No rezzing, thoughts?

[BloodOmen]

I'm all for long cast time rezzing, no rezz at all is a terrible idea and as said promotes zerging which is all fine I guess if you like that sort of thing but MJ said he wanted to support solo and group play - no rezzing does not promote group play in anyway, shape or form.

As for the GW2 system that was/is terrible and I hope for the sake of any future MMO its not replicated.

A mix of DAOC rezzing but with some additional penalties would be nice, something like this

Slower/fixed cast time - cannot be altered by any cast speed changing mechanic (higher dex or +% cast speed for example)
High power cost
Easily interruptable

I do however think the rezzed target should gain some sort of immunity much like DAOC, it'd be quite harsh having to cast say a 6 second rezz and then having said target instantly die again.

 

[Jairon Kalach]

It would also completely kill group vs group RvR. Imagine having to run all the way back to the revival stone every time someone in your group gets killed or having to stand about doing nothing while waiting for the group to come and pick you up.

Yeah... So I guess when I chose to fight someone, it would be over something important to me, more than just for sport, or just because I see them. And that makes the world a bit more dangerous to me, too. That sounds good to me, not bad.

 

[Jairon Kalach]

I'm all for long cast time rezzing, no rezz at all is a terrible idea and as said promotes zerging which is all fine I guess if you like that sort of thing but MJ said he wanted to support solo and group play - no rezzing does not promote group play in anyway, shape or form.

I have to say, I completely disagree here. Rezzing is always in favor of the zerg. No-Rezzing gives a small-man team that wants to do hit-and run maneuvers against a zerg some amazing options to take down the zerg.

Rezzing favors the team with the largest numbers, because then as an individual I know that I'm safe when I'm in a zerg because it's the most likely that some healer will survive and be able to rez me. With no rezzing, as an individual I'm no safer in a zerg than I am solo. All it takes is one kamikaze attack when my team isn't paying attention and I'm running back, whether I'm in a zerg or not. Sure, attackers have to be more cautious... But with rezzing, if they attack the enemy and take a few out before they die, they've gained nothing. With no rezzing, if they attack the enemy and take a few out before they die, they've weakend the enemy. That gives a lot of power to small groups, and takes a lot of safety away from zergs.

 

[Clarus Ava/Hib]

In my opinion, if the terrain is wide enough, than there is enough space for everyone. 8vs8, 2vs2, 1vs1, 1vs100.

I like zerging sometimes, even for my twinks with low RR.(doh*g*), but I also like 8vs8 or sometimes stealther 1vs1.

And I think there must be some possibilities to gain some exp Points, especially when you do not have so much time for playing.

 

[professor nomos]

its really going to come down to how easy it is to heal & how hard it will be to kill players. if concentrated power (ala pbaoe) wipe players in 15 seconds, then having easy access to rez makes more sense than if it takes 2-3 minutes of hard fought skrimishing.

 

[Jairon Kalach]

its really going to come down to how easy it is to heal & how hard it will be to kill players. if concentrated power (ala pbaoe) wipe players in 15 seconds, then having easy access to rez makes more sense than if it takes 2-3 minutes of hard fought skrimishing.

Agreed... I would also pair this with a mechanism that allows you respawn closer to contested territory as you take and fortify land. Reward a slow march into the enemies territory, rather than, every night you go raiding as deep into enemy territory as you want (because you're part of a res-ball.)

 

[professor nomos]

what I'd like too see is crafters having the ability to create "soul stones" that allow rebirth from the veil. these would be fragile structures that only allow say 10 Rezs before self destroying and should be kept from the front lines because they're easily destryed by enemy attacks

 

[Vallikor]

Almost word for word an idea I had last night, too, Professor. It could keep you close to the fight, and be a target for the opposing side. I'd even be okay with being allowed to deploy it inside a building, as long as a single stealther could destroy it on his own (provided he can get that far in).

Another great idea that was suggested was Anti-rez warding. What if you could cast a spell that protected a radius or area of space from allowing souls to return to their bodies? Maybe it has a very long cast timer, and a long duration, but would be a neat mechanic if you were attacking a keep and the defenders kept rezzing inside said keep.

Mostly, though, I'm in favor of CU having a system that challenges me to stay alive and contribute. We don't actually know how long anyone will last in combat; is it going to be measured in seconds, or minutes? If I've been alive for 20 minutes, fighting hard, and get offed by a very well executed attack, I'm not going to be mad about having a hard trek back.

