What I have understood from this extremely well thought out level-based progression system is that levels = carrying capacity. Genius sir!
Gear progression system. Because you asked for it. (Irony Inside)
@TheJolirouge
I tried to read all the comments, but my brain has shut down in a defence mechanism.This is, the best thread on this forum and I 100% agree with what you wanted to achievet with it.
I also dont want to ruin it, so I wont say exactly what I agree with.Thanks for this thread everyone. Please continue.
Well said, OP.
It's bizarre that in a gaming landscape with games like Overwatch, Fortnite, and PUBG where cosmetics are literally 100% of progression, it's for some reason a huge problem in SoT.
Vertical (power) progression would destroy this game. Imagine logging in for the first time and "Captain Noobslayer the Overleveled" boards your ship and stands there puking on you for 30 seconds while you empty round after round of blunderbuss into his face but he just won't die because he has so much health and armor, before he does a jaunty dance on your corpse after killing you with a single swipe of his cutlass.
The fact that all players are on even footing in regards to items is what's going to keep this game exciting and fun. As soon as they start including items that influence power level, the whole thing will just go to the no-lifers and the rest of us may as well go play something else...
@bombhed
You don't see any problem with your suggestion?Entertain the following thought; you buy the game a year from now and run into a Player with endgame tier equipment.
How on earth are you supposed to deal with him?
Your bullets practically bounce off his clothing and if he shoots in your general direction you are practically instantly dead.Sounds like fun.
That's the reasoning behind higher tier weapons not doing more damage and the higher tier clothes not offering more protection - it would suck for new or lower tier people.@bombhed said in Gear progression system. Because you asked for it. (Irony Inside):
The progression your talking about is fine, what the game needs is a reason to buy the gear and weapons, at the moment your no better off, so why spend the gold? The gear is already ‘tier’ based depending on your rank with a particular faction, so why can’t the higher tier weapons do more damage and the higher tier clothes offer more protection? This would encourage more people to play as I know a lot of people that won’t play the game purely because of the fact that you are no better off in your first hour then you are in a 1000 hours. Obviously these bonuses should not work on a PVP level as veteran players would put new players off the game before they can even get started l out but currently anyone who prefers playing solo or in a small two man crew is basically excluded from skullforts as trying to take on such a task without being able to gain any sort of advantage means it’s near impossible to kill ads whilst having to continually fix the ship before it sinks. I really enjoy the Game as it is but I feel this change would only improve the players experience and would attract a far greater fan base.
You clearly don't get it, do you?
RARE has stated they don't want power progression of any kind, as to avoid any sort of concerns with balance and to avoid potential disparity between vets and newbies because of stat boosters.
If a really mechanically inclined newbie came along and went up against a longtime vet that's better at map-reading than anything else, I fully expect the newbie to win in a PvP scenario, since Sea of Thieves is one-hundred-percent skill-based.
It's like CS:GO or Overwatch. No arbitrary stat-boosting items that give you an artificial advantage over other players, just you and your raw skill decide the outcome.
This is one of the worst threads I've ever read. It's incredibly intellectually dishonest. You have put no effort into understanding how to implement progression into SoT outside your strawman. People who want real progression in SoT aren't after ehat you think. It really just seems like you people completely lack imagination on how to implement power progression in a way that does not keep friends from playing together, while also not creating serious power gaps.
It's only a horrible idea with the current amount of content (which you purposefully implemented in an exaggerated negative light). You can do horizontal progression and have upgrades. You just dont have to make the upgrades pivotal.
It's like the Battlefield games. They have great progression. Most guns fair pretty similarly within their own class, but each offers its own variance on the playstyle. For example some rifles trade accuracy for rate of fire, dealing less damage with individual rounds, but firing more rounds at a target.
I'm not saying we need to add in a bunch of different rifles (though I'd like the addition of a few more melee options and a hand mortar), but there can be balanced additions that keep the game fair for everyone. They don't even have to be level locked, just put a cost to them.
