Raids

    • DraXor wrote:

      dont think about this as raids v0.1 but more like different game mode, I know this is far away from COOP, but this might be something, not sure how hard to develop this could be but probably not so hard, and this could give some 'purpose' for group of players ... to do

      (...)
      Something that guild/community can do together, have 1 goal ...

      im not sure I explained exacly what im thinking of

      I think you quite did, mate (explain what you are thinking), and I follow you correctly, I agree with where you are heading: a bit of cooperative PvE gameplay soon (this year?) would go a long way to keep the PvE guilds interested, even if it's an equally long way from the "real thing" (fully-fleshed raids and such).

      Just saying that, just personal opinion, a guild tracking by hand how many times they kill a boss, and Hex coding said counter, is more or less the same, and (again just personal opinion) not really much of cooperative play.

      I'm at a loss when trying to come up with a suggestion for an alternative (guess that's why, at the end of the day, true multiplayer feels so different than other modes of play: it's just hard to come up with an alternative that replaces it! =), but very broadly speaking, I personally feel that if I don't need to coordinate at all with my team-mates, then it's no multiplayer.

      I mean: killing a Raid Boss 100 times only needs the coordination of saying "yeah, let's kill him!", but after that is just a single player experience multiplied by 100. What would make it a bit multiplayer is, say, if each kill had to be done with a different race/shard/mercenary/(something else?) up to a point that it was really, really hard for just a single individual to do it 100 times (although I bet anything somebody would, just for the very well earned bragging rights! =)

      I dunno... really can't put my finger on it, sorry to say. Just saying that I feel that coop multiplayer, to be really coop, needs to require some sort of coordinated strategy among teammates.
    • Kerghans wrote:

      What would make it a bit multiplayer is, say, if each kill had to be done with a different race/shard/mercenary/(something else?) up to a point that it was really, really hard for just a single individual to do it 100 times (although I bet anything somebody would, just for the very well earned bragging rights! =)
      This is actually a pretty neat idea. Could be listed when you click on it to see whats greyed out/crossed off (already completed) and whats left. Throw in some wacky other challenges related to hp/troops/actions etc and you've got yourself something potentially worth actually using in-game chat for =)
    • Skirovik wrote:

      Could be listed when you click on it to see whats greyed out/crossed off (already completed) and whats left. Throw in some wacky other challenges related to hp/troops/actions etc and you've got yourself something potentially worth actually using in-game chat for =)

      Yyyyup. Somebody was mentioning in chat the other day that the PvE Dungeons & AI champs could maybe give "style points" by defeating them under different conditions (with certain races/combos, or maybe decks without certain type of cards, like "defeat the Boss with no Troops, only Actions, Constants & Artifacts", to put a crazy example). Guess something like that could be tracked both at an individual character level, or across a Guild.

      I suppose some time-based crazy requirement (like "defeat the Boss using every card in Hex, in less than 24 hours") that would (should! =) be impossible for a normal homo sapiens would be the sort of challenge a Guild would be proud to tackle. (Above all if the achievement can be shown of in the Guild's Hall/Keep/Stronghold).

      Still not fully multiplayer, IMHO, but at least the possibility to share & work towards a common goal, I suppose?
    • Sukebe wrote:

      0% co-op coding progress...not 0% progress period. the same interview that said they have not started programming also said that they have been working on it, just not on the code portion.
      0% coding progress is effectively 0% progress. The time consuming part of Hex isn't the idea part, it's the programming. The KS showed pretty clearly that CZE did not initially appreciate that, since all their previous experience had been in game development/design. You can believe whatever you want to believe, but their recent statements suggest they are not working on raids at all, and don't appear to be really making any progress on multiplayer of any kind.
    • Silvanos wrote:

      Sukebe wrote:

      0% co-op coding progress...not 0% progress period. the same interview that said they have not started programming also said that they have been working on it, just not on the code portion.
      0% coding progress is effectively 0% progress. The time consuming part of Hex isn't the idea part, it's the programming. The KS showed pretty clearly that CZE did not initially appreciate that, since all their previous experience had been in game development/design. You can believe whatever you want to believe, but their recent statements suggest they are not working on raids at all, and don't appear to be really making any progress on multiplayer of any kind.
      just because you believe they are not working on it at all now does not mean they don't plan to. Raids have always been end game content for MMO's and until Hex lets us get to level 30 with all the talents and all the classes it makes sense to prioritize completing those things. You can be as doom and gloom as you want but nothing they have said so far indicates they have no intent on giving us multiplayer options, only that they have other focuses right now.
    • Something that's been proposed a few times, and was done really well in Dragon's Dogma, that might work as a 'pseudo-co-op' would be 'shared bosses'.

