What is endgame/midgame/earlygame - A call for a roadmap

[pppp]

As the topic title says - what is end game, what is mid game and what is early game? How do you define it?
I can see at least two totally conflicting definitions:

1. Given skill tree,

• early game is getting skills up to 1k LP cost, some 20-30 attributes
• mid game is getting skills up to 10k lp, some 70-80 attributes, getting a village
• end game is getting all the skills (minus rage for non-pvpers), attributes around 100 or more and maybe some credos

That's a definition which was already outdated in W3 (disclaimer: minus credos, can't say for earlier worlds, I was not playing back then).

2. Given the current world

• early game is getting all skills, attributes well above 100, a village totem, set of alts with crucial credos, lots of other stuff, first week of the world,
• mid game is attributes into 100s, closer to 1k, getting a realm, covering all available space with realm claim, 2nd week, up to 2nd month,
• end game is grinding q into 1000s, 3rd month, until the reset

I am asking players for opinion and developers for a design document defining what should be early/mid/late game, how long into the world it should last and what achievements belong to each category.
These categories should be probably further divided for more precise definitions and definitions for a single player should separated from definitions for a team, at least in the realm part. Note, in fact this approach implies world end some day.

Given the basic timeline and what should be achieved at what time into the world (or into the gameplay for late comers) we can start defining what skills, what attribute/skill levels and what crafts should be available at each stage, including foods, curios, weapons etc. It should also define stages at which cheesing certain animals should be possible. I am under impression the current design process is chaotic and it is driven by for what players push most and what developers fancy. We need for some formal guidelines. There are many issues ranging from stuff being overpowered, through trading issues, to playerbase decline which can be traced back to reaching endgame too early or from stuff being available (or not) at a wrong stage. quite a lot of things that now belong to midgame should be moved to late game, e.g. realms, killing biggest animals, deeper mines. Siegecraft should have tiers and together with walls should be also distributed between different game stages.

Remark:

I believe cheesing is a valid part of the game as long as requirements for it can be controlled by design. I like how achieving something earlier requires extra thought but it should not be ridiculous like killing a troll with fresh alt, day one.

[jorb]

Of what use would this document be?

[loleznub]

We could get better at seeing the perspective of the player, but the reverse is also true.

would be a good place to start for that, obviously to see what the development perspective is...

[jorb]

Ok, I don't really have a formalized view of x should take y time to unlock, &c&c&c. Players beat the game in the time they beat it, and we work to extend the longevity of it, quite simply. Ideally the game should last indefinitely, and get more fun the older the world is. I also do not really develop with the assumption of a reset.

I am under impression the current design process is chaotic and it is driven by for what players push most and what developers fancy.

Very much so.

We need for some formal guidelines.

Why? How does meta work in this department solve any particular balance issue? Why not just adress the balance issue directly?

We have a loose roadmap of big ticket items we'd like to get done. Client rendering (*sigh*) and then object-controlled objects. Working on seasons in between. Looking at a combat revamp. Not sure what anything more formalized actually accomplishes, given that the main priorities remain what they are, and provide us with plenty of things to do.

[Colin500]

We have a loose roadmap of big ticket items we'd like to get done. Client rendering (*sigh*) and then object-controlled objects. Working on seasons in between. Looking at a combat revamp. Not sure what anything more formalized actually accomplishes, given that the main priorities remain what they are, and provide us with plenty of things to do.

I know that it's a bigger project and might feel just as important, but for the love of god please pause your work with seasons and focus more on other things, mainly combat.

[jorb]

Nah, we're getting close to something playable. Will push that before starting any new projects, especially a nebulous one like combat.

