Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Jumpgate Evolution Dev Talks Class Balance

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the check-out-my-+1-laser dept.

Space 86

Hermann Peterscheck recently made a post on the Jumpgate Evolution developer blog about NetDevil's strategy for balancing the various classes of ships in the game. They seem to be taking a different approach from most MMOs in letting the PvP side of the gameplay set the baseline, rather than allowing PvE concerns to override that. From the section titled Combating Combat: "Early on our lead systems designer, Jay Ambrosini, came to the correct conclusion that all of the preliminary balancing was best done in a PvP context. The reasoning is that in PvE, the player needs to feel powerful, but in PvP the fight needs to feel balanced. Once ship classes are balanced in PvP, its not as hard to make the player feel powerful in PvE, but the opposite is not true. We spent many weeks playing just the first class of ship, the light fighter, in teams of 5 or 6 in order to evaluate what it was that made those ships fun to fly and fight. After daily battles, you begin to see what makes those ships work. We also started with the mid level ships as opposed to the low or high level ships. This is primarily because you can find the center point and then work upwards and downwards from there. ... It's very tempting to just throw a bunch of classes of ships together in order to say things like "our game has 15 classes of ships!" but this, we believe, is the wrong direction. People want meaningful and strong choices and not lots of meaningless, empty choices. Currently we plan to have 4-6 classes, but they will each have nearly endless possible configurations within those groups."

cancel ×

86 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

irrelevant (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28894153)

who cares that much about gaming, anyway?

Re:irrelevant (-1, Offtopic)

splutty (43475) | more than 5 years ago | (#28894187)

Let me mod you irrelevant.

Aw crap...

and you're modded "Offtopic" (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28894377)

How Ironic.

scratching head (1)

zygotic mitosis (833691) | more than 5 years ago | (#28894197)

I have no idea what any of those words mean. Can someone explain TFS?

Re:scratching head (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28894357)

I don't see what is hard to understand in TFS. It's standard, basic, gaming vocabulary. I wonder what you're doing in /. gaming section if you don't know theses words.

PvP : Player vs Player. All that relates to fighting between players.

PvE : Player vs Environment. All that relates to the fights between a player (or group of players) and computer-controlled opponents.

Class : A category of avatar that can be played. Each having strengths, weaknesses and powers/abilities. For a fantasy-based game that could be Knight, Wizard, and Healer. Here it's different kind of spaceships.

PS : posting as AC to avoid karma-whoring.

Re:scratching head (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28894563)

Except class in this instance refers, as in Eve, to the class of ship; e.g frigate, destroyer, battleship, omfg big bloody ship run...

Re:scratching head (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28895897)

From the post you are replying to:

Class : A category of avatar that can be played. Each having strengths, weaknesses and powers/abilities. For a fantasy-based game that could be Knight, Wizard, and Healer. Here it's different kind of spaceships.

To which you replied:

Except class in this instance refers, as in Eve, to the class of ship; e.g frigate, destroyer, battleship, omfg big bloody ship run...

did you not bother to read the comment, or are you just a fucking idiot?

Re:scratching head (1)

An ominous Cow art (320322) | more than 5 years ago | (#28895327)

That's a definition of "PS" that I was unfamiliar with. I always thought it meant "Postscript".

Re:scratching head (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28894395)

Translation of summary:

"Please pay attention to us. Guys? Guys?!"

"Shit, I think they're all busy playing EVE. :("

Further explanation:

n00bs at game design attempt to build a game tailored for both PvE *and* PvP. As history dictates, they're failing. Hard.

PvP balancing (1)

splutty (43475) | more than 5 years ago | (#28894215)

I think they're thinking in the right direction here.

It's all nice and well to be all powerful, but there are only a few thnigs that piss off (more or less serious) PvPers more than the 'gank' mentality. I hope they manage to balance it in such a way that actual skill makes a difference as well.

I've been looking forward to this game for quite a while, and most of what I've heard actually sounds promising and well thought out. I hope they can live up to our expectations, though.

I know that a lot of us have played Elite in the past, and there's always some sort of 'could-it-be' feeling when news about these sort of games come out.

Splut.

ps. No 'The One' jokes please :)

Re:PvP balancing (1)

Shanrak (1037504) | more than 5 years ago | (#28894429)

Guild Wars tried the same thing, and now they've decided to just split pvp/pve skills for all the 'powerful ones'. The problem with balancing PVP over PVE is because, guess what, the same powerful characters in PvP typically does well in PvE as well. People tend to gravitate towards the 'best' and most overpowered build, and if its nerfed in PvP, you can bet that the PvE players will complain. I guess the people working for GW got tired of it and finally decided to make 2 versions of each skill to maintain PvP balance yet PvE overpoweredness.

Re:PvP balancing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28894493)

I thought that balancing for PvP was a good thing. Balancing for PvE is trivial. The PvP players could moan and complain about skill X. It would get balanced. I could enjoy PvE and all I had to do was occasionally adapt my builds a bit. The only PvE players complaining were the ones that could only use cookie-cutter builds for whatever it was they did (farming X usually). The PvE skills were a disappointment. They could have made skills tailored to PvE, ones that would helped there but not been overpowered in PvP. Things like: Sneak (half-sized aggro radius) or Track (find direction of nearest creature). Skills that would be welcome in PvE without having to be excluded, by the game's rules, in PvP because they're overpowered.

Re:PvP balancing (3, Interesting)

zwei2stein (782480) | more than 5 years ago | (#28894747)

Good amount of PvE players got very pissed by this. It made it very hard to get to PvP because all you know about game (1000+ skills and synergies between them) gets thrown out of window, its basically like playing new game.

Typically, PvE felt next to no fallout from PvP based nerfs. PvP builds were quite different from PvE metagame (ironically, "sabway" based builds that steamroll PvE and basically set standart for soloing game were originally used in PvP, their PvE version only because used after they were nerfed in PvP).

That PvP based nerfs did was purging PvE from most ridiculous gamebreakers.

That disconnect that gave PvE was ever increasing power creep and ton of gamebreakers: For example, skill "Shaddow Form" now gives permanent immunity to all spells and attacks. Yep, you are reading right. Players can equip it and two other skills, walk into middle of enemy mob and be unharmed. For as long as he wishes. Yep, ultimate 'tank' that does not require healer. And he is able to kill stuff. He is able to solo equivalent of raid encounters/heroics with absolutelly no danger to him and no skill required.

Without PvP disconnect, it would literally take minutes to be nerfstomped. This is what split gave players: Ridiculous win buttons. People do complain anyway because game with cheats enabled is boring and pointless to play.

Re:PvP balancing (1)

Vohar (1344259) | more than 5 years ago | (#28895321)

Eh, that Shadow Form bit isn't quite on the mark. The setup only works in certain areas, because it -does- have weaknesses. Touch attacks and area spells still work against someone with Shadow Form active. Most PvE mob groups have at least one enemy that will still be a danger. Often that danger consists of a spell interrupt or enchantment removal, which prevents Shadow Form being recast.

You were making some good points, unfortunately you resorted to hyperbole and threw it off track.

Everything in Guild Wars has a counter. -Everything.-

Re:PvP balancing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28897963)

Shadow Form is a good example of where PvP can help with balance in PvE.

Re:PvP balancing (1)

zwei2stein (782480) | more than 5 years ago | (#28898577)

Having counters does not mean anything is ballanced. That is ballance rule n. #1. If this rule was not true, PvP would require no ballance updates because counters exist, right.

