• AE: Soft Cap Limit--How do you tell?
• Will Horizons be a "by the numbers" game?
• Utildayael, you hurt my feelings! (Skill Cap Question)

I hate to disagree with SCAN, and usually it doesn't do any good. But here we go.
Numbers ARE important. Look at D&D. You have to know what your skill is and the damage the weapon does, and the health of the enemy. Then you take all the numbers and do the calculations. It works great. However, the player doesn't do the calculating anymore. That's all in the computer. So, for the same reason we don't see the formula the program is using to calculate damage, I don't think we need to see the numbers either.
I'm not saying, 'use text-based messages,' I'm saying, "DON'T USE MESSAGES."
Any of you play Aliens VS Predator? Look at the 'health meter' for the alien. That was perfect. It was a 'glowing area' on your UI. If you were full health it had a bright glow, if it got down to nothing, you're dead. That's perfect. You can see the amount of life you have by the glow. You can even see how much damage the enemy is doing by how much 'the glow' changes each time it hits you. You don't need numbers. You never get to see the enemy's numbers anyway, so that part doesn't matter. (How effective your strikes are could be done something like the "Lightning Orb" idea, but I wouldn't want it to be amount damage, but rather percentage of your total damage ability.)
I don't think skills should be quantified at all. The computer knows the numbers, and if you want to know if you have the skills, try the task.
The only problem I've run into with the "No blatant quantifying" method is judging the worth of items. How do I know a "Broad Sword of Slaying" is worth buying? I'm working on that part. (Weight can have numbers. As can clothing sizes. There's nothing wrong with saying "That ax weighs 5 pounds." But you can't say, "And does 50 points damage." IRL. So, to sum up. I think games and technology have passed 'beyond' the 'numbers game.' Since we don't have to manipulate the numbers, we don't have to see them.

It would be cool if AE could be truly revolutionary, and define a new idea. However, I guess I understand that since they are making a game that is 'massively multiplayer' they have to appeal to the 'massive market' and changing all the rules isn't the best way to do that.

That's what we are all saying. We don't want to know specifics. We don't want to know that Monster X hits for 5 damage, so if we have 4 hit points we run, and if we have 6 hps we fight one more round. What we want is excitement, not calculations. We want to wonder, "Is that enough health to survive one more hit, or should I take off?" That's when the adrenaline kicks in, not from some accounting assignment. Also, Pyros didn't say the dagger 'was' lucky, just that it 'seemed' lucky. You're right in that there isn't a lucky dagger, but if you only have approximations of damage dealt and hit percentage, a certain dagger can certainly 'seem' lucky. Can't you see? With the simple change from hard, cold numbers to a representation, graphical, and somewhat 'im-precise' view of what's going on, it can take this ho-hum game and turn it into something where you play by 'feel' and you can become attached to things for no actual reason. It becomes personal, and in my opinion, more fun.

I don't think "descriptions" have any benefits over straight numbers. They are tied directly to numbers, or number ranges. Also, as has been said 50 times, spoiler sites will give you the numerical translations. What I want to offer is a system without messages at all. We save the chat window just for chatting. (What a concept!) Instead, we program graphical representations that totally change the way we expect the information to get to us.
I want to expand on what Thuamok said...

quote:
Everyone who is in favor of graphics in an RPG is already in favor of masking numbers. There are more precise(and much uglier) ways of displaying the information.

The first RPG's used lots of dice and lots of numbers. The numbers were used as a precise and impartial way to determine the outcome, and the dice were used as a way to create risk, diversity, and suspense. Without dice it would have been purely math, and without numbers it would have been completely arbitrary.
As time went on, we progressed. The first was computers. Now, the dice aren't needed. The computer supplies the random element. The numbers are still important though, because that's how the player sees what's going on.
A few years ago, we started the second revolution. This time it's graphics. We used to say, "You go west, you see a building and trees, exits are north, east, and down." Can any of you honestly say that it wouldn't be completely stupid if every time you moved a message came up in the chat window saying, "You just moved north, your new position is 2343,123. You can see trees and a river." That isn't needed now because the graphics can display that information. It's not as precise. We don't get a list of the exits, we have to spin around and look, but it works great, and many people will never go back.
Take that same thought, but apply it to the numbers that you all know and love/hate. Graphics have progressed even further. Now, instead of, "You hit an ogre for 50 hps." we can have a "Lightning Orb" (if you will) that shows us the relative power of the attack. Sure it's not as 'precise' as numbers. We don't know it was exactly 50. However, it is accurate. If done correctly, we could know easily how we compare to this enemy after just one hit. Plus, similar methods could tell us how hard we are getting hit in return. It's not a better system, or a worse system. It's a NEW system, and a more 'advanced' system. We are progressing BEYOND numbers. Technology allows us to hide the ugly parts of the game mechanics. That's exactly what a User Interface is for.

Fire Prevention FAQ
• Q: How do I know if I can kill Monster X if I don't know my numbers.
  A: Without getting a cheat guide in Everquest, how did you know you could kill Monster X? There was nothing that spelled out the stats of the monsters. You just had to fight them, and then after a while, the 'Lore' was known, and you could ask other players.
• Q: How do I know if my skill is high enough to make Item B?
  A: Trial and error! How did you learn to do Math? When did you know you could solve 5 x 3? When you could do 5 x 3 in you sleep, your teacher said, 'Okay, now try 5 x 12.' There are no magic numbers you look at. You look at 'what' you can accomplish and compare that to how hard the next step 'SEEMS.' Why should the game be all about numbers when just taking away the numbers would make it closer to they way we behave naturally?
• Q: Wouldn't spoiler sites and "ShowEQ" tools just make all the hidden numbers visible?
  A: Maybe. But that's out of the game. In game, if the numbers aren't visible, you can't see them. Sure, you may know that it takes skill of 50 to make chainmail, but you can't see what your skill is. You know that a grelk has 150 hitpoints, but you don't know how much damage you do in a swing. Plus, look at it this way. There are thieves that can break into your car in less than 60 seconds. Does that mean that you never bother locking it?
• Q: But isn't this different than the way we've always done it.
  A: Absolutely, and isn't it beautiful.

