Glorious Alpha Two Testers!

Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!

For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.

You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.

Headshots, Hitboxes, Crits and Stat itemisation.

I'll start by saying I whole heartedly appreciate Intrepid pushing the envelope with the vision of combat in  Ashes. It needs to be done.

But i must voice some concerns that may or may not have been addressed already. I believe there is a forum poll partially regarding the matter of headshots, But I would like to dig a little deeper.

Split systems, balance issues and conflicts within hybridasation.

So I get the logic behind action combat system rewarding skill* with a crit. my concerns are as follows.
1. are all the hit boxes the same size/dimensions for all player entities? If not the how will the prevention of best min-max advantage choices be alleviated aka (elitism) Also can they be effected by other forms of itemisation/consumables...

2. How robust will NPC/Mob AI and design be to prevent Action combat  Headshot uptime overpowering  tab systems?

3. Will gear stats that provide a crit bonus  for tab target users be bypassable/avoidable for action combat users allowing them to put more stats into other perks making them overall stronger characters?

4. Will a full group of snipers trivialise content? speed runs, boss kills, single target nukes etc....

5. how hardware and system hungry will the multiple hit box  resource management be? can the average computer handle the massive player conflicts proposed to occur...

I'll admit i am old school and prefer TAB, But I know there is player base that don't...

I just don't know if the Pandora's (head shot/crit hit) box is the solution...I have long term reservations and concerns.

So yeah probably could waffle on a bit more but it's already getting into to long didn't read territory.


«1

Comments

  • Unfortunately, despite the communities clear concerns, we wont know until Alpha 1 p2, which i believe they stated is the first look at combined action/tab mix.  

    I THINK...(Sorry if wrong) Castle siege alpha 1 p1 will be all action as well...(?) So, we will get a much better look at action combat.  We just get to wait and see, and hope they do it right.

    As for the action combat gear, I totally agree this needs to be a thing IF armor truly has offensive stats and such.  Maybe even a Crit reduction component.  Then you're looking at crafted sets like in ArcheAge,  Crit leather, tank leather, melee leather ect.  It would be sad to see the BiS leather have crit chance on it, if you plan to be an action combater

    Valid concerns, Time will tell :)
  • I'm not the most informed person on IS current design plans, so take this with a grain of salt, but I think I can help with a couple of these:

    1.) The existence of different races of Vera, as well as the customization of the Tulnar, pretty much guarantees that some players with have different hit-boxes. This will most likely be countered with differing race stats (AKA a dwarf is small and harder to hit with some attacks/skills, but he isn't going to be able to move as fast as other races.)

    2.) As Spatanz mentioned, we won't really know how the Tab v. Action will work until further into the Alpha. Luckily, that still gives us, and the developers, plenty of time to get used to such a system and alter it as needed.

    3.) I don't see why they would do this, nor how it would be by-passable at all. The only thing I can think of is that the action combat skills would be less likely to rely on or use crit based play styles, to which I would simply say that non-crit builds have always existed in MMO's and probably won't disappear any time soon.

    4.) This is another thing that will need balancing and testing through the alpha/beta stages, but I agree that ranged attacks give players a huge advantage against mods. Making sure that they are not the obvious choice over melee builds 100% of the time is something I hope that IS, with everything else their doing, doesn't forget about :)

    5.) Not sure how old-school your computer is, but https://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=34813&game=Ashes of Creation is a great place to check if you can handle it. It gives both the specs we know we need now, as well a projected minimum requirements for full release, and shows what, if anything, needs upgrading. A mid tier computer should be satisfactory though, especially if your not looking to go for ultra high graphics settings and the like.

    I hope this was helpful!
  • Ok, lots of stuff here

    1. are all the hit boxes the same size/dimensions for all player entities? If not the how will the prevention of best min-max advantage choices be alleviated aka (elitism) Also can they be effected by other forms of itemisation/consumables...

    • We do not have a quotable answer for this

    2. How robust will NPC/Mob AI and design be to prevent Action combat  Headshot uptime overpowering  tab systems? 

    • They have said they want the AI to be robust and we will be testing that started as early as Alpha 1 - Phase 1: Horde Mode

    3. Will gear stats that provide a crit bonus  for tab target users be bypassable/avoidable for action combat users allowing them to put more stats into other perks making them overall stronger characters?

    • We do not have a quotable answer for this but given how many different ways they've talked about stats on gear, talked about how crit is factored into the math, basic game design, etc that it is probably in, but with no direct quote I don't want to give you false information

    4. Will a full group of snipers trivialise content? speed runs, boss kills, single target nukes etc....

    • Maybe.  But this is no different than having 5 Tab Targetters who can all primary the same target with either a series of instants or ground drop abilities

    5. how hardware and system hungry will the multiple hit box  resource management be? can the average computer handle the massive player conflicts proposed to occur...
    • They have shown content as run by a GTX 970.  Now, if you choose to run a 2019 release game on 2014 hardware, expect 2014 results.  If your potato can't potato cover it in butter.  

    I'll admit i am old school and prefer TAB, But I know there is player base that don't...

