Obviously i think roots are hard cc. Read my post again, i go on to say i dont like roots as hard cc compared to stuns. A rooted melee is like a stunned ranged character. Silenced mages can at least still move around.
We also have very little info on melee mobility as of now. We shall see about the specifics, but I stand by what I said from a general point of view.
Sorry, it was ambiguous if you were wording it so that roots were hard cc or not. Fair enough lol.
I would argue melee classes should have more than just melee abilities to be able to deal with such things. Even if a game has stuns, it also most likely still has roots too, so how would you argue they deal with those roots?
I think the argument to be made in our discussion here is not "stuns should exist because roots do" and it's that "melee classes just need more utility/mobility". Even in the current alpha, tanks have the pull and a charge. That's good enough to deal with roots. Get rooted? Pull them to you.
Give melee's a ranged silence or disarm to allow more counterplay to the counterplay against them.
I am not against roots. My argument was basically, if you're going to allow roots, you should also allow stuns. They are basically the same thing to melee characters, save for the odd ranged spell some builds have.
And my argument is, they are the same only if you make them the same.
You easily fix that by giving melee characters rooted options, not by taking the nuclear approach of implementing stuns because of it.
Especially since roots usually still exist even after you implement stuns lol. Unless you are arguing for no roots and all stuns. Then that's where I begin to think your stance is extreme if that is your stance.
Implementing a mechanic present in most mmorpg hardly seems nuclear to me. My stance is both have their place, i don't get the big deal with stuns. Stuns are marginally better than roots, and in most games this means roots last longer than stuns. That is a fair tradeoff in my opinion.
Obviously i think roots are hard cc. Read my post again, i go on to say i dont like roots as hard cc compared to stuns. A rooted melee is like a stunned ranged character. Silenced mages can at least still move around.
We also have very little info on melee mobility as of now. We shall see about the specifics, but I stand by what I said from a general point of view.
Sorry, it was ambiguous if you were wording it so that roots were hard cc or not. Fair enough lol.
I would argue melee classes should have more than just melee abilities to be able to deal with such things. Even if a game has stuns, it also most likely still has roots too, so how would you argue they deal with those roots?
I think the argument to be made in our discussion here is not "stuns should exist because roots do" and it's that "melee classes just need more utility/mobility". Even in the current alpha, tanks have the pull and a charge. That's good enough to deal with roots. Get rooted? Pull them to you.
Give melee's a ranged silence or disarm to allow more counterplay to the counterplay against them.
I am not against roots. My argument was basically, if you're going to allow roots, you should also allow stuns. They are basically the same thing to melee characters, save for the odd ranged spell some builds have.
And my argument is, they are the same only if you make them the same.
You easily fix that by giving melee characters rooted options, not by taking the nuclear approach of implementing stuns because of it.
Especially since roots usually still exist even after you implement stuns lol. Unless you are arguing for no roots and all stuns. Then that's where I begin to think your stance is extreme if that is your stance.
Implementing a mechanic present in most mmorpg hardly seems nuclear to me. My stance is both have their place, i don't get the big deal with stuns. Stuns are marginally better than roots, and in most games this means roots last longer than stuns. That is a fair tradeoff in my opinion.
As I've explained, stuns remove all player agency. It's the entire purpose of this thread.
Roots remove player movement agency, but leave them with the ability to still act via abilities.
If your argument is melee classes don't have ranged options or anti-ranged options, then the argument should then be, give them ranged or anti-ranged options. It should not be, "Let's lean even further into removing player agency because we can't design a fully-fledged class".
What's your argument against mages that can teleport? How's that any different concerning melee classes? A mage who teleports and keeps kiting a melee class is no different than the melee getting rooted and attacked while rooted.
Give melee options to deal with such things, just like casters have options to deal with things.
I can think of many options, all it takes is like 30 seconds of thinking.
A lesser ranged attack
A pull
A ranged silence
A ranged disarm
A block ability
A reflect ability
And that's only a few possible options. Implementing stuns because of badly designed melee classes ideally isn't the stance you want to take.
The best part is those options aren't just restricted to when you're rooted.
I really don't think simply having stuns in the game can be called "taking away player agency". A 1 second stun vs a 3 second root is probably balanced, if anything the root is probably better here.
Simply making all classes range is not a solution man. Melee have other tradeoffs over ranged.
I guess I just fail to see the problem. I know you tried to explain, but I still don't see it. Let's agree to disagree.
I'm pro stun. I'm pro any combat moves in pvp. Why limit us?
Many others and I have provided many strong arguments why they should be limited. Please read more than just the title lmao.
@Dygz Both blind and fear are better than Stuns yes. You can still move while blinded. It's absolutely no different than the silence/disarm example from my original post. Of course extremes are never good, but arguing from the extreme is never a good argument anyways. Minute long blinds are worse than 2 second stuns as @Aerlana said.
I agree fear is not really fun but it's still better than outright stuns since you run away from the attacker and usually exit fear after taking damage.
@Tyranthraxus Nobody here is arguing against CC. This post is against stuns. If anything, this is an argument for more and more varied CC.
@veyrah None of what you said can't be done through other CC options, which was the entire purpose of my post.
@CROW3 So lets add broken limbs and concussions and your character becoming paraplegic. Realism only goes so far towards good game design. Stuns are not good game design in pvp. If you don't understand why, read the original post.
As for me overgeneralizing stuns? No, I absolutely am not. My entire argument is that stuns remove all player agency, which is against the core principle of playing a game. I recognize it could be an extreme opinion, but it's also very true that any scenario you give me where a stun would be needed could be replaced by other viable CC's that don't take away player agency.
