AzathothMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
@Robben DuMarsch , you my friend, are now my favorite person on the forums. You are a true inspiration and hold a special place in my heart with several that have come before you.
I do however fear that perhaps you are unable to determine what a fact is, versus an opinion. That, my friend, is what's going to make reading each and every one of your posts delightful. Thank you.
I never said it would be easy, but IS doesn't seem to be whining about having to do it, since it was the goal from the beginning. They appear to maybe have not realized how intricate the balancing act would be, but again appear to be going for it. So there are some limitations to tab-targeting, perhaps there might be some for action, every game has these limits and in every game a portion of the player base will complain.
"These two systems are clashing in such a way that the entire combat system will need to be designed around avoiding the inherent imbalances in these combat systems from being exploitable - Thereby resulting in silly limitations, like no hard CC for anyone using "tab target."
Please tell me exactly, since you think perhaps I am too lazy to 'unravel' things, which of your opinions in reference to my statements are backed up by this conclusion.
"But why sacrifice tab target? It's not going to be easy to balance, nor will it be necessarily fun, to have a hybrid system."
-Notice here, in my response, I was referring to the 'fun' aspect you mentioned. Because, like me, you seem to be having trouble correlating things. I never said it was going to be easy to balance, or the difficult of balance is an opinion. It is, however combined with an opinion. Since you like examples, combing a fact and an opinion is like this "Rain is water, so everyone loves rain" < Obviously not true.
"Action combat can simply be more fun, enjoyable, immersive, and if enough resources are poured into it that might otherwise need to be spent on a hybrid system, could be even better for players that want to avoid twitch style gameplay."
-Here, oddly enough, I was also referring to the 'fun' aspect of your post, as mentioned in my response. Also, the 'could be even better' is obviously an opinion based on your assumption "If enough resources...". Where, even if IS said that "If enough resources are spent this could be even better for players that want to avoid twitch style gameplay" that would still be an opinion. I have been accused of not liking things specifically because IS said they weren't going to do it, but I have never taken their opinions as facts.
""Action Combat" and Tab Targeting are like an ice cream sundae and beef stew. Both are good in their own right, but they shouldn't be mixed together."
-You saying they "shouldn't be mixed" is not the same as IS saying they are trying to find , or struggling to find, a balance. Also, as in my response, I pointed out others 'feel' differently because you know, it's an opinion. I could say that Cayenne Peppers and Ice Cream are good separately, and shouldn't be mixed together (which is a legit opinion I have), but several of my friends like that flavor of ice cream. You know, opinions.
+1 Skull & Crown metal coin
0
Options
HartwellMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
The Importance in Healing:
Tab targeting is great for healing/support classes. It isn't that it is needed to support other players, but it is needed for specific types of support. Most games with action combat healers use AoE healing to make up for less predictable player movements. FPS games use channeled heals, where once you get an initial tap you can heal them as long as you are in range. Online games with direct healing projectiles and no tab targeting are pretty rare. I've seen online games with direct healing projectiles before, but the only working examples I can think of are small group PvP games. Imagine using a loose healing projectile during a castle siege. Your own team would be your worst enemy.
As a backer, I wouldn't mind them getting rid of tab targeting, but support spells better not be non-AoE if they go that route. Healers often need to turn situations around immediately. In an MMO, projectile healing will be viewed as ineffective unless you can just spray healing bullets into a mob of allies without consequence.
The Importance in World PvP:
I actually don't know how they'll initially handle faction-less world PvP with action combat. It will probably require some testing on their end. Tab target combat is 1000x more deliberate than action combat. Ever accidentally slap an NPC with a sword in a single player action combat RPG and need to reload a save? I sure have. More than I ever did with tab targeting. What about doing the same thing in an action MMORPG where you accidentally slap an innocent player? Do you get auto-flagged for PvP? In most MMORPGs you just need to tab target a player and then hit them to get flagged. Accident protection would get annoying for people wanting to make an opener, but a lack of accident protection would get annoying for the defenders.
Tab targeting solves this issue. If you hit somebody who've you locked onto, you've more than likely wanted that attack to go through. Have there been times where this hasn't been the case? Yeah, but it's easier to catch yourself before the mistake is made.
