I don't share the general aversion to being able to tell how difficult a mob is by looking at it - the much criticized system of having the color of the name indicate a mob's general power works for me. Two points to support my contrarian view.
1. In real life you can look at an enemy and often - not always - tell whether it is weak or powerful. Size, seeming muscularity, how it handles itself. Just taking humans, an experienced warrior (which I am most certainly not but my character will be) can tell from someone's stance, movements, weapons and how they hold their weapons whether they are more likely to be a rookie or special forces.
2. My character will learn rapidly how powerful beasts and humanoids are. Why is it a plus for the player to need extensive notes along the lines of "kobold - wimpy; ogre - ouch; wight - feets don't fail me now"?
This said I haven't the slightest objection to having in-game indications of an enemy's effectiveness not appear until your character is a sufficient level to actually be an experienced warrior and/or better yet but perhaps too complicated, until the character has fought that specific type of enemy.
dorotea said:1. In real life you can look at an enemy and often - not always - tell whether it is weak or powerful. Size, seeming muscularity, how it handles itself. Just taking humans, an experienced warrior (which I am most certainly not but my character will be) can tell from someone's stance, movements, weapons and how they hold their weapons whether they are more likely to be a rookie or special forces.
The problem is that this is not often terribly accurate threat assessment even in real life, let alone a fantasy universe with various mythical creatures. Can a human look at a hippo and know fighting it is a bad idea? Yes. Can a human look at another human and accurately know the threat level? No, we only make snap judgements/assumptions and can't know the danger until that person is engaged. For all you know that small statured person you pass on the street and think isn't a threat is Bruce Lee and the muscled bodybuilder you thought would wreck someone turns out to have never been in a fight or thrown a punch and is a clumsy ineffective fighter, or has fought but is still a poor combatant.
Also the more intelligent a confronted fighter the higher the odds a person is less likely to know how dangerous they are until it's too late, unless they don't want to fight and make a show of prowess to dissuade.
Everything Iksar says is most definitely true.
I have played hardcore often enough (die and you delete the character) that I find the idea of having no idea if an enemy is level 1 or level 50 a bit unsettling. But I certainly won't do that until I have gotten several characters up to high level and know the ropes.
Aradune said:The current plan is no visual indicator, but you will be able to /con mobs. How accurate the /con is, however, is something we are thinking about tying into the skill system or another system. Would love your feedback on this idea.
This is the way to go , you get a general feel with a /con and then how accurate your /con are depends on different factors , like experience and skill.
And if not all monsters , npc's or animals have same generic level a secondary skill of "the art of conning" would be fun , as an example "A Kobold" (nr1) is an easy mob to kill ,the "A Kobold"(nr2) that you meet around the bend isnt all that easy since it has been around longer looks quite like the first "A Kobold" but since you where cocky and didnt /con Kobolt nr2 your in troubble =).
I think it would be so fun if mobs had a level spread so we never can be 100% certain when we meet one , in EQ you can see if the kobold is a harder or easier /con by the name since they have the some times tribe in the name so i hope that to will be adressed , a mob only displays the generic name "A Kobold" untill we have met / killed/ ran away from enough times to be able to see the differances in their clothes /markings / ETC
Difficulty indicators in the UI are a must. Slash commands are a clunky relic of the past.
Edit: When I say difficulty, I mean con.
Aradune said:The current plan is no visual indicator, but you will be able to /con mobs. How accurate the /con is, however, is something we are thinking about tying into the skill system or another system. Would love your feedback on this idea.
I don't want it to be an exact science. Doing a /con should give me some idea of the mob in relation to a player of my level - but not, perhaps, specifically my class. I should have to take other things into account as well. Perhaps the mob is blue to me, and blue means I should have a decent chance of prevailing. But perhaps the mob is a caster, and my class doesn't do particularly well against casters (no defenses against magic). Or perhaps the mob can buff the bejesus out of itself, or debuff me into the dirt. I should have to take things like that into account too.
This is, of course, from a solo perspective - but for me the same should hold true for groups and raids.
Finally, over/under cons should be a thing.
Not so much the difficulty of the mob, but certainly I'd like to be able to tell something about its level without having to do a slash command. Personally I really liked the system used in EQOA where there would be different colors on the reticle of your target. Ranging from gray to red.