Some of you don't seem to 'get it.'
You said, "I need to know when to stop whacking the training dummy." When you are able to go out into the woods and survive long enough to whack a giant rat, you don't need to whack the dummy anymore. Training dummies aren't for maxing your skills, they are for getting started enough to go do the real thing.
And if you max a skill to the soft cap, and then start practicing a different skill, you're entirely missing the point. The whole reason there are softcaps is to reduce power-gaming, not encourage it.
This is not a race. I believe we have progressed to the point that all stats can be completely hidden. Back in Pen and Paper, you had to see your 'numbers' because you had to do the calculations yourself. Now that the computer is doing everything, we don't need numbers anymore.
How do you know if your stats are high enough to kill something? Go try to kill it! How do I know if I can make "Baked Alaska?" Get the ingredients and try to bake it.
There should be no notification that you've 'reached a cap.' There shouldn't even be a notification that you've gained skills. It's all internal and all automatic.
It will be INCREDIBLY different from what we're used to. However, it's new, it's progress, it's better.

I see what you mean. However, how do you know if you can dunk a basketball? How do you know if you can rocketjump to the quad? You just have to keep trying. I think it's a little lazy to think that a game should just tell you what you can and can't do. People are used to experimenting in life; it's even easier in a game.
I think having no numbers would slow the game down. People who want to accomplish everything as fast as they can will be frustrated. People who want to know the answer before they ask the question will be frustrated. However, I think that once people figure out that the game is just a little slower paced than the others, they will appreciate the immersion.
It's new and crazy. Might not be a safe bet, but I think it's a great idea.

But think of it this way also. How do you find a dragon's weaknesses? Do you hunt big lizards, then baby dragons, then wounded dragons, then dragons? Or, do you look it up in the manual or spreadsheet? I have nothing against learning the best way to fight, but I think you learn better from real fighting than training dummies. If I can max my skills in a training room, that's like putting on god mode or something.

How do you know you can't make a katana or a wedding cake? You don't have any numbers telling you do you? You know because you're you, you've grown up with you, right? I think we can use the same method with our characters. You create a character. For the first bit you'd have to just try it and find out. However, after a while, you'd get the 'feel' of your character, and you could start making judgements. Now, lets talk about that katana. You can make daggers every time, and short swords one out of 3. Since Katana's are 3 times as hard as short swords I would assume I had a 1 in 9 chance.
Basically, my point is that if you are really playing your character, you KNOW your character because you've been there for his progression.
There are still flaws, I admit it. For one...How do I know the katana is 3 times as hard as a short sword. Seems like a number to me. Maybe we'd fix that by failing at different times. If you try to make a katana and it's going to take 3 days, but you fail after 15 minutes, then you can't do it. But if you fail after 2 and a half days, you're really close. I don't know. It's gets tough.

You say you want to know when you hit the 'soft-cap' for the day/week/month/year. You say it would be pointless and frustrating to continue working on a skill when you've already maxed out your improvement for a certain time range. And you say that you don't want people telling you how to play the game.
This is what I want.

• I don't want a "DING" to come up and say I'm wasting my time if I'm doing something for my own enjoyment.
• I don't want someone to ask for my 'numbers' and then have them brush me off if I refuse to play the game 'by the numbers'.
• I want to play a game, I don't want to feel like I'm falling behind in some desperate race to increase my skills.
• And, I want Horizons to be a game where 'in- game' matters more than 'out-of-game.'

It seems to me that all a definite skill-cap notification would do is make it so you can maximize your stats in the shortest possible time without actually playing the game. Is that what you're saying? Do you want Horizons to be a measuring tape, or a statistics experiment rather than a fantasy game? No notification doesn't mean you won't hit all your soft-caps and level as fast as it is theoretically possible. It just means you'll have to derive your own motivation and not rely on statistics.
Play however you want, but the world should be developed for those who actually want to play IN the world.

This is about the "DING! You've reached your daily limit."
I personally think this is an easy answer, "Absolutely not." Here's why. Look at Tetris. The point of the game is to clear away as many lines as possible. After you clear away 10 lines you get a reward, "DING! Welcome to level 2." Saying "DING! You reached a soft cap," is exactly like saying the purpose of Horizons is to max out all your skills. If that's so, why are they making all sorts of different styles of monsters? Why are they making breath-taking scenery?
The people who want a notification want to know when to stop practicing. What are you practicing for? One person wants to be the best trained guild in all of Istaria? Why not just keep practicing? If you're a guild known for your great training, doesn't it seem odd to want to do the minimum necessary? Maybe every second you aren't saving the world you should be training to save the world! It fits exactly with the character you wanted, and it doesn't require a 'DING.'
The ONLY thing, (undebatable) that a DING does is maximize the result with a minimum effort. It sounds a little lazy to me.

So The Bonk wants 2 games in one?
1. A game where you just mindlessly and repetitively practice skills, for no reason other than to reach your skill cap.
AND
2. A game where you are finally free to actually enjoy the game and play it the way the developers designed it.
I guess I'm really confused about the need of the first type of game. Why don't you just throw that out? You obviously don't like it, or you wouldn't want to know exactly when you can stop playing it. It just seems really silly for AE to design a feature for people who ADMIT they don't want to play the game the way it's designed.