2
Options
unknownsystemerrorMember, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One
How flagging is initiated for OWPVP has been explained. You have to directly target the person you want to flag or heal with a single target ability. This was done to stop the "karma bombing" of other mmos where people would run through others aoe attacks to force flag. You force flag and become purple. If you heal someone already flagged purple, you yourself become flagged for pvp.
1
Options
HartwellMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
How flagging is initiated for OWPVP has been explained. You have to directly target the person you want to flag or heal with a single target ability. This was done to stop the "karma bombing" of other mmos where people would run through others aoe attacks to force flag. You force flag and become purple. If you heal someone already flagged purple, you yourself become flagged for pvp.
This is good to hear. It also demonstrates a fundamental importance that targeting will have in AoC, even for action combat players.
1
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Dial-up wasn’t “below suggested minimum” when EQ was released, it was all that was available. Broadband internet wasn’t common until years after the launch of EQ.
There were 20,000,000 broadband connections a year after EQ launched.
Broadband was never a minimum requirement, but a DSL connection was a suggested minimum (they are different).
In the US, one year after EQ launched 4% of households had broadband. That means 96% of households didn’t. Are you seriously suggesting that it was something they would expect a customer to have?
We didn’t have a majority of households with broadband until 2007, when it hit 51%.
I never said anything about the minimum requirements, I was talking about the suggested/recommended specs for the game.
This is about as smart as your arbitrary limit on statistics from above - you honestly may as well have quoted the system requirements from a different game.
I never said anything about the minimum requirements, I was talking about the suggested/recommended specs for the game.
This is about as smart as your arbitrary limit on statistics from above - you honestly may as well have quoted the system requirements from a different game.
It is generally accepted that “recommended specs” are the same as minimum specs for decent gameplay. EQ1 was almost certainly not designed with the assumption people would be using broadband.
2
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
The Internet - and by extension anything on it - is world wide, bro.
Limiting statistics to US only in any discussion in relation to the internet is totally arbitrary.
You don’t want to open that can of worms. That’s ridiculous for two reasons. First, broadband usage was lower outside of the US. Second, they only released in North America in 1999, it didn’t release to Europe until more than a year later.
I never said anything about the minimum requirements, I was talking about the suggested/recommended specs for the game.
You literally said minimum. Did you mean optimal recommendation? If you meant that you should have said it. “Minimum recommendation” is not a term used by publishers, especially not SOE when the game was released.
This is about as smart as your arbitrary limit on statistics from above - you honestly may as well have quoted the system requirements from a different game.
At least I’m quoting things instead of making them up.
Tab targeting can work just fine as a soft target prioritising feature during combat (think ESO, it was okay in that); for instances where healers are playing it can make the game much more engaging.
I'd personally be fine with full action + placeable AoE templates. However what we want kinda doesn't matter as Intrepid and @Steven Sharif has already made his decision according to the players' demands long ago + some market research I assume. What we have is a hybrid system which supposedly will take the best bits of both vastly different systems. I must say tho, the fact that 'if hybrid doesn't work we'll go tab' bit has been mentioned more than once in the last 5 months is kinda disturbing for most people that prefer action combat (so basically displeasing both tab audience - through APOC and with such statements the action audience). Once we see it working, most of the concerns will most likely be gone. I'd say just let the player choose either of them (both if you believe you can achieve it) which is what they are planning to do hopefully - meaning choosing either of those won't effect their gameplay significantly (that hybrid bit being forced on the player etc) and people will be able to enjoy it as they wish. In the last livestream I loved how Brad Constantine was passionate about making hybrid system work instead of trying to please\calm the audience by saying tab is their go to if things don't work out well etc. It's a bit of a long read but anyways. This is my opinion on the matter
2
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
The way it has been described is that it’s not like you’ll be able to go into one mode or the other, or decide if individual skills are action or tabbed. Each class will have a mix of skills, some action, some tab.
So if you want to go exclusively with one style or the other, it may be feasible, but you’d lose maybe half of the skills for your class. If you’re willing to be flexible you’ll have more variety.
Most games run just fine on systems below the stated minimum spec - and this was even more common in the '90's - let alone the recommended minimum.
EQ ran fine on dial-up. I specifically said this in the initial post that lead to this conversation.
That said, Verant (SoE) had a habit of designing games with an eye to future technology. EQ was designed in the knowledge that before long most people playing would have broadband internet, and EQ2 was designed with the assumption that within a few years of launch, most gamers would be running CPU's at 6ghz or higher (which is why the game had issues for a few years).