    I just don't know if the Pandora's (head shot/crit hit) box is the solution...I have long term reservations and concerns.

    • Head shots are nothing more than action-combat critical.  Tab targetters can stack their crit rate up so that means every single attack has a chance to crit.  So their math looks something like this:  
    • Did I hit?  Yes/No   (this can be from not having 100% Accuracy or from Evasion)
    • Did I crit? Yes/No (this is just a % chance based off crit rate
    •  Action combat however needs to aim for the head hit box in order to crit and it means:
    • Did I hit? Yes/No    
    • If Yes then I crit, if No then I missed. 

  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited October 2018
    One thought that crossed my mind thinking about it, is simply not giving a critshot (hitting a headshot) a 100% proc guarantee all the time.
    Dimishing returns should ring a bell for everyone who played mmos before so you might have a great streak of headshots but the more you hit the more likely it is to just hit a normal hit so you somewhat even out to the expected critchance of tabtarget.

    Combine that with higher missrates and you have a whole lot of points you can use to overall balance it.
    Headshots in particular will be riskier than bodyshots because (I assume they are sensible enough to do it) of the sizedifference.
    So you can use headhits to counterbalance missrate if you overall just missed a whole lot and it counteracts the dimishing return above mentioned.

    I doubt that you will ever be able to speedrun anything just because you headshot something 40 times in a row, that would just mean the content is trivial in the first place and anyone could. After all we are promised a slower more tactical approach to the game and the arenamode back at Pax?(or whatever event it was) did give the impression of longer winded battles as promised.

    Valid concerns for sure, but overall I would say at some point we just have to trust the developers that they put the effort behind it to make it balanced by asking themselves the same questions.
    They are figuring out the action combat just now on how to do the blending after all.

  • I fail to see how head boxes will be different sizes even if the leg and body boxes are. So thats one problem out the way.

    If people are going to Xv1...they will do that no matter what weapons they use. Tab or action.

    The whole point is crit is either real (aka skill based) or pseudo (aka guesstimated through RNG). Logging the mean chance of crit success for action combat can provide the base RNG value for tab targetting.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited October 2018
    Responses in [-]
    Minizem said:
    I'm not the most informed person on IS current design plans, so take this with a grain of salt, but I think I can help with a couple of these:

    1.) The existence of different races of Vera, as well as the customization of the Tulnar, pretty much guarantees that some players with have different hit-boxes. This will most likely be countered with differing race stats (AKA a dwarf is small and harder to hit with some attacks/skills, but he isn't going to be able to move as fast as other races.)

    [This would be an even worse balancing nightmare. making a race slower to compensate will just result in best race/worse race elitism. I can only expect all hit boxes to be standard for player characters.]

    2.) As Spatanz mentioned, we won't really know how the Tab v. Action will work until further into the Alpha. Luckily, that still gives us, and the developers, plenty of time to get used to such a system and alter it as needed.

    [Indeed but the primary issue is a headshot hitbox with a presumed 100% crit proc rate compared to every other playstyle ingame. I don't know if it is even possible to balance in the grand scheme of things.]

    3.) I don't see why they would do this, nor how it would be by-passable at all. The only thing I can think of is that the action combat skills would be less likely to rely on or use crit based play styles, to which I would simply say that non-crit builds have always existed in MMO's and probably won't disappear any time soon.

    [Yes but if you are an action combat player you a guaranteed a 100% head shot crit regardless of the rest of your build compared to non action combat players. with Skill* being the determining factor. if a skilled player can manage a 99% headshot rate (because of reasons) the payoff make alternatives seem insignificant. If they don;t reward headshots with 100% crit proc then there is no justifiable reason to have them in the first place]

    4.) This is another thing that will need balancing and testing through the alpha/beta stages, but I agree that ranged attacks give players a huge advantage against mods. Making sure that they are not the obvious choice over melee builds 100% of the time is something I hope that IS, with everything else their doing, doesn't forget about :)

    [Yep.]

    5.) Not sure how old-school your computer is, but https://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=34813&game=Ashes of Creation is a great place to check if you can handle it. It gives both the specs we know we need now, as well a projected minimum requirements for full release, and shows what, if anything, needs upgrading. A mid tier computer should be satisfactory though, especially if your not looking to go for ultra high graphics settings and the like.

    [It's not a "will this game run on my potato?" issue but an overall  negative compound effect that penalizes everyone irrespective of their personal PC system.]

    I hope this was helpful!

    [thanks, appreciate the time and effort]






  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited October 2018
    The following is just my opinion and nothing more...
    When it comes to hit boxes and player avatars.. I have the feeling they will all be the same or there would be an inherent advantage/disadvantage to each race. Looking over the races we are starting with, I do not see why the hit boxes would differ from race to race. Sure Dwarves are shorter then, say, Humans, but even in more recent table top games (like DND 5e) they are considered the same 'size' (in this case medium). Sure they are shorter by a bit but they still have big heads. heh.
    Now if they wanted to do different size hit boxes.. Personally.. I'd make the critical hit damage increase proportionally to the size difference in the head size. Human to Elf would be a 1 to 1 size difference. Human to Ogre would be 1 to 1.2 with the ogre's head being 20% bigger, so easier to hit, so 20% less damage.. Human to Sprite at 1 to 0.5.. So the sprite's head is 50% smaller but takes 50% more critical damage..
    Numbers are arbitrary and used only as an example of course.
  • Yeah it's a wait and see how it goes.
    just thought there might have been some hard facts I am not aware of.

