Development Cycle Archive
Thread: IC 1-17 Star Wars Galaxies Combat Profession Mix and Match
The weakness for mix match professions is,
People have already shown there is no real variety in mix match profession. Brawler pretty much stick with the same template that made them uber, this is why there is a new cap on things.
So does mix matching really make the game unique not at all. So many people had the same build of picking up 1 or 2 skill trees in each combat profession to stack the bonuses.
If a fighter chose not to mix match other combat profession to become uber, then they just simply went doc/combat profession.
This game is trying to have its cake and eat it to but i dont think it is working or will work in the future.
You can not have a swordsman have a specific uniqeness to it if you promote the swordsman to become swordsman/tka/fencer/pikeman all hybred into on. People choose their profession because they like that particualr class for whatever reason. I do not want to be a swordsman who has to swing a pike, fight unarmed, then grab a baton to make my swordsman better than any regular master swordsman.
Have any of the elite combat profession have another class to them. There is no way doc/master swordsman should be better than a true combat master swordsman. This is what makes the game fall apart. If someone wants to be a doc/swordsman then fine but they will not be as tough as a master swordsman who decides to only concentrate on his profession.
I do definitely appreciate the current method of skill-distribution (oppose to "skills sprinkled throughout the trees" as with Creature Handler)..
It's more logical in that sense... Take melee for example - We see all different forms of martial arts in Real-Life.
And, in this "real life", we also see MANY fighters each with their own skills - based on their training and experiences. Some people are devistating strikers - and others simply can NOT be touched. It all depends on ones' specific training.
Therefor, I feel to stay true to what actual training is, skill-types should remain within "like-skill trees" as they are (divided by Offensive or Defensive skills and abilities - then perhaps a tree of weapons-skills of the respective types (because training with different weapons takes specific skill as well.)
Logical reasoning should prevail here.
---
Have any of the elite combat profession have another class to them. There is no way doc/master swordsman should be better than a true combat master swordsman. This is what makes the game fall apart. If someone wants to be a doc/swordsman then fine but they will not be as tough as a master swordsman who decides to only concentrate on his profession.
---
I have to agree with this to some extent.
The cherry pick concept sounds wonderful up front, but does promote character design for pure combat effectiveness, and if a mixed design is more effective- everyone is mixed. The result is that everyone is the same, a very odd outcome for a system intended to promote very different concepts.
In general I have the following suggestions:
1. Make armor part of the class balance. Have some classes avoiding hits in the first place (TKA, Pistols, etc) while wearing little to no armor and others depending upon armor to suck it up (heavy swordsman, Carbine, Commando). One can run the range from all avoid/block without any armor (say TKA) to all armor buthit more often(Commando) andpoints inbetween. This can also result in more types of armor for the crafters to make and a return to use of non-comp armor. This would be a major tie-in to the combat re-balance as current comp armor is the end all be of combat, that would have to change. This seems VERY Star Wars Movie like to me.
2. In the case of mixed professions when armor/avoid conflict (say a TKA/Commando)t- always drop one's ability to avoid down to the max level forarmor being worn. Thus mixing professions of different armor types is not cherry picking as such- but is instead a way to match your style to what's going on at a specific time.
3. Add a delay for switching armor/clothing to prevent exploiting the system. Say the 15 second non-combat delay now used for vehicles.
4. Increase the effect of the Mastery box and allow only one elite/hybrid Mastery per character. Perhaps increase the cost/effect for that box. This would mean that to reach the height of a profession, one would need to pass on the heights of the others.
5. On a somewhat related note- Characters should not depend on Buffs more than they depend upon their skills and stats. Currently the Buffs ARE the character (buffs are at least 2x and often much more than starting stats. This means we're playing the buffs and not the character. Modifiers should not exceed the base in order for the base to matter). Ideally, any buffs should be a percentage and not a flat add so that the stats (selected for the profession) still determine potential. In this way, someone stat'd for Master Swordsman will have the edge on someone stated for a Doc/Swordsman mix.
6. In line with point 5, perhaps Mastery could increase the base HAM values (i.e. the character has now improved his natural stats). This however should not be read as a general increase on top of existing buffs, but a re-balance thereof.
1. Make armor part of the class balance...
2. In the case of mixed professions when armor/avoid conflict (say a TKA/Commando)t- always drop one's ability to avoid down to the max level forarmor being worn. Thus mixing professions of different armor types is not cherry picking as such- but is instead a way to match your style to what's going on at a specific time.
