What is horizontal progression?

Faugaun

I was reading Gidorick's post:

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/192510/please-explain-the-desire-for-level-cap/p2

It seems that a lot of people do not understand horizontal progression. Infact the best explanation that I could find is at the following link:

http://www.engadget.com/2014/02/05/mmo-mechanics-comparing-vertical-and-horizontal-progression/

So I wrote my own description:

http://asolutionaday.com/games/what-is-horizontal-progression/

It's lengthy so that why it's not in the thread. I think it is valuable to have the discussion "What is horizontal progression?" Because first we need to accurately define the idea. Once a concensus is reached on what horizontal progression is then it can be discussed whether or not this is desirable for ESO. Finally, using both these talks we can more clearly indicate to the developers what our wishes are and keep everyone on the same page. I've linked my ideas on horizontal progression please critique them and/or share your own below and everyone discuss them all as this can benefit the game by making sure everyone is talking about the same thing and then developing a conversation around that topic to improve ESO.

lathbury

what I got from that is horizontal progression is to you unlocking new skills as long as they are balanced these provide options without necessarily increasing power.

Tolmos

Yea, mainly horizontal progression is different from game to game, but the general idea is that you continue to improve your character not through arbitrary number gains (+100 to my chest piece! +5 to my gloves! OH BOY!) but rather through things like new skills or mutations, new weapons choices, etc. It can also include other, non-combat oriented, rewards like new armor, new mounts, player housing and rewards for that, etc etc.

The goal is to replace 1 carrot (bigger numbers for the sake of having bigger numbers) with lots of rewards to keep the game interesting without any possibility of power creep being introduced. It also creates a game where player skill == skill, and not stats == skill or seniority == skill like systems such as the Champion Points, by keeping everyone on an even playing field.

Players who have been around longer continue to get better than new players, but they do so because they have played longer and are better as players; it's not a virtual "better" in that their character has a stat advantage and their opponent has a stat handicap, thus emulating the idea that they are "better".

CapnPhoton

So as an example?

You bought a skill trait that gives you more damaged to mobs at 20% or less health. The next bonus 10 levels later is for the same but its 25%.

MCMancub

lathbury wrote: »

what I got from that is horizontal progression is to you unlocking new skills as long as they are balanced these provide options without necessarily increasing power.

That's exactly what it is. It leads to 2 possible situations:
1. Not all skills are balanced. Then there is one superior build.
2. All skills are balanced. Then the content would have to be balanced in such a way that you succeed by using skills based on situation.

#2 is not a bad thing. In fact, we see it a lot in ESO. Tons of fights require you to switch around your skills and think about the mechanics. That's a good thing.

My biggest issue with having only horizontal progression in MMOs is that they (referring to actual MMO RPG's) are entirely founded upon the principle that your character progresses. It's the whole point of the game: to create a character and develop them. We often see this in the form of levels. All of that is taken away when all you have at end game is horizontal progression. You develop your character as you level and then it suddenly comes to a complete halt because there is no vertical progression at end game.

There needs to be a solid mix of both. WoW did not have this. All you got at end game was better gear to make the skills you've always had even stronger. GW2 didn't have any sort of treadmill. You simply unlock new builds with traits. ESO has a very nice balance between the two.

Kendaric

Unfortunately English isn´t my native language which made it somewhat difficult to get my point across in Gidorick´s thread.

Good examples of horizontal progression are TSW (their entire skill system) or the alternate advancement system present in EQ and EQ2. The champion system is ESO, while actually vertical progression, appears to have been intended as a mix of vertical and horizontal progression.

MCMancub

Kendaric wrote: »

Unfortunately English isn´t my native language which made it somewhat difficult to get my point across in Gidorick´s thread.

Good examples of horizontal progression are TSW (their entire skill system) or the alternate advancement system present in EQ and EQ2. The champion system is ESO, while actually vertical progression, appears to have been intended as a mix of vertical and horizontal progression.

I would say Champion System is almost entirely vertical progression, but that's not a bad thing! There's more to end game progression in ESO than just the Champion System. There's gear sets, which offer options on roughly the same power level as well as skill points to expand and give more options with the way you build your character.

Elsonso

Nice write up. May I suggest that some editing be done to clean up the typographical and other errors?

Faugaun

lathbury wrote: »

what I got from that is horizontal progression is to you unlocking new skills as long as they are balanced these provide options without necessarily increasing power.