First, broadband usage was lower outside of the US.
Nope.
The US has never had the best internet service, and is often below average when looking at the whole of the OECD.
This is in part due to the physical size (Australia has this same issue), but also a general lack of competition (I have a choice of 37 different broadband providers where I live, how many do you have?).
Didn't you argue earlier that they had the make the game accessible to scientists in Antarctica, and miners in the outback Australia, because 350 ping to make the game extremely playable wasn't enough for you?
lol
0
Options
NagashMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Didn't you argue earlier that they had the make the game accessible to scientists in Antarctica, and miners in the outback Australia, because 350 ping to make the game extremely playable wasn't enough for you?
lol
now now everyone knows people living in Australia don't need luxuries like water or internet
The dead do not squabble as this land’s rulers do. The dead have no desires, petty jealousies or ambitions. A world of the dead is a world at peace
Didn't you argue earlier that they had the make the game accessible to scientists in Antarctica, and miners in the outback Australia, because 350 ping to make the game extremely playable wasn't enough for you?
lol
now now everyone knows people living in Australia don't need luxuries like water or internet
I've got 220 ping to Australia from the East Coast, US.
As long as someone is not using satellite or on a connection that is borderline broken, they should be below 350 ping.
ESPECIALLY if there are localized servers.
Unfortunately that means that scientists in antarctica probably couldn't play the action combat well.
1
Options
NagashMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Didn't you argue earlier that they had the make the game accessible to scientists in Antarctica, and miners in the outback Australia, because 350 ping to make the game extremely playable wasn't enough for you?
lol
now now everyone knows people living in Australia don't need luxuries like water or internet
I've got 220 ping to Australia from the East Coast, US.
As long as someone is not using satellite or on a connection that is borderline broken, they should be below 350 ping.
ESPECIALLY if there are localized servers.
Unfortunately that means that scientists in antarctica probably couldn't play the action combat well.
you mean the penguins
The dead do not squabble as this land’s rulers do. The dead have no desires, petty jealousies or ambitions. A world of the dead is a world at peace
Didn't you argue earlier that they had the make the game accessible to scientists in Antarctica, and miners in the outback Australia, because 350 ping to make the game extremely playable wasn't enough for you?
lol
I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
You seem to be getting mixed up between my statement that any game being released now should be playable in those areas, and the discussion on the original EQ.
Back in 1999, EQ was technically playable from Antarctica (the year Amundsen-Scott base received a dedicated {old} communications satellite). I don't know if anyone did (my first encounter with a gamer on Antarctica was in EQ2), but it was technically and technologically possible.
In order for a game to still be playable in those areas now, it needs to be able to factor in a 350 - 550 ping, something no game with pure action based combat has ever managed.
Australia's internal internet infrastructure is essentially broken.
Sure, you may get 220 ping to a server in Sydney from the east coast of the US, but that server is physically located at the end of the Endeavour Cable (linking Sydney to Hawaii). This means the data you send and receive essentially travel exclusively along what can be considered backbone internet infrastructure.
However, once you hit Australia, since a fiber optic network (National Broadband Network) was used as a political football for a decade or so, the speed quickly decreases. You probably have a faster connection to that server, located close to Paddington no doubt, than someone in Penrith would have to that same server - simply because that person in Penrith has to have their data sent and received over the Australian network.
However, as you get even further out of the major cities in Australia, your internet options are even worse. Once you hit the outback, the only option you have is satellite.
Didn't you argue earlier that they had the make the game accessible to scientists in Antarctica, and miners in the outback Australia, because 350 ping to make the game extremely playable wasn't enough for you?
lol
I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
You seem to be getting mixed up between my statement that any game being released now should be playable in those areas, and the discussion on the original EQ.
Back in 1999, EQ was technically playable from Antarctica (the year Amundsen-Scott base received a dedicated {old} communications satellite). I don't know if anyone did (my first encounter with a gamer on Antarctica was in EQ2), but it was technically and technologically possible.
In order for a game to still be playable in those areas now, it needs to be able to factor in a 350 - 550 ping, something no game with pure action based combat has ever managed.
