Ranged combat builds, AoEs and gap closers

Has combat become chaotic and ugly in the recent mmo years?

Been playing a bit of ESO again.
Either on battlegrounds or during sieges, the same thing happens always.

The ranged builds pew pew pew pew, some times for a long duration, until finally the battle turns from an fps game to an aoe zergfest, with spamming buttons without even aiming.

How do you feel about pew pew stalemates?
How do you feel about AoE zergfests?
How do you feel about spammable gap openers and gap closers?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Ramirez

You know why? Because they don´t have nothing personal to lose in the battle is the same with gw2 wvwvw, if they lose they gears to other players , believe me sieges and clan wars will be much more tactic and played with caution

Noaani

Ramirez wrote: »

You know why? Because they don´t have nothing personal to lose in the battle is the same with gw2 wvwvw, if they lose they gears in the , believe me sieges and clan wars will be much more tactic and played with caution

None of the large scale PvP like that in Ashes will put players in a position where they could lose gear, so I am unsure how this would change things.

I mean, if player gear was at stake, rather than just a short penalty that takes a few minutes to work off, then absolutely, players would be more cautious.

Thing is, that isn't the case in Ashes.

George_Black

This topic has nothing to do with gear dmg or loss. In eso you also consume a lot of expensive potions. Stay on topic.

Noaani

George Black wrote: »

This topic has nothing to do with gear dmg or loss. In eso you also consume a lot of expensive potions. Stay on topic.

It sort of does.

Giving people something to lose means they will take care. Without something to lose, people just charge in to combat without thought, creating that chaotic, ugly combat you speak of.

I mean, this only happens because the combat system allows it to happen, but even when the combat system allows it to happen, it would only happen if people are willing to be that careless.

In order to get in to those situations, both need to exist.

Ashes isn't going to change the fact that players in these situations don't have much to lose, as I said in the above post, so any discussion should be focused on the combat system - which I assume is what you are after.

George_Black

Why not throw in there that since this is a subscription game and you pay $ you will play more organized.

Feel free to play wit games and derail, or stay on topic and provide some insight from a players prespective to developers.

Tacualeon

George Black wrote: »

How do you feel about pew pew stalemates?

A natural and historically accurate depiction of what massive battles between mortals leads to.
Stalemate happens because group damage is a threat to the individual in the frontline and being ranged is risk-free.

Is hard being the first one to avance on an enemy group who has got a good deffensive position.
That's why charges and landings are so famous.
That's why sieges were so rare.
And that's why knights had more prestige than pike-men.

Both in real life and videogames, people find safety in groups.
People don't move forward just because, and both irl and videogames people are not enthusiastic about being the first one exposing themselves to harm if not for a huge reward in money, glory or prestige. (or in this case, an entertaining experience)

I would like Ashes to have some design elements that incentivize and rewards melees for wise aggression.
Someone needs to propose game.
Someone needs an incentive to move the chess-piece first.

George Black wrote: »

How do you feel about AoE zergfests?

I think it happens for the same reason as stalemates, group safety.
I would like some design element to avoid this.

People will fight videogame massive battles like they would fight real massive battles: Safe.
And a similar group zerg meta will develop.
I think that is in videogame and movies where we can experience individuality and being the hero of a battle, because usually massive battles are more about who has more troops and is more organized.

Unlike real battlegrounds, I would like videogame to cherish individuality and side-skirmishes.
In massive battles, the biggest number and the more organized team usually win.
This is a place where through design we could architect fun, the real things is not appealing.

Individuals get vastly outshined by group damage, and moments of brightness and personal skill get lost among the zerging.

I would be a shame not to architect fun and create those moments ourselves, and instead let instinct of preservation take over and drag us to a zerg meta. Why let ourselves gravitate toward a "realistic" meta when we could create our own fantasy meta?

We cannot put humans in groups fights, make death a thing, and expected not to act zerg and gang on individuals.
We have historical presedents about how humans act in similar scenarios, we have no arguments not to expect the same meta.

George Black wrote: »

How do you feel about spammable gap openers and gap closers?

I will pick the most mobile and tactical type of melee because that's how I roll, but I don't want Ashes to be a dash fest like BDO.

Fewer dashes, but the warrior and tank classes with damage reduction when charging, or when moving toward an enemy, or some entertaining and rewarding experience enough to justify exposing myself to being focused fire by half a raid.
I don't want to spend most of my time as a tank resurrecting.

Noaani

George Black wrote: »

Why not throw in there that since this is a subscription game and you pay $ you will play more organized.