I would say that any increase in power is defacto vertical progression. As I train a mount to run faster I am gaining a numbers advantage and someone with a slower horse will never catch me in a race. This is vertical progression. Equipping gear that has +700 magicka to replace gear that had +650 magicka is also vertical progression. However equipping gear with +300 health and +350 stamina to replace gear that had +650 magicka might be considered horizontal. Certainly new skills (provided they are balanced with existing skills and limited by a skill bar with a limited number of slots) is horizontal progression.

Tolmos wrote: »

Yea, mainly horizontal progression is different from game to game, but the general idea is that you continue to improve your character not through arbitrary number gains (+100 to my chest piece! +5 to my gloves! OH BOY!) but rather through things like new skills or mutations, new weapons choices, etc. It can also include other, non-combat oriented, rewards like new armor, new mounts, player housing and rewards for that, etc etc.

The goal is to replace 1 carrot (bigger numbers for the sake of having bigger numbers) with lots of rewards to keep the game interesting without any possibility of power creep being introduced. It also creates a game where player skill == skill, and not stats == skill or seniority == skill like systems such as the Champion Points, by keeping everyone on an even playing field.

Players who have been around longer continue to get better than new players, but they do so because they have played longer and are better as players; it's not a virtual "better" in that their character has a stat advantage and their opponent has a stat handicap, thus emulating the idea that they are "better".

Generally I agree with this statement though some of your specific examples of what equates horizontal progression I disagree with simply because items like "player housing" do not necessarily progress your character. I like to think of rewards, player housing this type of thing in more of a "Parallel Progression" or "Alternate Progression" type of view. Obviously you can progress your house if the system allows for that, but it doesn't directly benefit your character. Same with a collection... you can obviously progress towards getting the whole collection but it doesn't progress your character. Horizontal and Vertical progression in my mind are character-centric as far as where the progress occurs and a new phrase "Alternate/Parallel progression" seems more appropriate to describe non-character-centric progress.

CapnPhoton wrote: »

So as an example?

You bought a skill trait that gives you more damaged to mobs at 20% or less health. The next bonus 10 levels later is for the same but its 25%.

That is vertical progression in my book.

MCMancub wrote: »

lathbury wrote: »

what I got from that is horizontal progression is to you unlocking new skills as long as they are balanced these provide options without necessarily increasing power.

That's exactly what it is. It leads to 2 possible situations:
1. Not all skills are balanced. Then there is one superior build.
2. All skills are balanced. Then the content would have to be balanced in such a way that you succeed by using skills based on situation.

#2 is not a bad thing. In fact, we see it a lot in ESO. Tons of fights require you to switch around your skills and think about the mechanics. That's a good thing.

My biggest issue with having only horizontal progression in MMOs is that they (referring to actual MMO RPG's) are entirely founded upon the principle that your character progresses. It's the whole point of the game: to create a character and develop them. We often see this in the form of levels. All of that is taken away when all you have at end game is horizontal progression. You develop your character as you level and then it suddenly comes to a complete halt because there is no vertical progression at end game.

There needs to be a solid mix of both. WoW did not have this. All you got at end game was better gear to make the skills you've always had even stronger. GW2 didn't have any sort of treadmill. You simply unlock new builds with traits. ESO has a very nice balance between the two.

agree in large part, again small differences but overall this describes my thoughts.

Kendaric wrote: »

Unfortunately English isn´t my native language which made it somewhat difficult to get my point across in Gidorick´s thread.

Good examples of horizontal progression are TSW (their entire skill system) or the alternate advancement system present in EQ and EQ2. The champion system is ESO, while actually vertical progression, appears to have been intended as a mix of vertical and horizontal progression.

The champion system was proposed to be horizontal, the application failed as it is obviously vertical in its current form...I realized this as soon as I saw the skill descriptions and that more points gradually increased them the power creep was only the natural result and eye-opener for many people.

MCMancub wrote: »

Kendaric wrote: »

Unfortunately English isn´t my native language which made it somewhat difficult to get my point across in Gidorick´s thread.

Good examples of horizontal progression are TSW (their entire skill system) or the alternate advancement system present in EQ and EQ2. The champion system is ESO, while actually vertical progression, appears to have been intended as a mix of vertical and horizontal progression.

I would say Champion System is almost entirely vertical progression, but that's not a bad thing! There's more to end game progression in ESO than just the Champion System. There's gear sets, which offer options on roughly the same power level as well as skill points to expand and give more options with the way you build your character.

Again I can kind of go along with this but the current power creep is not good... something needs to be in place (and myself and many others have proposed various solutions) to prevent hardcore grinders from running away in the power race. CP caps, Daily limits that are easily attained by casuals, effective catch up mechanics, tiers etc... something to allow new players to reach other players while not being demoralizing.