They won’t be able to play tab effectively either with that kind of ping
Didn't you argue earlier that they had the make the game accessible to scientists in Antarctica, and miners in the outback Australia, because 350 ping to make the game extremely playable wasn't enough for you?
lol
I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
You seem to be getting mixed up between my statement that any game being released now should be playable in those areas, and the discussion on the original EQ.
Back in 1999, EQ was technically playable from Antarctica (the year Amundsen-Scott base received a dedicated {old} communications satellite). I don't know if anyone did (my first encounter with a gamer on Antarctica was in EQ2), but it was technically and technologically possible.
In order for a game to still be playable in those areas now, it needs to be able to factor in a 350 - 550 ping, something no game with pure action based combat has ever managed.
They won’t be able to play tab effectively either with that kind of ping
Yeah they will.
It is possible to play a tab targeting based game that has a 0.5 second GCD with a ping of up to 750 and still be able to function well enough. Not 100%, to be sure, but well enough.
There are limitations - you want to spec with long casting, big hitting abilities, and builds that have instant cast anything are out of the question.
PvP is also fairly hard, but still possible. Along with the slower casting big hitting abilities, you need to make sure you don't have positional based attacks, and you should do everything you can to block CC rather than remove it once it is on you.
When work has required me to travel, I've been involved in top end raiding in both EQ2 and Rift (and top end PvP in Archeage) with a ping as high as 750.
To be fair, if 750 is the best connection you can get, I would consider it unplayable in any game, but if you know how to play the game already, and then figure out how to best mitigate that latency when on the road, it is possible.
550 though, that is playable in any tab targeting game.
I find things like this to be similar monitor resolution/refresh. I game on a 40 inch, 4k 120hz monitor. I often think 1080p is unplayable for some games - but then when I have to travel I'm on to my laptop with a 1080p, 15 inch 60hz monitor and I make do just fine - even if it isn't the same experience.
To people that are used to a ping in the double digits, anything as high as 350 seems unplayable. But when you are in a situation where that is what you have, you find ways to make it work.
I just want the game to have fun combat, and from what we've seen, they have done substantially better with action combat than tab target.
That may well have something to do with them having spent far more time on action combat so far than tab targeting.
At least in what they have shown us - because we have yet to see any real tab target based combat. Alpha 0 was purely tab target based, but was so limited to just a few basic skills and was functionally more a proof of concept that the games servers actually worked rather than proof of design that it really doesn't matter what the combat there was.
Edit; and satellite internet works just fine for any online game other than action combat based ones.
I love all 3 base types of combat systems and my favorite MMOs of all time are:
Tab-Target would be "Last Chaos"
Turn-based would be "ToonTown" (I played for quite a few years since release and on fan-made servers when main servers closed)
Action-Combat would be Tera (Has a better combat system than a lot of single player games but boring Lore)
In my experience and opinion, WoW has the best tab -targeting and TERA has the best action combat system. Mix those two succesfully and AoC has the best combat system ever seen.
Do you need a ride to the Underworld?
0
Options
NagashMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I still miss the PvP from age of reckoning
The dead do not squabble as this land’s rulers do. The dead have no desires, petty jealousies or ambitions. A world of the dead is a world at peace
Comments
I do however fear that perhaps you are unable to determine what a fact is, versus an opinion. That, my friend, is what's going to make reading each and every one of your posts delightful. Thank you.
I never said it would be easy, but IS doesn't seem to be whining about having to do it, since it was the goal from the beginning. They appear to maybe have not realized how intricate the balancing act would be, but again appear to be going for it. So there are some limitations to tab-targeting, perhaps there might be some for action, every game has these limits and in every game a portion of the player base will complain.
"These two systems are clashing in such a way that the entire combat system will need to be designed around avoiding the inherent imbalances in these combat systems from being exploitable - Thereby resulting in silly limitations, like no hard CC for anyone using "tab target."
Please tell me exactly, since you think perhaps I am too lazy to 'unravel' things, which of your opinions in reference to my statements are backed up by this conclusion.
"But why sacrifice tab target? It's not going to be easy to balance, nor will it be necessarily fun, to have a hybrid system."
-Notice here, in my response, I was referring to the 'fun' aspect you mentioned. Because, like me, you seem to be having trouble correlating things. I never said it was going to be easy to balance, or the difficult of balance is an opinion. It is, however combined with an opinion. Since you like examples, combing a fact and an opinion is like this "Rain is water, so everyone loves rain" < Obviously not true.
