Another Perspective on Group PVE Gameplay
- Thread starter Eronakis_sl
- Start date
Noodleface
A Mod Real Quick
- 38,655
- 16,719
Reminds me of this baseball game I had on sega genesis. You could make any player play any position, no matter if they sucked or were good. I often times put in the left fielder as the pitcher, and was amazed that his fastball was only like 50 MPH and wild every pitch. This reminds me of that
I can see the tactical value in having a well designed AI script that wasn't easily overcome by the tank pushing one button every few seconds and generating AOE threat forcing every mob to target him.
Lets say the PVE encounter is your group of 5 players versus a group of 10 orcs. At the start of the encounter all 10 orcs would initially attack the player closest to them. That leaves the other 4 players in your group not matched up directly with any of the NPCs. Players not engaged with a NPC could get a buff that improves their damage or healing output. This would generate extra threat causing the NPCs to break off from their current target to attack the players who are not engaged. When the NPC starts attacking them, they lose the buff and start doing regular damage/healing output.
Packs of NPC mobs should also have the same exact types of abilities that players have. If the game has classes with the ability to cast fear, charm, mez, snare, root, etc then NPCs should be routinely casting those abilities against the players as well.
Lastly, if the players have invaded the NPC's home/dungeon/lair, when the SHTF and the players are starting to win the encounter, then the NPC AI should do something like in EQ where the NPCs start fleeing, raise an alarm, or whatever to issue a call for help from nearby mobs that haven't been aggroed. One thing I think is lame in a lot of MMOs is you can be fighting some NPCs in a large room and a pack of other NPCs across the room just stand there doing nothing oblivious to the fight going on just across the room.
Harkon
Vyemm Raider
- 1,549
- 4,090
I agree it's disappointing now that mmo's have gotten away from this. One thing I enjoyed about EQ was the risk of NPC's running to bring others and potentially having large trains coming back if you let one run.
I don't think NPC's should be trying to flee all the time but where it makes sense to the environment and type of npc it should happen.
Thank you for your reply and actually reading the OP!
There would be two distinct layers in which the AI will have to strategize and behave. The outside layer of how the NPC's behave together within a group and the inside layer of how the NPC's behave against the player when they're in 1v1 battle. The strategy of this proposal is specifically through adaptive combat mechanics that must complement the strategic AI and how well composition of a said group can work together to overcome challenges. You basically hit the nail on the head in that NPC AI must also have the same combat mechanics and similar spells/skills as the player. And they do.
I know your 10 orc fight was just an example but the scale of NPC capacity would be similar to the group size of players in some cases. Could a 10 orc battalion encounter a full group of players? Absolutely. Quite in frequent however.
Srathor
Vyemm Raider
- 1,894
- 3,080
It all depends how much realism you want to get into. And how well you want to handle suspension of disbelief.
If you look at the Black Rock Depths from WoW. That was a city but it was very cluttered with mobs standing around. You had some patrols but not that many that went to different areas. So you ended up having fights in the same room in visual range of other mobs but outside of Aggro range. All the devs had to do to wipe out most stupid groups was to give any of the npc's a yell that brought help from nearby npc allies.
Of course this would just change the game to a pull mechanic to outside of the shout range. Which the devs could counter with running for help mobs. which would cause the players to prioritize the runner mobs first.
It quickly devolves into a logistics arms war with good players, and a place noone goes with bad players. (See Gnomeregan/vanilla dire maul)
The truth of the matter is Devs can kill you at any time. They are the creators of the game and the encounters. They can cheat. What they are trying to do is not win, they are trying to lose in a manner that is fun for the good player, but also not too frustrating for the bad player.
That is frikken hard. That is why good dm's in pen and paper games have a shield. So they can fudge rolls good and bad so they can rope a dope players into being challenged but still having the random element and fun. MMO Devs are trying to be a good DM for millions of different players, that they will never meet, and who they know will scream at them and go to a competitor.