 

[professor nomos]

i agree. when i think about EvE which has a fairly stiff penalty for dying, what made that "okay" was that death could usually be prevented or at least delayed if you came prepared.


if players can prepare for fights in ways that let them stay in the fight for 10+ minutes then limited sccess to Rez is fine

 

[Coldbeard]

You guys argue as if dying and getting resurrected carries no penalty and is something that can be done at your own leisure, which it is usually not. If implemented correctly dying and getting resurrected will you leave you severly reduced and the seers resurrecting you weakened, but it will give you another chance to participate in the ongoing fight and it adds more tactical dimensions to the gameplay. The worst case scenario would be if dying forced you back to some spawn point where you would have to idle around for long time and you would have half group out fighting and the rest waiting purposeless at some spawnpoint for a long time, splitting up groups and making it difficult to meet up again.

Having a close spawnpoint is in my opinion not desirable, as it creates an rvr atmosphere where you spawn, run and die and then quickly run back out again, rince and repeat. Making dying much less impactful and creating and endless "zerg" situation. It's what DAoC managed to balance well with their system and almost all MMORPGs following has failed to copy. Having a spawn point too far has the problem of long waiting time, but it creates the gameplay where you have supply lines running to the battle, that allows more roaming and skirmish play to harass the supply lines to the main battle zone (again, DAoC). This also helps manage the flow into the main RvR zone .

I'll admit that there are some interesting arguements advocating the no resurrection idea, but all in all I think it's a vital feature to have in an MMORPG. The focus should be how it should be implemented.

 

[eksdee]

The argument that no rezzing benefits smaller groups frankly baffles me.

 

[Jairon Kalach]

While I admit that dying has a penalty often, that penalty is usually shrugged off within minutes of being resurrected or not worth worrying about. Plus, there isn't as much of a penalty to your team for letting you die. If a team member dies, they get rezzed, maybe you wait a few minutes, and then you get to push further into enemy territory at full strength. I'd rather that the battles were focussed on moving the border forward than roving teams killing other roving teams just for being there. Sure, there should be some "havoc squads," but the risk should be higher, the deeper into enemy territory you go, just for being on that piece of land.

Res, in the end, makes the game binary. Either you or the enemy wipes, and within a few minutes, either you or the enemy is back at full strength. Since we a developer who is willing to try going without rez, I think it's worth taking into the January IT and seeing how it plays. And then if it sucks, we've proven there are a lot of other ideas to be tried.

 

[Vesir]

the argument that no rezzing benefits smaller grps is based on the premise that a small group could hit the large (unaware/uncoordinated) group and kill a few people then pull off and then keep whittling them down that way since the large uncoordinated grp wouldn't be able to rez

 

[Jairon Kalach]

The argument that no rezzing benefits smaller groups frankly baffles.

I'm sorry, I wrote a paragraph explaining why... Which point in that paragraph can I explain further for you?

 

[eksdee]

I'm sorry, I wrote a paragraph explaining why... Which point in that paragraph can I explain further for you?

It baffles me because I find the logic behind it inherently flawed, not because I don't understand it.

From a very base perspective let's say we have a group of 8 vs. 40 people. 40 people have more firepower, right? Therefore it's likely someone can get blown up very quickly, but with good co-ordination they can recover and rez then fight back. No rezzing means any mis-step and one person is simply gone, done. This makes the fight even more uneven in favour of the zerg. On the flipside, if the group gets a couple of kills, it is actually less likely the zerg will rezz those people quickly by the very nature of it being a disorganised zerg - maybe they're in a group without healers, maybe they're tag alongs not grouped, etc etc etc. The group, on the other hand, can use its organised nature to recover extremely quickly and be rewarded for its co-ordination.

Having no rezzing strips away what I think of as the 'layers' of combat in an MMO. You have dps, CC, healing and positioning. Mastering and co-ordinating all of these elements are what separates good players/groups from bad ones. If we're hoping for a game which rewards skill, then imo we should be looking for a game which adds as much depth to the combat as possible. Rezzing is most certainly a part of that. Regardless, if you take it away then you simplify the combat and that ALWAYS favours the zerg.

 

[Jairon Kalach]

It baffles me because I find the logic behind it inherently flawed, not because I don't understand it.