What I said was by no means hyperbole. Oh, does have counters ... or does it?

Echant removal is off mark, so are interupts. Can't be hit by spell -> can't be disenchanted. Can't be hit by spell/attack -> can't be interrupted. There is no downtime to allow that. For very, VERY rage nonspell disenchants, one aditional enchant will provide easy cover.

Touch skills technically work, but will not cause death - they will not take last hitpoint the same way that sacrifice will not kill user with one hitpoint. And if monsters have no other means to remove that last hitpoint... Besides, mobs will not run towards character to use them, so it is just matter of staying at ranger.

PBAOES are easy to avoid because they have quite limited range of 'adjacent' while permas can kill at 'in area' range. Not to mention that most mobs will not cast them in there is only one player within range.

People solo areas full of counters without problems. Stygial Veil and Duncan's dungeons are full of touchers and AOE. UW is full of PBAOE and nonspell/nonattack interrupts/enchant removal.

Those 'counters' utterly fail at countering SF.

Simply put, it is the game breaker as I described it.

Re:PvP balancing (1)

Vohar (1344259) | more than 5 years ago | (#28899707)

Have you even played Guild Wars?

Touch spells still work. There are enchant removals that work like that. Some interrupts as well.

You're just plain wrong about PBAOEs. They -will- use them on single targets. Short range isn't an issue since the enemies will be on you at all times--it takes a few seconds to cast the buffs necessary to make Shadow Form last long enough to have no lapse. Plus you'll want to be in the middle of packs anyway when using the Silver Armor method of damaging enemies.

You say Touch skills will not cause death? Whaaa? Touch spells do whatever they do, whether that's damage, debuff, conditions, whatever. Conditions are the only effects that won't take the last hitpoint. If a touch spell strips enchants or just plain does damage, then it does that.

At least try it sometime before you start spreading misinformation.

Re:PvP balancing (1)

zwei2stein (782480) | more than 5 years ago | (#28902691)

1) Those enchant removals/interrupts are irrelevant - they are easily avoided by simple enchant cover and interrupt is easily baitable on mobs. This is sole reason why permas can run Bogroot Growths even when it is plagued by Soulrending Shriek (enchant removal that goes throught perma, fyi). Been there, done that.

2) Mob will NOT use PBAOEs when there is only one person within range. You can easily test this by visiting your local Terrorweb Dryder and waiting till he casts lava font. You will wait a long time. For Bonus points, check range of PBAOES, they are nearly all Adjacent and Slivers is In Area range and since it are spellcasters that use ranged attacks, you can stay at range where slivers will harm them and you will be out of their BPAOE range anyway. Been there, done that.

3) It is True. Permas can, and do run places with touchers easily and safely. Slavers' Exile duncans room for example. touch/bite will simply not kill if you have 1hp left, they will steal 0hp. It is well known behavior of lifestealing based skills. People armed with this knowledge run Slaver's Exile Duncan solo. Been ther... you know what.

---

Look, there is no need to be defensive about this gamebreaker, its not like anet will nerf it if they read this.

Re:PvP balancing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28911735)

dude you're a moron

you act like all enemies are set up the same

most mob touch skills are damage not drain. 1hp = dead after hit

soooo many pbaoes go off against my sf sin if i try a place the first time. stomps(and hey that interrupts too), frozen burst on avalanches...

you fail. bad.

Re:PvP balancing (1)

Shanrak (1037504) | more than 5 years ago | (#28902647)

Without PvP disconnect, it would literally take minutes to be nerfstomped. This is what split gave players: Ridiculous win buttons. People do complain anyway because game with cheats enabled is boring and pointless to play.

Actually you are wrong, perma shadow form was in both PvP and PvE originally (when the split did not exist). It DID get stomped fast, and then the PvE players complained so they nerfed it in PvP and kept it in PvE.

Re:PvP balancing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28894785)

The problem with balancing PVP over PVE is because, guess what, the same powerful characters in PvP typically does well in PvE as well.

How is that a problem? Sounds like you just need to balance PvP and the PvE will be okay.

Re:PvP balancing (1)

SupremoMan (912191) | more than 5 years ago | (#28895519)

In the original skill was very much involved in combat. But it's more to do with aiming and maneuvering than pressing 1-3-2 instead of 1-2-3 in combat.

Thou of course ganking happened. You could however pull off 1 vs 2, or even 1 vs 3. Hell I seen some fellow run from a huge swarm of angry pilots who were after him for pirating. But he was ready for chase and had artifact engines. (Artifacts being relics from pre-collapse of space)

Wait and see (2, Insightful)

Ksempac (934247) | more than 5 years ago | (#28894403)

That looks like a good idea, and many people are already expecting Jumpgate Evolution as something fresh and new. However, every single MMORPG to date, has claimed before release to have new ideas, good balance between classes, interesting PvP and PvE. Most of them failed one of theses areas, and many failed all. That's why I take theses new claims with a big grain of salt.
So i say let's wait till the game is released and thoroughly tested by everyone...then we will see if this is more than marketing talk.

Re:Wait and see (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28899103)

JGE isn't a MMORPG.

**shrugs**

It's a twitch based shooter with a skill tree. different thing

Re:Wait and see (1)

physburn (1095481) | more than 5 years ago | (#28907389)

Maybe Jumpgate Evolution will be the MMO Elite that will eat my time, like Elite first did when I was young. Looking forward to it, I think.

---

MUD Games [feeddistiller.com] @ Feed Distiller [feeddistiller.com]

JGE v EVE (5, Insightful)

castironpigeon (1056188) | more than 5 years ago | (#28894571)

EVE is good at what it does, but there's a reason it doesn't have more players and that's not because of the scifi theme. I pull this opinion out of my ass, but consider for a moment the plethora of MMOs (or even single player games) with a fantasy background. Any style of MMO fantasy gameplay that you could possibly want is covered. PvP, PvE, free, paid, large group, small group, free-for-all, instanced...

Now what about a space sim MMO? Aside from a few no-name indie offerings or a Freelancer hack to play multiplayer on a server with a few other people, your only option is EVE. One shard, PvP centric, click-orbit-wait navigation, learning curve like an overhanging cliff - love it or leave it.

Now maybe I give the JGE team too much credit, but I fully expected for them to deviate from this. It would only make sense that they not go for the exact same niche that EVE fills. Duh. So we get collision detection and some sort of real navigation - great. But now they're balancing around PvP? C'mon, seriously? So now we'll have EVE with point & click navigation and EVE with something else. And you can play the former in a universe already several years old with many bugs worked out or you can start in a fresh universe that's completely empty. This is seriously the most retarded thing I've heard from JGE to date.

And no, I don't believe JGE can properly balance PvP and PvE. It's never been done. You either focus on one or the other and whatever you don't focus on becomes some half-assed wannabe minigame that players will complain about until the end of time. See PvP in WoW and PvE in GW as examples...

Re:JGE v EVE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28894755)

Last I checked, PvP in WoW worked quite well and had a large amount of followers ever since its introduction, some time 4 years ago. Of course people whine and bitch but that is entirely besides the point because most of the time, it turns out that they are either bad at the game or got destroyed by someone who spent more time playing (surprise, surprise, there's a correlation between time spent playing and power in-game!).

As for everyone shooting JGE down before they've even had a change to try it, I say good riddance because chances are your favorite game is tic-tac-toe because it is so well balanced for PvP...

