Petition to Jorb for Stat Caps

[Ysh]

Instead I will rather look at meaning of what the other men try to say, instead of focus so much on words they will use.

What they say is shaped by the words they use, as is the mode of thought that accompanies it. This is why I focus on it, because I keep hearing the same arguments, and they almost inevitably focus around 'we need stuff to do at the ennnnnd'. Meaning they're still thinking about the game as having a beginning, a middle, and an end. As long as that thought is driving them, they're going to keep suggesting similar results to those already being achieved.

A broken clock is right twice a day and a fool can have good ideas. I think it is mistake to discount an idea for any reason other than its own merits.

[Lunarius_Haberdash]

A broken clock is right twice a day and a fool can have good ideas. I think it is a mistake to discount an idea for any reason other than its own merits.

Each idea can certainly be judged on its own merits, no denying that. However that doesn't make the presenter not a fool, nor does it fix the clock. Educate a fool, fix the clock, you start hearing productive ideas that aren't just regurgitated MMO nonsense with occasional strokes of brilliance.

[Ysh]

A broken clock is right twice a day and a fool can have good ideas. I think it is a mistake to discount an idea for any reason other than its own merits.

Each idea can certainly be judged on its own merits, no denying that. However that doesn't make the presenter not a fool, nor does it fix the clock. Educate a fool, fix the clock, you start hearing productive ideas that aren't just regurgitated MMO nonsense with occasional strokes of brilliance.

I think you and I have the same goal here.

[xdragonlord18]

fundamentally their isnt much difference between dungeons and a system like gilding they both add content to the end game

They have absolutely nothing in common in relation to types of content.

i think u might b dumb they r both examples of end game content

[Lunarius_Haberdash]

i think u might b dumb they r both examples of end game content

Alright, let's approach this then. How do you define end game content? Because I think we're using different metrics.

[xdragonlord18]

Alright, let's approach this then. How do you define end game content? Because I think we're using different metrics.

end game content is content that u must be in the end game to complete u r in the end game when u have conquered more than half of the games challenges or when u have completed more than half of a games progression

[Lunarius_Haberdash]

end game content is content that u must be in the end game to complete u r in the end game when u have conquered more than half of the games challenges or when u have completed more than half of a games progression

Alright, that's the definition as I understand it. How do you see Gilding fitting into this description? There is no "finishing" gilding, it's available from the beginning and relevant at every stage of the game. Can you explain how that fits your concept of end game?

I will repeat that my issue with end game design is that HnH has no intrinsic 'halfway point' or 'half of its challenges'. It is an ongoing persistent game with no set victory conditions to 'halfway complete'.

[xdragonlord18]

There is no "finishing" gilding

this is false there is a finished gilding which is the weakest instance of the gilding in which further improvements does not render any significant buffs

it's available from the beginning and relevant at every stage of the game. Can you explain how that fits your concept of end game?

yes it is relevant at every stage of the game including the end game stage there r gildings that one can only get when they r in the end game

I will repeat that my issue with end game design is that HnH has no intrinsic 'halfway point' or 'half of its challenges'.

It is an ongoing persistent game with no set victory conditions to 'halfway complete'.

haven is a finite game so their is a half way point even if it is not obvious or explicit u dont need 2 have a victory condition 2 conquer half of the games challenges the victory is implicit in the mastery of the games hardest challenges

[Lunarius_Haberdash]

haven is a finite game so there is a halfway point even if it is not obvious or explicit u don't need 2 have a victory condition 2 conquer half of the games challenges the victory is implicit in the mastery of the games hardest challenges

I'm afraid we're just going to have to agree to disagree then. We simply have vastly different expectations of the style of game that HnH has put itself forth to be and an equally disparate concept of when and where 'end game design' is appropriate.

[Kaios]

First of all listen to this man because he is very smart:

I'm one of those people who consider themselves to be pro-stat caps, but for completely different reasons that stated in OP. Main 2 reasons for stat caps imo are balance in pve and ability to have more free time outside of hnh. And one thing to point out, I would like to see stat/skill caps that affect combat only, so just as an example, you could raise your stats and skills indefinitely but once it reaches a certain point, say 1000, then whatever goes past that will not affect your combat performance, apart from clothing, so with full gear and buffs on u could have max of 2k of each combat stat and skill. Note that those numbers are just used as an example. In any case here's what my thoughts are on such caps and why it could be benificial:

I would really love this game to be more difficult in terms of PvE, to have challenging early game where people will drop like flies to some of the animals that will hunt you and not the other way around, to wounds and sicknesses, and hunger, even though its in the game, its nearly impossible to die from it unless you try really hard. It would also allow to add late game creatures and monsters that will be impossible to defeat solo and will require a real team work. Getting killed in pvp is another thing that i'd like to happen more often, but I would also like for people to restore their characters much faster, which is why i kind of liked the idea of the new combat system that got scrapped, to have some of the abilities that you would find in MOBAs like dota, lol, hon and others, a combat system that usually wipes one side during an encounter, rarely without any casualties. If dying becomes a normal thing and something easy to restore from, then i believe more people would be willing to try it more often. Even though I don't mind the KO system we have right now, its still possible to die in combat when people use a specific strategy, so maybe if combat was a little bit different there would be an even easier way to kill people that would require a little bit more effort than just knocking them out. Also if you wouldn't need to spend most of your free time every single day by grinding your industry and your character to stay fit and relevant for # years non stop, it would really be a relief and even though it might anger some of the real hardcore players at first, it will attract more people into the game, and if pvp is fun enough, people will still play it, just for that. Just like in mobas where you don't have to spend months or years grinding, but play the game for pvp only, where your player skills are more important than your character's. But how much stats for a stat cap is enough? Thats a very difficult question, all depends on the balance of the game, but I'd say 4-5 months of casual progress from the world start, that some hardcore players might reach in about 2 months would be fair imo. What about industry and crafts? I think that part should be left as is, for the most part, and keep growing as the world goes on along with other qualities, perhaps making it slightly easier to raise your character back up to max.

Second, in my opinion, I think encouraging players towards two specific routes is a viable way to go and you have already partially achieved this with the credo system. Players should either focus on raising their attributes and skills evenly for a "balanced" build or could instead choose the route of specialization. This could be achieved by implementing diminishing returns in the form of a player's highest skill or attribute affecting the learning point/food cost of all other skills and attributes.

An example of this might be, Player A raises their combat skills to 300 before raising anything else where as Player B raises theirs to 1000. The overall impact this has on other skills is that the learning point cost for Player A to now raise something like Exploration would be 30% higher than its normal cost at level 1 and Player B's learning point cost would increase marginally higher at 100%. As you close the gap towards your highest skill the cost increase would lower until you match your highest skill at which point the rate returns to what it would normally be at that level. Not sure if that makes sense but I hope so.

This combined with the credo system would hopefully encourage more players towards balancing their skill sets and attributes or specializing to be the village smith or something like that.

Of course there will always be those players that want to min/max everything and obtain all they possibly can or pump out numerous alts with varying capabilities which is fine and they should be able to do so but I feel with some sort of diminishing return in place like this it will at least make that achievement a more difficult prospect and also add value to any player's character(s) that do happen to reach those points.