Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our ongoing Alpha One Preview testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!

What Should The Benefit to Action Combat Be?

AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
New post because the Combat Discussion has gotten deep and this is a philosophical thing that doesn't affect the mechanics as much anyway.

Discussion in that thread has hit a point where some definition of this, is needed, but it probably shouldn't happen in that thread.

In this case I'm giving the options, they're limited because they're feedback around the Compilation in that thread, if you want something else entirely, expect a discussion on balance. Here's the options:

1. Reduced cooldowns on all Class Abilities used from Action Target mode.
Reasoning/Lore/Expected Result: The user is a strong combatant in a high focus state. They aren't being 'guided by their Deity' or anything like a Tab Targeter. You can use your abilities more often, so missing is less painful, but you're still limited by your overall mana pool, so any unbalance comes from having a spammable ability that you have the raw skill to hit with.

2. Reduced Mana cost on all Class Abilities used from Action Target mode.
Reasoning/Lore/Expected Result: The user is using their training and not pushing their 'sixth sense' or whatever and using up their mana to do so. Allows you to miss more with lower overall mana cost, allowing you to outlast opponents, and output more damage total without necessarily shortening Time To Kill.

3. Additional effects on all Class Abilities when used from Action Target mode.
Reasoning/Lore/Expected Result: The user's accuracy is what drives the additional effect, whatever it is, by being focused. Allows you to more drastically affect the opponent's abilities, at the cost of 'having to be accurate enough to actually succeed at this, and losing damage when you miss'.

4. Reduced Recovery Frames on all Class Abilities used from Action Target mode.
Reasoning/Lore/Expected Result: If the user isn't 'stopping to guarantee their success', they also are probably 'thinking differently and moving faster' or 'didn't need to commit as much'. They 'believed they could use their force more efficiently' and so they didn't need to swing quite as hard, or something. Directly raises damage output and lessens the pain of missing.

5. None of the above
If you're choosing this, you either believe there's a much better way and will wait on Intrepid to find it, believe that all of the above are unbalanced (or are suspicious), or just don't believe Action Combat should even be in the game (For those of you who are anti-Action Combat, please just put the '5' and try not to derail the thread too much with the arguing. I request this realizing that Talking Is A Free Action)

All of these advantages, and in fact, any advantages, rapidly reach the point of being 'required' in PvE, but if I thought that could be balanced, I'd understand the Hybrid Combat intention way better. If Intrepid already has something better than any of these, this won't matter, but if they don't, it may matter a lot.

Please choose below by giving either a number or multiple numbers, e.g. 1+2 if you think both should be in, and most importantly any reasons why you didn't choose the others, even if you just say 'Balance', it's super helpful.

In case anyone is wondering why this is relevant, it's because of the 'Sticky Reticle' part of the Compilation, so if you want to just discuss that, please put anything about it in the Combat Discussion thread.
«13

Comments

  • VhaeyneVhaeyne Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    5: (With a solution)
    Tab-Target(TT) skills should have a miss chance built into them that can be modified by gear like most traditional TT MMORPG combat systems. Action Combat(AC) skills should not have any miss chance at all.

    To me, that is the bare minimum required to balance the two play styles in one world. If they could just get the numbers right on that everything would work fine together.

    What is good about this is that an AC player could ignore stats that give them accuracy for more of other stats. (Risk vs Reward)
    hKBVnLk.png
  • DizzDizz Member
    I won’t explain too deep because I'm not a native English speaker, and if it's hard to understand what I'm saying, I apologize about my poor English.

    I choose 5.

    I feel arena.net did a good job with combine tab targeting and action targeting together. So I will suggest just take GW2 combat system and action camera as a reference or a prototype and build and modifies from there. It just needs more polishing, for example: characters, skill animations, animated effects, weapon or spell sound effects, camera shaking effects etc to make every skill and move feel more natural more connected between upper and lower body animations while moving in any direction especially with melee weapons.

    I will not suggest to make combat like BDO or anything like that, there are too much conflict or just bad designs in those games especially Korea and China games today in my opinion.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    I'm confused why this is even a question.