Re:JGE v EVE (1)

DrMrLordX (559371) | more than 5 years ago | (#28894859)

Check my post below yours. PvP balance in WoW isn't all beer and skittles, especially for the PvE crowd. Let's see if the QQers can get Chaos Bolt nerfed next. Poor Warlocks.

Re:JGE v EVE (2, Interesting)

Kreigaffe (765218) | more than 5 years ago | (#28897609)

PvP in WoW is bad. Not because some OP class beat me, but because it's just bad. Seriously. And, no, I don't know a single person who thought the PvP system was good 4 years ago. PvP in WoW was around before honor.. and it was more fun before honor. WoW managed to turn something that should be fun in and of itself, with no rewards -- PvP -- and twist it into just another gear ladder to climb.

It's a bit like chutes and ladders. Sure, at the top levels of play I bet it's pretty complex and the top players would whip my ass. Sure. That doesn't change the fact that the game itself is not really an accurate meter to measure how good you are at video games. 99% of the trick in WoW is being a certain class and a certain spec and finding friends of certain classes with certain specs. Grats, you just pwned a spreadsheet (that's also why EVE is so damned boring, it's just spreadsheets in space..).

Re:JGE v EVE (1)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 5 years ago | (#28898865)

That doesn't change the fact that the game itself is not really an accurate meter to measure how good you are at video games.

Ah, now we see the origin of the unsubstantiated whining. "I have a high gamer score on XBox but I get my ass kicked in WoW! WoW must be broken!"

Re:JGE v EVE (1)

Kreigaffe (765218) | more than 5 years ago | (#28899605)

.. right, I don't even own an xbox, thanks. I'm pretty tired of people mistaking me for a 16 year old when I talk about video games. If you want to find actual skill and a level of competition that's high enough you could actually call something a sport, just go gander at a random FPS tourny, or even a fighting game tourny. WoW was not designed as a competitive PvP game. I mean, hey, people hold RPS tournies, that doesn't mean they're skilled at RPS. It'd be like winning a coin toss tournament and then claiming you actually are skilled at saying "HEADS!" or "TAILS!".. baloney. And so is WoW's PvP.

Re:JGE v EVE (1)

Chibi Merrow (226057) | more than 5 years ago | (#28898497)

Last I checked, PvP in WoW worked quite well

Then you're either a liar or were on drugs when "last you checked".

Re:JGE v EVE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28895363)

Mmm the only genuinely PURELY pvp based MMO released successfully to at least a few months of commercial viability (that I am aware of, sure there have been other smaller games, but I do not count mafia wars on facebook, sorry /.) was Planet Side, which did not require a time sink to be effective or fun, but the longer you played the more content was opened up, purely by virtue of having been PVPing. PS had (has?) 0 PVE content.

EVE still has a PVE game, and a moderately well developed one at that. I would love nothing more than to see another game in the style of Planetside, but take a page from City of Heroes badge system. Provide lots of minor content upgrades or brags for people to have on their character for PVP accomplishments. It meats the obsessive compulsive need of the PVE gamer while keeping games focus completely fixed on the PVP.

Essentially an MMO of Counterstrike where the more you win, the more you can upgrade til you die, then start over again with some territorial conquest would be just about perfect for me. Til some dev ruins it with giant robots ;)

Re:JGE v EVE (1)

srmalloy (263556) | more than 5 years ago | (#28896781)

However, developing from the start with the intent of incorporating PvP and balancing PvP before balancing PvE ensures that PvP will integrate with the rest of the gameplay, instead of being spatchcocked onto PvE. To use your example, City of Heroes was released with no PvP at all, and when the developers decided to add PvP, it exposed a number of severe imbalances between the archetypes, as well as hate and discontent from the player base as the developers made change after change to the game mechanics while weaseling from "We won't make any PvE changes for PvP reasons" to "We won't make any PvE changes for purely PvP reasons" (with convoluted explanations of why something that was a problem in PvP but had never been a problem in PvE really was a problem in PvE to justify 'movement suppression' being implemented in both PvP and PvE), and eventually ripped out the entire PvP mechanics and replaced it with a completely redesigned (and more byzantine) set of PvP-only mechanics that gimped many character builds that had been tweaked to work well under the old mechanics.

While I don't care for PvP in general (my experience being that it suffers too much from the problems of "Me and my fifteen friends can mop the field with you all by your lonesome" and "This character I've been tweaking for two years using all the gold I can buy can mop the field with your character you've been playing for two weeks", both leavened with big helpings of "H4 H4 H4! PWNZ0RD UR AZZ B10TCH!" attitudes from people whose sole apparent validation of themselves as people seems to be how many players they can dry-gulch using a massive advantage while running away hurling insults if it even looks as if the fight is going to be close to fair), NetDevil's route is by far the better way to go about it; AI for NPCs in games is still significantly less capable than a live player can be, and it's much easier to tweak the way the game cheats to balance this deficit in PvE is much less obtrusive than the kind of changes that are required to take a PvE game and try to balance it in PvP.

Re:JGE v EVE (1)

Arykor (966623) | more than 5 years ago | (#28897589)

Planetside has added brags for pvp accomplishments though their "Merit Commendations" [sony.com] system.

Re:JGE v EVE (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 5 years ago | (#28895445)

Now what about a space sim MMO? Aside from a few no-name indie offerings or a Freelancer hack to play multiplayer on a server with a few other people, your only option is EVE.

Too bad you left out the best free option [sourceforge.net] , but at least now we know you don't know what you're talking about. Not that it's massive, but it's persistent and allows ~32 players per server. You can pilot arbitrarily-sized ships in the game, although the bigger they get, the more you see the flaws (e.g. the failure to properly implement docking/undocking for different sizes of craft, etc.)

Re:JGE v EVE (1)

castironpigeon (1056188) | more than 5 years ago | (#28896349)

Vega Strike has been in beta for how many years now? I've seen it before and it strikes me as the typical open source project - the developers seem more interested in monkeying around with the code as a mental exercise than actually getting to version 1.0. Which is fine. It's their toy, they get to do what they want with it. But for anyone not associated with the dev team I think I covered it under the no-name indie category.

Re:JGE v EVE (1)

Ironica (124657) | more than 5 years ago | (#28898547)

Too bad you left out the best free option [sourceforge.net] , but at least now we know you don't know what you're talking about. Not that it's massive, but it's persistent and allows ~32 players per server.

32 != Massively Multiplayer. That's not even half a monkeysphere. [cracked.com]

Re:JGE v EVE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28896035)

The reason I don't play MMOs is because of the lack of sci-fi and space games. EVE bored me to tears (and that's saying something) and JGE... oh... wait.

I just remembered, I don't play MMOs because i don't like having to pay for the same game every month, ad infiitum. I'll just stick to my X-universe, thanks.

Re:JGE v EVE (1)

t00le (136364) | more than 5 years ago | (#28896093)

I have been playing Eve for over six years now and only because Descent and Freelancer got boring. I think they are positioning themselves to take a huge portion of the Eve player base, which used to play the previously mentioned games. Eve is boring because of the navigation and the huge amount of PvE that the game is based around. At times it seems the entire framework of the game is centered around the carebears mining or building shit in station, which is needed in a pure sandbox environment. The idea that they are basing the framework of the ship class balancing around PvP excites me. That way when it goes live all the PvP'ers from Eve will haul ass and never look back while the carebears in Eve wonder why the market crashed and they are unable to sell anything.

I know a very significant number of people across numerous large alliances in Eve that will bail when Star Wars or JGE is released. The sandbox of Eve has gotten boring as of late....