In my opinion if you want to have great PvE gameplay, have a reason for the players to go there. (Great Loot, great xp, great story tie ins, visible world location) Have a reason for every class to go as well. (Special abilities, hidden tricks, points of interest to let classes shine, class quests.) And have a reason to come back again, (different mobs/story advances) if there is to be a reason to go back that is like grinding then make a good explanation (See caverns of time)
If you look at the Black Rock Depths from WoW. That was a city but it was very cluttered with mobs standing around. You had some patrols but not that many that went to different areas. So you ended up having fights in the same room in visual range of other mobs but outside of Aggro range. All the devs had to do to wipe out most stupid groups was to give any of the npc's a yell that brought help from nearby npc allies.
Of course this would just change the game to a pull mechanic to outside of the shout range. Which the devs could counter with running for help mobs. which would cause the players to prioritize the runner mobs first.
It quickly devolves into a logistics arms war with good players, and a place noone goes with bad players. (See Gnomeregan/vanilla dire maul)
The truth of the matter is Devs can kill you at any time. They are the creators of the game and the encounters. They can cheat. What they are trying to do is not win, they are trying to lose in a manner that is fun for the good player, but also not too frustrating for the bad player.
That is frikken hard. That is why good dm's in pen and paper games have a shield. So they can fudge rolls good and bad so they can rope a dope players into being challenged but still having the random element and fun. MMO Devs are trying to be a good DM for millions of different players, that they will never meet, and who they know will scream at them and go to a competitor.
In my opinion if you want to have great PvE gameplay, have a reason for the players to go there. (Great Loot, great xp, great story tie ins, visible world location) Have a reason for every class to go as well. (Special abilities, hidden tricks, points of interest to let classes shine, class quests.) And have a reason to come back again, (different mobs/story advances) if there is to be a reason to go back that is like grinding then make a good explanation (See caverns of time)
Elsebet
Peasant
- 110
- 5
I like the idea of tanking being like a toggle stance or type of CC that anyone can perform, just in a different way. For example a monk type class might grapple and pin down their opponent(s). A mage might summon one or more illusions to distract a target or targets. A healer might calm or root a target. A support class might create defensive or offensive walls around the group or a player.
The idea that melee is responsible for the front lines, not just the tank, is also a good idea. I'm pretty sure this was how tanking worked in DAoC, I rarely remember having a warrior in my levelling groups, mostly beserkers.
The idea that melee is responsible for the front lines, not just the tank, is also a good idea. I'm pretty sure this was how tanking worked in DAoC, I rarely remember having a warrior in my levelling groups, mostly beserkers.
Thanks for your reply!
It's a video game and high fantasy after all. The suspension of disbelief is kind of out the window when you throw magic in the fold. But nonetheless, it doesn't take away from having some immersion factors embedded into the gameplay and the world.
The way I am currently envisioning this is that most NPC's would roam in different sized groups, where as NPC's that are still or follow short ranged pathing will be guards of some sort. Of course not all NPC's will be aggressive either. I really liked what Everquest did with different factions and how you can raise or lower your reputation. See Velious with the choice of Giants, Dwarves or Dragons if I remember correctly.
Developers are indeed the GM for every player who decides to join their world on their terms and hopefully the player can obtain enjoyment out of it. Balancing gameplay between player skill is a feat in it's self. Devs will always be in perpetual ways to balance their game so an average player can find it's necessary challenges and give me's.
Oh absolutely, there has to be some sense of direction for the player to have any desire to adventure in any particular part of the world. Couldn't agree more. (I'm not insinuating hand holding either)
Thanks for your reply!I like the idea of tanking being like a toggle stance or type of CC that anyone can perform, just in a different way. For example a monk type class might grapple and pin down their opponent(s). A mage might summon one or more illusions to distract a target or targets. A healer might calm or root a target. A support class might create defensive or offensive walls around the group or a player.
The idea that melee is responsible for the front lines, not just the tank, is also a good idea. I'm pretty sure this was how tanking worked in DAoC, I rarely remember having a warrior in my levelling groups, mostly beserkers.
In this approach tanking is more loosely based off the melee archetype as a whole. Casters and other classes have their own set of roles that complement them. The idea of other casters temporary alleviating aggro from a tank for a short time is an interesting course. However, that would work better for more of the traditional tank and aggro gameplay we have currently.
I don't have much experience with DAoC but I have hardly hear any negative comments about the game. An Old School classic. Miss those days!
Noodleface
A Mod Real Quick
- 38,655
- 16,719