    Like I said, I am not entirely against (headshot crit)  it I am just concerned on implementation and consequences.

    I do not adhere to a 100% balance mantra, as all games that do inevitably end up stale, boring and dead.

    I feel that just the right amount of imbalance is necessary in tandem with a rock/paper/scissors foundation to prevent a hard META from forming. this keeps the game mechanics in perpetual flux resulting in a better long term experience.
    Obvious tweaking and dialing in the buff/nerf metrics are expected.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited October 2018
    I have to say, I don't really follow your train of thought as to why some of this stuff is a concern. If you are skilled enough to hit head shots, you should be rewarded, the concept is fine, I guess you are just worried about the fine-tuned balance?

    I know you say that you understand it's a system that provides a crit as reward for skill but then your hypotheticals include a 99% head shot rate player. Maybe someone in alpha can tell us how hard it is to hit a headshot and how frequently it happens? But I mean if a player can legitimately pull off a 99% hit shot rate then yes they should be called "over powered", they've earned it. Is there a way to achieve this with tab targeting? Probably not, but it's also much easier to hit things with tab targetting and therefore should have a lower ceiling. So if you decide to exclusively rely on tab targeting then yes you should be outcompeted by skilled action combat players imo: that's not a balance issue, that's a skill issue. It doesn't mean tab targeting is not viable, but it won't be max/min optimal in some/many situations.

    I also prefer tab targeting but to give an example: hunters in WoW back in BC (when I played) had no way of distinguishing themselves in dps really imo, you had the "optimal rotation" that you would spam and that was it. Of course being a good player is being able to follow boss mechanics and stay alive and all but there was no real way for a "skilled" player in PvE to pump out bigger numbers than another one if they had the same gear. I personally would like a system where dps classes can distinguish themselves in PvP AND PvE and the multi hit-box system sounds like it could do that.

    Also, it can still be balanced by adjusting how easy/hard it is to crit by changing
    i. hit box size ii. projectile/weapon speed iii. player movement speed/defensive skills etc

    Again, not sure why a skilled player utilizing the more skill-based action combat system shouldn't overpower a tab system.
    Whocando said:
    2. How robust will NPC/Mob AI and design be to prevent Action combat  Headshot uptime overpowering tab systems?
    NPC/mobs don't need to have auto-crit head shots. If anything having multiple hit-boxes can make for interesting boss fights where you are rewarded for hitting certain boss parts while staying alive and dodging all other mechanics. It could also possibly reward having melee and ranged dps.

    Final thought: I think the combat system should allow players who prefer tab, like me, to dabble in action (not be strictly binary) so we try to learn to be 99% headshot op (especially in PvP) but most likely find a sweet spot of tab and action that suits us personally through augments. I have a post about this if you want to read more on my thought on this.
  • If your referring to how crits work in the BR, I doubt that the mechanics of that will carry over 100% to the full game.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited October 2018
    @NeuroGuy the problem with giving specifically  ranged dps and only ranged dps a free damage bonus based on skill , is that any advantage will be deemed best.

    If i can do more damage from further away with gear that doesn't require crit gear because i get it for free because of a skill metric and am less likely to be forced to evade/dodge which means a higher DPS uptime compared to all other playstyles then where is the incentive to play any other way, it's a significant risk to the health of the game.

    by having a  Sniper system risks becoming the "Cheese" so it requires it's own tuning to make it compatible with all the other systems. 
    Split systems are generally a balancing nightmare.

    Will I be able select tab target the same distance as a Action Combat shot?
    Will I have the same tab target skill range as a Action Combat shot?
  • Can only hope they don't go too nuts with crit since crit is usually a minimum of 2x multiplier in MMOs would like to see the crit soft cap kick in down around 15% (max skill level BiS gear) maybe short term burn buff soft cap @ 25%. Once the crit monster is out of the bag it's the only build that becomes "viable". Not too sure how they'll keep the rate low for action headshot.

    Maybe have gear soft cap crit rate and flat short term buff increases to multiplier not crit rate so we don't see people running around with ridiculous crit rates of 40% or more in average to good gear, Really don't want to see Diablo III or Tera style damage outputs for PvE lets keep it closer to Everquest damage outputs pre Plane of Power.

  • Whocando said:
    @NeuroGuy the problem with giving specifically  ranged dps and only ranged dps a free damage bonus based on skill , is that any advantage will be deemed best.

    So I have no idea on the range, there is no information on it but I would like to assume it would be similar range. I also am not sure why you assume the hit-box system would not apply to melee characters. 