Re:JGE v EVE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28899527)

The thing about eve pvpers is that trying to pvp in another game is well, boring as all hell compared to pirating, merc work or fighting in an alliance.

I was on a pvp server in AoC -- hit 80 with 2 toons and ya know what? End game pvp was sitting around popping out of hide to kill someone then either dying or running away and hiding again. At some point you can mess with cities but meh.

WoW pvp? Huzzah loot grinding and hoping your class isbuffed in the next major rebalancing.

SWG? Wanted to shoot myself.

Warhammer? Had potential, but there are no lasting consequences of pvp, and too much of the pvp is sharded with bizzare contributions to each other and ultimately too many wow players who bail the second going gets tough for a better chance at phat lootz.

____
Now the problem with Eve currently is the massive 0.0 colonization that's taken place. It was only matter of time once more and more alliance built up reserves to launch outposts and amass capital fleets up to the point where there was a massive material barrier preventing new alliances from trying to fight for space (heyday of 0.0 fighting was over 1 year after the CA-SE war) and the fact that any true war of dominance between alliances will be such a drain even on the victor they will have little chance of fighting off a 3rd party. (See SA-FIX -> SA-BOB -> BOB-ASCN).

What would help eve most of all would be a gradual reduction of the availability of npc provided supplies for running of pos/outposts causing first a price spike, then focing alliances to streamline their empires and focus power in central locations opening peripheral locations for attacks.

Re:JGE v EVE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28899985)

most folks will not leave EVE becouse some new game is on the market... people will try and decide for them self as for pure PvP nah it's too boring for the long run, you need variety, so when one way get bored you switch

Re:JGE v EVE (2, Insightful)

Spectre (1685) | more than 5 years ago | (#28897031)

Keeping in mind, while Jumpgate: Evolution may be a new title, it is based on a game that pre-dates EVE, Jumpgate (the Reconstruction).

A twitch-based space flight simulator with manual control of your ship, weapons aiming, etc, doesn't have much in common with EVE.

Yes, I've played both games for years each (the original Jumpgate and EVE). If the new release of Jumpgate keeps those twitch-based aspects of the classic version, I doubt there will be much overlap in the customer base between EVE and Jumpgate.

EVE is all about strategy, from the market to the control of regions, to the battles.

Jumpgate is all about tactics, again, from the market to control of regions, to the battles (assuming most of the mechanisms of the new version are at least similar to the classic version).

As to whether or not PVP and PVE can be balanced, well, the classic version balanced for PVP and did a great job of that. PVE was available but minimal but you could pick the difficulty of opponent you wanted, so rather like Guild Wars, the PVE was weak.

Perhaps some of the people participating in the beta of the new version would have some insight into how many of the changes to the game are substantive to the type of game and how much is updates to "modernize" the look and feel.

It has been done, is out now. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28897189)

There is a game that's managed to balance these things, IMO. It's Vendetta Online:

http://www.vendetta-online.com/

The developers went for an FPS style game rather than a more click-based method of playing and they focused on ship balance so that PvP would be the best experience. Additionally, because it's more skill based, a relatively new player with talent can quickly become competitive with players who have been around for years. No single ship loadout exists for serious PvP.

on the PvE side of things, there are a series of missions available that one can take with different levels of difficulty. I agree with the original summary where if one person wants more challenge to a PvE setting, throw in more things shooting at you. It really is the PvP that's hard to get right.

It can be done and, I think, has been done. (and they're having a 2 week trial key giveaway right now).

***I'm not a dev, but I'm a player of the game***

Re:JGE v EVE (1)

Filgy (2588) | more than 5 years ago | (#28897447)

PVP is what makes eve so awesome... Why wouldn't JGE want to focus on it as well due to the popularity of it in Eve? And to say you can't focus on both is absolutely ridiculous.. Just look at the market in EVE, or invention, or missions, or ratting.... Sure EVE PVE isn't great but the PVP aspect is what makes the game the way it is and the PVE still is decent.

You kinda sound like an EVE carebear to me that mined in Jita all day until that was nerfed - and probably got your ship suicide ganked a few times - and now you want JGE to be the PVE hold hands all day paradise that EVE isn't... Hello Kitty online is that way.......

This is not EVE with PvP balancing... (1)

Fallen Kell (165468) | more than 5 years ago | (#28897617)

I can tell you exactly why I don't play EVE, because there is no way I can compete with guys how have been there for a year. It isn't just the learning curve, it is how the character gain abilities/skills/etc. EVE is based entirely on how long you have been there with no upper cap, which means guys how have been there will ALWAYS be more powerful then you, no matter WHAT you do. At least in WoW or other MMORPGs, after being there for a while (3-4 months), you actually have a chance to compete with people who have been there for years. It is reverse age-ism on EVE. You will always be a subordinate. While I have to say I liked the idea of removing the ability of some class of players who do nothing but play the game all day every day from completely dominating the game (as is the case in most MMORPGs), in the long run, the method used is very bad for allowing new people from joining due to a permanent "level gap" between new players and old players.

Re:This is not EVE with PvP balancing... (2, Informative)

rokel (986883) | more than 5 years ago | (#28897887)

At least know what your talking about before taking time to write that much, okay? If you had taken a bit to actually think you'd have realized that after a point all the extra skill points older players have doesn't mean they are stronger in a ship then you, rather that they can fly MORE ships then you! Of course the knee jerk reaction is to be expected from someone who probably got owned hard. (cry about being over powered) Oh, I almost forgot to mention there are mechanics in game for purchasing older characters with more skill points using in-game currency. Crazy huh? :D

Re:This is not EVE with PvP balancing... (3, Insightful)

KermodeBear (738243) | more than 5 years ago | (#28898501)

I used to think this was true as well, but I very quickly discovered that it isn't. I'll use myself as an example of this.

I came to Eve after hearing about the space theme and the PvP aspect; After a week or two of play, I felt much like you do: All of these people have been around for so long, how can I stand a chance?

Well, I didn't give up right away and, after talking to a few people, I ended up in a zero-security alliance. They showed me how I can be effective in a variety of roles without needing a lot of skill points or expensive ships.

I filled several very important roles:
1. Electronic Warfare. I fly Caldari ships, and the Griffin is a very cheap ECM frigate that, even with low-grade modules, is very effective.
2. Scouting and Intelligence. You don't need ANY SP to do this - just a brain. I flew a system or two ahead of my fleet and was very helpful.
3. Tackling. Big ships aren't good at this - they're too slow. However, a cheap frigate is great at locking quickly and holding other ships down.

This was in less than a month of starting. After a week or two, not only was I tolerated in fleets, I was welcome because I was willing to learn, not afraid to die, and I was able to follow orders.

Fast forward four, maybe five months. I decided that I wanted something different; now I fly with a pirate corporation. I now do solo and small gang work - and I regularly attack players with years more of SP than me. I win more often than I lose because I am prepared, I have a plan, and I know what I can and cannot do effectively.

The whole "Skill Point Gap", while true on paper, is completely false in practice. Not all those SPs are in fighting skills anyways. Experience plays a factor. Environment plays a factor. Dictating the engagement is a factor. The more I fly, the more I realize how little SP matters and how much everything else does.

That said, the best thing that someone new to the game can do it pick one or two things and specialize. It doesn't take long, for example, to become highly proficient SP-wise in something specific such as (as an example) interceptors.

The only advantage that the six year old player has over the six month old player is the number of things he can specialize in.