    If there is a benefit to action combat abilities, what should the benefit be to tab target abilities?
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Alpha One
    Vhaeyne wrote: »
    5: (With a solution)
    Tab-Target(TT) skills should have a miss chance built into them that can be modified by gear like most traditional TT MMORPG combat systems. Action Combat(AC) skills should not have any miss chance at all.

    What is good about this is that an AC player could ignore stats that give them accuracy for more of other stats. (Risk vs Reward)
    Ignoring stats is the antithesis of an RPG.
    I think the target's gear is probably going to give some amount of Evade, regardless of whether the attack is tab-target or action combat.
  • insomniainsomnia Member
    I recall they already said it a while back
  • VhaeyneVhaeyne Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Dygz wrote: »
    Ignoring stats is the antithesis of an RPG.
    It does not ignore stats all together. It ignores the stats that are involved in hit chance. States would still be used for everything that is not involved in calculating hits.

    Action combat moves use the player's skill instead of the character's skill.
    Dygz wrote: »
    I think the target's gear is probably going to give some amount of Evade, regardless of whether the attack is tab-target or action combat.

    This is ridiculous. If I hit you with an aimed skill shot. I should never see the word evaded instead of a damage number.
    hKBVnLk.png
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    Vhaeyne wrote: »
    This is ridiculous. If I hit you with an aimed skill shot. I should never see the word evaded instead of a damage number.
    You won't.

    As always, Dygz doesn't know what he is talking about.

    The only way you will see an action combat skill hit a player and not deal damage is if that player has used an active defensive ability to neutralize that damage.

  • DizzDizz Member
    Vhaeyne wrote: »
    5: (With a solution)
    Tab-Target(TT) skills should have a miss chance built into them that can be modified by gear like most traditional TT MMORPG combat systems. Action Combat(AC) skills should not have any miss chance at all.

    To me, that is the bare minimum required to balance the two play styles in one world. If they could just get the numbers right on that everything would work fine together.

    What is good about this is that an AC player could ignore stats that give them accuracy for more of other stats. (Risk vs Reward)

    I think this will easily make action skills too powerful because it won't miss if you know how to aim, and will gain extra damage or other stat to gain advantage because not need to stack accuracy, and if action skill are too easy to use or you can say doesn't require player skill to use, it will make target action skill meaningless I think. For example Tank's Resounding Smash and Shockwave(I just feel these two skills look like easy to use and hard to miss base on describe), if most of action skills are easy to use like these two skills, the 75:25 ratio hybrid skill selection will always 75% action skills and no one will take 75% target skills then tanks and hybrid combat seems pointless.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Alpha One
    edited June 12
    Vhaeyne wrote: »
    It does not ignore stats all together. It ignores the stats that are involved in hit chance. States would still be used for everything that is not involved in calculating hits.
    Ignoring stats involved in hit chance is the antithesis of an RPG.


    Vhaeyne wrote: »
    Action combat moves use the player's skill instead of the character's skill.
    An RPG should still be factoring in character stats because an RPG is about the characters' abilities; not the players' abilities.


    Vhaeyne wrote: »
    This is ridiculous. If I hit you with an aimed skill shot. I should never see the word evaded instead of a damage number.
    No. What is ridiculous is thinking that in an RPG, player skills trump character skills.
    This is another difference between an RPG and an FPS.
    Action combat means that your player skill can help you land or dodge a hit, but it should not completely ignore character stats because the whole point of an RPG is that you can create characters that can do things the players cannot.
    Whether that is Spot a hidden object or Evade an attack.
  • VhaeyneVhaeyne Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    @Dygz

    We have discussed many times on here that the term RPG has no one set definition. It has been innovated and redefined too many times. Your ridged and antiquated ideas on what an RPG is might be preventing you from thinking outside the box. Try to consider things in terms of game balance and fun instead of what you think an RPG should be.
    hKBVnLk.png
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Alpha One
    edited June 12
    Yeah.
    I am and you aren't.
    You want to play an MMORPG as if it's an MMOFPS.