    Whocando said:
    If i can do more damage from further away with gear that doesn't require crit gear because i get it for free because of a skill metric and am less likely to be forced to evade/dodge which means a higher DPS uptime compared to all other playstyles then where is the incentive to play any other way, it's a significant risk to the health of the game.
    So if we get rid of the increased range assumption, I'm not sure your "needing to dodge/evade less" argument remains. Neither does the label of "cheese" as it will be the same as if a tab-targeting player crits you on their first shot, you wouldn't call that cheese. But again, I'm not sure why you insist that using the tab-targeting system should be incentivized, it is an option we are given (which most games don't give), and we choose what suits us best.

    Briefly my thought process:
    • Tab-targeting is 1. stat based (gear) and 2. involves tactical decision making
    • Multi hit-box action combat is 1. stat based (gear), 2. involves tactical decision making (albeit maybe to a lesser degree, especially in PvE) and 3. skill-based targeting
    Being involved in PvP combat where someone is using action combat also forces a tab-targeting player to be more skillful as how they move/try to evade incoming shots is in their hand, it literally makes the whole game a bit more skillful to play for everyone.

    Multi hit-box action combat is harder than tab targeting and is less gear reliant. You should have a higher ceiling with it than you do with tab-targeting. If you want to be max/min optimal, you should try to get good at it. So why would anyone ever use tab-targeting? Because it will be hard to be good enough to outcompete tab-targeting.

    Just because the skill/dps ceiling is higher, doesn't mean everyone who uses it will be at the ceiling. Realistically, they can balance it so that maybe initially only 15% of people using action combat can pump out higher dps than tab-targeting players, the rest do ~the same or less even because they can't land shots. But maybe 10% of those 15% do way more damage because they are super good at it so people want to achieve that too so they push through having lower dps in hopes of getting better.

    I just don't see a point to force incentivize a less involved combat system with higher gear/stat reliance (tab-targeting) when there is a combat system which is more skill based and contains all the other stuff too more or less.
  • A melee  has to dodge more than a ranged. more evasive actions equate to less DPS.

    I am not sure where you interpreted forced incentvisation from of "less involved" combat.

    The mojority of what i have said thus far is that ranged action DPS is the less involved system compared to everything else. That might be hard to understand, but reticle acuracy isn't rocket surgery either. I would go as far as to say that ranged DPS is the easiest class/profession generally speaking in the MMORPG genre, TAB or Action.

    I am also aware how the MMO community psyche can be sheepled into the (only way to play) situation regardless of skill, abilty or logic. the META will always generate a herd and headshots specifically have a very inherent  risk to the META.

    I have seen similar toxic effects in other MMOs.
    I get the 'maffs' aspect of dice rolls vs skill shots compensation metrics in theory.
    As mentioned before it's now a wait and see on implementation and how the compound effects are managed to prevent an exponential combat nightmare.







  • @Whocando
    Oh ok, I think I get your concern now. It's more of a ranged vs melee issue I guess. Fair, yeah we'll have to see how it's handled.
    Personally, I don't mind everyone trying to head shot me if it's rate of occurance/impact is reasonable. I'd just assume most of those players would end up doing less damage to me than if they were tab-targeting :P.
  • Shoklen said:
    The following is just my opinion and nothing more...
    When it comes to hit boxes and player avatars.. I have the feeling they will all be the same or there would be an inherent advantage/disadvantage to each race. Looking over the races we are starting with, I do not see why the hit boxes would differ from race to race. Sure Dwarves are shorter then, say, Humans, but even in more recent table top games (like DND 5e) they are considered the same 'size' (in this case medium). Sure they are shorter by a bit but they still have big heads. heh.
    Now if they wanted to do different size hit boxes.. Personally.. I'd make the critical hit damage increase proportionally to the size difference in the head size. Human to Elf would be a 1 to 1 size difference. Human to Ogre would be 1 to 1.2 with the ogre's head being 20% bigger, so easier to hit, so 20% less damage.. Human to Sprite at 1 to 0.5.. So the sprite's head is 50% smaller but takes 50% more critical damage..
    Numbers are arbitrary and used only as an example of course.
    I was thinking something along the same lines for racial disparity myself.
    If the target is bigger its easier to hit, so less skill, less bonus.
    So all they need is a datum cross section area for body legs head.
    If the area is 20% below datum, the mutiplier is +20%
    If the area is 20% above datum, the multiplier is -20%

    As long as every physical variation is based of one nominal idealised size, all build advantage can be neutralised.

    :thumbsup:
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited October 2018
    Whocando said:
    A melee  has to dodge more than a ranged. more evasive actions equate to less DPS.

    I am not sure where you interpreted forced incentvisation from of "less involved" combat.

    The mojority of what i have said thus far is that ranged action DPS is the less involved system compared to everything else. That might be hard to understand, but reticle acuracy isn't rocket surgery either. I would go as far as to say that ranged DPS is the easiest class/profession generally speaking in the MMORPG genre, TAB or Action.

    I am also aware how the MMO community psyche can be sheepled into the (only way to play) situation regardless of skill, abilty or logic. the META will always generate a herd and headshots specifically have a very inherent  risk to the META.

