Personally, I think tactical skill should be the leading factor. That would require a combat system with some depth to it. I do not like rock/paper/scissors and I don't like fixed systems. Give me some decisions - based on tactics - based on awareness - based on opponent decisions - based on skills and armament.
"One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
I am deliberately not voting as any vote would indicate a certain type of game. Character progression including gear should be the dominating factor in a mmorpg (60% combined), with 40% on player skill which includes tactical decisions, preparation, cooperation, etc; luck has almost no place in combat THOUGH luck must have a place in non combat as RNG, mob placement/randomness/skillselection and much more.
This is of course nothing more than my personal preferences, and a game could easily be 100% player skill based and be awesome (possibly not best suited as mmorpg though).
I shouldnt be surprised that the people saying "Character Skill" are interpreting "Player Skill" as twitch-based action.
Player Skill can also refer to strategies, tactics and timing. In turn-based MMOs knowing when to use the right skill at the right time for maximum effect is a Player Skill.
Using your brain would be a Player Skill, more people around here should try it.
I can't see how it can be anything other than player skill.
The further you move away from player skill (which includes not only reflexes for dodging, movement and aiming, but also in selecting the right skills to use at the right time, co-ordinating with other people, prediction of opponents attacks etc), the more combat becomes observational and can no longer be called gameplay.
For example, if the outcome of combat was 100% about character skill, then combat would be a case of two characters approaching one another, pressing a button to initiate combat, at which point the outcome is known and one wins, the other loses. I can't see how anyone could find that fun, it certainly can't be called gameplay.
Gear is the same as character skill - if the outcome was 100% about gear, then player input and character progression become entirely meaningless and combat, again, boils down to just watching what your character does, rather than, you know, playing the game.
These days, its all a balancing act. Character skill and gear deliberately unbalance combat and reduce the importance of player skill. But, the question is what *should* be the deciding factor, and it should be player skill.
That was really well said, on all points.
So much of mmo combat (pvp) plays as you describe above: unless the two players have similar gear/levels the outcome is a forgone conclusion and is generally a miserable experience for the undergeared player.
Similarly with pve, I think it is fair to say the majority of players are looking for some sort of challenge: there is a point where no amount of player skill can compensate for being undergeared (which will differ depending on the mechanics of the game), and a point when it becomes so easy that it is boring.
So in both pvp and pve, you can basically measure the fun factor of a game by the extent to which it facilitates allowing a player to succeed through using their skill to overcome challenges.
One difference between pve and pvp, is that some pvp players revel in the feeling of power they get from easily killing undergeared players, and mmo pvp mostly caters to this crowd.
I have never seen people boasting of how their max level toon sporting all epic gear and the best consumables took out massive groups of low level pve trash mobs in a starter area: but for pvp, people will make videos of equivalent pvp actions and think its really cool.
You've basically outlined why I spend nearly all my gametime doing endgame.
Once you reach endgame, gear and character progression level out. For PvE, devs tend to get lazy and use some sort of stats to gate content, but this at least means the devs can almost guarantee the level of gear that the team is using and balance the content around it. This means there is actually a challenge. Same with PvP - once you reach endgame and have been PvPing for a while, the majority of players will end up with the same gear level, which results in combat based on player skill. Sure, newbies are still undergeared and will get stomped and that sucks for them and me, but most of the time you're in relatively balanced fights.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
It depends on the game. People forget that "role playing game" is about the character. So, when you are leveling your character you are enhancing their kills, gear and whatever else there is. This is not about "player skill so much as "character skills/abilities".
But other games are more about the player and their ability to play the character.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I can't see how it can be anything other than player skill.
The further you move away from player skill (which includes not only reflexes for dodging, movement and aiming, but also in selecting the right skills to use at the right time, co-ordinating with other people, prediction of opponents attacks etc), the more combat becomes observational and can no longer be called gameplay.
For example, if the outcome of combat was 100% about character skill, then combat would be a case of two characters approaching one another, pressing a button to initiate combat, at which point the outcome is known and one wins, the other loses. I can't see how anyone could find that fun, it certainly can't be called gameplay.
Gear is the same as character skill - if the outcome was 100% about gear, then player input and character progression become entirely meaningless and combat, again, boils down to just watching what your character does, rather than, you know, playing the game.
These days, its all a balancing act. Character skill and gear deliberately unbalance combat and reduce the importance of player skill. But, the question is what *should* be the deciding factor, and it should be player skill.
That was really well said, on all points.
So much of mmo combat (pvp) plays as you describe above: unless the two players have similar gear/levels the outcome is a forgone conclusion and is generally a miserable experience for the undergeared player.