[pppp]

To have a clear view what we are aiming for. In particular:
- how long it should take to reach particular skills, on average and in shortest time
- how long it should take to have first villages formed
- how long it should take to hunt q100/q200/q500 mobs
- what tier of players should be foraging/farming any particular stuff

The topic relates to many issues but it was triggered by the discussion about the latest patch but also by the recent thread about credos. Looking deeper into foraging vs gardening issue there is no basic and detailed level definition how foraging should relate to gardening, I 'd like to see a list like:

• Stuff that can be foraged but is better gardened
  • item 1(e.g.chantrelles)
  • item 2(e.g.bluebells)
  • item 3
• Stuff that can be foraged and gardened but gardening makes sense only when it is not available locally
  • item 1(e.g.chives)
  • item 2(e.g.kvann)
  • item 3(e.g.parasol mushroom)
• Stuff that can be foraged and gardened with credo
  • item 1(e.g.troll mushroom)
  • item 2
  • item 3
• Stuff that can be foraged only
  • item 1(e.g. waybroad)
  • item 2(e.g.chamomile)
  • item 3
• Stuff that can be gardened only / with credo (e.g. rare mutations from categories 1 and 2
  • item 1(e.g. red bell)
  • item 2
  • item 3

Basic level definition is how much stuff belongs to each category and what players can do with that stuff (eat/study/craft/sell- to whom?)
Pausing here, we have to define who is new player, who is mid-level player and who is top level player. For the purpose of the foraging example let's assume new player has less than 1k per exp and mid level player has more. Top level player is one who can not be bothered with foraging. In gardening credo separates new players from mid level and top ones are lazy asses.
We can put more details into our list:

• Stuff that can be foraged but is better gardened
  • item 1(newb level)(eat/study)
  • item 2(newb level)(sell)
  • item 3(mid level)(e.g.eat/craft)
  • item 4 (mid level)(e.g.sell)
• Stuff that can be foraged and gardened but gardening makes sense only when it is not available locally
  item 1(newb level)(e.g.eat/medicine)
  • item 2(mid level)(e.g.craft)
  • item 3 (mid level)(e.g.eat)
• Stuff that can be foraged and gardened with credo (this is mid level only, since it requires credo all items are good candidates for trade)
  • item 1
  • item 2
  • item 3
• Stuff that can be foraged only
  • item 1(newb level)(own use e.g. eat/study)
  • item 2(mid level)(own use e.g. eat/study)
  • item 3 (mid level)(Sell)
• Stuff that can be gardened only / with credo (e.g. rare mutations from categories 1 and 2) (depending if mutations are one time or can be cultivated it is mostly for sale or for own use too)
  • item 1
  • item 2
  • item 3

I do not even want the list itself now, It can be made per topic as needed, it should have been created for the purpose of discussion of gardening change. But I want basic definitions that are used in creating that list and similar lists that may apply to any other activity, like hunting, all kinds of crafting, combat.

I want a definition who is new player, who is mid player who is top player in respect to every(or at least most) activity and defined by having or not having any particular skill or credo, skill level, access to specific ingredients. I expect more detailed definition than the makeshift one I gave above (because why 1k per exp and not 500 or 2k ? does forager credo matters ? should it ?)
Then once we have these definitions we can try to find out what interactions could be between low/mid/high level players, what stuff we want to be traded and we can verify if that stuff is actually traded and why not. In a way that is a counterpart of test-driven programming.

Calling things low/mid/high tier can help make certain discussions more formalized and civilized. e.g. instead of:
- "It's retarded to have forager credo ask for strawberries, I cannot complete it on day one."
we might have:
-"Forager credo is considered low level one, strawberries can be seen at 1850 low per*exp, which above 1000 per*exp early game threshold"

[wonder-ass]

ideally the game shouldnt have a early game mid game endgame everything should be somewhat valuable and useful. something legacy was able to accomplish through not inflated qualities.

[pppp]

ideally the game shouldnt have a early game mid game endgame everything should be somewhat valuable and useful. something legacy was able to accomplish through not inflated qualities.

That's not possible. Even if the world would not have early/mid/late game the players and their characters will always have, unless there is no progress, no skills, no dependency on ingredients. And last but not least, no knowledge involved.

[pppp]

We have a loose roadmap of big ticket items we'd like to get done. Client rendering (*sigh*) and then object-controlled objects. Working on seasons in between. Looking at a combat revamp. Not sure what anything more formalized actually accomplishes, given that the main priorities remain what they are, and provide us with plenty of things to do.

This is completely different level of design. Think planning a trip vs choosing a car to buy vs getting purchase paperwork done.
Your time allocation is one thing, players have little to say in that. Interface implementation is another thing. And system design is the third thing. I am talking about system design thingy, which is mostly independent from fps players can boast about and that can be ran with a sheet of paper, a pencil and a dice.