Best Of

Noaani wrote: »

As a simple thought experiment - if Steven claims that "with adventuring, time investment should reap an equitable reward" (in the video above), how can that be true if there is a minimal difference in power between a level 45 and a level 50?

Only one of those two concepts can be true in any one given game - either the power between that 5 level gap is small OR there is an equitable reward for leveling.

You present it in a way as if they were mutually exclusive which is not entirely accurate, kind of a false dichotomy.

The time it takes to reach a new level increases gradually, so 47-48 would obviously take more time than 33-34. While 45-50 will give you the same amount of skill points than 35-40 (as far as we know), it will require more time, but that reward is still pretty decent as you eventually max out your skill points.

Meanwhile, while the difference may not be that significant, it still exisits. However, it's not like in other games where, for example, level 50 would have a 98% win rate against level 43. Their advantage wouldn't be that huge and it may end up being somewhere around 65-80% win rate, so the player with lower level would still have a chance not only to fight back, but to actually win if he plays his hand right.

Yes, you understand me clearly, some games are just like that. You can get away with 'not wearing good defense gear as a healer' sometimes, or 'not having a good weapon, as a tank', sometimes, but it depends on the design, quite a bit.

If the PvE is easy and the game doesn't really care about builds, your gear won't matter, but Ashes is supposedly not that type of game.

Noaani wrote: »

What I will say is that the game needs players that start the game later to be able to level up faster - as both myself and Azherae have said, the game needs it's population to be somewhat close together in level. New players to the game need to be able to catch up to existing players in a reasonable amount of time - in both level and gear.

The solution is simple to answer the issue of competitivity of new players : Make the xp curve exponential

That way, a new player can quickly become competitive. Extremely long last 5 to 10 levels would keep a small level gap between old and new players.

And it's always more motivating to seek out your gear and kill bosses and mobs when you know you've still got a few levels to gain. Killing bosses over and over again when you're at max level is frustrating when you don't have the loots you're looking for.

By gaining xp, you're at least happy to be approaching max level (even if you didn't yet find the loot you are looking for).



I can imagine this kind of curve. Or even a curve that rises even faster at the end :

Caeryl wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Caeryl wrote: »

Elden Ring is an especially good example of an RPG that utilizes active defenses on top of gear based resistances

Yes, and the result is a game with action combat.

Not hybrid combat.

That combat is literally what Intrepid are trying to avoid - just as much as they are trying to avoid tab target combat. More actually, since tab target is their stated default if hybrid doesn't work.

Keep your goal posts in one spot. Active dodging, which is ALL we're discussing here right now, is not remotely 'anti-rpg' like you claimed

I didn't say active dodging - I said action combat.

The notion of an RPG is that you are playing the character. The idea is to improve that character, to make that character the best it can be. The more you bring action elements to the fore, the more you push RPG elements to the back.

Yes, some games do this (some genres do this, ARPG's are a thing). However, they exist while doing the above, they are not an exception to the rule.

If an issue is widespread, I fully expect a rollback.

Importantly though, I would expect Intrepid to state that there will be a rollback in game, on the forums and in social media as soon as it is identified that there is an issue - even if they need to find a fix for the issue before the rollback happens.

If something as serious as this happened, I wouldn't do anything myself unless the developer/publisher posted remedial action that people need to take.

There is no expectation on my part that players maintain an inventory of their, well, inventory. This is why rollbacks are the solution to issues like this.

Smaller scale is harder to work around. Adding in functionality to do individual character rollbacks could be interesting, but there would need ro be checks in place to make sure there have been no other trades, purchases or sales. Smaller scale in my experience (people finding obscure bugs and such) usually requires bespoke resolutions.

In my opinion, a hybrid combat system needs to strike a balance between tab-target abilities and action combat. That's the whole point—finding that sweet spot. It’s important to balance skill-based defensives with action-based dodging and countering. Some abilities just naturally work better as tab-target, while others feel more intuitive with action combat. For example, if a mob throws a spear using a tab/lock-on ability and I use an action combat skill to dodge, I should be able to evade the attack. It’s all about making sure both systems complement each other and work smoothly together.

Caeryl wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Caeryl wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Caeryl wrote: »

They 'worked' when that was the only option, but it's an outdated system

But it still works.