Stuns are absolutely never necessary. Necessary means there's no other option. There are plenty of other options.
Also, Tradition is never solely a good argument for something.
Tl;Dr: People not reading the original post, and thinking this is an argument against all CC, or people having the opinion that stuns are necessary for some reason.
This person is just here to argue, not have an interesting discussion.
I offered a pretty good compromise I think. Make stuns depend on pre-apploed status effects. If a mage stun requires a burning status effect to work, the receiving player can prepare for it by either pulling back into his party, casting some cc shield (if he has one) or preemptively buffing defense or healing.
Ok, I don't know where you got the "I'm just here to argue" bit from but that's pretty disingenuous.
You made the claim that stuns are necessary, but you don't explain why they are necessary.
I however, explained how they are not necessary.
I stand by what I said. I don't see how your compromise can't be solved through other CC options. Your idea is nice "compromise", but why is a compromise needed? Why do you believe stuns are an absolute necessity? I'm honestly looking for your answer here.
Combo effects are neat, I agree, but why can't the combo effect be burn -> root or burn -> silence. Why does it need to be burn -> stun?
In a pvp game you need hard cc. Roots never appealed to me, it seems unfair treatment of melee characters. Ranged characters can still retaliate whilst rooted as it is only movement restriction. Melees would be stuck away from the damage source unable to fight back. At least a stun levels the playing field.
The best work around to this is to simply give Melee a range closer, whether that's a pull, blink, or charge can differ on the class but the effect is the same.
The hard difference between an all out stun and a root is if you're stunned you can't even cast defensives, whereas if you're rooted you might want to cast one or a root turns into a good way to bait one from your opponent.
If I said something that you disagree w/ feel free to say so here.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Hmmnn. I guess the real issue is chain-stun/stun-lock.
I'm pro stun. I'm pro any combat moves in pvp. Why limit us?
Many others and I have provided many strong arguments why they should be limited. Please read more than just the title lmao.
@Dygz Both blind and fear are better than Stuns yes. You can still move while blinded. It's absolutely no different than the silence/disarm example from my original post. Of course extremes are never good, but arguing from the extreme is never a good argument anyways. Minute long blinds are worse than 2 second stuns as @Aerlana said.
I agree fear is not really fun but it's still better than outright stuns since you run away from the attacker and usually exit fear after taking damage.
@Tyranthraxus Nobody here is arguing against CC. This post is against stuns. If anything, this is an argument for more and more varied CC.
@veyrah None of what you said can't be done through other CC options, which was the entire purpose of my post.
@CROW3 So lets add broken limbs and concussions and your character becoming paraplegic. Realism only goes so far towards good game design. Stuns are not good game design in pvp. If you don't understand why, read the original post.
As for me overgeneralizing stuns? No, I absolutely am not. My entire argument is that stuns remove all player agency, which is against the core principle of playing a game. I recognize it could be an extreme opinion, but it's also very true that any scenario you give me where a stun would be needed could be replaced by other viable CC's that don't take away player agency.
Stuns are absolutely never necessary. Necessary means there's no other option. There are plenty of other options.
Also, Tradition is never solely a good argument for something.
Tl;Dr: People not reading the original post, and thinking this is an argument against all CC, or people having the opinion that stuns are necessary for some reason.
This person is just here to argue, not have an interesting discussion.
I offered a pretty good compromise I think. Make stuns depend on pre-apploed status effects. If a mage stun requires a burning status effect to work, the receiving player can prepare for it by either pulling back into his party, casting some cc shield (if he has one) or preemptively buffing defense or healing.
Ok, I don't know where you got the "I'm just here to argue" bit from but that's pretty disingenuous.
You made the claim that stuns are necessary, but you don't explain why they are necessary.
I however, explained how they are not necessary.
I stand by what I said. I don't see how your compromise can't be solved through other CC options. Your idea is nice "compromise", but why is a compromise needed? Why do you believe stuns are an absolute necessity? I'm honestly looking for your answer here.
Combo effects are neat, I agree, but why can't the combo effect be burn -> root or burn -> silence. Why does it need to be burn -> stun?
In a pvp game you need hard cc. Roots never appealed to me, it seems unfair treatment of melee characters. Ranged characters can still retaliate whilst rooted as it is only movement restriction. Melees would be stuck away from the damage source unable to fight back. At least a stun levels the playing field.
The best work around to this is to simply give Melee a range closer, whether that's a pull, blink, or charge can differ on the class but the effect is the same.
The hard difference between an all out stun and a root is if you're stunned you can't even cast defensives, whereas if you're rooted you might want to cast one or a root turns into a good way to bait one from your opponent.
My suggestion to set up stuns with status effects would also give the opportunity to cast defensives.
Also roots in games usually also limit skills to non-mobility.
I'm pro stun. I'm pro any combat moves in pvp. Why limit us?
Many others and I have provided many strong arguments why they should be limited. Please read more than just the title lmao.
@Dygz Both blind and fear are better than Stuns yes. You can still move while blinded. It's absolutely no different than the silence/disarm example from my original post. Of course extremes are never good, but arguing from the extreme is never a good argument anyways. Minute long blinds are worse than 2 second stuns as @Aerlana said.
I agree fear is not really fun but it's still better than outright stuns since you run away from the attacker and usually exit fear after taking damage.
@Tyranthraxus Nobody here is arguing against CC. This post is against stuns. If anything, this is an argument for more and more varied CC.
@veyrah None of what you said can't be done through other CC options, which was the entire purpose of my post.