Re:This is not EVE with PvP balancing... (1)

OglinTatas (710589) | more than 5 years ago | (#28900929)

The only advantage that the six year old player has over the six month old player is the number of things he can specialize in.

Also, many 6 year olds have long since stopped drooling.

Re:This is not EVE with PvP balancing... (1)

space_jake (687452) | more than 5 years ago | (#28898529)

It doesn't take that long to specialize in a single class of ship. T2 modules on a T1 battleship is 3-4 months training time. You're really damn competitive with that skill set. There is an upper cap on each class of ship and you can only fly one ship at a time. Just because the older player has 40 million more skill points doesn't mean that they're all impacting his/her skill in their current ship.

Re:This is not EVE with PvP balancing... (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 5 years ago | (#28906967)

Except that each skill has a cap of 5, and you can only be in one ship with a few weapons in it at a time. That your opponent has huge amounts of skill points in skills for ships he isn't in right now and weapons he doesn't have right now doesn't matter in the slightest.

Re:This is not EVE with PvP balancing... (1)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 5 years ago | (#28929361)

EVE PVP is a social game. You have to play with others in order to do well at it. And you don't need lots of skills to do that, you need lots of people on your side. (and that also makes it more fun)

Jumpgate is its own game, but . . . (1)

DrMrLordX (559371) | more than 5 years ago | (#28894735)

Jumpgate Evolution is going to have its own balance considerations that are not necessarily related to balance issues in other MMOs, but stating that balancing classes in PvP makes PvE balance "easy" (when the goal is making the player "feel powerful" in PvE) is nonsense.

Take a look at what Blizzard is going through with WoW patch 3.2. One of the changes in the upcoming patch is that Seal of Blood/Seal of the Martyr (Paladin abilities) are being pulled from the game. For those not familiar with WoW Paladins, those seals (identical seals with different names for the Horde and Alliance respectively) caused all melee and melee specials of Paladins to inflict a boatload of extra damage that can not specifically be resisted and is not eaten up by armor (some things can reduce it, but generic armor/resists can not). Paladins using those seals also eat some of the damage their seal dishes out (10% under most circumstances), though usually it is not hard to cope with that "recoil".

Seal of Blood/Seal of the Martyr were fingered as a culprit when non-Paladins complained that their damage in PvP environments was "too bursty", even though few players with credible opinions ever bothered complaining about Seal of Blood/Seal of the Martyr in PvE. When they decided to pull SoB/SotM, they attempted to compensate Paladins for their loss by changing two seals often neglected by Retribution Paladins (the sort fond of using SoB/SotM): Seal of Vengeance/Corruption (same seal, different names for Alliance and Horde respectively) and Seal of Command.

Seal of Command they revamped entirely to be nothing but a weak version of SoB/SotM with no recoil. For reference, it does 36% of weapon damage on strikes as opposed to 48% for SoB/SotM. This change has not thrilled Retribution Paladins at all since it costs a talent point to even learn Seal of Command (all Paladins learned SoB/SotM automatically regardless of talent ditribution) and since the new Seal of Command will be weaker than the old SoB/SotM were. Of course, Seal of Command has always been weaker, which is why any Retribution Paladin worth his/her salt stopped using it once they could learn SoB/SotM.

Seal of Vengeance/Corruption, both of which applied "damage over time" (DoT) effects that could stack up to 5 times, will stay the same but provide a 33% damage bonus and improve critical damage from 150% to 200% once the target has 5 effects stacked on them. Applying the DoT effects is not difficult, and it has been pointed out that the new SoV/SoC actually improves overall damage-per-second vs. SoB/SotM in any fight lasting longer than about 20-30 seconds, but this only applies if the Paladin is not forced to switch targets. The problem is that the DoT effects themselves do not last longer than . . .12 seconds, I think, which means that if the Paladin is stuck in any boss fight with a gimmick that forces the Paladin to attack a new target, he/she/it is now forced to establish another "5-stack" on the new target before he/she/it can once again enjoy the 33% damage bonus plus the boost to critical damage, and after that, if he switches back to his previous target, the old "5-stack" will probably be gone, forcing the Paladin to apply yet another "5-stack" to his/her/its initial target. In fights which require such behavior from a Paladin, some of them have taken to switching to Seal of Righteousness, a relatively low-damage seal that just happens to outdamage Seal of Command provided said Paladin has 5 talent points in Seals of the Pure (see below).

As an added point of frustration, those hoping to maximize their damage per second using the new SoV/SoC will need to put 5 talent points in a talent found in the Holy tree called Seals of the Pure, which means Retribution Paladins will have to pull 5 points off something else. Such a change to their talents will reduce their overall utility.

But wait! There's more. Another change they've made to reduce Paladin "burst" damage in PvP is to change a Retribution talent, Crusader Strike, which is a fairly bland melee attack that does little more than give the Paladin the ability to take a swing at one opponent no matter how fast their weapon is or how much haste they have (in other words, it's off their auto-attack swing timer). In 3.1 and before, it has had a "cooldown" of 6 seconds, meaning you have to wait 6 seconds before you use it again. In 3.2, it will do less damage and have a cooldown of 4 seconds. It has been calculated that, over the course of 12 seconds, the new Crusader Strike will do a little bit more damage, but thanks to the fact that you now have to use it 3 times over the course of 12 seconds in order to achieve the new damage figure, you now pay 33% more mana because they apparently haven't bothered to adjust the mana cost of Crusader Strike.

Aaaaaaand they nerfed a special mana-regeneration effect called Replenishment (Retribution Paladins get Replenishment every time they use a Judgement attack) so that it will provide a bit less mana per second than it once did, so that makes the Crusader Strike mana issue even more obnoxious.

What is their proposed solution to the mana problem from Crusader Strike? Apparently they want us to use an item called a Major Glyph (top-level characters can use up to 3 Major Glyphs) to solve the problem; specifically, they want us to use Glpyh of Seal of Command which gives you extra mana every time you use a Judgement attack. One problem: in order for that Glyph to work, you have to stop using one ofthe other Major Glyphs you liked (which will probably be Glyph of Seal of Blood, since it too is gone in 3.2) and you have to use Seal of Command, which stinks.

So, you can burn up 5 talent points to occasionally do more damage with SoV/SoC provided you're fighting a long-lasting enemy that doesn't force you to switch targets while also running out of mana thanks to Crusader Strike and Replenishment changes, or you can suffer from a clear-cut PvE damage nerf by using Seal of Command and not run out of mana quickly.

And don't get me started on the Exorcism changes.

To relate this back to TFA, Blizzard's attempt to balance Retribution Paladins in PvP has totally screwed up their PvE damage per second. It's now conditional based on the fight, and they do less area of effect (AoE) damage to groups of monsters than before due to the seal changes. So, no, balancing things on the PvP side did not make Retribution Paladins on Blizzard's public test realm (PTR) "feel powerful", at least not compared to how they felt in 3.1 on Live servers. The rest of the Paladins will suffer if/when the changes go live. Patch 3.2 has, allegedly, been significantly delayed as Blizzard struggles to get things right on the PvE side without giving back too much of the PvP power that they took away.

Re:Jumpgate is its own game, but . . . (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28894763)

All those words LOOK like English, but make absolutely no sense... a life.... get one.

Re:Jumpgate is its own game, but . . . (1)

DrMrLordX (559371) | more than 5 years ago | (#28894817)

Dude, this is a discussion about game design. Give me a break. WoW happens to be one of the biggest MMOs ever (if not THE biggest ever), and it provides a perfect example of why the Jumpgate: Evolution dev responsible for writing TFA is just not right about PvP/PvE balance.