A shortfall in the present system is exactly this. The armour available becomes rapidly redundant until you wear Composite. Using a system as that described will force players to choose armour according to your play style and skills gained. This not only provides a greater variety in combat styles but a more considerate approach to spending skill points, not to mention a greater reward for those Armoursmiths out there.
3. Add a delay for switching armor/clothing to prevent exploiting the system. Say the 15 second non-combat delay now used for vehicles.
15 seconds may seem a long time so perhaps a time calculated by the armour's statistics providing you with a Cumbersome value similar in value to weapon speed.
4. Increase the effect of the Mastery box and allow only one elite/hybrid Mastery per character. Perhaps increase the cost/effect for that box. This would mean that to reach the height of a profession, one would need to pass on the heights of the others.
This surely cannot be considerd a bad idea at all. Giving the players an opportunity to enhance their profession into something worth sacrificing skill points and lengthy game time for to become notorious or famouswarriors/artisans/entertainers etc... will allow the player to really feel individual. Perhaps even having special abilities that require skills from other complimentary trees could develop ones individuality even further. Presently there is a real feeling of blending into the crowd a little too well.
5. On a somewhat related note- Characters should not depend on Buffs more than they depend upon their skills and stats. Currently the Buffs ARE the character (buffs are at least 2x and often much more than starting stats. This means we're playing the buffs and not the character. Modifiers should not exceed the base in order for the base to matter). Ideally, any buffs should be a percentage and not a flat add so that the stats (selected for the profession) still determine potential. In this way, someone stat'd for Master Swordsman will have the edge on someone stated for a Doc/Swordsman mix.
Buffs are a slight gripe of mine. I really do not like the present system of medically enhancing someone to super-human ability. Not only that, but it can really negate thevalues found from playing a certain race. Buffs are never going to disappear, I have to accept that, but can we make them less ostentatious, and more subtle? Granting bonuses according to your presently laid out HAM as suggested above is an excellent idea but alsoincluding racial and profession restrictions and bonuses would make the system a more exciting and considerate experience.
Hi,
I'd like to suggest and idea that would:
1. Create uniqueness and diversity amongst all characters
2. Help define roles but still allow players to continually explore new ways of playing
3. Specialize in specific SUBareas of skill building welcome to all types
How?
By using the existing special titles and adding crossover bonuses to them that the individual can choose.
Example:
Player 1 has the title of engineer, he is also working on bio-engineer.
As he attains the abilities to create better bio engineered pets, because of his other engineer title he would get an option that looks like this:
Congratulations your hard workhas unlocked a special ability, please choose one from the following:
Rancor Creation Specialization -Damage +10%
Rancor Creation Specialization -HAMS +10%
Rancor Creation Specialization- Levels +10%
Thank you for you selection, you are no a Rancor Engineer Specialist (or Kimo, GSP, etc.,)
If the devs really wanted to make the game interesting they could add a special race bonus as well on top of it. Maybe wookies get +5% on any of the above. Maybe it specific to one choice. Who knows but it would be really cool to have specialties. Maybe a ranger/smuggler could have choices to add bonuses in their skill related areas: the accumulation of more containers, better camo, increased wilderness bonuses. Find secret treasure stashes..whatever it is it doesn't matter... the ideas are endless! The bonuses dont have to be out of this world, just something that people can be pleased with. I wont even bother mentioning what could be done in the fighting classes, it would be just too exciting and I could fill pages of crazy ideas that everybody would like.
We have a wonderfulchance in this forum to push ideas like this to make the game go outside the box. I'm sure an idea like this one would be easy to get implemented by the devs. They would just have to add a few more abilities in your character box. All people have to do is raise the roof and be heard!
If you like this idea or ideas similar to this one let your voice be heard! If your going to the fan fest let them know the game needs the diversity people are looking for!
Cheers!
-concerned council for the state of the game
people will always try to correct something, no matter what you fix. do not incite the silent majority.
dabbling in fact most emulates the RL.
one that invests in, say defenses, gives up many of the great offensive benefits - i do not think it is proper for hard-core offensive professions to think that they deserve to be on equal footing as more defensive professions without investing in those.
Perhaps we should use the analogy that we are all coaches of a team. a team is comprised of slots that have various skills. we are all limited by say a salary cap. now the question is what slots do you invest in - there is a myriad of theory as to what is best, and what suits your style. In RL sometimes strong defense works - and sometime a strong defense is really a strong offense, again a myriad of styles. Some want to win their conference, some want to win the "show" - some are willing to put hard work into it, and some are willing to put more money into it.
in SWG I prefer to give up a profession because I dislike it rather than it's been nerfed. many people calling for caps on this and that also are only considering their own play style - of course they are not considering the play style of others (the silent majority) and how it may impact them.