Gray - much lower level, no value.
Light blue - several levels lower than you.
Dark Blue - a few to 1 level below you.
White - Same level as you.
Yellow - 1 to a few levels above you
Orange - Several levels above you.
Red - Many levels above you.
With all due deference to the wonderfulness of EQ in its day - that day was a while ago.
I know my way around many slash commands but I agree with Liav - slash commands are a clunky relic of the past no matter how useful a device they were when we couldn't do anything better.
EQ2 may have been worse than EQ in some ways but the move to a more menu-driven interface and away from slash commands was not one of them.
Aradune said:The current plan is no visual indicator, but you will be able to /con mobs. How accurate the /con is, however, is something we are thinking about tying into the skill system or another system. Would love your feedback on this idea.
This sound great it just silly that we ingame can runn around and instantly know how dangerous a npc is. Involvo a skill like Perception for every one with a range depending on you skill level and maybe some class skill/spells to improve this ranger/rough is adpet and tanks as it there number one role to engage first so they should be good at summing up the oposition.
Edit
I dont like the notion "Grey Mob" nothing should be grey . One of the best rpgtbltop systems is WHRPG fantasy because it dont matter how good you are a silly Skaven can still kill you. I dont think we should be able to runn like Master's anywhere there should always be a danger in every zone, then travel and loggout position importent decissions.
i grew fond of lineage 2's system...
10+ levels below you = Dark Blue
9-6 levels below you = Light Blue
5-3 levels below you = Green
2 levels below you to 2 levels above you = White
3-5 levels above you = Yellow
6-9 levels above you = Pink
10+ levels above you = Red
Edit: the mobs name is the color above when targeted
I would like to see this be tied into race, class, and faction. If you're a human, then you probably have an easier job telling how strong another human is. If you're a wizard, then you have an easier time guessing the strength of another wizard. This likely wouldn't extend well into non-playable races and classes, so maybe if you have faction with or a history of hunting a specific type of enemy, then you can gain a boost in conning. You could retain these bonuses through progeny if you wanted to do that too. If your mother was a wizard and you know a lot about wizardry, but you are a warrior, then maybe you have a bonus to assessing the strength of both.
Just a thought.
Here's my thoughts, and I believe this was said before, so I am agreeing weith it.
I think that the whole /con system should be tied to the perception system. If you "suck" at perception, you "suck" at /con'ing a mob. This would encourage the average player to develop their perception, which is going to be needed in any case, so it wouldn't be too far out of your way to do so.
Xeravik said:My main was a Necromancer in VG. This is how I interpreted the dot system: Is it an elite 6 dot? No? It's dead.
That's the problem with any difficulty meter, depending on the skill of the player and what class the player is the same mob could be impossible or moderately easy. How do you tell the warrior that he is gonna get slaughetered by the hill giant but the druid will beat it? Or how a paladin will beat undead yet a ranger will die to them? The /con system wasn't any better than the dot system really other than as some others have mentioned immersion.
I don't put much stock in those systems for that reason. It is through playing the game that I figure out what I can defeat or how many players I will need to help me win. This is going to be a group focused game so I am assuming most mobs will be dangerous to fight alone unless you are a specific solo friendly class or fighting a mob your class specializes in killing.
Aradune said:The current plan is no visual indicator, but you will be able to /con mobs. How accurate the /con is, however, is something we are thinking about tying into the skill system or another system. Would love your feedback on this idea.
I'm ambivalent on whether it's a /command or presented graphically in the monster nameplate. However, my 2 cp on that topic is that current games have trained people to look at nameplates - I feel like only old EQ people remember having to do it with a /command :)
That said, the idea of tieing it to a skill intrigues me. What if...
- Characters get a "Lore" skill for enemy types that can be advanced by spending time fighting those enemy types and studying their habitats/equipment. For example, Lore: Humanoids, or Lore: Dragonkin.
- This skill gives access to an ability which can be used to "inspect" a creature at a distance and learn more about it.
- As this skill advances, this ability gets more accurate, as follows (for the sake of example, using a 100 point scale)
Skill level 0-15: You can tell if the creature is higher/lower level than you (same as /con)
Skill level 16-30: You can tell the relative toughness of the creature (looks like it could be soloed, might need a hand, definitely bring friends, you and what army?)