    "I don't agree that MMORPGs are a worthwhile canvas for real role playing."
    :rolleyes:
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    Dizz wrote: »
    Vhaeyne wrote: »
    5: (With a solution)
    Tab-Target(TT) skills should have a miss chance built into them that can be modified by gear like most traditional TT MMORPG combat systems. Action Combat(AC) skills should not have any miss chance at all.

    To me, that is the bare minimum required to balance the two play styles in one world. If they could just get the numbers right on that everything would work fine together.

    What is good about this is that an AC player could ignore stats that give them accuracy for more of other stats. (Risk vs Reward)

    I think this will easily make action skills too powerful because it won't miss if you know how to aim

    This can be avoided by reducing the projectile size of action combat abilities.

    If both action and tab deal equal damage (or have otherwise equal effect), this means players are basically able to pick which abilities they opt for by deciding if they want to manage a reticle or a cooldown timer.
  • Cold 0ne FTBCold 0ne FTB Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    I know our current combat is placeholder but from everything I have seen so far this game is going to be leaning towards tab target style. Even action combat has a soft tab targeting built into it. This has only increased with time. None of the three current archetypes can be truly played in action mode. Their skills don't really suit action combat

    Something else you need to consider when we you suggest mechanics is what would happen if a large group of veteran players did this at the same time. What would happen if experienced players could get a bonus to their damage by making things slightly more challenging. They would all do it. What about those that are new or aren't hardcore? Their attacks would depend far more on hitting and they would have a tougher time. So instead of creating a dynamic that promotes duality you end up creating a system abused by the elite that punishes the new or less experienced.
    ZxbhjES.gif

    That is not dead which can eternal lie. And with strange aeons even death may die.
  • roostroost Member
    Dygz once again proving in this thread that he’s short sighted, pathetically stubborn, and willfully ignorant. I don’t know why people still try to argue with this guy. He refuses to discuss actual game design philosophy, and prefers to whine about semantics and what “should be” based on his own arbitrary definitions without giving any real reasoning.
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Functionally, all systems favor the experienced.

    If we want to argue that Action targeting shouldn't be a requirement for effective play, we'd probably be better off talking about latency, fatigue over time, or resultant technical imbalance.

    If we want to argue that Action targeting should be rewarded in any way at all, we can look at what Intrepid has said (more relying on wiki now, no, I didn't watch all the Livestreams/Podcasts to verify these):

    Damage.
    Charge up time.
    CC effects.
    Cooldown.
    Energy consumption.
    Cost to spec.

    Attack range will likely remain the same; as it is driven by the weapon or skill itself.

    I didn't ask about 'damage' because not all abilities are damaging. Similarly for 'charge up time'. These are applicable at their own timings and so on. "Cost to spec" is not possible to judge with the current skills and archetypes, and the Compilation that triggered this is one based on Action Combat players with a large preference for moving the game closer to a 'Frame data' based game, so 'Recovery Frames' became a consideration.

    Also, I'll point out one more thing, apparently...

    RNG is always going to play a role in Ashes of Creation whether that be in PvP or PvE, but one way to mitigate that is through the action system. The action system is going to be far less sort of dependent on those you know dice rolls and there'll be far more in your own hands. They won't ever completely eliminate that but it's a way for us to sort of reward skilled play versus sort of tactical strategies type play.– Jeffrey Bard

    I make no claims about what exactly 'won't ever completely eliminate' means, but those who are faulting Dygz, you should know that it's in there.
  • Cold 0ne FTBCold 0ne FTB Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Azherae wrote: »
    Functionally, all systems favor the experienced.

    If we want to argue that Action targeting shouldn't be a requirement for effective play, we'd probably be better off talking about latency, fatigue over time, or resultant technical imbalance.

    If we want to argue that Action targeting should be rewarded in any way at all, we can look at what Intrepid has said (more relying on wiki now, no, I didn't watch all the Livestreams/Podcasts to verify these):

    Damage.
    Charge up time.
    CC effects.
    Cooldown.
    Energy consumption.
    Cost to spec.