Saying your game is a hybrid of tab and action, but limiting defense to action only - that doesn't work. I feel the need to remind you again here that if hybrid doesn't work, action is not the default - tab is, because it works.

In what world is mitigation through armor not a defense in your mind? Or abilities that boost armor or spell resist? Have you told yourself that there can't be both built in mitigations and active defensive options for whatever reason?

It still is - but it then leads to the opposite issue.

With what you are saying, I can be using an action ability, put all my skill in to hitting you at long range, and then nope, your mitigation stat makes it a miss.

That isn't good. If your game is asking players to aim at each other, a hit should be a hit.

You've royally misunderstood what incorporating both would actually look like.

Evasion as a stat should not exist. RNG should never be the determining factor for entirely avoiding damage from an attack.

Mitigation is exactly that, mitigating damage from hits based on your resistances from armor, spells, or abilities to various damage types.

This is back to an action only defense.

Imagine, if you will, if that ability does more than just deal damage. Imagine it has a debuff or CC attached to it. If it hits, you suffer the debuff or CC. This makes action the only defense that matters.

Even if you remove that debuff or CC from the picture, you are still saying tab target defense should protect you from some of the damage, but action combat defense should protect you from all of it.

That isn't a hybrid combat system.

Edit to add; to take this one step further, what about tab target abilities that literally can't miss, that you can't get out of the way of?

If you are going to say that you should be able to use action combat to dodge them, then we are back to where we started at in that anyone that is constantly moving is effectively immune to ranged tab target attacks.

Again, that isn't a hybrid combat system.

I don't particularly care if abilities will generally hone onto a target, but Misses should only ever be determined by an action taken by the player that visibly moves them. Gear shouldn't even be a factor on if something hits or not, only how much damage it does.

It should be extremely obvious when someone has dodged your skills, letting rng from gear do it doesn't give any information to players fighting each other. It's bad for clarity and bad for skill expression.

It should indeed be extremely obvious when someone has dodged one of your attacks. This is usually accomplished by putting the word "dodged" or "blocked" or "parried" or "resisted" in the floating combat feedback in game, as well as in the combat log.

It is blatantly obvious.

Caeryl wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Caeryl wrote: »

They 'worked' when that was the only option, but it's an outdated system

But it still works.

Saying your game is a hybrid of tab and action, but limiting defense to action only - that doesn't work. I feel the need to remind you again here that if hybrid doesn't work, action is not the default - tab is, because it works.

In what world is mitigation through armor not a defense in your mind? Or abilities that boost armor or spell resist? Have you told yourself that there can't be both built in mitigations and active defensive options for whatever reason?

It still is - but it then leads to the opposite issue.

With what you are saying, I can be using an action ability, put all my skill in to hitting you at long range, and then nope, your mitigation stat makes it a miss.

That isn't good. If your game is asking players to aim at each other, a hit should be a hit.

While it is true that I prefer tab target combat over action, I am absolutely looking at this from the perspective of both (I literally always look at things from as many reasonable perspectives as I am able to imagine).

I hope you realize you're just proving the point here for why stat stick defenses are an outdated relic. There's no true skill expression when your gear is doing 90% of the fighting for you, and it puts far too much reliance on Gear Number Big than actually keeping combat awareness of the game space.

All of this is besides the actual point - it is just you having your preference for action over tab. It doesn't actaully address the issue at hand - which is that there is no viable way to have both action and tab defense in a hybrid game like Ashes that isn't complete shit.

I totally agree that tab is outdated. However, it's also the best system for an MMORPG in which character progression exists. That is the point of an MMORPG (or just an RPG). You are supposed to improve your character - it isn't a test of your skills vs mine, it is a test of your character vs mine.

Action combat is the best option for if you don't want character progression, or want very little. That isn't really an MMORPG - which is why actin combat is basically just anti-MMO (edit to add; for clarification action combat is anti-MMORPG, not just MMO. Action combat is fine for an MMOFPS or similar).

You can claim this is outdated, but at the end of the day you seem to be saying here that you want a game with no character progression - which is not an RPG.

This isn't designed as a action combat game. You are not using WASD to avoid attacks (besides aoe). This is pretty standard MMO stuff.

I don't think that is going to change at this stage. Not sure that I want it to. Twitchy combat isn't generally what this style of game is about.