Faugaun

lordrichter wrote: »

Nice write up. May I suggest that some editing be done to clean up the typographical and other errors?

Thanks and yeah it's not perfect in fact it was a first draft....when time permits I will clean it up, just wanted to get my thoughts on paper before they left my head (I'm blond, /grin). I also anticipate that some of my views might change based on further discussion and thus some of the write-up may need further modification/clarification before it is in the final state.

GaldorP

Horizontal progression means you unlock more things to choose from but you don't get stronger by default.

Very simple example from an FPS MMOG: You have a default gun that has average stats in most fields. As you progress, you can unlock other guns that are more specialized, perform better in one specific area, and worse than the default gun in other areas. Depending on the situation and personal preference, you choose the gun you would like to use. The new guns you unlock aren't stronger than the default gun, they are just different.

MissBizz

lathbury wrote: »

what I got from that is horizontal progression is to you unlocking new skills as long as they are balanced these provide options without necessarily increasing power.

See, I don't get that though. Look at Vigor. After taking a long time, you could open up a new skill, but then boatloads of people complained that it wasn't soon enough. So, either people complain he new skill is OP to have so far down the line.. OR.. you open up new skills that are not more powerful, but they why would you care about opening up that skill? I just don't get it I guess. I'll be keeping an eye on this thread.

Haven't had quite a chance to read your entire post Faugan, but I shall dig into it throughout the day

[edit] Alright, read through. I can see how vigor does not match up as your example, it's not simply the exact same skill but tweaked - it's a brand new skill. I actually enjoy the "non-combat" passives of the CP system, and are going after a few. I agree that many of the passives may seem a bit over the top combat-wise, so that could be a good idea. Hmm.

Faugaun

MissBizz wrote: »

lathbury wrote: »

what I got from that is horizontal progression is to you unlocking new skills as long as they are balanced these provide options without necessarily increasing power.

See, I don't get that though. Look at Vigor. After taking a long time, you could open up a new skill, but then boatloads of people complained that it wasn't soon enough. So, either people complain he new skill is OP to have so far down the line.. OR.. you open up new skills that are not more powerful, but they why would you care about opening up that skill? I just don't get it I guess. I'll be keeping an eye on this thread.

Haven't had quite a chance to read your entire post Faugan, but I shall dig into it throughout the day

Thanks, yeah it's long (sorry it's like 10 pages double spaced 12 point font in word), let me try to clarify and provide answers to your problems.

So you take some time to open a new skill. That skill and all other skills should be balanced, this idea that a skill is good early on but not later and that it becomes obsolete is poor skill balance. In a perfectly balanced skill system (I've never seen one) every skill is equal to all other skills, but they do different functions so in a given situation one skill might be preferred over another but all skills are useful.

Consider a boss who has the following mechanics:

At 5 meters or less he cleaves you for 10,000 damage. (call this physical damage)
At 5-15 meters he jumps at you and stabs you for 10,000 damage (we will say it is fire damage)
At 15-25 meters he casts a spell at you causing 10,000 damage (call this a poison dot)

Consider a few different tanks:

A Argonian Werewolf DK
A Bosmer Vampire DK (poison resist racial)
A Dumner (that's the one with increased fire resist racial passive right?) DK

Consider 3 different taunts:

Melee taunt (5 meter range)
Mid-Range taunt (5-15 meter range)
Long-Range taunt (15+ meter range)

With all these different combinations of boss mechanics and tanks each one might prefer a different skill for their taunt.

The Argonian Werewolf would not want to be exposed to that poison and would perhaps choose the melee taunt relying on his heavy armor to mitigate the damage.

The Bosmer Vampire might actually prefer the poison DOT and thus choose the Long-Range Taunt

The Dunmer who is neither werewolf nor vampire but has additional fire resist my opt for fire damage over the physical or the poison, thus preferring the midrange taunt for the fight.

Each of these taunts are just a taunt, one is not op compared to the other but they provide different benefits for the tank using them based on the situation they are in. Sure the Argonian WW Dk might be able to glyph for poison resist and use the mid-range taunt and complete the fight just fine ...but now he cannot use other glyphs ....but if he unlocks a different taunt which prevents exposure to the poison damage suddenly he can use the glyphs for something else. This means that unlocking the skill is desirable (in some situations) even though it is not OP it is all about skill when building (and playing) your character and not about "this skill is +10% and this skill is +15%".

Hope that helps to clear things up for you?