    Attack range will likely remain the same; as it is driven by the weapon or skill itself.

    I didn't ask about 'damage' because not all abilities are damaging. Similarly for 'charge up time'. These are applicable at their own timings and so on. "Cost to spec" is not possible to judge with the current skills and archetypes, and the Compilation that triggered this is one based on Action Combat players with a large preference for moving the game closer to a 'Frame data' based game, so 'Recovery Frames' became a consideration.

    Also, I'll point out one more thing, apparently...

    RNG is always going to play a role in Ashes of Creation whether that be in PvP or PvE, but one way to mitigate that is through the action system. The action system is going to be far less sort of dependent on those you know dice rolls and there'll be far more in your own hands. They won't ever completely eliminate that but it's a way for us to sort of reward skilled play versus sort of tactical strategies type play.– Jeffrey Bard

    I make no claims about what exactly 'won't ever completely eliminate' means, but those who are faulting Dygz, you should know that it's in there.

    Of course they do but the question is... Is it abusable. Does it break the system? People often forget to ask this question. If 300 of the most experienced players in the game got in the group and did this what would happen?

    What about the reverse does it hurt new and less experienced players too much? Does it create an unfriendly overly mechanically challenging form of combat that has too steep of a learning curve? You always need to consider the end user.
    ZxbhjES.gif

    That is not dead which can eternal lie. And with strange aeons even death may die.
  • Wandering MistWandering Mist Moderator, Member, Founder
    The main benefit to Action over Tab is that you can hit someone without having to click to target them first. Of course, this benefit only matters if the game is designed around it. League of Legends does this will with the way the map is designed and how bushes in that game work.

    In LoL, there are bushes scattered around the map that break line of sight. If you are standing outside a bush and an enemy is standing inside a bush, you cannot see them or click to target them, even if you know 100% that they are there. In this situation, tab abilities don't work because you cannot click to target them, but action abilities DO work.

    Most of the time, when you are out in the open you are more susceptible to tab abilities, but when you are in the bushes, you are more susceptible to action abilities.

    Now, the question is, can Ashes use a similar system? I think so, if you had solid objects that stopped a player from being click targeted.
    23in6tvjikn1.gif
  • Cold 0ne FTBCold 0ne FTB Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    The main benefit to Action over Tab is that you can hit someone without having to click to target them first. Of course, this benefit only matters if the game is designed around it. League of Legends does this will with the way the map is designed and how bushes in that game work.

    In LoL, there are bushes scattered around the map that break line of sight. If you are standing outside a bush and an enemy is standing inside a bush, you cannot see them or click to target them, even if you know 100% that they are there. In this situation, tab abilities don't work because you cannot click to target them, but action abilities DO work.

    Most of the time, when you are out in the open you are more susceptible to tab abilities, but when you are in the bushes, you are more susceptible to action abilities.

    Now, the question is, can Ashes use a similar system? I think so, if you had solid objects that stopped a player from being click targeted.

    This is more realistic and a good way to approach this.
    ZxbhjES.gif

    That is not dead which can eternal lie. And with strange aeons even death may die.
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    I'll note you both as basically saying:

    5 - Don't give Action Combat any bonuses other than Action Targeting itself.

    This is only because you didn't give any other numbers, so I can't draw any other conclusion at the moment. Do you have any opinions on 'sticky' reticles?
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Alpha One
    edited June 12
    Azherae wrote: »
    RNG is always going to play a role in Ashes of Creation whether that be in PvP or PvE, but one way to mitigate that is through the action system. The action system is going to be far less sort of dependent on those you know dice rolls and there'll be far more in your own hands. They won't ever completely eliminate that but it's a way for us to sort of reward skilled play versus sort of tactical strategies type play.
    – Jeffrey Bard
    Yes. This is precisely my point.
  • How does the action combat Vs tab targeting work when there is a player between you and your target? Does the skill hit the in between player in action combat but hit the target in tab targeting?

