Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Introducing: SCIENTIST class
Anashel
Member UncommonPosts: 200
Hi! During this weekend we will reveal 4 classes. With start the day with:
THE SCIENTIST
(The soldier shown is a placeholder. No design has been done for the scientist class... yet!)
Scientists spend their time looking for a rupture site or, when they find one, trying to analyze and extract all possible information to better understand this phenomenon. They follow behind the Soldier and deploy gadgets to unlock mysteries beyond our greatest imagination.
ABOUT CLASS SKILLS
In the Black Watchmen Universe, you will have to work with the following category of skills. Please keep in mind that, this being an ARG, you can highly customize our suggested templates and invent new types of characters!
Code Breaking and Puzzle Solving (MEDIUM)
Skill at breaking codes, understanding how systems work, hacking terminals and generally good at solving various forms of puzzles.
Online Research and Analysis (HIGH)
Ability to quickly find the needles in a haystack, connecting the dots in a large volume of information, prioritizing data and researching the web
Tactical Skill - APM Level (LOW)
High level of actions per minute, using your weapon or various types of technology. High level of control and concentration over long periods of time.
Real World Knowledge (HIGH)
Fluent in various languages and topics including art, history, war, and politics.
Companion App (LOW)
Use of a location-based device and skills in urban and rural combat through augmented reality.
Community Leadership (MEDIUM)
Ability to organize and plan group attacks. Strong skills in commanding Special Ops teams and diffusing tense situations.
You can improve your skills over time to enable access to higher-level game events.
DO YOU PLAN TO PLAY A SCIENTIST CLASS?
Comments
Uh! Based on past experiences, this seems to be the class I'd enjoy - albeit I'd reserve final judgement for when all 4 classes have been revealed - might be looking for a bit more "Tactical Skill", but as we now know, we can adjust for that.
Just a quick few questions - I promise to try to limit my rant, getting a bit embarassing being this active. :S
- The phrase "They follow behind the Soldier" made me wonder, do the classes somehow interact? Say, for example, the availability of one mission is dependant on the completion of a pre-requisite mission by another class? Not only that, but is the interaction primarily sequential, or both sequential and co-operative?
Say, for example, the Scientists locate a new Rupture. The Soldiers then move in an clear it, and when that's done, the Scientists move in and set up shop, so to speak (sequential interaction). After this, just to keep it simple, the Scientists conduct their "research", but in order to make any meaningful progress, they need Soldiers to maintain on-site integrity - and vice verca, Soldiers need new information from Scientists, in order to better maintain said integrity (co-operative interaction).
In essence, after the sequential phase, Soldiers keep the area closed off, so Scientists can work on the "why, what and how", and the Soldiers can in turn use that information, to manufacture stories that keeps the public eye at bay - ("Hello, 90's sci-fi!") - and so on.
- Might be an obvious question, but will it be possible to fail missions, or will it merely be a question of time and stubborness, or conversely, merely the hints becoming more and more pronounced - if all else fails?
- While all things are certainly relative, is there an intended difference in "difficulty" among the classes?
Doing a quick comparison of the Soldier and Scientist "stats", it would seem that the Scientist is somewhat more "involved", having 16 filled bars compared to the Soldiers 13. Is this an indication that, for example, Tactical Skill is considered more involved/difficult than, say, Real World Knowledge, or is it an indication that there's a difference in the level of involvment/difficulty associated with the two classes?
*reads his post, sighs, and once more looks apologetically at the reader for the rant*
All good questions, this and your last Soldier's post, your on fire!
- The phrase "They follow behind the Soldier" made me wonder, do the classes somehow interact? Say, for example, the availability of one mission is dependant on the completion of a pre-requisite mission by another class? Not only that, but is the interaction primarily sequential, or both sequential and co-operative?
In user generated event, they are sequential then overlay. Scientist find a rupture, soldier plan a deployment tactic to secure the site (sequential) but neet to keep it secure once your there (overlay). In game generated event, they are cooperative. Everyone play at the same time with more advance mechanics. (Coordinating attack, etc...)
As for keeping public eye at bay "90's sci-fi" it's Division 66 jobs. And if they failed, they will likely call in Cybertech or Sniper to help contain the situation.