All it will take is for one "class" of ship to look balanced in PvP but weaker-than-everyone-else in PvE for the crying to start.

Re:Jumpgate is its own game, but . . . (1)

Hecatonchires (231908) | more than 5 years ago | (#28895117)

You care too much about Wow.

Re:Jumpgate is its own game, but . . . (1)

DrMrLordX (559371) | more than 5 years ago | (#28912015)

Not really. I may know too much about it, but I don't care all that much. This is just an example of PvP balance screwing up PvE balance. I wanted to be detailed instead of offering people vague assurances that, yes indeed, this will be a problem real soon now.

Re:Jumpgate is its own game, but . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28897357)

OH MY CHRIST.

shutupshutupshutup

Re:Jumpgate is its own game, but . . . (1)

Ironica (124657) | more than 5 years ago | (#28898725)

For all those who don't play a Paladin in WoW, here's the Executive Summary of the above post:

Jumpgate Evolution is going to have its own balance considerations that are not necessarily related to balance issues in other MMOs, but stating that balancing classes in PvP makes PvE balance "easy" (when the goal is making the player "feel powerful" in PvE) is nonsense.

Take a look at what Blizzard is going through with WoW patch 3.2. Blizzard's attempt to balance Retribution Paladins in PvP has totally screwed up their PvE damage per second. It's now conditional based on the fight, and they do less area of effect (AoE) damage to groups of monsters than before due to the seal changes. So, no, balancing things on the PvP side did not make Retribution Paladins on Blizzard's public test realm (PTR) "feel powerful", at least not compared to how they felt in 3.1 on Live servers. The rest of the Paladins will suffer if/when the changes go live. Patch 3.2 has, allegedly, been significantly delayed as Blizzard struggles to get things right on the PvE side without giving back too much of the PvP power that they took away.

(Note: I play a rogue, a druid, a shaman, and a mage regularly, and have been playing WoW since release. I've got nothing against people playing, loving, and going on at length about WoW. But I think you overestimate your audience's interest in the intricacies of Paladin Seal mechanics.)

Re:Jumpgate is its own game, but . . . (1)

DrMrLordX (559371) | more than 5 years ago | (#28912087)

Maybe I do, but the same dev that posted this is going to (hopefully) be drudging through even more obscure mechanics in his own project soon. Granted, I'm not addressing him, but this is about his rather broad-sweeping statements about PvP and PvE balance. And the 3.2 changes to Paladins were the first thing that came to mind (and aren't you glad I didn't even go into Holy or Protection Paladin changes?).

Would it have been better had I dredged up some old paper on Ebolt mechanics from UO in its heydey? If any game had PvP balance issues, ye gods. That's a case study in doing everything possible you could do wrong, to every degree possible.

Or maybe I should have gone on about an obscure Hungarian MUD I used to play on . . .

As an aside, yes, the summary paragraph would have been sufficient, but really it's a biased statement to make without something to back it up. I figured anyone reading this thread or posting to it would eat up game development and mechanic issues rather than vomit all over them. Yeah, I'm a geek, so what?

Re:Jumpgate is its own game, but . . . (1)

Knara (9377) | more than 5 years ago | (#28899811)

The simple difference is that WoW had PvP tacked on later. JGE is considering it from the start. PvP in WoW has always sucked because the concentration of the game is on PvE and loot gathering to make your character more pretty.

Re:Jumpgate is its own game, but . . . (1)

DrMrLordX (559371) | more than 5 years ago | (#28912125)

I had considered this, but of course if your statement is true, then any game based on PvP in the beginning will inevitably suck in PvE no matter how hard they try. That isn't balance, that's just lop-sidedness. If you're determined to neglect PvE, then sure, balancing PvE is easy because balance won't matter. Nobody's going to bother with it anyway.

Re:Jumpgate is its own game, but . . . (1)

julesh (229690) | more than 5 years ago | (#28900401)

For reference, you should probably read this blog post [eldergame.com] . The executive summary: the lead developers of WoW have recently switched teams to work on Blizzard's next big title, leaving only some fairly inexperienced devs behind. They're making what amounts to newbie mistakes because they've never been in charge of balancing a live game before. An experience project lead would probably not have done this. I'm assuming JGE has somebody experienced at the helm, so issues like the one you bring up are unlikely to be a major problem for them.

Re:Jumpgate is its own game, but . . . (1)

DrMrLordX (559371) | more than 5 years ago | (#28912267)

I hope that JGE has someone experienced on the helm, but honestly experience doesn't make a darn bit of difference if valuable lessons were not learned in the process. Take a gander at Raph Koster: has he ever been involved in a project that you, personally, liked? For me the answer is no. Then you have guys like Richard Garriot that go from a dedicated, intelligent game designer/lead developer/programmer/etc (U4) to . . . whatever he is now. It's not like he's disallowed from changing as a person, but it's pretty clear that he isn't a game developer anymore, so I wouldn't take his experience to be worth anything nowadays. It wasn't worth anything during Ultima 9's tumultuous dev cycle either.

btw, nice article you linked there. That would certainly explain a lot! Seems like Blizzard has forgotten their current cash cow a bit.

Re:Jumpgate is its own game, but . . . (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 5 years ago | (#28907173)

So because one game which did PvE first and then tacked on PvP screws up balance, that means a different game that is doing PvP balance first and then thinking about PvE is destined to screw it up?

If you get PvP balance right, then PvE will be easy - just give the monsters tweaked down player abilities. Since PvP is balanced and AI is crappier than good players that should make PvE easy enough.

And if one ship ends up being better in PvE than the rest then who cares, update the PvE monsters be better against that ship - there's no need to tweak the already balanced player ships.

That's why PvE is easier than PvP, you can tweak the E part without changing the P part to fix PvE issues with no effect on PvP at all.

Re:Jumpgate is its own game, but . . . (1)

DrMrLordX (559371) | more than 5 years ago | (#28911999)

As you seem to have conceded, PvE balance issues can crop up in the strangest places when you balance for PvP. If you wish to create a dichotomy between player powers in PvP and PvE then so be it, but don't act all surprised when the player base reacts with some hostility to a gun that is a peashooter in PvP and a planet-destroyer in PvE (an extreme example, I must admit, but look at Guild Wars). There is something to be said for continuity.

Re:Jumpgate is its own game, but . . . (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 5 years ago | (#28921389)

The point is it is easier to fix PvE than PvP. Especially if the monsters are effectively just like players, which is reasonably likely in a space ship combat style games.

No one likes space sims? (2, Insightful)

darkwing_bmf (178021) | more than 5 years ago | (#28895067)

I'm seeing a lot of negative comments on this story. I don't know if this game will fail or not (it probably will), but at least we'll have a new space sim until it does. I'd like the chance to actually fly my internet spaceship with a joystick and out maneuver missiles while engaging full afterburners. They've already added a "Descent" style arena for those that remember that game. My hope is this will end up being a very good multi-player version of X-Wing or Wing Commander.

Re:No one likes space sims? (1)

Seranfall (680430) | more than 5 years ago | (#28895635)

Any MMO that explores a genre that isn't heavily saturated in the market is a very good thing. Do you really want another fantasy MMO. Eve is great but we really don't need another game like it. It has it's niche and serves that niche very well. Gamers should be rejoicing that there is something new in a genre that hasn't seen a decent online game in years. It may suck it may not, but at least it's not another WoW clone. Is balancing the game around PvP a good thing? There isn't a single person on slashdot that knows for sure if it will be a boon or a bust. I just don't understand why JGE seems to get so maligned. If this was a fantasy MMO that was announcing it was being balanced towards PvP slashdot would probably be rejoicing.