Skill level 31-45: You can get basic information about normal enemy attacks (looks like it uses claws, bites, and its tail in combat)
Skill level 46-60: You can get basic information about special attacks (looks like it might be able to cast cleric spells)
Skill level 61-75: You can get basic information about resistances (looks like it likes fire, but it doesn't like the cold)
Skill level 76-85: You can get information about its disposition (looks like it will try to protect its fellows)
Skill level 86-95: Adds detail to all of hte above
Skill level 96-100: You can get information about its spawn timer (seems to come out to hunt at night, and only about once a week)
This was just off the top of my head, but assuming a variety of different Lore skills (rather than just a single one), that would add a new dimension for groups and guilds. Having someone with a high Lore skill would be a huge asset in planning out how to handle an encounter, for example.
Nephele said:Aradune said:The current plan is no visual indicator, but you will be able to /con mobs. How accurate the /con is, however, is something we are thinking about tying into the skill system or another system. Would love your feedback on this idea.
I'm ambivalent on whether it's a /command or presented graphically in the monster nameplate. However, my 2 cp on that topic is that current games have trained people to look at nameplates - I feel like only old EQ people remember having to do it with a /command :)
That said, the idea of tieing it to a skill intrigues me. What if...
- Characters get a "Lore" skill for enemy types that can be advanced by spending time fighting those enemy types and studying their habitats/equipment. For example, Lore: Humanoids, or Lore: Dragonkin.
- This skill gives access to an ability which can be used to "inspect" a creature at a distance and learn more about it.
- As this skill advances, this ability gets more accurate, as follows (for the sake of example, using a 100 point scale)
Skill level 0-15: You can tell if the creature is higher/lower level than you (same as /con)
Skill level 16-30: You can tell the relative toughness of the creature (looks like it could be soloed, might need a hand, definitely bring friends, you and what army?)
Skill level 31-45: You can get basic information about normal enemy attacks (looks like it uses claws, bites, and its tail in combat)
Skill level 46-60: You can get basic information about special attacks (looks like it might be able to cast cleric spells)
Skill level 61-75: You can get basic information about resistances (looks like it likes fire, but it doesn't like the cold)
Skill level 76-85: You can get information about its disposition (looks like it will try to protect its fellows)
Skill level 86-95: Adds detail to all of hte above
Skill level 96-100: You can get information about its spawn timer (seems to come out to hunt at night, and only about once a week)
This was just off the top of my head, but assuming a variety of different Lore skills (rather than just a single one), that would add a new dimension for groups and guilds. Having someone with a high Lore skill would be a huge asset in planning out how to handle an encounter, for example.
I like some of the stuff here, but towarda the upper-end you're getting way too far into the mechanics for me. Like the spawn times and what-not.
Love the idea, Nephele, as long as the skill acquisition isn't level capped. That is, if I can use it and max it out by creature type, regardless of my level, great. But if I have to wait until level 50 artificially, not a fan.
It would then become awesome at the exact moment I wouldn't need it anymore, or would use it far less frequently, likely.
Iksar said:dorotea said:1. In real life you can look at an enemy and often - not always - tell whether it is weak or powerful. Size, seeming muscularity, how it handles itself. Just taking humans, an experienced warrior (which I am most certainly not but my character will be) can tell from someone's stance, movements, weapons and how they hold their weapons whether they are more likely to be a rookie or special forces.
The problem is that this is not often terribly accurate threat assessment even in real life, let alone a fantasy universe with various mythical creatures. Can a human look at a hippo and know fighting it is a bad idea? Yes. Can a human look at another human and accurately know the threat level? No, we only make snap judgements/assumptions and can't know the danger until that person is engaged. For all you know that small statured person you pass on the street and think isn't a threat is Bruce Lee and the muscled bodybuilder you thought would wreck someone turns out to have never been in a fight or thrown a punch and is a clumsy ineffective fighter, or has fought but is still a poor combatant.
Also the more intelligent a confronted fighter the higher the odds a person is less likely to know how dangerous they are until it's too late, unless they don't want to fight and make a show of prowess to dissuade.
I agree with this 100%. I used to work with an SF guy that looked like a beach bum pretty boy. TO look at him you'd never know that he jumped in to help rescue an American F-111 pilot shot down in Libya and could disamantle you with one arm tied behind his back.