- Might be an obvious question, but will it be possible to fail missions, or will it merely be a question of time and stubborness, or conversely, merely the hints becoming more and more pronounced - if all else fails?
Oh yes, it is. In case of a user generated event, it's a good reminder that you can fail. So when a hub or a real game event happen, you know what is at stake. I said it before, in last two arg you killed the cheerleader. In Behind the Yellow curtain, the result was more catastrophic: the hub was closed down halfway and lost forever... So failure have really important consequence. Think of it as Diablo Hardcore mode. Your level 98 died due to lag? Too bad.
- While all things are certainly relative, is there an intended difference in "difficulty" among the classes?
Yes, soldier are easier class to play, cybertech and sniper are harder. That said, with the 'organic evolution' brainstorm we had in the other post: ar Sniper and Cybertech advanced class on Soldier and Scientist : could be. Sniper clearly. Cybertech being Soldier and Scientist at the same time? (soldier+hacker)
Doing a quick comparison of the Soldier and Scientist "stats", it would seem that the Scientist is somewhat more "involved", having 16 filled bars compared to the Soldiers 13. Is this an indication that, for example, Tactical Skill is considered more involved/difficult than, say, Real World Knowledge, or is it an indication that there's a difference in the level of involvment/difficulty associated with the two classes?
No, it's really the intensity of the game mechanics you are likely to meet with that class. Imagine each of them having their own level of difficulty curve. It's not that the soldier or the scientist won't do APM, it's more to the fact scientist will be less likely to have to do so.
That said, being scientist and managing to lvl up your APM as well as a soldier, with 3 time less opportunity to do it, create the opportunity for us to template a new type of advanced class since it was much harder for you to get there compare to what we expect from a Soldier. (Scientist + high APM = Major?)
Oh my, all the answers I was hoping for. ^^
Was worried that, because it will be a persistent ARG, that the possibility of failure might skew your intended progress in regards to storyline, but I take it that this means storyline is more the effect as a function of the causality from mission results, rather than the storyline being an inalienable and unalterable truth.
Beyond the already cool prospect of attaining an "advanced" class - making the Techpriest, Necromancer, Phasing and Mentalist Cyber-mage classes "rare" ones, I suppose - are you planning on other incentives for reaching these harder-to-get milestones? Missions that, if not require, then become substantially more manageable with the presence of one (or more) of these "advanced" classes, for example? Perhaps even missions uniquely available to the advanced class in question?
Can't in good conscience think up a suitable example, but say a mission that requires either a great deal of relative simple information to be entered in a specific order, in the case of being solved a "normal" class, but if the player is a Major - or there's a Major among them - the order is no longer necessary, as long as it's the correct information. That is to say, because of the Majors high APM and RWK, they gain the benefit of managing not Actions per minute, but Knowledge per minute. Having a high capacity for Working Memory (if primarily in terms of explaining the benefit).
On a final note, seeing as it's possible to level up various stats of our chosen class, and the possibility of mission failure is a very real one, is it also possible to lose progress on stats. For example by ignoring a certain type of mission, or outright failing one?
Oh, and great reference. Made me think what would happen if, say, Scientist + High Companion App = Proxy?
How to follow up after these posts???
Uhh. Dibs. I call dibs on the scientist.
Are we going to learn more about the advanced mutations when all the basic class information is released, or is that for a later time?
A.K.A. nikel
Woah, all that ^ sounds awesome. I believe I'm a Cybertech wannabe xD
And, up until now, I've read very interesting things, but I have the felling this is only the tip of the iceberg.
Can't wait to see the Cybertech class :P
- For example by ignoring a certain type of mission, or outright failing one?
I have a problem with the idea of losing something in a game. I don't see how it contribute to improve loyalty or engagement. So no, you wont have penalty for skipping a mission.
I have a long answer on the topic of character leveling, and it's call the Generation Engine. Remind me to make a post about it or have a video chat on the topic.
- Scientist + High Companion App =Proxy?
Nice, Ergo Proxy is a good idea! How about Laughing Man? High in Code Break, Online and Real World?
Overall, I like where all this is going...
Never apologize for having good ideas and questions
Sounds good, and I agree with you completely; while losing progression may serve a purpose in some games (EVE-Online springs to mind), it would be too demotivating to, for example, see one of your stats drop, because you had to go get milk.