Feel free to play wit games and derail, or stay on topic and provide some insight from a players prespective to developers.

If you looked at what was said, I was pointing out out that the post above my first post in this thread was not bringing anything relevent to the conversation, and basically shut down that particular point so that it need not be bought up again.

In my second post, after you complained, I reiterated that while the lack of potential loss was a factor in some games, since that isn't something that Ashes is going to change there is still no point in discuissing it.

But hey, don't pay attention to what's going on, thats fine.

Okeydoke

The pew pew stalemates are always going to happen. But one of the things that ESO did right was the openness of the battlefield in Cyrodiil. There were lots of pickings on the flanks of those opposing groups in a pew pew standoff. And also often a stream of solo and small group reinforcements coming in from behind the groups to pick off. That's how I became one of the first emperors, just mopping all of that up on a daily basis. But the standoffs are gonna happen, eventually one side makes a push and it ends.

Aoe zergfests suck. They are the ultimate dog doo doo form of mmo pvp. The scraping of the bottom of the barrel of how good mmo pvp can be. The basement, the dog water, the lowest IQ needing, just absolutely the horse fuck of mmo pvp. To get rid of Aoe zergfest pvp you either make your game with no AOE or you make it with good AOE that is upwards scaling in strength dependent on how many people it hits. Aoe one or two people and it does a smallish amount of damage to them. Aoe 6 or more and it becomes devastating. So zergs spread out because of fear of aoe, there aren't as many targets to aoe, and thus ends the aoe zergfest. ESO actually went the opposite direction though at the time I played, and limited the amount of people aoe can hit. So even if youre in range of hitting 10 people, the skill only hits 4. Don't know if that's changed since I last played years ago. But yeah its garbage.

Spammable gap closers and openers...that depends on the game. I thought it kinda worked for the most part in ESO. It depends on if you're having to manage a resource to use that spammable skill, like stamina or mana. Because then there's a risk vs reward of spamming it. In ESO people started to use "sustain" builds where they pretty much regained mana/stam as soon as they spent it. And in cases like that it can begin to feel cheap and gimmicky.

Edit - I quit before scenarios came out in ESO, so can't comment to that.

Vhaeyne

Speaking as someone who mains ranged a lot:

Spamming without aim sounds incredibly boring.

Stalemates should only happen if too people are equally geared and skilled, and even then someone should pull ahead.

AOE zergs happen, but unless you are fighting in a tunnel people should be able to dodge around them. I can't remember ever dyeing from AOEs unless I got pulled into it because I let myself get over extended.

Nothing should be spam-able. PvP should require timing and finesse.

Sounds like ESO is just as awful now as it was at launch.

Wandering Mist

Using blanket aoe's as zone control is a viable strategy. What I'd like to see are abilities that directly counter aoe in some way. In Divinity Original Sin 2 there is an ability called Battle Stomp that clears any harmful surfaces. Giving the tank (for example) a way of clearing aoe effects like this would stop the kind of stalemate that results from too much aoe being spammed around.

ariatras

I tend to favour ranged, or stealth melee (rogue)

The problem you describe sounds all too familiar. It even happens is small scale battles. It just lasts a lot longer on the large scale battles. Usually around chokepoints.

I believe the problem is layered. As in there are multiple causes.

Map design, and specifically the inability of MMO/RPG devs to direct the flow of battle. I've made a post on how the first Planetside did this very well. In short, here's how they did it.
Defenders had an incredible advantage. You could hold out against a larger force with relative ease. However, there are supplies that have to come in order to keep the base running (spawn vehicles, players, and power the generators) And so, adjacent territory sends supply vehicles (all player controlled) so the attackers try to make sure to destroy the supply-lines, and keep killing the transports, causing the defenders to commit forces to protect them, take different routes etc. This naturally spread out the battle. I've never seen this implemented well in mmo's

Another problem is class design. Specifically balance of the classes.

They go by a checklist of sorts. CC, CC-Break, movement-based ability, a form of selfheal/shield.
Just so class A will be able to deal with class B.
Even though, a rock, paper scissors approach is a lot more realistic and fun. Balance ruins many games. And I don't mean balance in the sense of, yea, this class/skill does way too much damage. Or this particular class is undertuned damage-wise. A barbarian/warrior type class should have a disadvantage against an archer/hunter/ranger type class in open fields especially. Less so in densely forested areas, or melee range. Walking forwards with the shield like the days of old for an incredible damage reduction or something more like a Reinhardt (overwatch) shield.

There are so many ways to do it rather than just. Oh, we'll give them a gap closer.

Child Item