the catass hardcore gamer is going to have much more experience and knowledge of the system to suceed in any role.
I don't see that as a problem. The problem is about the community closing itself and not accepting anymore anything from the outside. The game becomes inaccessible for new players.
There are many more goals beside that one but none of them seem in doubt because the system isn't described in all its detail. The goals are goals. They define how the system behaves. All the rest is strict balance and direct feedback from the game (which, obviously, I cannot have).
The original idea was to give depth to the large battles. Right now they are just about piling people and letting win who has the larger force. What I want to do is design some mechanics that aren't anymore involving just the group but the whole large-scale battle. This is what I think is missing.
The other goals and ideas are only a "form" of implementation. I'm not *fighting* against what the players do and how they organize. I'm, instead, offering them tools to support and give depth to those choices. That support and depth that is severely lacking in other games.
Some of the abilities I have in my mind (and another rough scheme was described here) are about "area of effect" like defence energy barriers and flags that can be dropped to boost skills at a range. In general these skills are designed so that they are appropriate to the role, so a commander will have skills that affect his squad and will be able to use them ON TOP of the skills he has available for his class (these are like realm abilities. Added abilities on top of your basic character). And, secondly, they are designed so that they bring "order" in a messy battle. Encouraging the players to organize in squads and sticking together as it happened in the actual medieval wars.
A defence force field would work only for those who are inside. This would help to organize both the space and the players. If everyone goes on his own as it always happen, they won't benefit from those skills and mechanics. But, since they are important, the players would slowly start to understand how to play and finally develop tactics and strategies even for these larger battles that right now are nothing else than messed up zergs. Like a huge "free for all".
Most players hate large battles because they are just a random mess. Instead I believe that large battles and sieges can be a lot of fun and could offer more interesting and involving gameplay. This is lacking today because the design never cared to give a structure to these battles. They just "happen" like if they were a side-effect.
What I'm doing is like coding a better looting system in a free for all game. I'm just shaping up a part of a game that, till today, has been completely ignored.
Re: PvP endgame - Better models are possible, always
the catass hardcore gamer is going to have much more experience and knowledge of the system to suceed in any role.
I don't see that as a problem. The problem is about the community closing itself and not accepting anymore anything from the outside. The game becomes inaccessible for new players.
There are many more goals beside that one but none of them seem in doubt because the system isn't described in all its detail. The goals are goals. They define how the system behaves. All the rest is strict balance and direct feedback from the game (which, obviously, I cannot have).
The original idea was to give depth to the large battles. Right now they are just about piling people and letting win who has the larger force. What I want to do is design some mechanics that aren't anymore involving just the group but the whole large-scale battle. This is what I think is missing.
The other goals and ideas are only a "form" of implementation. I'm not *fighting* against what the players do and how they organize. I'm, instead, offering them tools to support and give depth to those choices. That support and depth that is severely lacking in other games.
Some of the abilities I have in my mind (and another rough scheme was described here) are about "area of effect" like defence energy barriers and flags that can be dropped to boost skills at a range. In general these skills are designed so that they are appropriate to the role, so a commander will have skills that affect his squad and will be able to use them ON TOP of the skills he has available for his class (these are like realm abilities. Added abilities on top of your basic character). And, secondly, they are designed so that they bring "order" in a messy battle. Encouraging the players to organize in squads and sticking together as it happened in the actual medieval wars.
A defence force field would work only for those who are inside. This would help to organize both the space and the players. If everyone goes on his own as it always happen, they won't benefit from those skills and mechanics. But, since they are important, the players would slowly start to understand how to play and finally develop tactics and strategies even for these larger battles that right now are nothing else than messed up zergs. Like a huge "free for all".
Most players hate large battles because they are just a random mess. Instead I believe that large battles and sieges can be a lot of fun and could offer more interesting and involving gameplay. This is lacking today because the design never cared to give a structure to these battles. They just "happen" like if they were a side-effect.
What I'm doing is like coding a better looting system in a free for all game. I'm just shaping up a part of a game that, till today, has been completely ignored.