Looking forward to hearing about the Generation Engine, seeing as how you've already put so much deliberation into the classes - and possibility of classes - and how interesting a feature that is in and of itself.
And yet another good reference. Makes me wonder, though, will the "advanced classes" only be dependent on ones level of stats, or also on ones basic class?
Would, for example, both a Scientist who gained a high APM, and a Soldier who gained a high Real World Knowledge, be categorized as "Major"? Would obviously create quite a bit of overlap if so - and would, perhaps, necessitate some tricky lore-jumping to explain how someone from one of the Intellectual branches (Scientist, Cybertech), or Action branches (Soldier, Sniper), managed to be promoted into a category somewhat outside their original one (Scientist -> Major), and if not, generate quite a lot of classes - 720 per basic class, I believe. :S
Edit: Actually, feel free to disregard the following question. While it might certainly be interesting to know, it would also take out some of the excitement, as we'd then be able to "safely" try to achieve an advanced class, knowing exactly what the criteria would be for reaching one (if not a specific one). "Spoilers!", as the good River Song would put it.
Which brings up another question, do you have any idea of what would constitute a change into an advanced class?
I take it that raising a skill by one bar wouldn't be enough, such as a Scientist maxing out Online Research (4 -> 5).
Perhaps it's more dependant on whether or not you maxed a previously non-maxed skill, so in terms of generating an advanced class, a scientist who gained 2 bars in Community Leadership (3 -> 5), would generate a higher chance of advancement, than, say, the player gaining 2 bars in Tactical Skill (1 -> 3).
Finally, it may be dependent on the "severity" of the change, in which case, a low-level skill becoming even a medium skill, would reflect huge changes in the players objective playstyle - the inverse of the above.
Either way, I assume it won't be a case of "You gained one bar in X, you become [advanced class]!", as that would leave roughly 2,6 × 1032 possible classes.
Hehe, cheers for the kind words. ^^
I'm just overly aware of how long-winded my posts tend to be, and how bothersome it can sometimes be to read through it all. I really should learn to be more concise.
Edit: Oh, and just to keep the ball rolling. High Tactical Skill, APM, and Companion App = Anchor?
While everybody likes a good reference, naming too many of these after anime characters might not sit well with a lot of people, and Laughing Man means absolutely nothing as a name to those who have no knowledge of Ghost in the Shell. As awesome as the Laughing Man is, it doesn't really sound like a scientist's title without the context of its origin.
I think - or hope, as I agree with you - that the primary reason we named the links according to the characters we referred to, was based on a mixture of things; naming the specific characters in order to identify their strengths and weaknesses ("This is the type of character I envision when I think of someone good at these things"), and having a bit of fun.
But ultimately, the misunderstanding of it being propositions for the actual class-names, would be my fault - and I apologize.
Anashel rightly called his proposal "Major", and showed the image that somewhat explained how such an agent might be - if nothing else, then from a RP standpoint.
I took that, and for the fun of it ran with it. I thought the name was quite fitting for the role (Proxy), as well as the characters strengths and weaknesses.
Anashel then named the specific character in question, again, because the character portrayed how that "class" might be RP-wise, what strengths and weaknesses they portrayed.
I then put the final nail in the naming-convention, by using the characters translated surname, instead of the characters actual name. In all honesty, though, I did feel that a class with high APM, TS and Companion App, would fit well with that name; (Anchor, which would be the translation of the kanji - which I believe is no longer used in daily speech, the katakana (ankaa) being more common these days - used to write the characters surname, Ikari): Someone highly tactical, highly capable, and very calculative in their actions.
If that hasn't put your mind at ease, despite I feel silly for "reminding you" (I take it for granted you've played one of HEs previous ARGs), HE have been quite original - and very clever - in their naming conventions thus far. Names can carry a lot of weight, and I'm rather sure HE won't pass up such an oppertunity to flesh out the ARG, by creating meaningful names for their classes - and not copy/paste them from popular fiction.
We won't name them literally Proxy, Laughing Man and Major ...
Scientist seems great for me. Maybe mixed up a little with the Sniper.
Looking forward to how this actually plays out.