    I have no access to see if this is the case.
  • SkyraSkyra Member
    5. With suggestion.
    There should be no advantage to AC over TT. This does not meant that they have to be perfectly same only that they should perform on average the same. And how to achieve this is to have only AC and TT is just AC with aim bot slapped on top of it. Now i will give reasoning and elaborate more how i would design it.

    For me most of the abilities fall into three categories. Ground target/character based AOE, target locked, projectile(those include melee weapon attacks). AC and TT would differ only in how projectiles work since ground target is inherently action based and target lock is TT based. Ground targets and TT both would encompass 25 percent of characters abilities so 25 / 75 percent split of AC and TT would be achieved. When it comes to projectiles those would be 50 percent of all abilities and would function like this. In AC projectiles are regular entities that are shot where reticle is aiming at, if there is cast time more than 0.2 seconds projectile is released by secondary action. Stat attack rating increases speed of projectiles so it is easier to hit. When it comes to TT projectiles are still projectiles they travel and can be dodged by moving out of their path, only aim is performed by what is essentially aim bot and they would have week homing ability since otherwise with real projectiles it would be to easy to avoid them. Stat attack rating would improve homing aspect of projectiles. Basic point of balance of AC and TT would be around effects of attack rating. If this is not enough to balance it so that on average AC and TT performs similarly then some of the other four original suggestions would be fine.
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    How does the action combat Vs tab targeting work when there is a player between you and your target? Does the skill hit the in between player in action combat but hit the target in tab targeting?

    I have no access to see if this is the case.

    Basically this is how it works. Can make healing 'interesting'. This is part of the reason for asking because of how 'sticky' reticles work in this situation is different to how straight Tab Targeting works.

    It's also the reason why 'Stat-Affected Sticky Reticle + AimLock After Sticking + (from Skyra) possibly Homing aspect' would still work differently and possibly require more coordination than a full Tab Target system.

    So far, unfortunately it seems like those who support Action Combat don't support any of the things Intrepid has previously said that they've planned. This leaves the Devs in a difficult position, I think. They can't go back on all the things said so far, people have 'preordered' and jumped in to help test, based on things they heard and philosophies they agreed with.

    Subscription model or not, I don't expect that the Action Combat supporters will get what they seem to want without some compromise, as they are usually the ones 'asking for things not promised' and Steven is on record saying that if he is forced to choose due to incompatibility, it's Action Combat that will be reworked/removed.

    I just hope that we can avoid that outcome, but as I've noted before, I don't think it is the 'Action Combat is a waste of time' crowd that is going to 'end up losing out' here if the current vocal Action Combat supporters don't 'give an inch', which would be sad because as IS maintains even now, there's a lot of potential here.

    The conversation in the Combat Discussion thread is likely to move on from here, though, so if this thread stays on its current direction, I'll just leave things on that end as they are due to basically 'insufficient clarity on how to approach reticles'.
  • DizzDizz Member
    Azherae wrote: »
    How does the action combat Vs tab targeting work when there is a player between you and your target? Does the skill hit the in between player in action combat but hit the target in tab targeting?

    I have no access to see if this is the case.

    Basically this is how it works. Can make healing 'interesting'. This is part of the reason for asking because of how 'sticky' reticles work in this situation is different to how straight Tab Targeting works.

    It's also the reason why 'Stat-Affected Sticky Reticle + AimLock After Sticking + (from Skyra) possibly Homing aspect' would still work differently and possibly require more coordination than a full Tab Target system.

    So far, unfortunately it seems like those who support Action Combat don't support any of the things Intrepid has previously said that they've planned. This leaves the Devs in a difficult position, I think. They can't go back on all the things said so far, people have 'preordered' and jumped in to help test, based on things they heard and philosophies they agreed with.

    Subscription model or not, I don't expect that the Action Combat supporters will get what they seem to want without some compromise, as they are usually the ones 'asking for things not promised' and Steven is on record saying that if he is forced to choose due to incompatibility, it's Action Combat that will be reworked/removed.