Ah... Thank you... I see some of our more fundamental differences in perspective, now... Highlighting those things.

From a very base perspective let's say we have a group of 8 vs. 40 people. 40 people have more firepower, right? Therefore it's likely someone can get blown up very quickly, but with good co-ordination they can recover and rez then fight back.

Sure, although there is a theoretical limit in any combat system in which adding people doesn't speed up the TTK. If that limit is >8, then yes, the zerg is at a significant advantage. If that limit is down towards 3, for example, then the small man can mitigate some of their numbers disadvantage through coordination and timing.

No rezzing means any mis-step and one person is simply gone, done. This makes the fight even more uneven in favour of the zerg.

I can't disagree with this part of it.

On the flipside, if the group gets a couple of kills, it is actually less likely the zerg will rezz those people quickly by the very nature of it being a disorganised zerg - maybe they're in a group without healers, maybe they're tag alongs not grouped, etc etc etc.

This is probably more our fundamental disagreement.

You say: Zerg is less likely to bring up with a rez quickly because they're disorganized.
I say: Zerg is more likely to bring up with a rez quickly, because by raw numbers they are more likely to have someone available with the lowest cost/highest benefit rez available.

The other assumption that I don't make is that the zerg is all mindless scrubs. Sometimes it is, but I think our large groups in CU will be more likely to be full of people who know what they're doing with their classes.

The group, on the other hand, can use its organised nature to recover extremely quickly and be rewarded for its co-ordination.

I can't disagree with this.

Having no rezzing strips away what I think of as the 'layers' of combat in an MMO. You have dps, CC, healing and positioning. Mastering and co-ordinating all of these elements are what separates good players/groups from bad ones. If we're hoping for a game which rewards skill, then imo we should be looking for a game which adds as much depth to the combat as possible. Rezzing is most certainly a part of that. Regardless, if you take it away then you simplify the combat and that ALWAYS favours the zerg.

While I agree in general with this thought, I'm not at all worried about ending up with a simple, easily accessible combat system.

The problem I have with in-combat rezzing is that it tends to override your other 'layers.' You may have perfect DPS, CC, healing, and positioning... But there are 10 healers in my 40 man zerg. So, even if you kill one of the zerg guys, he's back up and the zerg is still bearing down on you with full-strength. This makes retreating AoE traps, and hit-and-run tactics useless. Without rez, though, if you take out one of their guys, they are at least weaker.

The other problem I have, is OOC rez. In the end, when the battle is done... OOC res makes most small-man work pointless. Stepping away from the 8 v 40 argument for a second, what about 8 v 16? If there is a 16 man group headed towards your territory, and your 8-man group can take out 8 of them before dying... Well, if there's OOC rez, you just wasted your time. But if there's not OOC rez, you just whittled that force down by half, giving your deeper defenders something easier to deal with. And in a ground control game like CU will be, I think that's very important.

Anyway... hopefully the premises on which we differ are clearer, so at least the logic isn't as baffling.

 

[Clarus Ava/Hib]

No Buffbot Buffs anymore was penalty enough
ok stupid Argument

but what is the difference, if a group has to wait 10 minutes somewhere to have the counters up or to rerun from the bind point?

 

[eksdee]

/snip

Yeah, clearly there is a fundamental difference between 40 random guys and an organised group of 40. In the case of an organised group of 40, I would hope an 8 man could never win anyway or those 40 people should be ashamed .

With all this said, I think it's largely pointless to speculate or ruminate too intensely on the intricacies of combat in a game which hasn't even been made yet. I think the suggestion made at some point to test with and without rezzing during IT/Alpha is very sensible and all avenues should be explored for sure where possible, but at this point - while willing to be won over - I'd be extremely worried about the success of a combat system without a ressurection mechanic in some way, shape or form included in it.

 

[Urgat]

As long as its as far removed as possible from that ABOMINATION that passes for rezzing in GW2, ill be happy.

That one mechanic was the main contributor to the GW2 zerg superiority meta-game that evolved very quickly.

Bleeerrggg

 

[rynnor]

As long as its as far removed as possible from that ABOMINATION that passes for rezzing in GW2, ill be happy.

Out of interest what was ressing like in GW2 - I never played it. Could everyone res or some such?