@subaqueousreach said in Gear progression system. Because you asked for it. (Irony Inside):
It's only a horrible idea with the current amount of content (which you purposefully implemented in an exaggerated negative light). You can do horizontal progression and have upgrades. You just dont have to make the upgrades pivotal.
It's like the Battlefield games. They have great progression. Most guns fair pretty similarly within their own class, but each offers its own variance on the playstyle. For example some rifles trade accuracy for rate of fire, dealing less damage with individual rounds, but firing more rounds at a target.
I'm not saying we need to add in a bunch of different rifles (though I'd like the addition of a few more melee options and a hand mortar), but there can be balanced additions that keep the game fair for everyone. They don't even have to be level locked, just put a cost to them.
You chose Battlefield as your example of a good experience using progression lol!!!!!!! This is literally the worst game ever for this, if you miss the first week of launch then you have had it your just cannon fodder. I think this is a great example of why it should never be implemented in games with pvp.
@subaqueousreach said in Gear progression system. Because you asked for it. (Irony Inside):
@lumpaywk just because you werent very good at battlefield doesnt mean its progression was bad.
Way to miss the point, it was nothing to do with skill its to do with old players having more powerful weapons. Its widely known as such the game is classic for this issue lol.
@lumpaywk I seemed to do just fine starting several months after Battlefield 3 launched. Lots of people were already max rank and I eventually got there too.
None of the guns are outright more powerful. Sure some might do more damage, but at the cost of other factors such as rate of fire or range or accuracy.
@subaqueousreach said in Gear progression system. Because you asked for it. (Irony Inside):
None of the guns are outright more powerful. Sure some might do more damage, but at the cost of other factors such as rate of fire or range or accuracy.
You're describing "sidegrades" and while they can hypothetically work, there's nearly always a best choice in the bunch, usually one that goes unchecked for months until devs finally realize it's OP and nerf it.
Sidegrades would still be better than flat out upgrades, though, but it does wind up creating mandatory progression because if you're not spending your gold to unlock all of the weapon varieties first, you're literally doing it wrong.
I've found that there is one advantage to clothing that I often use to great effect, and that's dressing as a fresh character and setting title to Sailor to trick people into thinking that you're new/a low level (as if that means anything), and therefore easy picking. It's hilarious how tilted some people get (and how many hackusations you receive) when a "Sailor" in rags turns out to be their worst nightmare.
(added bonus that my character is absolutely adorable no matter what she's wearing xD)
@thejolirouge Hey guess what? No one was asking for what you are suggesting we asked for. All anyone has ever asked for on here is some added depth to the weaponry and gear that is ALREADY in the game. The game has stats in it now, I hate to break your little candy crush loving heart but its true. We simply do not see them. The Blunderbuss has a statistical advantage over all other weapons at a certain range or used in a certain way. The Eye of Reach has a statistical advantage over all other weapons at a certain rage and in certain situations. These are all in the game, and all have functionally different uses. This does not need to be limited and needs to be expanded upon greatly for improved character progression and depth to the arsenal.
This idea also needs to be added to ship customization, which Rare themselves have played around with doing back in the early days. Rare talked about having certain ship parts that would give you better ship performance in certain situations for certain uses. They always had a trade off though, similar to the trade off we face now when choosing whether to equip the Eye of Reach, Pistol, Sabre, or Blunderbuss.
So you can take your OP and shove it. You are what is wrong with this game and this community. You are the type of players that hold games like this back. And you are part of the reason the media is ripping Rare and SoT apart. Open up your minds, be willing to see the possibilities outside of your own bias, and be willing to READ peoples suggestions before crying about them.
@ethnine said:
So you can take your OP and shove it. You are what is wrong with this game and this community. You are the type of players that hold games like this back. And you are part of the reason the media is ripping Rare and SoT apart. Open up your minds, be willing to see the possibilities outside of your own bias, and be willing to READ peoples suggestions before crying about them.