"Action combat can simply be more fun, enjoyable, immersive, and if enough resources are poured into it that might otherwise need to be spent on a hybrid system, could be even better for players that want to avoid twitch style gameplay."
-Here, oddly enough, I was also referring to the 'fun' aspect of your post, as mentioned in my response. Also, the 'could be even better' is obviously an opinion based on your assumption "If enough resources...". Where, even if IS said that "If enough resources are spent this could be even better for players that want to avoid twitch style gameplay" that would still be an opinion. I have been accused of not liking things specifically because IS said they weren't going to do it, but I have never taken their opinions as facts.
""Action Combat" and Tab Targeting are like an ice cream sundae and beef stew. Both are good in their own right, but they shouldn't be mixed together."
-You saying they "shouldn't be mixed" is not the same as IS saying they are trying to find , or struggling to find, a balance. Also, as in my response, I pointed out others 'feel' differently because you know, it's an opinion. I could say that Cayenne Peppers and Ice Cream are good separately, and shouldn't be mixed together (which is a legit opinion I have), but several of my friends like that flavor of ice cream. You know, opinions.
Tab targeting is great for healing/support classes. It isn't that it is needed to support other players, but it is needed for specific types of support. Most games with action combat healers use AoE healing to make up for less predictable player movements. FPS games use channeled heals, where once you get an initial tap you can heal them as long as you are in range. Online games with direct healing projectiles and no tab targeting are pretty rare. I've seen online games with direct healing projectiles before, but the only working examples I can think of are small group PvP games. Imagine using a loose healing projectile during a castle siege. Your own team would be your worst enemy.
As a backer, I wouldn't mind them getting rid of tab targeting, but support spells better not be non-AoE if they go that route. Healers often need to turn situations around immediately. In an MMO, projectile healing will be viewed as ineffective unless you can just spray healing bullets into a mob of allies without consequence.
The Importance in World PvP:
I actually don't know how they'll initially handle faction-less world PvP with action combat. It will probably require some testing on their end. Tab target combat is 1000x more deliberate than action combat. Ever accidentally slap an NPC with a sword in a single player action combat RPG and need to reload a save? I sure have. More than I ever did with tab targeting. What about doing the same thing in an action MMORPG where you accidentally slap an innocent player? Do you get auto-flagged for PvP? In most MMORPGs you just need to tab target a player and then hit them to get flagged. Accident protection would get annoying for people wanting to make an opener, but a lack of accident protection would get annoying for the defenders.
Tab targeting solves this issue. If you hit somebody who've you locked onto, you've more than likely wanted that attack to go through. Have there been times where this hasn't been the case? Yeah, but it's easier to catch yourself before the mistake is made.
This is good to hear. It also demonstrates a fundamental importance that targeting will have in AoC, even for action combat players.
We didn’t have a majority of households with broadband until 2007, when it hit 51%.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/214668/household-adoption-rate-of-broadband-internet-access-in-the-us-since-2000/
Looking it up, they did recommend broadband for the few people who could get it, but that was a theoretical optimum. The minimum was:
Minimum System Requirements
OS: Windows 95/98
Processor: Pentium 2 @ 233 MHz
Memory: 32 MB
Hard Drive: 600 MB Free
Video Memory: 4 MB
Sound Card: DirectX 7 Compatible
Keyboard & Mouse
CD/DVD Rom Drive: 2X Speed
Active Internet Connection @ 56.6 KBPs
Again, it would have been insane in 1999 to expect their customers to have that kind of connection.
Limiting statistics to US only in any discussion in relation to the internet is totally arbitrary. I never said anything about the minimum requirements, I was talking about the suggested/recommended specs for the game.
This is about as smart as your arbitrary limit on statistics from above - you honestly may as well have quoted the system requirements from a different game.
It is generally accepted that “recommended specs” are the same as minimum specs for decent gameplay. EQ1 was almost certainly not designed with the assumption people would be using broadband.
At least I’m quoting things instead of making them up.
So if you want to go exclusively with one style or the other, it may be feasible, but you’d lose maybe half of the skills for your class. If you’re willing to be flexible you’ll have more variety.
Most games run just fine on systems below the stated minimum spec - and this was even more common in the '90's - let alone the recommended minimum.