@CROW3 So lets add broken limbs and concussions and your character becoming paraplegic. Realism only goes so far towards good game design. Stuns are not good game design in pvp. If you don't understand why, read the original post.
As for me overgeneralizing stuns? No, I absolutely am not. My entire argument is that stuns remove all player agency, which is against the core principle of playing a game. I recognize it could be an extreme opinion, but it's also very true that any scenario you give me where a stun would be needed could be replaced by other viable CC's that don't take away player agency.
Stuns are absolutely never necessary. Necessary means there's no other option. There are plenty of other options.
Also, Tradition is never solely a good argument for something.
Tl;Dr: People not reading the original post, and thinking this is an argument against all CC, or people having the opinion that stuns are necessary for some reason.
This person is just here to argue, not have an interesting discussion.
I offered a pretty good compromise I think. Make stuns depend on pre-apploed status effects. If a mage stun requires a burning status effect to work, the receiving player can prepare for it by either pulling back into his party, casting some cc shield (if he has one) or preemptively buffing defense or healing.
Ok, I don't know where you got the "I'm just here to argue" bit from but that's pretty disingenuous.
You made the claim that stuns are necessary, but you don't explain why they are necessary.
I however, explained how they are not necessary.
I stand by what I said. I don't see how your compromise can't be solved through other CC options. Your idea is nice "compromise", but why is a compromise needed? Why do you believe stuns are an absolute necessity? I'm honestly looking for your answer here.
Combo effects are neat, I agree, but why can't the combo effect be burn -> root or burn -> silence. Why does it need to be burn -> stun?
In a pvp game you need hard cc. Roots never appealed to me, it seems unfair treatment of melee characters. Ranged characters can still retaliate whilst rooted as it is only movement restriction. Melees would be stuck away from the damage source unable to fight back. At least a stun levels the playing field.
The best work around to this is to simply give Melee a range closer, whether that's a pull, blink, or charge can differ on the class but the effect is the same.
The hard difference between an all out stun and a root is if you're stunned you can't even cast defensives, whereas if you're rooted you might want to cast one or a root turns into a good way to bait one from your opponent.
My suggestion to set up stuns with status effects would also give the opportunity to cast defensives.
Also roots in games usually also limit skills to non-mobility.
Stuns being set up by multiple abilities is a fine idea I just don't know if that's what Intrepid is going to do or not.
That said, being rooted wouldn't stop an ability like Javelin.
If I said something that you disagree w/ feel free to say so here.
I really don't think simply having stuns in the game can be called "taking away player agency". A 1 second stun vs a 3 second root is probably balanced, if anything the root is probably better here.
Simply making all classes range is not a solution man. Melee have other tradeoffs over ranged.
I guess I just fail to see the problem. I know you tried to explain, but I still don't see it. Let's agree to disagree.
I also don't know how you think a stun doesn't take away player agency. That's literally what it's meant to do. That's also why stuns being easy to cast is entirely bad.
Also notice how I gave more options than "making all class ranged". That's a bastardization of my entire reply to you.
I gave examples of "melee-focused" abilities that can be used as counterplay to being rooted.
These can range anywhere from, "an ability that blocks ranged attacks or reflects them" to "pull your enemy to you".
And guess what, the current Tank class is a melee class but even it still has a "weapon toss" ability.
Guess what happens when a Tank is stunned. They can not cast Javelin, Ultimate Defense, or even Weapon Toss.
Guess what a Tank can do while rooted. Javelin, Ultimate Defense, or even Weapon Toss.
Again, if your argument is that melee classes don't have options when rooted, then make your argument "what options can we give rooted melee classes"
They have been part of so many games. How did you survive this far?
Comment 69*
Ah yes, attempting to invalidate this entire discussion by using the "It's always been this way" argument accompanied by ad hominem while simultaneously disregarding the 3 pages of valid discussion and points brought up from both sides of the argument.
Funny enough, we've already addressed the "tradition" argument.
They have been part of so many games. How did you survive this far?
Comment 69*
Ah yes, attempting to invalidate this entire discussion by using the "It's always been this way" argument accompanied by ad hominem while simultaneously disregarding the 3 pages of valid discussion and points brought up from both sides of the argument.
Funny enough, we've already addressed the "tradition" argument.
In sekiro they reinvented the wheel and created great new combat.
In an mmo I wouldnt be too bothered whether my character can stand upright, taking hits without reacting, stars and birdies circling my head.
Do you know why?
Because there are so many systems coming together. So as long the devs can spend time putting everything together, and since "stuns have worked well in all video games", I dont think that looking for an alternative would be a good idea to spend time on.
Personally I am more concerned about the quality and animations of actions during combat, than alternative to stuns.
The difference is you don't actually need to reinvent any wheels. You're just taking out an unnecessary spoke and putting in more diverse spokes. It's not "looking for an alternative". The alternatives are already there. You're just bringing them to the surface. Don't pretend it's some huge issue to make root abilities and silences instead of one stun ability.
I say this as someone who's created countless abilities myself. Unless you're saying AoC is running on spaghetti code and creating an ability takes a whole week.
Also, I don't think stuns have worked well in all video games.
I believe stuns are just one of those things people take for granted and as a default of video games without critically thinking about why easy to pull off stuns are bad for them.
In fact, people complain about stuns in games all the time. Just look at Overwatch for example. The implementation of stuns created such a huge controversy and ended up with them not knowing how to balance around them anymore.
Bro. @veyrah and me just had a huge discussion about this and I've shown how that's not the case.
I guess it's too much to expect people new to a thread to read through it. It is indeed normal for every thread to have people jump in and reiterate things that have been already discussed thoroughly and these threads always end up in a cycle of having to re-explain everything.