Athas24

There needs to be a good mix vertically and horizontally in order to make things interesting and have a sense of achievement. I think ESO currently does a good job at achieving both honestly. Maybe opening up a few more skill trees with other guilds being involved like dark brotherhood, thieves etc. Perhaps increasing the fighters and mages lines by having some sort of split and focusing on one side or the other between the two using specializations. .. any way to introduce new skill trees will support more horizontal progression and make the cp system less of a burden for those who don't enjoy the vertical progression as much.

Aett_Thorn

I think that the current CP system is a random mix of vertical progression (increases in damage or resource regeneration, decreases in ability costs) and horizontal progression (chances to get double the amount from node harvests, better loot from treasure chests, and chances to proc effects when you die). However, it is definitely more of a vertical system than a horizontal one. It just every so often has a horizontal effect.

I would much prefer it to allow you to increase certain aspects of powers (such as stun duration, widen cone arcs or lengths, or make a certain portion of your damage from physical to magic, for instances) versus increasing sheer power and protection like some of the trees do now. But the ship has sailed, and there's no bringing it back now.

MissBizz

Faugaun wrote: »

MissBizz wrote: »

lathbury wrote: »

what I got from that is horizontal progression is to you unlocking new skills as long as they are balanced these provide options without necessarily increasing power.

See, I don't get that though. Look at Vigor. After taking a long time, you could open up a new skill, but then boatloads of people complained that it wasn't soon enough. So, either people complain he new skill is OP to have so far down the line.. OR.. you open up new skills that are not more powerful, but they why would you care about opening up that skill? I just don't get it I guess. I'll be keeping an eye on this thread.

Haven't had quite a chance to read your entire post Faugan, but I shall dig into it throughout the day

Thanks, yeah it's long (sorry it's like 10 pages double spaced 12 point font in word), let me try to clarify and provide answers to your problems.

So you take some time to open a new skill. That skill and all other skills should be balanced, this idea that a skill is good early on but not later and that it becomes obsolete is poor skill balance. In a perfectly balanced skill system (I've never seen one) every skill is equal to all other skills, but they do different functions so in a given situation one skill might be preferred over another but all skills are useful.

Consider a boss who has the following mechanics:

At 5 meters or less he cleaves you for 10,000 damage. (call this physical damage)
At 5-15 meters he jumps at you and stabs you for 10,000 damage (we will say it is fire damage)
At 15-25 meters he casts a spell at you causing 10,000 damage (call this a poison dot)

Consider a few different tanks:

A Argonian Werewolf DK
A Bosmer Vampire DK (poison resist racial)
A Dumner (that's the one with increased fire resist racial passive right?) DK

Consider 3 different taunts:

Melee taunt (5 meter range)
Mid-Range taunt (5-15 meter range)
Long-Range taunt (15+ meter range)

With all these different combinations of boss mechanics and tanks each one might prefer a different skill for their taunt.

The Argonian Werewolf would not want to be exposed to that poison and would perhaps choose the melee taunt relying on his heavy armor to mitigate the damage.

The Bosmer Vampire might actually prefer the poison DOT and thus choose the Long-Range Taunt

The Dunmer who is neither werewolf nor vampire but has additional fire resist my opt for fire damage over the physical or the poison, thus preferring the midrange taunt for the fight.

Each of these taunts are just a taunt, one is not op compared to the other but they provide different benefits for the tank using them based on the situation they are in. Sure the Argonian WW Dk might be able to glyph for poison resist and use the mid-range taunt and complete the fight just fine ...but now he cannot use other glyphs ....but if he unlocks a different taunt which prevents exposure to the poison damage suddenly he can use the glyphs for something else. This means that unlocking the skill is desirable (in some situations) even though it is not OP it is all about skill when building (and playing) your character and not about "this skill is +10% and this skill is +15%".

Hope that helps to clear things up for you?

That's perfect, and as you were typing I typed in an edit to my post as well

I actually think that's a much better example versus the one you used in the original article. The whole time I was thinking "But if I'm stealthed I prefer more damage, but then the entire rest of this fight I'm stuck with this skill that takes 3 seconds to cast!" lol

Ffastyl

maybe we gain 3 additional ability slots on our skill bar and we can use 1 thief, 1 mage and 1 warrior ability at a time.

This has been suggested by @Rune_Relic and the suggestion quoted in a couple threads discussing the CS. I believe it is a good idea, as someone with (for illustrative purposes) 1000 CP will have more options than someone with 400 CP, but both will have enough to use all 3 slots, making them equal in power.