EQ ran fine on dial-up. I specifically said this in the initial post that lead to this conversation.
That said, Verant (SoE) had a habit of designing games with an eye to future technology. EQ was designed in the knowledge that before long most people playing would have broadband internet, and EQ2 was designed with the assumption that within a few years of launch, most gamers would be running CPU's at 6ghz or higher (which is why the game had issues for a few years).
Nope.
The US has never had the best internet service, and is often below average when looking at the whole of the OECD.
This is in part due to the physical size (Australia has this same issue), but also a general lack of competition (I have a choice of 37 different broadband providers where I live, how many do you have?).
lol
now now everyone knows people living in Australia don't need luxuries like water or internet
I've got 220 ping to Australia from the East Coast, US.
As long as someone is not using satellite or on a connection that is borderline broken, they should be below 350 ping.
ESPECIALLY if there are localized servers.
Unfortunately that means that scientists in antarctica probably couldn't play the action combat well.
you mean the penguins
I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
You seem to be getting mixed up between my statement that any game being released now should be playable in those areas, and the discussion on the original EQ.
Back in 1999, EQ was technically playable from Antarctica (the year Amundsen-Scott base received a dedicated {old} communications satellite). I don't know if anyone did (my first encounter with a gamer on Antarctica was in EQ2), but it was technically and technologically possible.
In order for a game to still be playable in those areas now, it needs to be able to factor in a 350 - 550 ping, something no game with pure action based combat has ever managed.
Sure, you may get 220 ping to a server in Sydney from the east coast of the US, but that server is physically located at the end of the Endeavour Cable (linking Sydney to Hawaii). This means the data you send and receive essentially travel exclusively along what can be considered backbone internet infrastructure.
However, once you hit Australia, since a fiber optic network (National Broadband Network) was used as a political football for a decade or so, the speed quickly decreases. You probably have a faster connection to that server, located close to Paddington no doubt, than someone in Penrith would have to that same server - simply because that person in Penrith has to have their data sent and received over the Australian network.
However, as you get even further out of the major cities in Australia, your internet options are even worse. Once you hit the outback, the only option you have is satellite.
They won’t be able to play tab effectively either with that kind of ping
Yeah they will.
It is possible to play a tab targeting based game that has a 0.5 second GCD with a ping of up to 750 and still be able to function well enough. Not 100%, to be sure, but well enough.
There are limitations - you want to spec with long casting, big hitting abilities, and builds that have instant cast anything are out of the question.
PvP is also fairly hard, but still possible. Along with the slower casting big hitting abilities, you need to make sure you don't have positional based attacks, and you should do everything you can to block CC rather than remove it once it is on you.
When work has required me to travel, I've been involved in top end raiding in both EQ2 and Rift (and top end PvP in Archeage) with a ping as high as 750.
To be fair, if 750 is the best connection you can get, I would consider it unplayable in any game, but if you know how to play the game already, and then figure out how to best mitigate that latency when on the road, it is possible.
550 though, that is playable in any tab targeting game.
I find things like this to be similar monitor resolution/refresh. I game on a 40 inch, 4k 120hz monitor. I often think 1080p is unplayable for some games - but then when I have to travel I'm on to my laptop with a 1080p, 15 inch 60hz monitor and I make do just fine - even if it isn't the same experience.
To people that are used to a ping in the double digits, anything as high as 350 seems unplayable. But when you are in a situation where that is what you have, you find ways to make it work.
Even if the game is 75%, 25%, hybrid you're going to be at a big disadvantage.
I just want the game to have fun combat, and from what we've seen, they have done substantially better with action combat than tab target.
I think that's tje only test ground they had for tab target. Could be wrong.
At least in what they have shown us - because we have yet to see any real tab target based combat. Alpha 0 was purely tab target based, but was so limited to just a few basic skills and was functionally more a proof of concept that the games servers actually worked rather than proof of design that it really doesn't matter what the combat there was.
Edit; and satellite internet works just fine for any online game other than action combat based ones.
I love all 3 base types of combat systems and my favorite MMOs of all time are:
Tab-Target would be "Last Chaos"
Turn-based would be "ToonTown" (I played for quite a few years since release and on fan-made servers when main servers closed)
Action-Combat would be Tera (Has a better combat system than a lot of single player games but boring Lore)