 

[CorNokZ]

My first real char in daoc was a cleric and as support I liked the fact that I had more than one job. If there will be no rezzing it will have a huuuuge impact on the game play. Much bigger than if it was implemented. As a healer class you'd like to have more to do rather than just healing. All three main healer classes in daoc had more than just healing to do.

I wouldn't roll a new healer class if the only thing I had to do was stand in the back of every fight and heal. I'd be bored out of my skull. Also the trash talk you'd get if people died would do my head in

 

[Soazak]

Out of interest what was ressing like in GW2 - I never played it. Could everyone res or some such?

Everyone can rez by just running upto someone and pressing F, if multiple people rez it's much faster.


I personally like the daoc style of rezzing, can't fault it tbh. I'm not a fan of 'no rezzing' or out of combat only rezzing, but it should be something that isn't too easy to do (e.g. 4s+ cast time).

 

[rynnor]

Everyone can rez by just running upto someone and pressing F, if multiple people rez it's much faster.

Yeurgh...

 

[Tanos]

Basically a feature that is good for some players but will piss off the majority of players is a bad idea.
Now what about rezz. I find it vital. I want spend my evening in the game playing and having fun. Waiting and running back seems not to be very funny to me.
Yes, beeing killed should have a meaning. It should hurt. But you should be motivated to log in and die again. If you are just running around, got unluckily killed three times and spend your whole evening just trying to get to the action you will probably not come back. If you are the guy beeing always the first to rush into a keep and all you get is a nice 15 minutes oppertunity to getting a fresh coffee, you might not do this again. In a perfect MMORPG world the players would group, cooperate and die for the pride of their realm. But this is just a game. In fact they will be just pissed and quit.

I fully understand the idea of having no rezz. I just think the ideas of the people proclaiming it are a bit to "romantic". You must design your game in a way the suites to many possible playstyles. The same people having fun in "hit and run" zergs may cry if 7 of them stand victorious in the enemies territory and the 8th man is at home on the gate keep.

You can think of many possibilities to make dying hurt you. No rezz in combat. 5 minutes serious rezz-sickness. High casttime and mana cost. And the good one is: You can tweak this factors. But once you removed it, you can just pray. There are also a lot of BSC ideas out there. Most i read have one thing in common: They are hard to balance and easy to exploit. Remove insta- and group rezz. Remove all sorts of rezz-sickness cures. Make it a thing a healer has really to time well. But there two things you should avoid:
1. punish the healer for doing his job
2. keep people away from the core of the game: fighting each other

 

[boxfetish]

Based on comments from MJ above and in other posts/interviews I don't see it being anything like DAoC rezzing. Personally, I kind of like the idea of losing RPs (or whatever the equivalent to XP in Camelot Unchained will be) for being rezzed (not for dying) so that we can leave DAoC style rezzing in, but you lose 1 or 2 percent of your character progression everytime you are rezzed. Make the choice.

That said, I don't think Jacobs will put any kind of XP loss into this game.

 

[professor nomos]

what i would like to see ismultiple ways too rez. too much of the current debate assumes that only healers can Rez and thus the arguments become bickering rather than dialogue.

Hie about a spell from healers, a gadget from crafters, and then the veil mechanic.

this makes the options varied and reduces potential that one class becomes too important to RvR.

 

[Tanos]

Most discussions heading towards less rezz, not more. Personally i would be very well off with a modified DAoC system. The only valid concern is can see is endless, static fights, but i think you can handle this with variations of cast time/power cost/cast range.

 

[Raven]

There is hardcore and there is making it so ball breakingly painful to do anything that it becomes a complete waste of time. Rezzing with a debuff on the rez target and a large dent in the mana pool would be just fine. It punishes you for dying but it doesnt punish you enough to say "fuck this shit" and cancelling your subs.

 

[Dutch_NS]

Really Bad Idea:

Even the best groups like Dem Hibbies, and Nolby Pride in the old days lost 1 or 2 members in there big fights but could get them up easy again to fight on. There just need to be a rez illness that cant be cured like it was in classic, and maybe a longer cast time from 10 second or something if they dont want to make it that easy.

No rez = FAIL for 8 man its that simple no discussion even possible.

 

[Kyrana]

Yeah... So I guess when I chose to fight someone, it would be over something important to me, more than just for sport, or just because I see them. And that makes the world a bit more dangerous to me, too. That sounds good to me, not bad.

I am one of those people that kills for sport though, and I want that choice.