not that different from my battle mage. The way of approaching it is different though. My battle mage would still have one benefit that doesn't exist to my knowledge in wartechers. PSO had 12 different class-only abilities. For FOnewearls, they had the highest TP capabilities, and their megid was actually a viable spell, simply because it pierced, and could hit multiple targets. The other 11 classes had similar things. Megid was also the equivalent to Death in the Final Fantasy series, ie, an OHKO.

Some classes in PSO were better suited to different styles than others, and why I'd like to preserve that system is those class abilities (all 12 of them), and maybe add some more. Also, casts don't have a neurological mind (consisting of neurons), and don't have the same empathic abilities non-casts have in the PSO world, so it makes no sense for cast forces to exist. I am all for there being 16 races, 6 hunters, 6 rangers, 4 forces. Add another non-robotic race, and give its men and women as 2 new classes across every base class.

As for the grindfest, I started playing PSU before they added additional classes, played the story, and was done. I swapped classes a lot, because it was available to me, so I had reason to grind multiple classes. You also have to grind techs in PSU, which is not something you had to do in PSO, and as a force, that is incredibly annoying to do. When my ineffective foie is hitting 10x harder than my super effective barta, there is something wrong. In PSO, almost all my techs are very close in level. This has to do with where I got the levels, disks for higher level techs (software upgrades, essentially, for the tech creating device). Historically speaking though, techs were not always cast through machines, but rather machines made it easier for all to use them.

Overall, PSU pretty much killed the Phantasy Star series for me, so naturally, I am inclined to hate it.

Darki
Dec 18, 2010, 10:39 AM
But what we pretend in PSO2 is not to be "I hate PSU so PSO2 has to be PSO + new graphics" or either "I hated PSO so PSO2 has to be PSU with weewee clothes".

First of all we gotta first assume that all we say here will hardly affect in any way the content on the game, so I don't wanna start pointless arguments because this is all, bassically, a "dream" post where we comment what we would like next game to have, and probably what we know it won't have.

As you can see in my posts, I'm all up to trying to take the best from both games, not only stuff from PSU or from PSO, I try to come up with what I believe was the best from both games, and adding a bit on my own. So even if I'm basing many of the ideas on PSO or PSU, don't read it from your hatred for it's ressemblance to PSU, please. From my game point of view, PSO/U is an unique concept among MMOs. I loved both games, and I hated features from both games.

As you already noticed, my concept of a "battlemage" is not a "hunter with resta", and I know that in bassically all games (even in PSU) this is how "battlemages" ate pictured.

I like Wartecher being a true merge as a Hunter and a Force. Actually, my real concept of Wartecher is very well explained by its first part of the name: War. For me a Wartecher is a warrior that uses both offensive TECHNICs and melee as it's PRIMARY damage output. Not a "swordman that can use techs" or a "mage that can use a good sword". It's a warrior that can slash your gut as well as blowing your head with a fireball. None of them are "secondary".

So I loved that PSU made me able to play this way, even if really it wasn't the truth, specially as a beast WT, of course I do craploads more of damage with melee than techs.

For me, PSO2 is a NEW game. I liked classes in PSO, I loves classes in PSU. My intention is not to have ONLY PSU classes because from starters, half PSU classes were crap. Even WT is crap, I admit it. But the concept behind them, that is what I love it. To have three basic classes AND classes that are real hybrids between them. I DON'T WANT a crap "battlemage" that is just a build from a mage. I want a real one, and PSU gave me that, so I want it back and improved.

About the grinding stuff, I still don't see the problem of it. I don't see why rewarding hardworking players is bad. I understand the problem about levelling techs, but the problem is not actually in the level concept but in the balance between them.

I liked PSO disk mechanic, but I liked PSU too. I don't think it's fair leading the best thechs to the luckiest players, and not to the hardworking ones You can say that is also hardworking to run endlessy till you get the tech dropped, then... Why not both?

Just make PAs to be dropped, but leave a marging of advancement to them. So for example as I though before, you can level up a tech up to 10 levels from it's original disk level, as if it was a weapon that you were grinding. that way, a character that wasn't lucky and didn't got to get the level 25 tech still can level his lv16 tech to 26. If ever he wants more than that he will need to find a higher one, of course.

PSU problem was not that techs had to be grinded, but the fact that you could level up a skill in normal gameplay in less than one month (actually I levelled Dugrega, one of the slowest skills, in two weeks from 0 to 24), and you could be stuck with a tech for 6 months without getting it past 15. But that, balance is what it's needed, not to forget about the feature.

Dongra
Dec 18, 2010, 05:04 PM
I prefer the class system of PSO. I liked the fact that once you picked your class you were going to fulfill that specific role. PSU's job system really irked me because everyone started to switch to the stronger classes. This was still an issue in PSO but not as much as it was in PSU. As far as tech and PA levels go, I really do hope they have them drop. It was so boring leveling PA's in PSU. If you didn't level them, you were stuck dealing low damage.