    I have seen similar toxic effects in other MMOs.
    I get the 'maffs' aspect of dice rolls vs skill shots compensation metrics in theory.
    As mentioned before it's now a wait and see on implementation and how the compound effects are managed to prevent an exponential combat nightmare.







    Ranged DPS is easy ? If travel time is instant and a straight line trajectory then yes I agree.
    If however, travel time increases with distance AND requires bullet drop, then not only do you need perfect elevation despite th efatc they may be moving closer or further, but you also need to lead the target depending on how fast they are moving left/right. Thats without the fact the screen size of the hitbox shrinks with distance.
    That is where the skill comes in and its that aspect of skill that should be rewarded.
    IMHO.

    Hitting someone with a ranged weapon point blank with an instant head shot, with a bullseye painted on their head, requires no skill and should not necessitate and kind of bonus. So the devil is in the detail.

    There is also the far more important issue of the ammo size. The angular diameter of someones head is important when you have a choice of a 1meter wide fireball or a 1/2 inch wide arrow. That angular diameter of the target gets a whole lot bigger with a fireball...if any part of the object has to hit.
  • Fairly certain there is an element of aim assist for margins of latency compensation.
    So not quite 100% skill.

    Don't forget my concern is specific to the head shot free crit. Not the action ranged DPS  playstyle as a whole. I am not ANTI ranged.

    projectile size,  drop, velocity, hit scan size are indeed inherent attributes specific to the playstyle. Hence my other mentioned concerns of performance and system resources grand scale.

    Sure it can be skill and the art of combat engagment, but it can also be stand and pew pew pew.

    a world of perma jumping wiggle run counter (immersion) perhaps.

  • Q: 1. are all the hit boxes the same size/dimensions for all player entities? If not the how will the prevention of best min-max advantage choices be alleviated aka (elitism) Also can they be effected by other forms of itemisation/consumables...

    A: I dont know for sure but if I remember correctly they said the boxes will be the same size.
    It doesnt mean same shape but same mm² from all sides I would expect.

    Q: 2. How robust will NPC/Mob AI and design be to prevent Action combat  Headshot uptime overpowering  tab systems ? 

    Opinion: I think for PvE bosses it would be unfair for melees if range could just always headshot. They may be disabled for bosses. For other content I wont be able to say until we know how evasion works in the game.
    At highest skill levels it makes sense for aiming to overpower tab, as tab has lower skill requirement.

    Q: 3. Will gear stats that provide a crit bonus  for tab target users be bypassable/avoidable for action combat users allowing them to put more stats into other perks making them overall stronger characters?

    Opinion: It would make no sense if tab target was equal to an expert aimer. Tab target has only one risk factor which is evasion and we don't know if it affects aimers too. Tab skills have thus 2 reasons to be worse than aim if eva affects both. Lower skill requirement and tab skills are locked on target. Tab should be equal to mediocore or slighty over med aimer.


    Q: 4. Will a full group of snipers trivialise content? speed runs, boss kills, single target nukes etc....

    A: If the class balance isnt there, yes.
    O: AA vs Tab is a scenario where AA experts should overcome tab that takes no risks. You will have to take min 25% AA skills so this will be like setting up optimal talent builds. There is always a best setup in every game and I doubt AoC or any other game will be able to overcome this. We just dont know if it will be more AA or tab yet.

    Q: 5. how hardware and system hungry will the multiple hit box  resource management be? can the average computer handle the massive player conflicts proposed to occur...

    A: FPS games handle a huge lot of ppl easily with hitboxes and there are 20+ year old games 80+ player maps with more hitboxes. MMOs can be laggy with or without hitboxes, it only depends on the coders behind the scenes.
    Opinion: Ive seen many games with laggy hit calculations even w/o hitboxes. If hitboxes were too much trouble id rather be without. I anyhow doubt that as technology has developed rather quickly and the IS team doesnt seem that bad.
    Kevin FTW! 

  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited November 2018
    I have an idea on how they could balance head shot crits for action combat. They could take someone's crit % and equate to how often someone can crit with action mode. So let's just say the avg arrow shot takes 1 sec to get off, and someone has 50% crit. Every 2 seconds that person would be able to crit using the action mode, and anything that lands after a crit but still in that "CD" would only be normal damage. This would put a cap on how often someone can crit using action.  This would make it so wearing crit gear would still be viable because it would decrease the time between possible crits.  This would be more for balancing the top end side of things.  The bottom side of balancing would come down to how good/bad someone is at action combat.  If they suck at action they should use tab instead, anyways.
  • Nibiru97 said:
    I have an idea on how they could balance head shot crits for action combat. They could take someone's crit % and equate to how often someone can crit with action mode. So let's just say the avg arrow shot takes 1 sec to get off, and someone has 50% crit. Every 2 seconds that person would be able to crit using the action mode, and anything that lands after a crit but still in that "CD" would only be normal damage. This would put a cap on how often someone can crit using action.  This would make it so wearing crit gear would still be viable because it would decrease the time between possible crits.  This would be more for balancing the top end side of things.  The bottom side of balancing would come down to how good/bad someone is at action combat.  If they suck at action they should use tab instead, anyways.
    Crit is often a straight up multiplier that gives +X % for instance.
    It would be better to have crit damage +-X %.
    Those who dont build around crit get 100% efficiency.
    Those who do build around quit get 100% +-x% efficiency

    Now you may ask if the net result over time is going to be 100% regardless why have crit ?
    A chance of burst bonus that non crit builds do not get.
    Would you pay the price of unreliable damage for greater potential burst ?
    Risk vs Reward.