Which brings in the catch-up mechanic mentioned by ZOS: reducing the XP required for the first 300 or so CP. Under the suggestion above, making the first 300 CP easy to obtain grants all players the opportunity to max out 1 star under each group of constellations. CP after the first 300 will only add more options rather than increase the character's power.

Morvul

well, to define vertical versus horizontal progression in pure ESO terms:

The champion system is pure vertical progression: the more CP you get, the stronger you are.
Yes, there is "choice" in where to invest your points first, but that is trumped by the goal of simply having everything to be strongest.

The actuall skill system, in contrast, is mostly horizontal progression with only a mild dose of vertical progression: oncy you have a total of 10 skills and 2 ultimates, everything more just gives you more options - but you can't use them all at the same time. Hence having more skills unlocked gives more options, but it does not make you "stronger" per se - it makes you more flexible, more adaptable, better able to build exactly for the situation you intend to face.
So ESOs mostly horizontal skill system makes you "stronger" by allowing you to customize for the situation at hand, not by simply making every number bigger.
(the part where you level up individual skills, morph them, then level them up again - that's the vertical part of the system. But the skill leveling effects are not that huge, in the grand scheme of things)


The big irony here, of course, is that ESO already had a brilliant horizontal progression system - it's skill system.
Then Zenimax set out to replace (the hated) veteran-rank vertical system with an alternative horizontal "endless progression" system called Champion system - which ends up just as vertical as veteran ranks. Even though we KNOW they can build good horizontal systems - they've done so already

Faugaun

Athas24 wrote: »

There needs to be a good mix vertically and horizontally in order to make things interesting and have a sense of achievement. I think ESO currently does a good job at achieving both honestly. Maybe opening up a few more skill trees with other guilds being involved like dark brotherhood, thieves etc. Perhaps increasing the fighters and mages lines by having some sort of split and focusing on one side or the other between the two using specializations. .. any way to introduce new skill trees will support more horizontal progression and make the cp system less of a burden for those who don't enjoy the vertical progression as much.

The problem with the champion system is not that it's vertical it's the power creep associated with its implementation. Currently we are 3 months (??) into it's implementation. There are players approaching if not past 1000 CP this is a huge advantage both in trials and in pvp (two of the major end-game competitive activities). The people with these large CP caches are literally winning just because they grind more CP and thus are more powerful and can thus do trials faster and fight in pvp more effectively. Ok fast forward to a year from now....the first hardcore grinder is at 3600 CP and a new player joins ...as soon as that player sees that at his casual pace (100 cp per month, that's almost a vet rank (900k exp per day) ) it will take 3 years in order to be competitive and on equal ground as the guy who is already there...what do you want to bet that player says screw this and goes to find a different game to play?

Now consider you have a mmo with a population (we will say 100 for ease) of 100 players and all new players are discouraged and quit before ever reaching the end game...slowly those veteran players will also get bored and leave for greener pastures. Eventually that 100 players becomes 50 players, then 25 players, then 12 players ....and there are no players to replace them (because they are not going to start a game that take 3 years just to be competitive). As time passes the game earns less money (because there are fewer players) less money = less investment in new content...less money in new content means fewer things to interest old players so more players quit ...this causes even less money, even less content and even fewer players ....eventually the game is shut down and that's that, no more ESO for us to enjoy. Will anyone miss it? probably not it will have been a failure that swirled in the mmo toilet and died because all the players left.

Consider the alternative the game has 100 players, 10 new players per week stay and 2 veterans leave...well shoot in 12 weeks the player population has grown from 100 to 196 (almost doubling). This continues, the devs have more money, money invested in content draws more players and retains more veteran...so more money is invested in further development accelerating growth and providing fun for us. A few years later ESO is renowned everyone plays and its a fun lively environment that has evolved into something that lasts and is amazing.

Which sounds more fun? for me it's easy, a long lived ESO sounds more fun than a lot of alternate options....This is where a small vertical progression (easy for new players to catch up) and large horizontal progression (more end-game content) has it's advantages...It doesn't intimidate new players, it keeps old content relevant, it keeps old gear relevant and this results in all new end game content being supplemental to all end-game content that came before. Veteran players still have their skill advantage but a new skilled player isn't helpless and alone at the mercy of the game.

Faugaun

MissBizz wrote: »

Faugaun wrote: »

MissBizz wrote: »

lathbury wrote: »

what I got from that is horizontal progression is to you unlocking new skills as long as they are balanced these provide options without necessarily increasing power.