Similarly with pve, I think it is fair to say the majority of players are looking for some sort of challenge: there is a point where no amount of player skill can compensate for being undergeared (which will differ depending on the mechanics of the game), and a point when it becomes so easy that it is boring.
So in both pvp and pve, you can basically measure the fun factor of a game by the extent to which it facilitates allowing a player to succeed through using their skill to overcome challenges.
One difference between pve and pvp, is that some pvp players revel in the feeling of power they get from easily killing undergeared players, and mmo pvp mostly caters to this crowd.
I have never seen people boasting of how their max level toon sporting all epic gear and the best consumables took out massive groups of low level pve trash mobs in a starter area: but for pvp, people will make videos of equivalent pvp actions and think its really cool.
Agree with both, but I do want to add that an RPG with complex systems, proper gearing is to a certain extent a part of skill (that being knowledge and understanding of how various systems work together).
Of course, this depends on how much the game allows for customization in stats and ability augmentation via gear and whether or not there is a "best" set of gear that removes any and all thought.
While I chose player skill I dont feel this covers what I mean exactly.
1stly actual player input skill is a great addition to overall competition but there is only so much you can do without getting "too twitchy" With that I'll add in twitch combat char animation is the biggest factor and with even micro lag or simply bad animations this is usually a big break in definitive competitiveness.
So that leaves the best part.
Strategy!
When it comes down to it for me it is all about hundreds(I mean 100s) of load out possibility. From skill combinations to item and gear. One of the most reputable and oldest form I can think of is a battle mage. Even from the old pen and paper days you can see players love tooling and retooling their builds and even breaking the common "class boundaries" that so often limit strategy.
There is nothing like finding a list of semi compatible skill synergies and not being able to make it work until you realize this heavy fighter needs to wear light armor or this battle magi needs a chain tunic to work well.
This is where some game limits are so critical. While I can tool up a heavy armored arbalist it may not work without a synergy with a pulse blast spell and limits such as mana regen in heavy armor are the limits and not a "class" limit.
If "character skill" is meaning skills we can train/increase as we're gaining experience...
Then....
It should reflect a lot of character skill
While I can see an item being important to a story, the almighty hero, leaning on gear creates the min-max trap we're currently under which supresses the two main elements that should come out: roleplaying & exploration in a world of massive players/characters.
Yes exploration is probably dead but the question concerns what one thinks "should be" the deciding factor.
Like others have said we should have tactical combat & if the character is evolving, improving (sorry hate the word progress/progression as it's too min-maxy) then that character should reflect knowledge gained.
We should too which is why player skill should enter in as well.
I'm pleased to see "gear" very low on the votes at 5%.
This is a hard one for me. When I say player skill, it comes with the caveat that games are currently emphasizing the wrong kind of skill.
Currently, the emphasis is on twitch reflexes, which is just shallow and wrong for combat in a proper RPG - especially a MMO.
What we should be emphasizing is intellectual skills - such as proper character building, team composition, decision making, positioning, and intelligent management of mana and cooldowns. Instead, we're emphasizing half-second dodges above all else.
"Player Skill" is just another word for Lag, and Lag should never be a deciding factor in combat. When it comes to "Player Skill" there just is no such thing. When Lag is involved any "Player Skill" disappears like a puff of smoke. They are left wondering where did all their skill go?
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
If you mean player skill by how fast they can twitch or press keys then I would have to say not that. However if you mean more strategically and not relying on action combat then its player skill. Anyway I just think it would depend on the game. You have to be more specific.
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
i played a lot of rpgs on c64 and also pen n paper. for me always character skills in a role play game. then player skill/strategy, then luck. was always funny in pen n paper when you roll a 99 and won a battle which you were never be able to.
current mmos are too twitchy for me. i prefer the combat of AoC or Swtor. its not too fast and not too slow.
After all, the traditional model of RPG's is suppose to be the element of building ones character. I am in the camp of not totally omitting the 'carrot on the stick' gear progression system. I am in the camp of less gear dependency. I think having good gear should be an avenue to help within combat as a perk but it shouldn't put you over the edge. Wow has a bad case of gear dependency it's absurd. I just believe a better skilled player should trump a lesser skilled player and not allow gear to be the determining factor.
As one who has designed my own combat mechanics this is a very challenging avenue to balance the gear vs. player skill ratio.
I would also like to pin this for this thread too. That Character Skill should = Stats/gear progression. I don't think I would categorize Class Skill into Character skill. In some games classes will trump classes that are gear dependent. Which is also bad design. I am looking at you Blizzard!
I chose player skill, but I do not mean twitch. I mean the ability to use the right skills at the right times and anticipate things that come up, draw aggro, cede aggro -- the kinds of things I was able to do in EQ1 as a shaman to keep a party alive while others would have wipes.