    This also solves the 100 head shot crit vs 10 head shot crit problem.
    If aim bots are a thing (as opposed to genuine skill) and some players are basically guaranteed +50% crits, many people are going to be sorely pissed.
    If the crit is +-50%, its not a guaranteed win scenario no matter how many guaranteed head shots you get.
    TTK is maintained overall.
    You could have skill determine the multiplier and the build determine the cap.
  • Headshots, if they end up mattering, will be a problem for as long as they matter. Scripting, cheating etc will fuck up important events. Headshot classes will forever have an advantage in many pvp situations
  • Crit is often a straight up multiplier that gives +X % for instance.
    It would be better to have crit damage +-X %.
    Those who dont build around crit get 100% efficiency.
    Those who do build around quit get 100% +-x% efficiency

    Now you may ask if the net result over time is going to be 100% regardless why have crit ?
    A chance of burst bonus that non crit builds do not get.
    Would you pay the price of unreliable damage for greater potential burst ?
    Risk vs Reward.

    This also solves the 100 head shot crit vs 10 head shot crit problem.
    If aim bots are a thing (as opposed to genuine skill) and some players are basically guaranteed +50% crits, many people are going to be sorely pissed.
    If the crit is +-50%, its not a guaranteed win scenario no matter how many guaranteed head shots you get.
    TTK is maintained overall.
    You could have skill determine the multiplier and the build determine the cap.
    I know crit is a damage multiplier.  What I'm talking about is a way to balance how often someone crits with action vs how often someone crits with tab.  Nothing to do with the amount of damage applied because that should be universal across both types of combat.  Basically, if they don't introduce limits on action, someone that uses tab and has around 50% of the crit stat, is at a disadvantage to someone who uses action extremely well and can hit the head box more than 50% of the time.  What I'm suggesting is that the crit stat sets that limit on action skills.  So the higher your stat the more often you can crit using action.  At the moment you are guaranteed a crit with a head shot.  I'm suggesting you are not guaranteed a crit with a head shot if you are over the limit.  So if you crit there would be an internal CD before you can crit with another head shot.  The higher % crit stat you have the shorter the CD.  Any hits within that CD count as regular hits.  What this does is create the same limit for both action and tab so one is not more powerful than the other.  Not only does this balance the top end but makes it so the crit stat is not worthless using action combat. 
  • Nibiru97 said:
    Crit is often a straight up multiplier that gives +X % for instance.
    It would be better to have crit damage +-X %.
    Those who dont build around crit get 100% efficiency.
    Those who do build around quit get 100% +-x% efficiency

    Now you may ask if the net result over time is going to be 100% regardless why have crit ?
    A chance of burst bonus that non crit builds do not get.
    Would you pay the price of unreliable damage for greater potential burst ?
    Risk vs Reward.

    This also solves the 100 head shot crit vs 10 head shot crit problem.
    If aim bots are a thing (as opposed to genuine skill) and some players are basically guaranteed +50% crits, many people are going to be sorely pissed.
    If the crit is +-50%, its not a guaranteed win scenario no matter how many guaranteed head shots you get.
    TTK is maintained overall.
    You could have skill determine the multiplier and the build determine the cap.
    I know crit is a damage multiplier.  What I'm talking about is a way to balance how often someone crits with action vs how often someone crits with tab.  Nothing to do with the amount of damage applied because that should be universal across both types of combat.  Basically, if they don't introduce limits on action, someone that uses tab and has around 50% of the crit stat, is at a disadvantage to someone who uses action extremely well and can hit the head box more than 50% of the time.  What I'm suggesting is that the crit stat sets that limit on action skills.  So the higher your stat the more often you can crit using action.  At the moment you are guaranteed a crit with a head shot.  I'm suggesting you are not guaranteed a crit with a head shot if you are over the limit.  So if you crit there would be an internal CD before you can crit with another head shot.  The higher % crit stat you have the shorter the CD.  Any hits within that CD count as regular hits.  What this does is create the same limit for both action and tab so one is not more powerful than the other.  Not only does this balance the top end but makes it so the crit stat is not worthless using action combat. 
    So, you want the person that is really good at action combat to be able to be beat by a tab target player in a fair match? Let's say both players are the same level, same gear, but one is using action combat and is really skilled at it, and the other is a tabby. The tabby SHOULD lose to a skill action combat user EVERY SINGLE TIME!
  • Nibiru97 said:
    Crit is often a straight up multiplier that gives +X % for instance.
    It would be better to have crit damage +-X %.
    Those who dont build around crit get 100% efficiency.
    Those who do build around quit get 100% +-x% efficiency

    Now you may ask if the net result over time is going to be 100% regardless why have crit ?
    A chance of burst bonus that non crit builds do not get.
    Would you pay the price of unreliable damage for greater potential burst ?
    Risk vs Reward.