Well, to be fair all of the alternatives to stuns you’ve mentioned can be implemented in addition to stuns. That’s not an either or.
Hence the stalemate.
But that's how games already are. WoW/FF14/etc. has stuns.... and roots, and silences, and disarms. It's not an "alternative" if you do the same thing.
The original argument is that stuns aren't necessary and there are better alternatives to stuns. Keeping simple stuns in is entirely against the point.
Nobody has given me any example of a reason why a stun is necessary. Veyrah brought up the melee classes being rooted, and that's so easilly countered by "melee classes should already have ways to deal with ranged classes even when not rooted". Not to mention games with stuns also have roots, but I don't see any of you complaining about the melee classes in those games struggling when rooted.
If I root you as a melee and you are ranged, by the time I get to you you have fired spells. If I had gapclosers, why the f would I spend points on root? It's a waste of an ability given to me. Could I have something else? No? Damn.
If I root you, as a melee to get away, you fire crap at me.
I dont know what you spent hours figuring out regarding roots, I am not gonna bother reading it, fact remains that if you take away stuns and replace them with only roots (and silences), it's a matter of luck on who you come across.
There is no need to get rid of stuns. This is coming from a guy that does play classes with heavy cc toolkit (heck, when I realized that in L2 classic all I have to do is stun to win, I didnt bother playing).
The real problem is giving stuns to all playstyles, or having stun abilities on low CD, or having many CC abilities.
But most def, you cant get rid of stuns.
I would like to get rid of healing? How about that?
"Make the game more exciting, no more falling back on healing when you screw up. Remove healing."
Nobody has given me any example of a reason why a stun is necessary.
You fundamentally believe all stuns are bad. There’s no logical gymnastics to get around a fundamental position. So there’s no debate left.
😵💫
Earlier in the thread, Dreoh agreed with me that Wildstar's CC system was good. A CC system which included stuns.
I don't know that he fundamentally hates stuns. It seems more that he fundamentally hates being removed from the game for a short time with no retaliation. Which is a fair thing to be against. I feel the same way.
I don't thing there is a reason to debate if Dreoh thinks being timed out of a game in the heat of combat is fun. I think there is plenty of room for debate on what CC systems from other games were fun and what CC systems could be used in Ashes to make it a better game.
I offered up Wildstar as an example, but I am pretty sure there are other good examples of games where CC is fun for not just the person issuing the CC.
I think there is plenty of room for debate on what CC systems from other games were fun and what CC systems could be used in Ashes to make it a better game.
Agreed. I think that would be an intriguing thread.
So far I am not persuaded that stuns should not be in the game other than someone doesn’t like stuns. Not sure why I or anyone else would need to supply any counter argument to subjective opinion. Pointing out other CC options does not have anything to do with why stuns should not exist in game. Does or will the game have skills to break stuns or make one temporarily immune to that effect? Would that alleviate the complaint or is it not good enough?
So far I am not persuaded that stuns should not be in the game other than someone doesn’t like stuns. Not sure why I or anyone else would need to supply any counter argument to subjective opinion.
A perfectly executed performative microcosm of contemporary political discourse. Bravo.
I think there is plenty of room for debate on what CC systems from other games were fun and what CC systems could be used in Ashes to make it a better game.
For me;
Stun - character can't move or perform any action, persists through damage, maximum duration of 1.5 seconds, immunity to all CC for 4 times the actual effective time of the stun on the character once worn off. Constitution stat reduced duration.
Sleep - character can't move or perform any action, removed when damage taken, maximum duration of 4 seconds, immunity to all CC for 2 times the actual effective time of the sleep on the character once worn off. Rested buff (from player run Inn/tavern or player home) reduces duration by a set amount.
Silence - prevents the use of spells with a cast time only. Instant cast spells and all non-spell attacks can still be used. Duration of up to 4 seconds, immunity only to silence and interrupt for 2 times the actual effective time of the silence on the character once worn off. Wisdom stat reduces duration.
Blind - prevents the use of all non-spell attacks with a cast time. Instant cast non-spell attacks and all spells can still be used (spells are magic, they can find their own damn target). Duration of up to 4 seconds, immunity to only blind and interrupt for 2 times the actual effective time of the blind on the character once worn off. Will stat reduces duration.
Root - prevents all movement by character, including spells or abilities with a movement component. Duration of up to 12 seconds, but all forms of incoming damage provide a chance that the root will break - a chance that increases with a higher power stat. Root does not grant an immunity at all to CC effects (it is too easy to have an ally break a root on you).
Snare - slows movement and prevents all forms of sneaking or invisibility, and abilities that have a movement component have their range cut by 75%. Effect can persist for up to 20 seconds, but only effects players while in the area of effect of the snare. Dexterity stat allows faster movement through snare area. Snare has no immunity either, all you need to do is keep out of the patch of ground covered in big green wiggly vines (or what ever other appearance they decide to give it).
Prone - character is on the ground, all attacks against them have a higher chance to hit and to crit. Player is unable to use defensive skills. Prone isn't a CC ability by itself, but is a component of attacks such as shield back, or knockbacks, or giant boulders being magically thrown at you. The effect duration should be no more than 1 second, but it's duration is based on your health percentage - the higher your health percentage, the shorter the prone.
Interrupt - instant effect, stops casting of current spell only. Grants a flat 4 second immunity to Interrupt, blind and silence effects.
Impale - character is stuck on a stick of some sort. All actions can be attempted, but any action only has a chance of being effective (including movement). All attempts at an action that fail will damage you, a percentage of your total HP.