      Say there's a rare random encounter... if you defeat it you get a small reward, but you are only doing 0.1% of the actual boss. Once it's been beaten 1000 times everyone who participated gets a special reward. To add a social component, each person who encounters it can invite a friend or guildmate who has yet to fight it to fight it as well, thus adding a bit of that co-op feel since one person CAN'T do it alone, but being friends with people allows you to speed the process up AND get extra rewards for your friends too.
      Gamer. Streamer. Photographer. Writer. Anime Lover. Possessor of Stuffed Animals.

      Also... I'm terrible at this game.
    • The real question (that cannot be answered by us) is how much these "semi-solutions", these stopgag features would actualy use up in terms of resources (time, personnel, money). I'm pretty sure the only reason we don't have some form of those already is because of this concern.

      Which paints a picture of an office where everyone's doing their thing and you have a room of 4-6 guys come day in day out, sit in a room and theorycraft of co-op for weeks and months in a row, with no downtime. So taking some of them and putting them in the stopgag project would indeed push the original project back.

      If this isn't the case, then you just know that co-op is not the priority and neither is appeasing the PvE crowd in any way (since there are resources open but not assigned to even a stopgag feature).
    • Eraia wrote:

      Something that's been proposed a few times, and was done really well in Dragon's Dogma, that might work as a 'pseudo-co-op' would be 'shared bosses'.

      Say there's a rare random encounter... if you defeat it you get a small reward, but you are only doing 0.1% of the actual boss. Once it's been beaten 1000 times everyone who participated gets a special reward. To add a social component, each person who encounters it can invite a friend or guildmate who has yet to fight it to fight it as well, thus adding a bit of that co-op feel since one person CAN'T do it alone, but being friends with people allows you to speed the process up AND get extra rewards for your friends too.

      This is an awesome idea. I never play pve and I would do a few encounters to help complete something like this.
    • GobBluth wrote:

      Eraia wrote:

      Something that's been proposed a few times, and was done really well in Dragon's Dogma, that might work as a 'pseudo-co-op' would be 'shared bosses'.

      Say there's a rare random encounter... if you defeat it you get a small reward, but you are only doing 0.1% of the actual boss. Once it's been beaten 1000 times everyone who participated gets a special reward. To add a social component, each person who encounters it can invite a friend or guildmate who has yet to fight it to fight it as well, thus adding a bit of that co-op feel since one person CAN'T do it alone, but being friends with people allows you to speed the process up AND get extra rewards for your friends too.
      This is an awesome idea. I never play pve and I would do a few encounters to help complete something like this.
      Mobile games have been doing it for years. I never liked it in mobiles. It is a interesting idea. But again as to a post a few up, is resources best spent on that feature?
    • Eraia wrote:

      Something that's been proposed a few times, and was done really well in Dragon's Dogma, that might work as a 'pseudo-co-op' would be 'shared bosses'.

      Say there's a rare random encounter... if you defeat it you get a small reward, but you are only doing 0.1% of the actual boss. Once it's been beaten 1000 times everyone who participated gets a special reward. To add a social component, each person who encounters it can invite a friend or guildmate who has yet to fight it to fight it as well, thus adding a bit of that co-op feel since one person CAN'T do it alone, but being friends with people allows you to speed the process up AND get extra rewards for your friends too.
      When I saw Dragon's Dogma I was hoping you were going to suggest a mode where you use your friend's campaign character as a troop or mercenary.

      Like Pawns.
    • Vroengard wrote:

      these stopgag features would actualy use up in terms of resources
      That's kind of why I picked the suggestion I did... the only two things they'd have to implement are the tracking of how close the boss is to completed and who participated, and the ability to 'invite' a friend to fight it. Well, I mean, they'd also have to create the new fights, but that's not special really.

      Galliard wrote:

      Eraia wrote:

      Something that's been proposed a few times, and was done really well in Dragon's Dogma, that might work as a 'pseudo-co-op' would be 'shared bosses'.