See, I don't get that though. Look at Vigor. After taking a long time, you could open up a new skill, but then boatloads of people complained that it wasn't soon enough. So, either people complain he new skill is OP to have so far down the line.. OR.. you open up new skills that are not more powerful, but they why would you care about opening up that skill? I just don't get it I guess. I'll be keeping an eye on this thread.

Haven't had quite a chance to read your entire post Faugan, but I shall dig into it throughout the day

Thanks, yeah it's long (sorry it's like 10 pages double spaced 12 point font in word), let me try to clarify and provide answers to your problems.

So you take some time to open a new skill. That skill and all other skills should be balanced, this idea that a skill is good early on but not later and that it becomes obsolete is poor skill balance. In a perfectly balanced skill system (I've never seen one) every skill is equal to all other skills, but they do different functions so in a given situation one skill might be preferred over another but all skills are useful.

Consider a boss who has the following mechanics:

At 5 meters or less he cleaves you for 10,000 damage. (call this physical damage)
At 5-15 meters he jumps at you and stabs you for 10,000 damage (we will say it is fire damage)
At 15-25 meters he casts a spell at you causing 10,000 damage (call this a poison dot)

Consider a few different tanks:

A Argonian Werewolf DK
A Bosmer Vampire DK (poison resist racial)
A Dumner (that's the one with increased fire resist racial passive right?) DK

Consider 3 different taunts:

Melee taunt (5 meter range)
Mid-Range taunt (5-15 meter range)
Long-Range taunt (15+ meter range)

With all these different combinations of boss mechanics and tanks each one might prefer a different skill for their taunt.

The Argonian Werewolf would not want to be exposed to that poison and would perhaps choose the melee taunt relying on his heavy armor to mitigate the damage.

The Bosmer Vampire might actually prefer the poison DOT and thus choose the Long-Range Taunt

The Dunmer who is neither werewolf nor vampire but has additional fire resist my opt for fire damage over the physical or the poison, thus preferring the midrange taunt for the fight.

Each of these taunts are just a taunt, one is not op compared to the other but they provide different benefits for the tank using them based on the situation they are in. Sure the Argonian WW Dk might be able to glyph for poison resist and use the mid-range taunt and complete the fight just fine ...but now he cannot use other glyphs ....but if he unlocks a different taunt which prevents exposure to the poison damage suddenly he can use the glyphs for something else. This means that unlocking the skill is desirable (in some situations) even though it is not OP it is all about skill when building (and playing) your character and not about "this skill is +10% and this skill is +15%".

Hope that helps to clear things up for you?

That's perfect, and as you were typing I typed in an edit to my post as well

I actually think that's a much better example versus the one you used in the original article. The whole time I was thinking "But if I'm stealthed I prefer more damage, but then the entire rest of this fight I'm stuck with this skill that takes 3 seconds to cast!" lol

right which is fine if you can burst the enemy down but in a longer fight it's a disadvantage. it is all relative and it requires thoughtfulness (a purpose...what is this build going to be used for?) when developing your build...

is it a burst build that downs enemies in 5 seconds and then you're a sitting duck? or is it a build that if attacked by a burst build and you survive the first 5 seconds you're going to stomp them rofling ?

Ffastyl wrote: »

maybe we gain 3 additional ability slots on our skill bar and we can use 1 thief, 1 mage and 1 warrior ability at a time.

This has been suggested by @Rune_Relic and the suggestion quoted in a couple threads discussing the CS. I believe it is a good idea, as someone with (for illustrative purposes) 1000 CP will have more options than someone with 400 CP, but both will have enough to use all 3 slots, making them equal in power.

Which brings in the catch-up mechanic mentioned by ZOS: reducing the XP required for the first 300 or so CP. Under the suggestion above, making the first 300 CP easy to obtain grants all players the opportunity to max out 1 star under each group of constellations. CP after the first 300 will only add more options rather than increase the character's power.

was not aware, this is a great idea and should be discussed ! any chance of a thread link?

Morvul wrote: »

well, to define vertical versus horizontal progression in pure ESO terms:

The champion system is pure vertical progression: the more CP you get, the stronger you are.
Yes, there is "choice" in where to invest your points first, but that is trumped by the goal of simply having everything to be strongest.