Mesmerize - your character is compelled to do the bidding of the caster. Effect can last for up to 8 seconds, but every time you damage an ally (which could be loosely defined as anyone on your side of a siege, war or caravan, and anyone in your group or raid) there is a chance the effect will terminate. Effected player gains immunity to all CC for 30 seconds after effect wears off. Caster takes constant damage while effect is active.
From there, I would have passives in some class that increase the immunity period gained after being CC's, as well as giving most classes a CC break for at least one of the CC effects above (classes with an increase in immune duration get one CC break, classes without it get multiple).
Abilities like Mesmerize I would keep to only one class in the entire game (Enchanter, imo), so it is a rare, but class defining ability.
Some special cases of abilities would see the duration of these effects last longer than listed. An example of this is a bubble type spell, of which I can see two types. The first is one where the character is unable to move or cast (so, effectively stunned), but is also unable to be attacked. This effect could (should) last longer than the 1.5 second stun limit from above, even though it is in effect a stun with other effects tacked on the side.
The second is an Archeage bubble, where the player is encapsulated in a bubble, and slowly rises. The player in the bubble is unable to do anything, but if attacked the bubble will pop, and the character will fall to the ground - potentially taking falling damage. This is effectively a sleep effect, but with an added elevation effect. This could also last longer than 4 seconds, though probably not much longer.
I think the above list has all the types of CC covered, even if the names are different in some games.
I consider most of the things you listed to be the more standard MMORPG forms of CC I have seen before. I like that you included CC immunity and some form of balance in all of your examples.
Many of yous CCs fall under the category of CC where you are temporarily taken out of the game. Which is not something I am crazy about. There are ways to do CC without taking people out of the game.
Mesmerize, could be done in a much cooler way, for example. Instead of you losing control of your character and watching it attack an ally.
The caster of mesmerize could target an enemy and temporarily swap their name and player model with that target for a short duration. The target would also appear to be an enemy, and you would appear to be an ally on the players hud.
Something like this may or may not be hard to do, but it would create natural confusion that does not take a player out of the game. I could see people falling for this sort of thing in the heat of battle all the time. Especially when people are zerging and don't have their eyes on every character on the screen.
What do you think of the CC philosophy where instead of pausing the character mid-combat, something about the players perception or capabilities are altered?
I consider most of the things you listed to be the more standard MMORPG forms of CC I have seen before. I like that you included CC immunity and some form of balance in all of your examples.
Many of yous CCs fall under the category of CC where you are temporarily taken out of the game. Which is not something I am crazy about. There are ways to do CC without taking people out of the game.
Mesmerize, could be done in a much cooler way, for example. Instead of you losing control of your character and watching it attack an ally.
The caster of mesmerize could target an enemy and temporarily swap their name and player model with that target for a short duration. The target would also appear to be an enemy, and you would appear to be an ally on the players hud.
Something like this may or may not be hard to do, but it would create natural confusion that does not take a player out of the game. I could see people falling for this sort of thing in the heat of battle all the time. Especially when people are zerging and don't have their eyes on every character on the screen.
What do you think of the CC philosophy where instead of pausing the character mid-combat, something about the players perception or capabilities are altered?
Yeah, I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel at all, mostly just a base to start a discussion from.
Like some here, I am not opposed to the idea of occasionally losing either some or all of my characters function in a game - as long as there is clear mechanics reason behind it (ie, cut scenes are out, imo).
To me, what makes this even more acceptable is if there are things I can do to lower my susceptibility to CC.
Playing a game where you can be stun-locked is shit. A game where there is nothing at all you can do about CC just isn't worth playing.
However, a game where you can gain stats to lower the duration or increase the break chance of some CC's, where every build has at least one CC break, where every CC of consequence results in an immunity afterwards and that immunity can be increased via build choices - to me this is adding player agency, not taking it away.
That said, I do like your idea of a swap. I wouldn't call is a mesmerize, but as long as the range on it is long enough, I think it could be a really great idea.
It is a CC that would be almost entirely ineffective against a raid that is well organized, communicates well and has some discipline - but in games like Ashes, it is rare that these factors exist.
Rather than just swapping the targets name with your own, I think it would be cool if you could give your target the name of someone else in your raid - whether by using a dual target system, or by placing a buff on the person you want your target to appear as.
It's more of an identity swap (or identity disguise) than anything, but I think it's a great idea. Seems like an ability for the Trickster class, imo.
I will always prefer reactive gameplay over just pure stat systems. Ideally, both play a role.If we are not going to have the reactive CC systems I advocate for. Then having CC reduction items and talents is my second choice. It at least allows for more interesting build choices and trade-offs between raw DPS builds and PvP builds. I think it is entirely possible for a great game to have both.
My favourite solution to this was the old stability in GW2.
With the buff active you are immune to effects that take away all player agency, you could still be hit by immobilise.
With a normal party setup it was impossible to have permeant uptime but a good enough group could alway have it when they needed it.
This meant that if you lost control of your character, it was because somebody in your party made a mistake.
Having the proactive ability to prevent CC is something I like. As long as it is balanced well with the CCs. Rewarding players for paying attention and being able to read their opponents next action is always something I like to see.
Also, things like knock back immunity or even things like stillness/look-away in FFXIV are used in PvE to make encounters more interesting. Those things could exist in PvP too. I imagine having something like that eye telegraph in FFXIV go off as a cleric player raises his weapon in the air, and it glows white with a massive sun burst that blinds anyone looking directly at him in range. Just looking away would be that proactive CC immunity like stability from GW2, only without have to give players a skill to counter it.
There are many ways to make CC cool and interesting that it blows my mind that many games still just use "time out" mechanics like flat stuns with little or no counters.