      Say there's a rare random encounter... if you defeat it you get a small reward, but you are only doing 0.1% of the actual boss. Once it's been beaten 1000 times everyone who participated gets a special reward. To add a social component, each person who encounters it can invite a friend or guildmate who has yet to fight it to fight it as well, thus adding a bit of that co-op feel since one person CAN'T do it alone, but being friends with people allows you to speed the process up AND get extra rewards for your friends too.
      When I saw Dragon's Dogma I was hoping you were going to suggest a mode where you use your friend's campaign character as a troop or mercenary.
      Like Pawns.
      I was looking for something a little more low-development impact than that. But that'd be awesome too.
      Gamer. Streamer. Photographer. Writer. Anime Lover. Possessor of Stuffed Animals.

      Also... I'm terrible at this game.
    • Personally, I think coding two players mode can go a long way toward the ultimate PvE end-goal that is raid and also provide multiplayer presence to the game. Two players is definitely multiplayer, even though it's not "raid or guild war' size of multiplayer. I have also read many people expressed their intent to play co-op mode with friends and two players mode achieve that. Moreso, having two players support ready also makes implement of multiplayer casual game modes easier to do since part of it is already coded by then.
    • I had an idea for a multiplayer mode that would be easier to implement then full raids but still require some team work.


      People would form teams of 3 (could really be any size but this just for example).

      each player would be matched against a different AI deck.
      As soon as one player eliminated one AI the other 2 players get a buff, and then a 2nd buff when they 2nd AI is eliminated
      if player loses it over.
      if they win it could go on to further rounds.

      they give players a private chat channel for the team, and at some point if they can do it would be nice if you could view each others games, to encourage a social aspect.


      would sorta be like a multiplayer frost ring.

      (might need to give an allowance of loses, and change other details, but you get my idea)
    • All of these suggestions are nice but you must remember that all of these ideas would take a large amount of programming and bugtesting. Those resources are better spent elsewhere at the moment on vital areas of the game. They would also actually increase the time it takes to pump out a full fledged multiplayer as each stepping stone and stop gap you install would increase the work load to the end result. Even the simplest of additions to a piece of software have to be rigorously tested and debugged to prevent something bursting into flames. All things considered its best to just sit tight and wait for a full featured release.

      And as for them not getting started on the programming aspect of multiplayer i believe that the main factor holding them back is the UI and how to present it. The rules for something like two headed giant or 5 man free for all isnt too hard to wrap your head around or probably even to code. The problem lies in how to present the data in a meaningful and clear way. If you have a 5 man game how are you going to show all 5 players in a way that will allow you to grasp the current state of the game in a single screen? If you can display all of the information can it be done in a way you can meaningfully interact with? Will computers with lower to moderate specs be able to handle it? The problem isnt with the rules or the skill to program it but with the limited interaction we have with the game UI itself. Especially if they are trying to keep it simple enough for a tablet. If the UI is too simple it wont do what you need it to but if its too complex it wont be user friendly. That is the biggest hurdle for multiplayer as i see it at the moment.
    • Halko wrote:

      All of these suggestions are nice but you must remember that all of these ideas would take a large amount of programming and bugtesting
      I would be curious to know which part of my suggestion you think would take a lot of programming... I've got some basic coding knowledge, and the only thing I can think of that would require a new interface would be the 'invite a friend' part. Hex already has enough stat tracking that the rest would just require putting some of those stats to use... and they already have rare encounters in FRA at least.
      Gamer. Streamer. Photographer. Writer. Anime Lover. Possessor of Stuffed Animals.

      Also... I'm terrible at this game.
    • Eraia wrote:

      Halko wrote:

      All of these suggestions are nice but you must remember that all of these ideas would take a large amount of programming and bugtesting
      I would be curious to know which part of my suggestion you think would take a lot of programming... I've got some basic coding knowledge, and the only thing I can think of that would require a new interface would be the 'invite a friend' part. Hex already has enough stat tracking that the rest would just require putting some of those stats to use... and they already have rare encounters in FRA at least.
      I dont know how many engineers are working on hex pve. But creating anything new probably takes time and effort. A rare boss that multiple people deal with would take time and effort. I really thing strongholds that have a sense of end game is more important right now.

      What I don't understand is why strongholds are so far away if they were so close to being ready with az2. Hex needs to have a better roadmap or tell people hey strongholds are taking awhile because we want them to do this particular feature.
    • Pandaemonium wrote:

      I dont know how many engineers are working on hex pve. But creating anything new probably takes time and effort. A rare boss that multiple people deal with would take time and effort. I really thing strongholds that have a sense of end game is more important right now.