    I just hope that we can avoid that outcome, but as I've noted before, I don't think it is the 'Action Combat is a waste of time' crowd that is going to 'end up losing out' here if the current vocal Action Combat supporters don't 'give an inch', which would be sad because as IS maintains even now, there's a lot of potential here.

    The conversation in the Combat Discussion thread is likely to move on from here, though, so if this thread stays on its current direction, I'll just leave things on that end as they are due to basically 'insufficient clarity on how to approach reticles'.

    I don't really understand/know that "Stat-Affected Sticky Reticle + AimLock After Sticking + (from Skyra) possibly Homing aspect" will look like, I imagine that healer in AC mode their reticle will automatically stop on allies or enemies and if they move reticle away to another player reticle will automatically stop on the player?

    If I guess right enough, I will suggest that healer in AC mode stay the same as other roles(tank/damage).

    Make healing spell(I imagine a traditional healer and healing spell that need target) highlight allies/enemies base on what the spell do while button pressed and hold, and if you aim close enough the highlight color or effect changes to tell healer this is who you will heal, then cast spell while button released.

    And I don't know if the UI is already there or not, healer may need UI near every allies in same party to show their HP(for example: stamina UI in BOTW or just a bar under or above characters).

    In group fights like siege I will suggest simplify from aiming a target to aiming a party/team while in a raid/group(I don't know what the word you use in AoC), system will decide which one or what area to heal in the party/team for healers base on whatever make sense or balanced, so healers can focus more on reposition in a large group while having a siege fight.

    I imagine this like playing osu! in a 3D space but you have to move you character around at the same time.
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    I was a Cleric in yesterday's siege test.

    I'm not saying that it would not work, the way you've described it, but I will say that it would not have made things any easier for me, personally. There are multiple reasons why I wouldn't have felt better doing it that way, and some issues that might come up if I needed to target myself.

    There were also situations where my teammates were pulled into a group of allies so that there was a wall of allied units between them and me, which was actually my biggest problem. With the current tab-targeting setup, I actually can't target my teammates in any way, when this happens, other than clicking on their name in the left menu for party members. (yes, the UI is already there)

    The problem with Action Mode in this case is, that when I move the mouse to click on that UI, my character's focus can change in other ways. There were other moments where I purposely used the action mode because it was a faster way to get an idea of the status of people in front of me who weren't in my party, but if those people moved past each other, or got pushed or pulled, the heal would fail, or misfire.

    Since Tab Targeting doesn't seem to work on allied units for me, at all, I decided to go with making sure I was not usually in Action Mode, so that I could just rapidly click trying to 'catch' anyone in front who needed targeted healing.

    Sticky Reticles could solve this a little bit by 'sticking on a player for longer to let me decide if to heal them or not even if they move', but it won't solve the 'body blocking by allied units' problem. So if a non-party member gets damaged but ends up behind one or two allies or enemies, I can't help them consistently either way.

    If I knew this might happen, I'd 'stick' the reticle on them beforehand, but since the game can't necessarily predict whether I'm going to want to do an attack, or a heal, any enemy that crosses my reticle will probably 'steal' it off my ally even if they are 'sticky', which I think you're saying is how you already imagine it.

    The bigger question here is actually, if I was working perfectly with my siege allies, had perfect timing, and used Action Mode for healing for some reason, what benefit should I get? I think the most fair one for me, specifically, in sieges, is 'reduced Cooldown', but when I say 'fair', I mean 'it's okay to choose not to do this in most normal situations, and a reward for doing something hard in difficult situations'.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Alpha One
    I focused on Hallowed Ground to solve the enemy blocking dilemma. But, the cooldown is a bit too long for that to feel particularly helpful.
    I think what I would really like is to have a longer range for Rank 3 Castigation and to put a Ranger/Rogue Invisibility augment on it. Setting me up for Hallowed Ground.