Trying to get in the beta of this (1)

AP31R0N (723649) | more than 5 years ago | (#28895125)

i hope to get to try it. i also hope it doesn't have a Gygaxian power curve. Steep power curve = ganking/n00b st0mping. i hope the run player trade such that it doesn't cause gold farming and twinking.

As for niches, you're right on. EVE filled or created a niche, and did it well. It might not be as big as WoW, but it has a loyal base. The description of it never appealed to me, personally. WoW and it's ilk turn me off with the problems mentioned above. Once again i'll brag on my favorite niche game: PlanetSide.

Shallow Power Curve - My 6 year character gets the same Lasher rifle as your one day character. We have the same HP and amount of Stamina. The difference is that my high level character has more choices. We can both have a Lasher, but i switch to a tank. You could switch to the tank too, but you'd have to give up your Lasher.

No Grinding - You play to play. Leveling just happens as you go along. What you're doing has some bearing on the global battle, you don't have to go kill stuff just to get the next widgets. If you want to make levels... play. Join a squad/outfit and start a fight.

No Inane Quests - You might have to capture a remote tower, but once you have it, it's yours. It stays yours until an enemy comes and takes it. You can defend it if you want. But there's no one telling you to bring him Five Golden Rat Spleens.

Player Skill Matters - Eye hand coordination is a major factor. Most gamers have better coordination than i do, and i found my niche in the game. So even if you aren't an uber twitcher, you can still be competitive. Skilled players can hold their own against several n00bs. But the experienced player can still fall to the n00bs if their get their shit together. The shallow power curve means that no one is god like in relation to anyone else.

Pure PvP - There are a few automated turrets that shoot at you, but they are relatively ineffective. More of a deterrent really. Otherwise, if it's moving, it's another player.

No Gold Farming - There is no economy, no gold, no Chinese guys in sweatshops. If you want something, you go to the free vending machine. i suppose you could buy a high level character, but i've never heard of anyone doing that in 6 years. It wouldn't buy you much that you couldn't get on your own.

No Twinking (No player trade) - There's no player trade worth mentioning. Since you can get anything for free (if you have the certification for it), there is no economy. Supply is infinite, so price is 0. The only trading that happens might be for enemy equipment. Even so, it's a minor thing. "Oo, look i have a chain gun."

Team Work Rules the Day - Organized teams can beat larger disorganized teams. My outfit (guild/clan) isn't the biggest, but by using team speak and having a command structure, we can defeat enemy zerglings most of the time.

Strategy Rules the Day - Having the twitch will win the battle, but not the war. The empire that allocates its power wisely usually wins. Knowing where to attack or defend is the other half of the battle.

No Gygaxian Straitjacket Classes - You can unlearn one certification per 6 hours. If you don't like the sniper rifle, unlearn it, and buy something else.

Re:Trying to get in the beta of this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28895571)

Steep Power Curve - My 6 year character gets the same Lasher rifle as your one day character. I also get aircraft, tanks, better armor, healing, better vision, more speed, more stamina, faster hacking. We have the same HP, but I get more stamina. The difference is that my high level character has more choices. You just get the Lasher. We can both have a Lasher, but i switch to a tank. You could switch to the tank too, but you'd have to give up your Lasher for 24 hours.

Grinding - Kill stuff for XP. Playing for territorial control gains you nothing. You can play to play or play to level. What you're doing either has some bearing on the global battle, or no bearing but you get plenty of XP, and get to kill stuff for the next widgets. If you want to make levels... start a (large) fight. If you want to capture bases, find empty ones.

No Inane Quests - You might have to capture a remote tower, but once you have it, it's yours. It stays yours until an enemy comes and takes it. You can defend it if you want. But don't expect to level soon.

Player Skill Matters - Choose the winning faction to win. Outnumbering the enemy is a major factor. Skilled players, on the faction with the best weapons, and the most players, can hold their own. Occasionally someone (if using a particular processor to play, or if their network connection is terrible) will be god-like in relation to anyone else.

Twinking (Player trade) - Players can trade overpowered guns to friends on the other side.

Team Work Rules the Day - Organized teams can beat entire factions. My outfit (guild/clan) isn't the biggest, but by using team speak and having a command structure, we run rings around enemy zerglings all of the time. We just don't expect to level any time soon.

Strategy Rules the Day - Having the twitch will win the battle, but not the war. The empire that allocates its power wisely usually wins. The empire that zergs, levels. Knowing where to attack or defend is all of the war.

No Gygaxian Straitjacket Classes - You can unlearn one certification per 6 hours. But why bother, just zerg, level, and get all the good ones.

Fixed that for you.

Re:Trying to get in the beta of this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28898781)

Biggest failing of Planetside is that it is highly vulnerable to hacks because of the way it is designed. Its why I quit (more than once lol). I will be interested to see if JGE can side step that problem.

Making the game fun, first? (1)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#28895127)

What is this, a game company making a game fun, first?

They must be Indy, yes no?

Re:Making the game fun, first? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28897049)

They used to be indy, they're now owned by Gazillion.

Not EVE and maybe that is good... (2, Insightful)

space_jake (687452) | more than 5 years ago | (#28895387)

I like Eve, but the biggest misconception I see people make when seeing the game is that they think they'll be flying the ship like a sim game and they're not. It turns a lot of people off because they think it is going to be an action game and its more of a strategy game. Jumpgate sounds like it is going to be more of an action/sim game and I think that'll work in its favor.

Re:Not EVE and maybe that is good... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28896707)

A space flight-sim MMO based on PvP doesn't exactly target the same audience as EVE.

Halo did a similar thing (1)

jparker (105202) | more than 5 years ago | (#28896153)

Though Halo obviously wasn't concerned with balancing classes, they iterated on their single-player maps and combat design through multiplayer gameplay. At GDC a few years ago they said that their basic process was to rough out a campaign level, get a bunch of people to jump into a multiplayer game there, and see what developed. After they would group up and discuss where the natural choke points are, spots with great vistas or cover for sniping, and just generally where a fun battle develops. Tweak the level to emphasize those areas, throw some AI in, set them up to do that really cool thing Bob did that one time, and you've got a hit game.

I don't think techniques like this are really all that uncommon. I've worked on a number of FPS titles, and while we were never clever enough to test out the SP levels in MP, most other balance decisions were made there. There are a lot of reasons this makes sense. First off (and Bungie mentioned this as well), you often have your multiplayer up and running well before you have your AI written. (If you don't build the MP in from the beginning, it will usually be a nightmare to work with for the rest of the project.) Also, many of these decisions are made, or at least informed, by a consensus. When we were balancing weapons, we would usually get the whole team to play multiplayer for a few rounds, group up and get some quick impressions, modify and distribute new config files, then repeat. Those discussions are more useful when everyone is coming from the same context.