      What I don't understand is why strongholds are so far away if they were so close to being ready with az2. Hex needs to have a better roadmap or tell people hey strongholds are taking awhile because we want them to do this particular feature
      Everything takes time and effort, but you're misunderstanding the scope of what I'm saying. The encounter would act like a completely regular encounter when you face it. It wouldn't have a 10 million life total or an enormous deck or anything... it'd just be a normal encounter.

      The only thing is that it would track how many times it'd been beaten and when it hits a certain number, everyone who beats it gets a reward... and you can invite a friend to fight it.

      I really don't think that would be a huge project. Sure it'd take effort, but I doubt we're talking months of coding for something where the majority of the pieces already exist.
      Gamer. Streamer. Photographer. Writer. Anime Lover. Possessor of Stuffed Animals.

      Also... I'm terrible at this game.
    • My post wasnt directed at any particular post in general. It was just a reminder that while ideas are always nice and should be shared every one that is acted on will delay the endgame content even farther. The more baby steps and stop gaps you throw into a plan the longer that plan is stretched out.

      Its also a fact that even small and often innocuous seeming features are made they can have major problems that need to be addressed. I remember Chris Woods explaining how the shift mechanic was a nightmare to code. It would reference each card with or without shift as individual cards so sometimes your Deadeye Slicer would shift its effect somewhere and the card would transform into an entirely different card or give the wrong bonus. Or something like that.

      Its also probably a pretty large strain to test new features. Im sure the devs would hate to push a piece of content out only to find that it had a bug and deleted cards from your collection or became a loot pinata and threw winnings out far more than it should. After all the shift mechanic is a perfect example of this. All it did was remove an effect from one card and give it to another but it took a huge amount of time and troubleshooting to work through if i remember the story correctly.

      My only point was that the best course of action would be to hold tight and believe in the dream. By all means people can and should voice their opinions on how long its taking or whatever cool ideas they have but at the end of the day people should keep away from a negative doomsayer attitude. It doesnt reflect well on the community.

      And once again im not pointing fingers or naming names. Its just that there has been quite a bit of negativity as of late.
    • Silvanos wrote:

      Sukebe wrote:

      0% co-op coding progress...not 0% progress period. the same interview that said they have not started programming also said that they have been working on it, just not on the code portion.
      0% coding progress is effectively 0% progress. The time consuming part of Hex isn't the idea part, it's the programming. The KS showed pretty clearly that CZE did not initially appreciate that, since all their previous experience had been in game development/design. You can believe whatever you want to believe, but their recent statements suggest they are not working on raids at all, and don't appear to be really making any progress on multiplayer of any kind.
      Your argument is simply not true. The "programming" step is the last one, not the first one. You just don't start by coding. You have to design everything, think things through, do some mock ups playtests etc. Programming is the thing you do when everything is designed and working. The fact that they haven't started to program yet simply means they are still in the design state. And they have done some design work, if you listen to Cory interview again he describes in some details how they see the raid interface working. In short, they are working on it, just not coding.

      We speak a lot about raiding but I see a lot of players using it as a synonym of multiplayer, which are two very distinct things. Raiding in the context of MMO (which is clearly what Cory has in mind has he keeps refering to Hex as a TCGMMO) is meant to be the "end game" of PVE content. In most games, raiding requires you not only to have a max level character, but it generally requires you to meet a specific set of requirements to even just be able to try it (achievements, gear level, reputation, etc) all of which are designed to ensure you are strong enough for the content. Raids as end game content also should provide arguably the best "loot".

      Multiplayer on the other hand, is just a loose term used for player cooperating with other players towards a common goal in one form or another.

      With this definition in mind, my expectation is that we may see multiplayer PVE coming to us even before the end of the year. Raiding on the other hand would logically only happen once we can reach the intended maximum character level with access to complete talent trees. In that context, even if raiding would be completely coded and ready to use, chances are we wouldn't be getting it at this point anyway. Need to get a bunch of other stuff into the game to make raiding the logical "last" step of PVE progression. Even more so if there are new systems to come that are meant to help us get to the power level required for raiding itself! Who knows, maybe raiding will require a minimum keep size/level or to be "friendly" with an upcoming faction!
      @Twitch - @Twitter - @Youtube

      "A Gall's fortune is sometimes good and sometimes bad, but always true."