Not voting as the true answer should be ALL OF THE ABOVE. Unless a company can create a game that uses no skill sets, no levels, not hit/miss ratios, zero gear enhancement, then player skill will never be the sole determining factor in combat.
Before someone says they want a mix of these... I deliberately didn't include a mix option because that would result in very unhelpful data. Obviously any combat system can't function well with 100% one of these, so the options are for the primary deciding factor, that is, the factor that matters the most in combat. It could be 26% of what matters while each other option is 24.67%, or it could matter a great deal more, but the main point is that it is the primary deciding factor.
My real vote is for a balanced system. Character skill doesn't quite cover it but the concept of player skill that people commonly insist upon is hogwash. Git gud? There are way too many systems in play in an RPG and throwing them all away for the sake of twitch is wasteful.
My ideal system is a perfect balance between engagement, tactics, and preparation. Engagement; the pacing must be swift enough to demand(and maintain) my attention. Tactics: the combat should allow for some level of explicit reaction (not how quickly I can press 2,4,2,3,6 while animation cancelling). I'm talking "aggressor swings sword, defender raises shield". Preparation: character build should have a direct and significant influence on how I approach and the results of combat. This accounts for all of the gear and luck aspects of the poll.
Really, I don't think cohesive combat can exist without any one of these points.
My real vote is for a balanced system. Character skill doesn't quite cover it but the concept of player skill that people commonly insist upon is hogwash. Git gud? There are way too many systems in play in an RPG and throwing them all away for the sake of twitch is wasteful.
My ideal system is a perfect balance between engagement, tactics, and preparation. Engagement; the pacing must be swift enough to demand(and maintain) my attention. Tactics: the combat should allow for some level of explicit reaction (not how quickly I can press 2,4,2,3,6 while animation cancelling). I'm talking "aggressor swings sword, defender raises shield". Preparation: character build should have a direct and significant influence on how I approach and the results of combat. This accounts for all of the gear and luck aspects of the poll.
Really, I don't think cohesive combat can exist without any one of these points.
Player skill covers so much more than twitch combat.
Player skill covers:
Reaction times
Motor skills (twitch)
Situational Awareness
Group co-ordination
Tactical planning
Adaptability
Tactics
Player skill is also a big part of the preparation stage you talk about. It takes player skill to understand all of the games mechanics in order to be able to best prepare your character. Granted, a lot of people just look up stuff on the net, but for some of us we try to fully understand the game and then build our characters based on that deep understanding.
Player skill, in all it's forms, is the most important factor in determining average combat outcomes. Sometimes, the emphasis on player skill is placed on the pre-combat stuff (building your character and selecting the right gear) but most times, it is your actions during combat that determine the outcome.
Could you imagine a game where character skill was the determining factor?! How boring! I'm playing a champion, you're playing a wizard, therefore I win. Where is the skill in that? Or, I'm playing a single-target DPS, you're playing AoE, therefore I win? I can imagine nothing worse! Now, character skill can certainly unbalance combat, for example a stealther might have an unfair advantage against a clothie, but it still takes player skill to make use of that advantage and if the clothie is sufficiently skilled as a player, they can still beat the stealther.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Comments
That would require a combat system with some depth to it.
I do not like rock/paper/scissors and I don't like fixed systems.
Give me some decisions - based on tactics - based on awareness - based on opponent decisions - based on skills and armament.
Once upon a time....
That awesome cash shop gear won't buy itself. After that, gear of course, monkeys can succesfully play MMOs. Just look around here
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Character progression including gear should be the dominating factor in a mmorpg (60% combined), with 40% on player skill which includes tactical decisions, preparation, cooperation, etc; luck has almost no place in combat THOUGH luck must have a place in non combat as RNG, mob placement/randomness/skillselection and much more.
This is of course nothing more than my personal preferences, and a game could easily be 100% player skill based and be awesome (possibly not best suited as mmorpg though).
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
Player Skill can also refer to strategies, tactics and timing. In turn-based MMOs knowing when to use the right skill at the right time for maximum effect is a Player Skill.
Using your brain would be a Player Skill, more people around here should try it.
Once you reach endgame, gear and character progression level out. For PvE, devs tend to get lazy and use some sort of stats to gate content, but this at least means the devs can almost guarantee the level of gear that the team is using and balance the content around it. This means there is actually a challenge. Same with PvP - once you reach endgame and have been PvPing for a while, the majority of players will end up with the same gear level, which results in combat based on player skill. Sure, newbies are still undergeared and will get stomped and that sucks for them and me, but most of the time you're in relatively balanced fights.
But other games are more about the player and their ability to play the character.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Of course, this depends on how much the game allows for customization in stats and ability augmentation via gear and whether or not there is a "best" set of gear that removes any and all thought.