I will always prefer reactive gameplay over just pure stat systems. Ideally, both play a role.If we are not going to have the reactive CC systems I advocate for. Then having CC reduction items and talents is my second choice. It at least allows for more interesting build choices and trade-offs between raw DPS builds and PvP builds. I think it is entirely possible for a great game to have both.
My issue with most games in regards to stats is that most games either don't give you a reason to increase anything other than your classes main stat, or make it too easy to hit either a soft or hard cap, making stat increases worthless in general.
To me, this is no different to a game with a talent system where either you only have one viable path to take, or where you can get as many talents as you have places to put them.
I personally don't see a whole lot of difference between deciding which stat I want to boost and which talent I want to pick, assuming both systems are made well and players have real and actual choice.
Either system is shit if players don't have real and actual choice, however - and most MMO's don't give players any real choice in regards to stats.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited July 2021
*meh*
Whether Stuns are fun is going to be subjective by person and by game design.
Stuns are not quite as fun as a knockdown or knockback, but are effectively just the same.
And, I don't find stuns to be significantly different than Blind and Fear.
Fear is still a loss of agency - the differences there are that it's more of an adrenaline rush because, not only does it provide the illusion that I might be able to break the Fear early or control the direction I'm running in, I'm also afraid I might run into another hostile mob.
Blind is also a loss of agency. I suppose you could punch your hotbar keys and hope you somehow land a hit.
For me, they are all pretty much the same loss of agency - effectively.
In Ashes, Stun doesn't last long enough to become bored.
Again, I don't see Stun as a problem. Stun-lock could be a problem, but that seems easily solved by long cooldowns.
I think a better solution to removing Stuns is to have a Passive that can mitigate Stuns for those players interested in having their characters resist Stuns. Could be the opposite of the Passive for Disable Chance that we already have.
Comments
Implementing a mechanic present in most mmorpg hardly seems nuclear to me. My stance is both have their place, i don't get the big deal with stuns. Stuns are marginally better than roots, and in most games this means roots last longer than stuns. That is a fair tradeoff in my opinion.
As I've explained, stuns remove all player agency. It's the entire purpose of this thread.
Roots remove player movement agency, but leave them with the ability to still act via abilities.
If your argument is melee classes don't have ranged options or anti-ranged options, then the argument should then be, give them ranged or anti-ranged options. It should not be, "Let's lean even further into removing player agency because we can't design a fully-fledged class".
What's your argument against mages that can teleport? How's that any different concerning melee classes? A mage who teleports and keeps kiting a melee class is no different than the melee getting rooted and attacked while rooted.
Give melee options to deal with such things, just like casters have options to deal with things.
I can think of many options, all it takes is like 30 seconds of thinking.
- A lesser ranged attack
- A pull
- A ranged silence
- A ranged disarm
- A block ability
- A reflect ability
And that's only a few possible options. Implementing stuns because of badly designed melee classes ideally isn't the stance you want to take.The best part is those options aren't just restricted to when you're rooted.
Simply making all classes range is not a solution man. Melee have other tradeoffs over ranged.
I guess I just fail to see the problem. I know you tried to explain, but I still don't see it. Let's agree to disagree.
The best work around to this is to simply give Melee a range closer, whether that's a pull, blink, or charge can differ on the class but the effect is the same.
The hard difference between an all out stun and a root is if you're stunned you can't even cast defensives, whereas if you're rooted you might want to cast one or a root turns into a good way to bait one from your opponent.
My suggestion to set up stuns with status effects would also give the opportunity to cast defensives.
Also roots in games usually also limit skills to non-mobility.
Stuns being set up by multiple abilities is a fine idea I just don't know if that's what Intrepid is going to do or not.
That said, being rooted wouldn't stop an ability like Javelin.
Sure, but non-mobility skills can be made to be useful when rooted. Which is something that you completely ignored from my last reply to you.
I also don't know how you think a stun doesn't take away player agency. That's literally what it's meant to do. That's also why stuns being easy to cast is entirely bad.
Also notice how I gave more options than "making all class ranged". That's a bastardization of my entire reply to you.
I gave examples of "melee-focused" abilities that can be used as counterplay to being rooted.
These can range anywhere from, "an ability that blocks ranged attacks or reflects them" to "pull your enemy to you".
And guess what, the current Tank class is a melee class but even it still has a "weapon toss" ability.
Again, if your argument is that melee classes don't have options when rooted, then make your argument "what options can we give rooted melee classes"
Comment 69*
Ah yes, attempting to invalidate this entire discussion by using the "It's always been this way" argument accompanied by ad hominem while simultaneously disregarding the 3 pages of valid discussion and points brought up from both sides of the argument.
Funny enough, we've already addressed the "tradition" argument.
In sekiro they reinvented the wheel and created great new combat.
In an mmo I wouldnt be too bothered whether my character can stand upright, taking hits without reacting, stars and birdies circling my head.
Do you know why?
Because there are so many systems coming together. So as long the devs can spend time putting everything together, and since "stuns have worked well in all video games", I dont think that looking for an alternative would be a good idea to spend time on.
Personally I am more concerned about the quality and animations of actions during combat, than alternative to stuns.
I say this as someone who's created countless abilities myself. Unless you're saying AoC is running on spaghetti code and creating an ability takes a whole week.
Also, I don't think stuns have worked well in all video games.
I believe stuns are just one of those things people take for granted and as a default of video games without critically thinking about why easy to pull off stuns are bad for them.
In fact, people complain about stuns in games all the time. Just look at Overwatch for example. The implementation of stuns created such a huge controversy and ended up with them not knowing how to balance around them anymore.