The actuall skill system, in contrast, is mostly horizontal progression with only a mild dose of vertical progression: oncy you have a total of 10 skills and 2 ultimates, everything more just gives you more options - but you can't use them all at the same time. Hence having more skills unlocked gives more options, but it does not make you "stronger" per se - it makes you more flexible, more adaptable, better able to build exactly for the situation you intend to face.
So ESOs mostly horizontal skill system makes you "stronger" by allowing you to customize for the situation at hand, not by simply making every number bigger.
(the part where you level up individual skills, morph them, then level them up again - that's the vertical part of the system. But the skill leveling effects are not that huge, in the grand scheme of things)


The big irony here, of course, is that ESO already had a brilliant horizontal progression system - it's skill system.
Then Zenimax set out to replace (the hated) veteran-rank vertical system with an alternative horizontal "endless progression" system called Champion system - which ends up just as vertical as veteran ranks. Even though we KNOW they can build good horizontal systems - they've done so already

Absolutely true and well stated!

lathbury

yes the basic problem is not verticality per se as I think some verticality is needed to create challange ie a harder boss requiring you to get better gear or more levels. The problem is the system is capped horizontally with skill point cap and for all intents and purposes uncapped vertically.

Sausage

ESOs system is definitely more vertical than horizontal. I think thats the reason why they want to get rid off VR too, because its vertical too, theres two vertical endgame progression.

Lord Xanhorn

The problem with horitonal progression is there are no goals since the objectives stay the same. If I fight boss A with skills 12345 and then i horizontally progress to skills 56789, I am still fighting Boss A at the same strength and power just using different abilities. That is very boring to me since I already fought and beat boss A with skills 12345.

Faugaun

lathbury wrote: »

yes the basic problem is not verticality per se as I think some verticality is needed to create challange ie a harder boss requiring you to get better gear or more levels. The problem is the system is capped horizontally with skill point cap and for all intents and purposes uncapped vertically.

But what does verticality provide to boss difficulty? Why not just tune the boss appropriately to the current vertical progression cap? What makes the boss hard are the mechanics, new mechanics, mechanics that require less margin of error, mechanics that have different combinations then other previous bosses, bosses that introduce new skills (which can later be learn by the player in horizontal progression).

I do not see what benefit the Verticality provides other than creating a never ending carrot on a stick (in the form of a gear grind)....I don't think anyone cheers for a gear grind? But suppose game is released with 15 dungeons and 3 trials, expansion is released with 15 more dungeons and 3 more trials.....if you do it vertically then you still only have 15 dungeons and 3 trials to play (albeit different ones) but if you scale it to the current power level and completely halt vertical progression then you suddenly have access to 30 dungeons and 6 trials! Next expansion 45 dungeons and 9 trials! Next expansion 60 dungeons and 12 trials! Perhaps the most veteran players stick to mostly the newer stuff (at least until it loses it's shiny new appeal)...a new player hopping into this after 4 expansions will be like WOW I reached level 50 and now I have 60 dungeons and 12 trials to learn! what an epic endgame!

That's how you pull in new players and keep them you provide expansive content. You provide expansive content by keeping old content relevant and verticality causes content to become obsolete.

MissBizz

Here's a link to @Rune_Relic idea. Let me know anyone if there are any "updated/changed" versions elsewhere though

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/190525/best-idea-for-cs-gap-problem-thx-to-rune-relic

Faugaun

Lord Xanhorn wrote: »

The problem with horitonal progression is there are no goals since the objectives stay the same. If I fight boss A with skills 12345 and then i horizontally progress to skills 56789, I am still fighting Boss A at the same strength and power just using different abilities. That is very boring to me since I already fought and beat boss A with skills 12345.

Ok, I totally get this sentiment...but it's the same in a vertical progression you do the latest greatest ....and its done ...now what? ...except if it was horizontal ..well I haven't done those dungeons from 3 expansions ago in a while... maybe I should give them a whirl with some of these new abilities! (sure beats ...man I've got 3600 champion points and now all content is easy mode...I'm bored. Wish they would release new content...Yeah it'll probably be tuned to players with 500 CP so I'll beat it first day out and be bored again...)

Also if all dungeons had time trials and competitive leaderboards perhaps that could drive utilizing different skills on the same dungeon to more efficiently complete the content. Plus when you beat that record set 6 months ago (and it's still a legit score since there is no vertical progression) it would feel amazing! Awwwe yeah my group did better than any group in the last year on this content! Awwe yeah my group won the monthly prize (a pet or a mount of something or heck even a new color to paint my armor .... that's got to be simple to add as a prize)!

Faugaun

MissBizz wrote: »

Here's a link to @Rune_Relic idea. Let me know anyone if there are any "updated/changed" versions elsewhere though

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/190525/best-idea-for-cs-gap-problem-thx-to-rune-relic

Thanks MissBizz! I'll check it out later.