Padium
Dec 18, 2010, 07:13 PM
@Darki: I think what you and I want from the classes is pretty much the same thing described from different angles. And as far as your tech idea, I really like the idea of combining exp leveling of techs and the higher level disks.

The one thing I want changed most (apart from how hard it is to get lvl 30 techs) is how inefficient the more advanced techs were to use in PSO. Rafoie was almost useless, save one boss, due to low damage output compared to the basic foie, but high cost. Grants, it was used far too little, due to low output per TP cost.

I think the single biggest improvement would be giving grants splash damage, and widely increasing the range of the Ra and Gi level techs, to make them more reasonable. Also, having range scale by class would be nice too, forces should have better range with Rabarta/zonde than hunters, as hunters are more likely to be completely surrounded than forces, but at the same time, hunters shouldn't become reliant on techs, as a friend of mine pointed out. I find it hard to not be reliant on techs, what can I say, I want to be the tech focused battle mage ;)

Kent
Dec 18, 2010, 10:56 PM
Well, if you look at what the difference between Rafoie and Foie was in PSO, you can really see the kind of idea they're going for - the basic version isn't just a "wimpy" version of fire damage - it's designed to be the best single-target fire damage there is, whereas Rafoie is designed to deal a lot of fire damage over a wide area (with the pretext that there has to be a lot of targets there to actually take the damage). I'm not saying the numbers had it perfectly balanced - that was just the idea behind it. By doing this, they encourage the use of different techniques for different situations - which is one of the strongest points of PSO's system of differentiating techniques from each other (and one of the shortfallings of PSU's technique system).

Part of the problem with Grants is that it just falls short when compared to other single-target techniques at high levels. In Version 1 back on the Dreamcast, it was actually the most powerful single-target technique, by far, but had a high TP cost to go with it (which, it's pretty much just a slow version of Zonde now).

I would be against turning it into some wide-AOE technique, really. I think perhaps a small area of effect might be best for it, if kept otherwise the same. Though, I think it would probably be an interesting change if it were changed to be more similar to its in-game description (something about many beams of light hitting a target) and actually hit a target numerous times, instead of just appearing to do so and only dealing damage on one last large hit. Perhaps additional beams of light could also hit enemies close by to the target of the technique.

As the game's sole source of light-elemental damage for players, it would probably be fitting to give it some sort of area-damage, but at the same time, it should really be very effective as a single-target technique. It'd be interesting to see a single technique that has some variability to it based on the situation in which you use it... Naturally, they could also add more light-based techniques, but I rather liked only having a single one, with the idea that it's a very powerful one - it added some flavor to the game, rather than here "Here you go, have another element."

Darki
Dec 19, 2010, 12:25 PM
For me the best atually would be that teching wasn't to stay there standing like a tree and launching techs while inmobile (or almost). I'd love to see on techers the ability to use techs in a very dynamic way that combined some cool moves with the normal teching that we all know.

For example, Foie could be just that, a fireball, but on higher levels instead of just turning into a biggarz fireball, we could get some sort of movement that involved a real martial technique combo launching fireballs.

If someone has seen Cabal Online, the concept of the Wizard in that game is pretty much close to what I mean: wizards don't stay far throwing spells, they do acrobatics, launch spells in series and then they levitate due to the insanely high psychic concentration, just to end the combo with an explosion that blasts half the area.

In that matter, for example, we could have TECHNICs as a separate thing, I mean, the "fireball", but then deppending on the magic weapon used.

Padium
Dec 19, 2010, 01:25 PM
Well, if you look at what the difference between Rafoie and Foie was in PSO, you can really see the kind of idea they're going for - the basic version isn't just a "wimpy" version of fire damage - it's designed to be the best single-target fire damage there is, whereas Rafoie is designed to deal a lot of fire damage over a wide area (with the pretext that there has to be a lot of targets there to actually take the damage). I'm not saying the numbers had it perfectly balanced - that was just the idea behind it. By doing this, they encourage the use of different techniques for different situations - which is one of the strongest points of PSO's system of differentiating techniques from each other (and one of the shortfallings of PSU's technique system).

Part of the problem with Grants is that it just falls short when compared to other single-target techniques at high levels. In Version 1 back on the Dreamcast, it was actually the most powerful single-target technique, by far, but had a high TP cost to go with it (which, it's pretty much just a slow version of Zonde now).