    Also...need to see what other abilities we will have past Level 15.
  • SeloSelo Member
    Dygz wrote: »
    Yeah.
    You want to play an MMORPG as if it's an MMOFPS.
    :
    This
    And it seems like alot of pepole think that way, and it makes me afraid for the future of this game.
    Ive played mmorpgs since Meridian and many many times have i seen the same things beeing said in the development stage of a new mmorpg.
    People think they want this and that FPS mechanic, permadeath, full loot etc, but when the game is released, it always sucks and people want the basic systems back.
    Instead of wanting a system where you beat players becouse you can press keys and movent keys faster than your oponent, you should wnat a combat system that the whole community can be as equally good at.


    Affiliate Code:
    0dbea148-8cb8-4711-ba90-eb0864e93b5f
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    The part of this that concerns me the most is that we're already in an MMORPG that has no intention of balancing by class.

    Intrepid uses the term 'rock-paper-scissors' because it's familiar and easy to understand, but MMO veterans may recognize it better when I mention it as M/C/A (or whatever order you like). Attrition, Mitigation, Cooldowns.

    Attrition (Cleric, any class with magical DoT or bleed and survivability) beats Mitigation (tanks and evasion tanks), Mitigation beats Cooldowns (Rogues, Rangers, basically burst DPS), and Cooldowns beat Attrition. (Sure this is an oversimplification, just know that your gear and Augments are moreso moving you around on this slider, not coming up with some whole new incredible thing)

    In most games where this doesn't happen, balance gets wrecked practically week one, so I'm glad that this is their intention, but Hybrid Combat, if done wrong interferes with this.

    Either you make Cooldowns able to beat Mitigation somehow by making their damage larger, which just makes them basically the best, or you make Attrition able to beat Cooldowns somehow by making their damage too low. I truly mean no disrespect to Action Combat supporters when I say that they're almost always Cooldowns players, almost by default.

    But Ashes is so much more likely to cause the second situation, than the first, that I'm concerned for them. Cooldowns players already lose to Mitigation because Mitigation doesn't involve targeting as often and just disrupts their plans, even before they start to actually miss their skillshots. Once you can miss your skillshots against Attrition players too, you're forced into doing things like X/Cleric or carrying a pile of items just to not be withered away by DoT. If it's too easy to cleanse DoT then the problem is sorta solved, but the balance gets worse (it reverses sort of, because Attrition no longer beats Mitigation).

    Fantasy MMOs already have too many fiddly bits where things can break, so they end up on the same path and you can usually predict it unless they throw in some crazy mechanic that becomes balance all its own.

    That's the point of the entire longwinded question above. Which number you choose, determines what 'lets Cooldowns keep their spot in the triangle'. If you try to break out too much (with your feedback) while the combat system is being designed, you're throwing your chance to make that choice into the wind.

    "Don't throw away your chance, vote [Something Other Than 5, Probably] on Prop 12."

    This message has been sponsored and presented by the "Longwinded Diatribes In Hopes Of Balance" Super PAC.
  • roostroost Member
    Selo wrote: »
    Dygz wrote: »
    Yeah.
    You want to play an MMORPG as if it's an MMOFPS.
    :
    This
    And it seems like alot of pepole think that way, and it makes me afraid for the future of this game.
    Ive played mmorpgs since Meridian and many many times have i seen the same things beeing said in the development stage of a new mmorpg.
    People think they want this and that FPS mechanic, permadeath, full loot etc, but when the game is released, it always sucks and people want the basic systems back.
    Instead of wanting a system where you beat players becouse you can press keys and movent keys faster than your oponent, you should wnat a combat system that the whole community can be as equally good at.


    Bad take from a bygone era. The fact that you think action combat is about “pressing buttons faster” shows how little experience you actually have with true, proper, action combat in MMOs. Not everyone will be able to be good at a game, and expecting the devs to dumb it down just so “the whole community can be equally good” at it is laughable. Im tired of these UO and Everquest boomers coming in and demanding that games go back to having a single digit APM rotation. (Which only existed because of server limitations from the time)
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    How is Selo even remotely incorrect. They didn't say anything about mashing mindlessly.

    If you can react faster, and press your buttons faster, in that style of play, you win.

    If you don't, you shouldn't really be calling it Action Combat, it's just standard combat with extra steps to make you feel like you're better at it.
Sign In or Register to comment.