I've got work to do around the house so you all keep discussing this and I will catch up later. It is great to see everyone else's opinion on horizontal and vertical systems and what they are and how they benefit players!

MCMancub

Lord Xanhorn wrote: »

The problem with horitonal progression is there are no goals since the objectives stay the same. If I fight boss A with skills 12345 and then i horizontally progress to skills 56789, I am still fighting Boss A at the same strength and power just using different abilities. That is very boring to me since I already fought and beat boss A with skills 12345.

This is NOT the way horizontal progression is supposed to be, and we certainly don't see it this way in ESO.

You fight Boss A with skills 12345 because skills 56789 don't work as effectively. Conversely, you fight Boss B with skills 56789 because skills 12345 don't work as effectively. THAT is horizontal progression.

Faugaun wrote: »

Athas24 wrote: »

There needs to be a good mix vertically and horizontally in order to make things interesting and have a sense of achievement. I think ESO currently does a good job at achieving both honestly. Maybe opening up a few more skill trees with other guilds being involved like dark brotherhood, thieves etc. Perhaps increasing the fighters and mages lines by having some sort of split and focusing on one side or the other between the two using specializations. .. any way to introduce new skill trees will support more horizontal progression and make the cp system less of a burden for those who don't enjoy the vertical progression as much.

The problem with the champion system is not that it's vertical it's the power creep associated with its implementation. Currently we are 3 months (??) into it's implementation. There are players approaching if not past 1000 CP this is a huge advantage both in trials and in pvp (two of the major end-game competitive activities). The people with these large CP caches are literally winning just because they grind more CP and thus are more powerful and can thus do trials faster and fight in pvp more effectively. Ok fast forward to a year from now....the first hardcore grinder is at 3600 CP and a new player joins ...as soon as that player sees that at his casual pace (100 cp per month, that's almost a vet rank (900k exp per day) ) it will take 3 years in order to be competitive and on equal ground as the guy who is already there...what do you want to bet that player says screw this and goes to find a different game to play?

I get what you're saying here, but it's still not right. Don't get me wrong, the Champion System has issues, but they don't stem from the fact that it's vertical and not horizontal. The system itself is fine. The implementation is not. That's the problem. There's nothing wrong with the power creep or the incredibly high cap. Nothing at all. The problem lies in the environment. It's an untamed beast right now, but in the right setting it's an excellent system.

Xjcon

I didn't read all the way through the op, not saying it's a bad idea or a good one from what I did read.

Why reinvent the wheel at this point tho, isn't that what has happened to other games, look at WoW it evolved after every expansion and at some point it wasn't what I wanted to play anymore so I moved on.

Eso is a unique mmo, it has some issues what game doesnt. my question is why do so many want to change it so much?

Pre 1.6 was IMO sooooo much better, but even then when we didn't have CP people made threads like this wanting to totally redesign the game for them.

Arreyanne

One thing I always think is how can a developer justify Vertical progression, ya it been around since dirt, think about it though.

There comes a point where everything except the last bit of added content is worthless from a customers point of view. As a player why should I want to go do, for example the daily's in a previous level cap area that pay most likely 50-75% less in game money, when I can do the new ones for more rewards.

New armor and new weapons and new stuff is always nice but at what cost? Why can we not how nice things, for everyone?

Another game I play just added a new tier of armor and weapons, making everything below that tier obsolete.

Perhaps retention rates for player would increase if the new tier of gear was a cosmetic item or a selection of cosmetic items so that everyone completing that content wouldn't look just like everyone else that completed that content.

Would not the content team then be more available to create new content due to the fact they didn't have to rebalanced the entire game around the new tier of gear every time new content was released?

MCMancub

Arreyanne wrote: »

One thing I always think is how can a developer justify Vertical progression, ya it been around since dirt, think about it though.

There comes a point where everything except the last bit of added content is worthless from a customers point of view. As a player why should I want to go do, for example the daily's in a previous level cap area that pay most likely 50-75% less in game money, when I can do the new ones for more rewards.

New armor and new weapons and new stuff is always nice but at what cost? Why can we not how nice things, for everyone?

Another game I play just added a new tier of armor and weapons, making everything below that tier obsolete.

Perhaps retention rates for player would increase if the new tier of gear was a cosmetic item or a selection of cosmetic items so that everyone completing that content wouldn't look just like everyone else that completed that content.

Would not the content team then be more available to create new content due to the fact they didn't have to rebalanced the entire game around the new tier of gear every time new content was released?

The game you're looking for is called Guild Wars 2. And no one plays it because all there is to do is get new costumes.