Why not both? It's not a zero-sum game. It's disingenuous to make that argument. It has no bearing on the validity of stuns.
Hence the stalemate.
Silence is unfair to mages.
Silence me, a fight, I will still cast a double slash on you.
Bro. @veyrah and me just had a huge discussion about this and I've shown how that's not the case.
I guess it's too much to expect people new to a thread to read through it. It is indeed normal for every thread to have people jump in and reiterate things that have been already discussed thoroughly and these threads always end up in a cycle of having to re-explain everything.
But that's how games already are. WoW/FF14/etc. has stuns.... and roots, and silences, and disarms. It's not an "alternative" if you do the same thing.
The original argument is that stuns aren't necessary and there are better alternatives to stuns. Keeping simple stuns in is entirely against the point.
Nobody has given me any example of a reason why a stun is necessary. Veyrah brought up the melee classes being rooted, and that's so easilly countered by "melee classes should already have ways to deal with ranged classes even when not rooted". Not to mention games with stuns also have roots, but I don't see any of you complaining about the melee classes in those games struggling when rooted.
If I root you, as a melee to get away, you fire crap at me.
I dont know what you spent hours figuring out regarding roots, I am not gonna bother reading it, fact remains that if you take away stuns and replace them with only roots (and silences), it's a matter of luck on who you come across.
There is no need to get rid of stuns. This is coming from a guy that does play classes with heavy cc toolkit (heck, when I realized that in L2 classic all I have to do is stun to win, I didnt bother playing).
The real problem is giving stuns to all playstyles, or having stun abilities on low CD, or having many CC abilities.
But most def, you cant get rid of stuns.
I would like to get rid of healing? How about that?
"Make the game more exciting, no more falling back on healing when you screw up. Remove healing."
Lame
You fundamentally believe all stuns are bad. There’s no logical gymnastics to get around a fundamental position. So there’s no debate left.
😵💫
Earlier in the thread, Dreoh agreed with me that Wildstar's CC system was good. A CC system which included stuns.
I don't know that he fundamentally hates stuns. It seems more that he fundamentally hates being removed from the game for a short time with no retaliation. Which is a fair thing to be against. I feel the same way.
I don't thing there is a reason to debate if Dreoh thinks being timed out of a game in the heat of combat is fun. I think there is plenty of room for debate on what CC systems from other games were fun and what CC systems could be used in Ashes to make it a better game.
I offered up Wildstar as an example, but I am pretty sure there are other good examples of games where CC is fun for not just the person issuing the CC.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
Agreed. I think that would be an intriguing thread.
A perfectly executed performative microcosm of contemporary political discourse. Bravo.
So do I.
However, I see no reason to not simply repurpose this thread. For me;
Stun - character can't move or perform any action, persists through damage, maximum duration of 1.5 seconds, immunity to all CC for 4 times the actual effective time of the stun on the character once worn off. Constitution stat reduced duration.
Sleep - character can't move or perform any action, removed when damage taken, maximum duration of 4 seconds, immunity to all CC for 2 times the actual effective time of the sleep on the character once worn off. Rested buff (from player run Inn/tavern or player home) reduces duration by a set amount.
Silence - prevents the use of spells with a cast time only. Instant cast spells and all non-spell attacks can still be used. Duration of up to 4 seconds, immunity only to silence and interrupt for 2 times the actual effective time of the silence on the character once worn off. Wisdom stat reduces duration.
Blind - prevents the use of all non-spell attacks with a cast time. Instant cast non-spell attacks and all spells can still be used (spells are magic, they can find their own damn target). Duration of up to 4 seconds, immunity to only blind and interrupt for 2 times the actual effective time of the blind on the character once worn off. Will stat reduces duration.
Root - prevents all movement by character, including spells or abilities with a movement component. Duration of up to 12 seconds, but all forms of incoming damage provide a chance that the root will break - a chance that increases with a higher power stat. Root does not grant an immunity at all to CC effects (it is too easy to have an ally break a root on you).
Snare - slows movement and prevents all forms of sneaking or invisibility, and abilities that have a movement component have their range cut by 75%. Effect can persist for up to 20 seconds, but only effects players while in the area of effect of the snare. Dexterity stat allows faster movement through snare area. Snare has no immunity either, all you need to do is keep out of the patch of ground covered in big green wiggly vines (or what ever other appearance they decide to give it).
Prone - character is on the ground, all attacks against them have a higher chance to hit and to crit. Player is unable to use defensive skills. Prone isn't a CC ability by itself, but is a component of attacks such as shield back, or knockbacks, or giant boulders being magically thrown at you. The effect duration should be no more than 1 second, but it's duration is based on your health percentage - the higher your health percentage, the shorter the prone.
Interrupt - instant effect, stops casting of current spell only. Grants a flat 4 second immunity to Interrupt, blind and silence effects.
Impale - character is stuck on a stick of some sort. All actions can be attempted, but any action only has a chance of being effective (including movement). All attempts at an action that fail will damage you, a percentage of your total HP.
Mesmerize - your character is compelled to do the bidding of the caster. Effect can last for up to 8 seconds, but every time you damage an ally (which could be loosely defined as anyone on your side of a siege, war or caravan, and anyone in your group or raid) there is a chance the effect will terminate. Effected player gains immunity to all CC for 30 seconds after effect wears off. Caster takes constant damage while effect is active.
From there, I would have passives in some class that increase the immunity period gained after being CC's, as well as giving most classes a CC break for at least one of the CC effects above (classes with an increase in immune duration get one CC break, classes without it get multiple).