    This also solves the 100 head shot crit vs 10 head shot crit problem.
    If aim bots are a thing (as opposed to genuine skill) and some players are basically guaranteed +50% crits, many people are going to be sorely pissed.
    If the crit is +-50%, its not a guaranteed win scenario no matter how many guaranteed head shots you get.
    TTK is maintained overall.
    You could have skill determine the multiplier and the build determine the cap.
    I know crit is a damage multiplier.  What I'm talking about is a way to balance how often someone crits with action vs how often someone crits with tab.  Nothing to do with the amount of damage applied because that should be universal across both types of combat.  Basically, if they don't introduce limits on action, someone that uses tab and has around 50% of the crit stat, is at a disadvantage to someone who uses action extremely well and can hit the head box more than 50% of the time.  What I'm suggesting is that the crit stat sets that limit on action skills.  So the higher your stat the more often you can crit using action.  At the moment you are guaranteed a crit with a head shot.  I'm suggesting you are not guaranteed a crit with a head shot if you are over the limit.  So if you crit there would be an internal CD before you can crit with another head shot.  The higher % crit stat you have the shorter the CD.  Any hits within that CD count as regular hits.  What this does is create the same limit for both action and tab so one is not more powerful than the other.  Not only does this balance the top end but makes it so the crit stat is not worthless using action combat. 
    So, you want the person that is really good at action combat to be able to be beat by a tab target player in a fair match? Let's say both players are the same level, same gear, but one is using action combat and is really skilled at it, and the other is a tabby. The tabby SHOULD lose to a skill action combat user EVERY SINGLE TIME!
    But why?
  • nagash said:
    Nibiru97 said:
    Crit is often a straight up multiplier that gives +X % for instance.
    It would be better to have crit damage +-X %.
    Those who dont build around crit get 100% efficiency.
    Those who do build around quit get 100% +-x% efficiency

    Now you may ask if the net result over time is going to be 100% regardless why have crit ?
    A chance of burst bonus that non crit builds do not get.
    Would you pay the price of unreliable damage for greater potential burst ?
    Risk vs Reward.

    This also solves the 100 head shot crit vs 10 head shot crit problem.
    If aim bots are a thing (as opposed to genuine skill) and some players are basically guaranteed +50% crits, many people are going to be sorely pissed.
    If the crit is +-50%, its not a guaranteed win scenario no matter how many guaranteed head shots you get.
    TTK is maintained overall.
    You could have skill determine the multiplier and the build determine the cap.
    I know crit is a damage multiplier.  What I'm talking about is a way to balance how often someone crits with action vs how often someone crits with tab.  Nothing to do with the amount of damage applied because that should be universal across both types of combat.  Basically, if they don't introduce limits on action, someone that uses tab and has around 50% of the crit stat, is at a disadvantage to someone who uses action extremely well and can hit the head box more than 50% of the time.  What I'm suggesting is that the crit stat sets that limit on action skills.  So the higher your stat the more often you can crit using action.  At the moment you are guaranteed a crit with a head shot.  I'm suggesting you are not guaranteed a crit with a head shot if you are over the limit.  So if you crit there would be an internal CD before you can crit with another head shot.  The higher % crit stat you have the shorter the CD.  Any hits within that CD count as regular hits.  What this does is create the same limit for both action and tab so one is not more powerful than the other.  Not only does this balance the top end but makes it so the crit stat is not worthless using action combat. 
    So, you want the person that is really good at action combat to be able to be beat by a tab target player in a fair match? Let's say both players are the same level, same gear, but one is using action combat and is really skilled at it, and the other is a tabby. The tabby SHOULD lose to a skill action combat user EVERY SINGLE TIME!
    But why?
    because 'whitedude' values to ability to move a mouse around a mousemat accurately over all other skills
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited November 2018
    Seaber said:
    nagash said:
    Nibiru97 said:
    Crit is often a straight up multiplier that gives +X % for instance.
    It would be better to have crit damage +-X %.
    Those who dont build around crit get 100% efficiency.
    Those who do build around quit get 100% +-x% efficiency

    Now you may ask if the net result over time is going to be 100% regardless why have crit ?
    A chance of burst bonus that non crit builds do not get.
    Would you pay the price of unreliable damage for greater potential burst ?
    Risk vs Reward.