Sigh. I'm quite worry about your reasoning, when you're the one who can't accept the game as Rare made it, and want to change it to fill your own conception of the game. I'm not open minded? You're the one who's not giving any credit to what the creators want to achieve because you're blinded by what you know from other games instead of thinking the SOT experience differently.
Yes, weapons have different advantages, but the balance comes with the fact that they're all accessible to anyone when you start the game, without any cost in time or gold. A progression system for unlocking more weapons would ruin this, just like this threads so-called "suggestion" proves it.
SOT is about using self skills, tactics, strategy and communication, not some grinding advantages. That's the core of the game, and it won't change. I'm not holding it back, it's just a fact. Rare want to build over it with players feedback and suggestions to make the a game greater experience, yes, not to totally drop their vision to the good will of players. And as far as I know, they are the ones to choose the feedback they listen to.
Mike Chapman, Design Director said:
When games separate progression by power, you either have to play at the same pace or very close – that just seems crazy, especially in a game like ours.
The game is more than just the mechanics – it's the psychology of how you work with other people – how you strategize with the crew. It's less about the mechanical skill – it's not a game where you can only play with people if they can hit a target from 50 metres away. Or only play with people who have the best weapons.
You're just using the tools we've given you, and you're communicating with the crew using your "soft skills" rather than your "hard skills" of using the controller or keyboard, to contribute to the crew's success. Mechanical skill matters to a point, but what will make the difference is the strategy, synergy of working together, determining roles, and how they go about what they're trying to accomplish.
That's all. And they never told a word on the fact it could be different for any reason.
PS: by the way, don't say passive-aggressive things like "I hate to break your little candy crush loving heart but its true" or "So you can take your OP and shove it", especially when you're wrong. It's not giving any weight or credit to your arguments, and actually THAT behavior is what is wrong with this game and this community.
@thejolirouge And the game, as a far as the publics perception of it, has failed. So clearly what he said, and the theories surrounding what Rare was "trying" to do did not work. So you can choose to be a closed minded, rose colored glasses wearing, hyper fanboy. Or you can be open to understanding the need for growth and development, even if it does go against the ideas you fundamentally believed in. That is called growing, and learning. Its kind of a thing you do in life.
And I never said you couldn't start with or without the additions I, and others, are suggesting. See again, you are missing the point and you are so focused on your narrow minded ideas that you miss important things in the conversation as a whole that really could make the game better. But instead you see "statistical advantages" and just go with your knee jerk reaction rather than giving it reasonable consideration. All I suggested was some depth and diversity added to the system that is already in place. I used what is in the game now as a example, and the fact that there are already functional advantages in the equipment in the game now. Honestly the game should have never launched with so little options to begin with, and I have no idea what they were thinking after the 2+ years of testers telling them there wasn't enough content.
But hey. Keep it up. The closed minded part of this community playing around in the kiddy pool will surely make this game great again, there's no reason to listen to valid concerns and feedback that goes against their methodology because they're clearly right and the rest of the gaming community clamoring about the games lack of depth and diversity is obviously wrong and doesn't understand.
EDIT: And if you are going to try and say that you do not care what the public thinks. Ask Hello Games how that worked out for them. Sure, financially SoT was a success. But if you want to see the game continue to grow and have things added to it, then you're going to want to keep public opinion of your game high from the start. If you don't....well lets just say its very hard to climb back into the good graces of the gaming community once the court of public opinion has passed its verdict.
@ethnine said :
And I never said you couldn't start with or without the additions I, and others, are suggesting.
Geez... the thread was not about gear diversity, which is OK, but about gear progression. It's even written in the title. Have you missed it or what?
You're actually getting upset and fighting for a cause that isn't even linked to this topic, and that I've never disprove at any moment.Ask Hello Games how that worked out for them.
They are coming to Xbox One, and their biggest update since the release is coming this year, after 18 months and 3 major updates bringing new content and mechanics, for a 16 persons team. So... quite fine, I guess.
48 out of 54