1stly actual player input skill is a great addition to overall competition but there is only so much you can do without getting "too twitchy" With that I'll add in twitch combat char animation is the biggest factor and with even micro lag or simply bad animations this is usually a big break in definitive competitiveness.
So that leaves the best part.
Strategy!
When it comes down to it for me it is all about hundreds(I mean 100s) of load out possibility. From skill combinations to item and gear. One of the most reputable and oldest form I can think of is a battle mage. Even from the old pen and paper days you can see players love tooling and retooling their builds and even breaking the common "class boundaries" that so often limit strategy.
There is nothing like finding a list of semi compatible skill synergies and not being able to make it work until you realize this heavy fighter needs to wear light armor or this battle magi needs a chain tunic to work well.
This is where some game limits are so critical. While I can tool up a heavy armored arbalist it may not work without a synergy with a pulse blast spell and limits such as mana regen in heavy armor are the limits and not a "class" limit.
If "character skill" is meaning skills we can train/increase as we're gaining experience...
Then....
It should reflect a lot of character skill
While I can see an item being important to a story, the almighty hero, leaning on gear creates the min-max trap we're currently under which supresses the two main elements that should come out: roleplaying & exploration in a world of massive players/characters.
Yes exploration is probably dead but the question concerns what one thinks "should be" the deciding factor.
Like others have said we should have tactical combat & if the character is evolving, improving (sorry hate the word progress/progression as it's too min-maxy) then that character should reflect knowledge gained.
We should too which is why player skill should enter in as well.
I'm pleased to see "gear" very low on the votes at 5%.
AC2 Player RIP Final Death Jan 31st 2017
Refugee of Auberean
Refugee of Dereth
Currently, the emphasis is on twitch reflexes, which is just shallow and wrong for combat in a proper RPG - especially a MMO.
What we should be emphasizing is intellectual skills - such as proper character building, team composition, decision making, positioning, and intelligent management of mana and cooldowns. Instead, we're emphasizing half-second dodges above all else.
a stun when it matters
a defensive when it matters
burning it down when thats the best course of action
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
No.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
current mmos are too twitchy for me. i prefer the combat of AoC or Swtor. its not too fast and not too slow.
60% player skill
40% character skill
After all, the traditional model of RPG's is suppose to be the element of building ones character. I am in the camp of not totally omitting the 'carrot on the stick' gear progression system. I am in the camp of less gear dependency. I think having good gear should be an avenue to help within combat as a perk but it shouldn't put you over the edge. Wow has a bad case of gear dependency it's absurd. I just believe a better skilled player should trump a lesser skilled player and not allow gear to be the determining factor.
As one who has designed my own combat mechanics this is a very challenging avenue to balance the gear vs. player skill ratio.
I would also like to pin this for this thread too. That Character Skill should = Stats/gear progression. I don't think I would categorize Class Skill into Character skill. In some games classes will trump classes that are gear dependent. Which is also bad design. I am looking at you Blizzard!
No such animal.
~~ postlarval ~~
Please read the OP before posting.
My ideal system is a perfect balance between engagement, tactics, and preparation. Engagement; the pacing must be swift enough to demand(and maintain) my attention. Tactics: the combat should allow for some level of explicit reaction (not how quickly I can press 2,4,2,3,6 while animation cancelling). I'm talking "aggressor swings sword, defender raises shield". Preparation: character build should have a direct and significant influence on how I approach and the results of combat. This accounts for all of the gear and luck aspects of the poll.
Really, I don't think cohesive combat can exist without any one of these points.
Player skill covers:
- Reaction times
- Motor skills (twitch)
- Situational Awareness
- Group co-ordination
- Tactical planning
- Adaptability
- Tactics
Player skill is also a big part of the preparation stage you talk about. It takes player skill to understand all of the games mechanics in order to be able to best prepare your character. Granted, a lot of people just look up stuff on the net, but for some of us we try to fully understand the game and then build our characters based on that deep understanding.Player skill, in all it's forms, is the most important factor in determining average combat outcomes. Sometimes, the emphasis on player skill is placed on the pre-combat stuff (building your character and selecting the right gear) but most times, it is your actions during combat that determine the outcome.
Could you imagine a game where character skill was the determining factor?! How boring! I'm playing a champion, you're playing a wizard, therefore I win. Where is the skill in that? Or, I'm playing a single-target DPS, you're playing AoE, therefore I win? I can imagine nothing worse! Now, character skill can certainly unbalance combat, for example a stealther might have an unfair advantage against a clothie, but it still takes player skill to make use of that advantage and if the clothie is sufficiently skilled as a player, they can still beat the stealther.