I would be against turning it into some wide-AOE technique, really. I think perhaps a small area of effect might be best for it, if kept otherwise the same. Though, I think it would probably be an interesting change if it were changed to be more similar to its in-game description (something about many beams of light hitting a target) and actually hit a target numerous times, instead of just appearing to do so and only dealing damage on one last large hit. Perhaps additional beams of light could also hit enemies close by to the target of the technique.

As the game's sole source of light-elemental damage for players, it would probably be fitting to give it some sort of area-damage, but at the same time, it should really be very effective as a single-target technique. It'd be interesting to see a single technique that has some variability to it based on the situation in which you use it... Naturally, they could also add more light-based techniques, but I rather liked only having a single one, with the idea that it's a very powerful one - it added some flavor to the game, rather than here "Here you go, have another element."

That's pretty much what I'm going for, more balance in the tech levels. The area range of the Ra level, it really sucked for the most part, and there was rarely a reason to use them. Gibarta, it was the least useful of all. Any situation that used it, Rabarta was more useful to me. I want all techs to have a good use for them.

As for Grants, what you said is pretty much what I meant. I like the idea of it hitting a target multiple times (hadn't thought of that). Every flash grants has before hitting should do x amount of damage, where x is a constant. So if there are 4 flashes, it would effectively do 4x damage to the single target. Then when it pings (and does damage as it did in the original), I think it should also do x damage in a nova-like fashion, affecting everything in the area of effect. This range could grow as the level increases, but it wouldn't grow too huge (Ra level tech range, with Ra level splash damage, but basic level single target damage). It would be great against those bosses that have mobs around them, or multiple parts you can hit. Nuke down a hard to kill enemy, and affect whats around it at the same time, it would be worth the high TP cost then.

Darki
Dec 19, 2010, 02:13 PM
Balance is where all comes to. If everything was well balanced, and I don't mean perfectly, but just moderately balanced, everything would be just fine.

I don't think anything in both PSU and PSO games are bad, but the games (especially PSU, I'd say), are so crappy balanced that it's even sad for the people that like the games.

PS: ZOMFG I made a post without a wall of text! O_O

Padium
Dec 19, 2010, 03:09 PM
PS: ZOMFG I made a post without a wall of text! O_O

LOL! That comment made my day!

Kent
Dec 19, 2010, 04:03 PM
That's pretty much what I'm going for, more balance in the tech levels. The area range of the Ra level, it really sucked for the most part, and there was rarely a reason to use them. Gibarta, it was the least useful of all. Any situation that used it, Rabarta was more useful to me. I want all techs to have a good use for them.
I liked the idea behind Gibarta - but it really got nerfed post-Dreamcast.

Fun Fact: On the Dreamcast versions, Gibarta's individual icicles were what would contact with and damage enemies, rather than just a static area of effect (it was the same with Gifoie) - they also pierced targets. As a result of this, any enemies in its area of effect could potentially get hit several times by the technique, meaning that Gibarta had a substantially-higher damage potential. I miss that functionality - it really made you think differently about how exactly you use the technique, because it was functionally an ice machine gun that would benefit more from using it closer to the enemy, rather than farther away - because you'd be more likely to land two or three hits on a target, instead of just one.

It's part of the reason I like the Gi- techniques the most - the sheer variety of their uses. In the more current games, Gifoie and Gibarta are a bit more reliable on dealing damage (though, I like Gibarta's ability to really hit targets in a cone that aren't grounded, and Gifoie's persistent AOE) and Gizonde is pretty much unchanged... But particularly for someone whose favorite class was FOmar, this was great: You have one technique that deals damage in a frontal cone, one technique that deals damage in a persistent area of effect, and one technique that jumps between target and allows you to literally snipe enemies from across the room. There was a bonus to Grants for them, too, but Grants...

As for Grants, what you said is pretty much what I meant. I like the idea of it hitting a target multiple times (hadn't thought of that). Every flash grants has before hitting should do x amount of damage, where x is a constant. So if there are 4 flashes, it would effectively do 4x damage to the single target. Then when it pings (and does damage as it did in the original), I think it should also do x damage in a nova-like fashion, affecting everything in the area of effect. This range could grow as the level increases, but it wouldn't grow too huge (Ra level tech range, with Ra level splash damage, but basic level single target damage). It would be great against those bosses that have mobs around them, or multiple parts you can hit. Nuke down a hard to kill enemy, and affect whats around it at the same time, it would be worth the high TP cost then.
If we look at the animation for Grants in PSO, it does have several "hits" that happen before the last one, that's larger and actually inflicts the technique's damage. So it could be possible that just the big flash at the end deals a larger burst of AOE damage, but there could easily be a dozen or so little hits leading up to it (with perhaps more being added as the technique levels up). It might be funny if the little darts of light "stick" to the enemies, and are subsequently detonated by the larger blast (think a Needler from Halo). It brings a kind-of-silly-but-kind-of-awesome image into my head.