Abilities like Mesmerize I would keep to only one class in the entire game (Enchanter, imo), so it is a rare, but class defining ability.
Some special cases of abilities would see the duration of these effects last longer than listed. An example of this is a bubble type spell, of which I can see two types. The first is one where the character is unable to move or cast (so, effectively stunned), but is also unable to be attacked. This effect could (should) last longer than the 1.5 second stun limit from above, even though it is in effect a stun with other effects tacked on the side.
The second is an Archeage bubble, where the player is encapsulated in a bubble, and slowly rises. The player in the bubble is unable to do anything, but if attacked the bubble will pop, and the character will fall to the ground - potentially taking falling damage. This is effectively a sleep effect, but with an added elevation effect. This could also last longer than 4 seconds, though probably not much longer.
I think the above list has all the types of CC covered, even if the names are different in some games.
I consider most of the things you listed to be the more standard MMORPG forms of CC I have seen before. I like that you included CC immunity and some form of balance in all of your examples.
Many of yous CCs fall under the category of CC where you are temporarily taken out of the game. Which is not something I am crazy about. There are ways to do CC without taking people out of the game.
Mesmerize, could be done in a much cooler way, for example. Instead of you losing control of your character and watching it attack an ally.
The caster of mesmerize could target an enemy and temporarily swap their name and player model with that target for a short duration. The target would also appear to be an enemy, and you would appear to be an ally on the players hud.
Something like this may or may not be hard to do, but it would create natural confusion that does not take a player out of the game. I could see people falling for this sort of thing in the heat of battle all the time. Especially when people are zerging and don't have their eyes on every character on the screen.
What do you think of the CC philosophy where instead of pausing the character mid-combat, something about the players perception or capabilities are altered?
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
Like some here, I am not opposed to the idea of occasionally losing either some or all of my characters function in a game - as long as there is clear mechanics reason behind it (ie, cut scenes are out, imo).
To me, what makes this even more acceptable is if there are things I can do to lower my susceptibility to CC.
Playing a game where you can be stun-locked is shit. A game where there is nothing at all you can do about CC just isn't worth playing.
However, a game where you can gain stats to lower the duration or increase the break chance of some CC's, where every build has at least one CC break, where every CC of consequence results in an immunity afterwards and that immunity can be increased via build choices - to me this is adding player agency, not taking it away.
That said, I do like your idea of a swap. I wouldn't call is a mesmerize, but as long as the range on it is long enough, I think it could be a really great idea.
It is a CC that would be almost entirely ineffective against a raid that is well organized, communicates well and has some discipline - but in games like Ashes, it is rare that these factors exist.
Rather than just swapping the targets name with your own, I think it would be cool if you could give your target the name of someone else in your raid - whether by using a dual target system, or by placing a buff on the person you want your target to appear as.
It's more of an identity swap (or identity disguise) than anything, but I think it's a great idea. Seems like an ability for the Trickster class, imo.
With the buff active you are immune to effects that take away all player agency, you could still be hit by immobilise.
With a normal party setup it was impossible to have permeant uptime but a good enough group could alway have it when they needed it.
This meant that if you lost control of your character, it was because somebody in your party made a mistake.
I will always prefer reactive gameplay over just pure stat systems. Ideally, both play a role.If we are not going to have the reactive CC systems I advocate for. Then having CC reduction items and talents is my second choice. It at least allows for more interesting build choices and trade-offs between raw DPS builds and PvP builds. I think it is entirely possible for a great game to have both.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
Having the proactive ability to prevent CC is something I like. As long as it is balanced well with the CCs. Rewarding players for paying attention and being able to read their opponents next action is always something I like to see.
Also, things like knock back immunity or even things like stillness/look-away in FFXIV are used in PvE to make encounters more interesting. Those things could exist in PvP too. I imagine having something like that eye telegraph in FFXIV go off as a cleric player raises his weapon in the air, and it glows white with a massive sun burst that blinds anyone looking directly at him in range. Just looking away would be that proactive CC immunity like stability from GW2, only without have to give players a skill to counter it.
There are many ways to make CC cool and interesting that it blows my mind that many games still just use "time out" mechanics like flat stuns with little or no counters.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
My issue with most games in regards to stats is that most games either don't give you a reason to increase anything other than your classes main stat, or make it too easy to hit either a soft or hard cap, making stat increases worthless in general.
To me, this is no different to a game with a talent system where either you only have one viable path to take, or where you can get as many talents as you have places to put them.
I personally don't see a whole lot of difference between deciding which stat I want to boost and which talent I want to pick, assuming both systems are made well and players have real and actual choice.
Either system is shit if players don't have real and actual choice, however - and most MMO's don't give players any real choice in regards to stats.
Whether Stuns are fun is going to be subjective by person and by game design.
Stuns are not quite as fun as a knockdown or knockback, but are effectively just the same.
And, I don't find stuns to be significantly different than Blind and Fear.
Fear is still a loss of agency - the differences there are that it's more of an adrenaline rush because, not only does it provide the illusion that I might be able to break the Fear early or control the direction I'm running in, I'm also afraid I might run into another hostile mob.
Blind is also a loss of agency. I suppose you could punch your hotbar keys and hope you somehow land a hit.
For me, they are all pretty much the same loss of agency - effectively.
In Ashes, Stun doesn't last long enough to become bored.
Again, I don't see Stun as a problem. Stun-lock could be a problem, but that seems easily solved by long cooldowns.
I think a better solution to removing Stuns is to have a Passive that can mitigate Stuns for those players interested in having their characters resist Stuns. Could be the opposite of the Passive for Disable Chance that we already have.