This would make the best space mmo (1)

autoevolution (1519077) | more than 5 years ago | (#28896883)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SubSpace_(video_game) [wikipedia.org] This game + 3d graphics and joystick controls + newtonian physics ( as in, once you start spinning, you keep spinning and once apply thrust, you keep moving ) would be spend-money-worthy. Actually any space game with newtonian physics would buy spend-money-worthy. There was something like this made by the guy who made X-Plane that you can download for free but that isn't really a game although you can fly around and shoot asteroids with a ship that handled like the space shuttle. With a joystick the setup would be your joystick 3d movement ( the 3rd "d" being twist / rudder ) would control the rotational thrusters, meaning that if you thrust in one direction you'll keep going in that direction until you thrust in the opposite direction to stop rotating. The " " axis would control rotational thrusters meaning if you push the joystick -----> you would spin clockwise and ---- would be counterclockwise. Pushing and pulling the joystick would control attitude, the rudder / twist would do the same thing that an airplane does, turning left and right. The hat-switch would be used to control lateral thrusters. I played the above mentioned game made by the guy who made X-Plane ( Austin Meyer I think? ) with this setup and it was quite a robust and awesome way of controlling a space ship. It's a little more complicated than controls for a plane like vehicle since you now have the option of using lateral thrusters to control the way you move, an analogy would be like saying a plane gives you 3 degrees of freedom but this setup gives you 6 degrees of freedom, well the analogy is not entirely correct but if you play that game mentioned by Austin Meyer or "Orbiter" or any space-flight simulator you will notice the difference. I think this kind of physics / control system would be just pure awesome in a multiplayer combat environment as there are pretty much boundless diversity in ways you could maneuver such a space ship. Also realistic weapons the behave like real lasers and gatling guns found on fighter jets with realistic spread would be cool. Also the fact that the velocities of the bullets would be added to relative velocities and that kind of realism, also the fact that moving fast through a debris field would make relative velocities of debris fast enough to damage the ships etc etc blah blah blah you get the idea...

Jumpgate was a pvp game (2, Insightful)

JuSTCHiLLiN (605538) | more than 5 years ago | (#28896903)

I played the original Jumpgate and found it mostly PvP orintated. I liked how I could jump into combat and, while your ship did matter, player ability was the main factor. Killing Krakken (PvE) was a secondary goal when no action was taking place. My favourite thing to do was baiting greifers in my scout and taking them right to a waiting trap. Ah the memories.

PvP is a niche, though. (1)

Ironica (124657) | more than 5 years ago | (#28899273)

Every new MMOG seems to think that they will be the ones to make PvP "work" at long last. But it's not likely to happen, for one simple reason: most people don't want PvP. Those who like PvP really, REALLY like it, and there's nothing wrong with that... but it's a small subset of the population. 46% of World of Warcraft's servers are PvP (or RPPVP) by default, which is pretty impressive... but when you look at the server populations, you see that doesn't translate into nearly half of the players preferring a PvP environment. On the "Normal" servers, 63% have a "Medium" population, and 29% have a "High" population; the plain RP servers are only slightly less populated, with 59% "Medium" and 17.6% "High." The PVP servers (and here I've just looked at the straight PVP servers... there's only 6 RPPVP servers, and they sorted to a different part of the spreadsheet, and I'm lazy) have the lowest proportion of "High" population servers, at 17%, but only 41.5% are "Medium". More than 40% of the PvP servers are "Low" population.

And that's a game that has spent a lot of effort on PvP. Granted, PvE is the first emphasis, but there's a lot of specifically PvP content. There's also a lot of PvP activity on the "Normal" and "RP" servers on an opt-in basis, but it operates almost like a separate game-within-a-game.

I don't think it's a coincidence that every game that's put PvP first has had relatively low adoption. I don't doubt that it's fun if that's what you like, but it's just not what most people like, and MMOGs do need a pretty large customer base to succeed.

There's a lot more to PvE class balance than "Making the player feel powerful." Truth is, people will ALWAYS bitch about class balance; if every class is bitching pretty equally, you've done it right. ;-) But if player characters are overpowered to the environment, the game isn't fun... and it sorta sounds like they're leaning that way.

I'd love to be wrong... I'm still waiting for a really good sci-fi genre MMOG to come along. I'm not a dragons-and-fairies type. But so far, they've all disappointed me. :-(

Why most people don't like PvP (1)

random coward (527722) | more than 5 years ago | (#28899913)

The problem with PvP is that developers haven't come up with a non-exploitable positive sum game for it. When it is a zero sum game people get very annoyed with the winner and the game and want to leave; therefore PvP tends to be a negative sum game. You can't have an economy based on a negative sum game.

Proof: If I get more than you lose when I beat you in PvP then we take turns beating each other rapidly and both advance quickly.
If every time I lose to one of the better PvPers he gets all of my loss thats angering. Its to much like theft and not like a game OR there is no real loss or gain and so where is the thrill?
If the game is only or mainly PvP and every time someone loses they lose more than the winner gains, the net assets in the game economy rapidly decrease.

Someone comes up with a positive sum game of PvP on an MMO that isn't exploitable and they'll be bigger than WoW.

Re:Why most people don't like PvP (1)

Ironica (124657) | more than 5 years ago | (#28900351)

Hm, interesting.

That isn't why I don't like PvP, but it definitely is an issue I hadn't thought about. Economics plays an enormous role in the playability of MMOGs to be sure.

Cool! (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | more than 5 years ago | (#28900133)

> "It's very tempting to just throw a bunch of classes of ships
> together in order to say things like "our game has 15 classes
> of ships!" but this, we believe, is the wrong direction. People
> want meaningful and strong choices and not lots of meaningless,
> empty choices. Currently we plan to have 4-6 classes, but they
> will each have nearly endless possible configurations within those groups."

Is there something wrong with Eve's model? Shuttle, tiny, small, medium, large, extra large, etc., with just minor variations for each of four races for flavor? Are they having a "healer" ship and a "caster" ship and a "melee" ship, :)

I was two-boxing dual battleships -- Tier 3 Minmatar Maelstroms -- and got ganked in 0.0 space. It wasn't by two other battleships, but by a swarm of little popcorn.

One Eve guy's .sig is: If you find yourself in a fair fight, you haven't done your homework.

Note: Just like real war.

Just what kind of silly PvP are they expecting to develop in this game?

Re:Cool! (1)

justinlee37 (993373) | more than 5 years ago | (#28900445)

I think what they are hoping to avoid is a situation where any one ship is clearly superior over all other ships, leading to a homogeneous environment wherein all players are only flying one kind of ship. If there are several different viable strategies, or some ships that work better against other ships, the game will have more variety (and be more fun) because there will be more balance between the choices.

So I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt. It would totally suck if all fights were "fair" to the point of being a simple coin toss, but I just don't see that happening. Who would be that stupid?

The game can still be balanced while offering the opportunity for creative and dedicated players to dominate in PvP with their strategies.

Re:Cool! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28901515)

The Jumpgate model IS the Eve model. When they say "class", they mean Trainer, Combat Fighter, Advance Fighter, Combat Gunboat, and Support Gunboat, with subtypes and factional variances for each.

Your "little popcorn" story happened a lot in the original Jumpgate, too. There was a well-known combat squad called The Swarm which specialized in the Gust, an upgraded newbie shuttle that was technically classified as a Light Fighter. There was also a player known to scare off pairs of fully-equipped combat fighters while flying solo in a cargo shuttle!

Why do PVP and PVE have to be so different? (1)

Aksimel (1347591) | more than 5 years ago | (#29016187)

Balancing for PVP vs. PVE wouldn't be an issue if they made the AI sufficient that PVE mimics PVP. EVE has started this direction with "sleeper" npcs in w-space. Eventually someone will get to a point where NPCs foes aren't easily discernible from players foes - hopefully then the whole PVP vs PVE nonsense will settle to a dull roar.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>