    This also solves the 100 head shot crit vs 10 head shot crit problem.
    If aim bots are a thing (as opposed to genuine skill) and some players are basically guaranteed +50% crits, many people are going to be sorely pissed.
    If the crit is +-50%, its not a guaranteed win scenario no matter how many guaranteed head shots you get.
    TTK is maintained overall.
    You could have skill determine the multiplier and the build determine the cap.
    I know crit is a damage multiplier.  What I'm talking about is a way to balance how often someone crits with action vs how often someone crits with tab.  Nothing to do with the amount of damage applied because that should be universal across both types of combat.  Basically, if they don't introduce limits on action, someone that uses tab and has around 50% of the crit stat, is at a disadvantage to someone who uses action extremely well and can hit the head box more than 50% of the time.  What I'm suggesting is that the crit stat sets that limit on action skills.  So the higher your stat the more often you can crit using action.  At the moment you are guaranteed a crit with a head shot.  I'm suggesting you are not guaranteed a crit with a head shot if you are over the limit.  So if you crit there would be an internal CD before you can crit with another head shot.  The higher % crit stat you have the shorter the CD.  Any hits within that CD count as regular hits.  What this does is create the same limit for both action and tab so one is not more powerful than the other.  Not only does this balance the top end but makes it so the crit stat is not worthless using action combat. 
    So, you want the person that is really good at action combat to be able to be beat by a tab target player in a fair match? Let's say both players are the same level, same gear, but one is using action combat and is really skilled at it, and the other is a tabby. The tabby SHOULD lose to a skill action combat user EVERY SINGLE TIME!
    But why?
    because 'whitedude' values to ability to move a mouse around a mousemat accurately over all other skills
    Given equal power ranks, and assuming you don’t have a paper-rock-scissors situation where one class has an advantage over the other in a one-on-one fight, the better player should win.  I think whitedude assumes the twitch player is “working harder” and the one with tab skills is in “easy mode” so the twitch player deserves to win.  But that’s crap.  Even if you don’t need FPS targeting skills, you still need to know when to use the right power, how to manage resources, etc.  There are skills beyond being able to point a reticle at something.
  • Atama said:
    Seaber said:
    nagash said:
    Nibiru97 said:
    Crit is often a straight up multiplier that gives +X % for instance.
    It would be better to have crit damage +-X %.
    Those who dont build around crit get 100% efficiency.
    Those who do build around quit get 100% +-x% efficiency

    Now you may ask if the net result over time is going to be 100% regardless why have crit ?
    A chance of burst bonus that non crit builds do not get.
    Would you pay the price of unreliable damage for greater potential burst ?
    Risk vs Reward.

    This also solves the 100 head shot crit vs 10 head shot crit problem.
    If aim bots are a thing (as opposed to genuine skill) and some players are basically guaranteed +50% crits, many people are going to be sorely pissed.
    If the crit is +-50%, its not a guaranteed win scenario no matter how many guaranteed head shots you get.
    TTK is maintained overall.
    You could have skill determine the multiplier and the build determine the cap.
    I know crit is a damage multiplier.  What I'm talking about is a way to balance how often someone crits with action vs how often someone crits with tab.  Nothing to do with the amount of damage applied because that should be universal across both types of combat.  Basically, if they don't introduce limits on action, someone that uses tab and has around 50% of the crit stat, is at a disadvantage to someone who uses action extremely well and can hit the head box more than 50% of the time.  What I'm suggesting is that the crit stat sets that limit on action skills.  So the higher your stat the more often you can crit using action.  At the moment you are guaranteed a crit with a head shot.  I'm suggesting you are not guaranteed a crit with a head shot if you are over the limit.  So if you crit there would be an internal CD before you can crit with another head shot.  The higher % crit stat you have the shorter the CD.  Any hits within that CD count as regular hits.  What this does is create the same limit for both action and tab so one is not more powerful than the other.  Not only does this balance the top end but makes it so the crit stat is not worthless using action combat. 
    So, you want the person that is really good at action combat to be able to be beat by a tab target player in a fair match? Let's say both players are the same level, same gear, but one is using action combat and is really skilled at it, and the other is a tabby. The tabby SHOULD lose to a skill action combat user EVERY SINGLE TIME!
    But why?
    because 'whitedude' values to ability to move a mouse around a mousemat accurately over all other skills
    Given equal power ranks, and assuming you don’t have a paper-rock-scissors situation where one class has an advantage over the other in a one-on-one fight, the better player should win.  I think whitedude assumes the twitch player is “working harder” and the one with tab skills is in “easy mode” so the twitch player deserves to win.  But that’s crap.  Even if you don’t need FPS targeting skills, you still need to know when to use the right power, how to manage resources, etc.  There are skills beyond being able to point a reticle at something.
    I mean I dont see every class is going to master action combat such as suport classes so of course tab target will be better for them.
  • Seaber said:
    because 'whitedude' values to ability to move a mouse around a mousemat accurately over all other skills
    Ure making an assumption that action combat doesnt also require all of the skill a tab target does.

    I have no idea how you can see 100% hit chance with no effort equal to risking complete miss on every shot.
  • Seaber said:
    because 'whitedude' values to ability to move a mouse around a mousemat accurately over all other skills
    Ure making an assumption that action combat doesnt also require all of the skill a tab target does.

    I have no idea how you can see 100% hit chance with no effort equal to risking complete miss on every shot.
    And you’re assuming there is nothing like a “dodge” stat common to most MMORPGs...  100% hit doesn’t have to be guaranteed.

    And the developers could simply make it so that tab-targeted skills have complications that twitch skills don’t.

    Just because you can’t think of a way to balance the play styles, don’t assume the experienced professional game designers can’t also.
Sign In or Register to comment.