Fubar over on TSW's forums. [Also in the German forums: Fubar]
My apologies. It was presented in a format that looked as though they were name suggestions as well to me. That's what I get for trying to think while sleep deprived.
I am very excited for the prospect of the scientist as well as the suggested method for class advancement. However, that sounds as though you'll be very busy in the beginning while people are moving in every possible direction. Is there an idea how many possible classes this might result in, or is it up in the air and entirely up to the playerbase's advancement?
I do actually like the inspiration for these classes. Gendo? Yes please.
Major actually reminded me of another soldier-scientist in name and description whose majestic visage is truly one for the ages: this fabulous fellow.
Hehe, no worries. I'm a bit too fond of prowling forums in a sleep-deprived state as well.
Excellent question as well, I can't imagine they'd make a class for each of the 720 possible combinations of skill mastery, or the.. 2,6 × 1032 , possible configurations of various levels of mastery among each of the skills, I believe it was. So what kind of limitations they'll set to prevent having to come up with that many titles, and possibly unique missions, is - as mentioned - a very good question.
Oh, and great reference as well. Have to love that big softy.
Scientist would probably be the one out of the classes so far that appeals to me most
Although, perhaps some mix of Cybertech and Scientist
Will be waiting with bated breath to see how it pans out a bit further down the line.
They are only indicative of the frequency of certain missions; not your skill level, mission difficulty, or mission rewards.
In other words, if you have Real World Knowledge at 5 and Tactical Skill at 1, you'll be offered more missions that require knowledge about the real world, than you would be offered missions that require a high dexterity and concentration. That isn't to say you'll never get missions related to "Tactical Skill", just that they'll be fewer than the other, higher rated skills. Think of it as "Clearence Level" as opposed to "Skill"; The higher your clearence level, the more often you encounter missions that fall into that category.
Skills are purely personal. That is to say, it's more or less completely reliant on you yourself what you're good at. You might not be the fastest or most accurate FPS player, but you could very well have a high Tactical Skill, if you purely opt to solve missions using that path. Your "Clearence Level" (skill stats) will presumably chance, and reflect what missions you do often - and eventually lead to "promotions" to more advanced classes.
[Disclaimer: Before you read on: Please read the entirety of the next part, to avoid confusion - and keep in mind it's nothing official, just me ranting.]
This is mostly me brain-farting, so none of the following is set in stone, and at best, based on quite a few assumptions.
Let's say that you're faced with a mission. This missions "natural" solution might be found in the realm of Tactical Skill, but because you have a high Real World Knowledge, you might be offered a way to solve it that way. The trade-off might then be, that the "Real World Knowledge" path is relatively harder, than if it had been a mission where "Real World Knowledge" was the natural path.
However, because skills are related to what types of missions you do most, and thereby what you might prefer - you'll be able to complete a mission the way you'd like, a mission you would otherwise find quite tedious.
While information is still "fuzzy" as to whether or not the above assumption is correct, one might say "Clearence Level" indirectly links with "difficulty" to some degree. However, the above might also not be the case, so if I managed to confuse you with all this, forget most of what I just ranted on about, and remember this:
- Skill stats are related to how often you encounter missions requiring certain personal, real world skill sets.
- There is no-one and nothing but you to define what you're good at, or improve what you're good at.
- Skills might fluctuate and change based on what types of missions you opt to do most, which might lead to "promotions" - e.g. a Scientist dabbling quite considerably in missions requiring "Tactical Skill", might suddenly be offered a promotion to become a new "Officer" class (Soldier+Scientist, basically).
Anyway, hope that answered your question, and that I didn't confuse you in the process.
Ah, good... I was worried it was going to dilute the experience by relying on character skills rather than player skills in solving problems. That's just not so much fun to me, so I'm glad they're doing it this way.
Unless you are one of those "new-age" scientists, who go around haunted mansions with geiger counters and stuff, I don't really think your real-world experience will help much in solving supernatural mysteries. Just sayin', don't hold yourself to a much higher standard than the rest of us. Or do, and excel, good on you.
Supernatural mysteries are not so different from "Why the hell did that enzyme do that?"
(Which, I swear, is guided by some force which only responds to really hard stares and threats of going in the incinerator)
Well, then I stand corrected.
Haha.