Because an MMORPG is an RPG which means it will have RNG.
You can make some other type of game that doesn't have RNG, sure.
Ok, explain New World.
It's an RPG, whether you like it or not. It has stats, it has stat-based combat. It has stat progression. It has roles to play.
Or is your definition of RPG literally "chance-based game"?
Edit: You're creating an arbitrary rule for "RPG" to quantify never innovating upon the genre and bring it into the modern world.
To be fair here, Fantasy MMORPGs technically 'need' some RNG because otherwise they have to build a fair combat system on a level that most players absolutely would not put up with.
If you want to 'drag people kicking and screaming into the modern era', that's a stance to have, but the combat systems in an Action MMORPG without RNG are not for the faint of heart, and anything less than approximately Absolver is just 'RNG with extra steps to mask it'.
Because an MMORPG is an RPG which means it will have RNG.
You can make some other type of game that doesn't have RNG, sure.
Ok, explain New World.
It's an RPG, whether you like it or not. It has stats, it has stat-based combat. It has stat progression. It has roles to play.
Or is your definition of RPG literally "chance-based game"?
Edit: You're creating an arbitrary rule for "RPG" to quantify never innovating upon the genre and bring it into the modern world.
To be fair here, Fantasy MMORPGs technically 'need' some RNG because otherwise they have to build a fair combat system on a level that most players absolutely would not put up with.
If you want to 'drag people kicking and screaming into the modern era', that's a stance to have, but the combat systems in an Action MMORPG without RNG are not for the faint of heart, and anything less than approximately Absolver is just 'RNG with extra steps to mask it'.
You're completely right and I also completely agree with you.
I'm just arguing the point people are making that an RPG isn't an RPG without RnG lmao
I've already told you that New World is not an RPG. Just as American football is not soccer.
Also, kickball is not soccer and kickball is not baseball.
New World is a hardcore PvP-centric MMO survival game that the devs are trying to tone down so it has greater appeal to MMORPG fans.
It's like taking Pineapple Fanta and adding cola to try to attract more Coke fans. But, that doesn't mean it's going to become Coke.
Are the Soulsborne series games RPGs?
And have you actually tried New World? Because that's a huge oversimplification based on the original pre-rework concept and not what the current game is at all.
I completely agree with you that Rust and Conan Exiles aren't RPG's, although Conan leans very slightly towards RPG.
New World however is.
Because there is not a single advantage of tab-targeting, is there?
it is annoying to have multiple enemies and have to press tab 342432 times until you are facing the right one. And clicking with the mouse limits your camera movement.
Especially in pvp: targeting one enemy that gets out of range, just for another one to come close and your hero does nothing.
Tab targeting was a limitation of old games, but it has no place in this new age where we can make combat more fluid.
When you try to punch someone, do you first "select your target" or do you simply swing? And if one enemy gets out of your way, why should your swing not hit the other dude behind him?
I played wow since original vanilla before TBC, I gladly move away from this old system.
Because there is not a single advantage of tab-targeting, is there?
it is annoying to have multiple enemies and have to press tab 342432 times until you are facing the right one. And clicking with the mouse limits your camera movement.
Especially in pvp: targeting one enemy that gets out of range, just for another one to come close and your hero does nothing.
Tab targeting was a limitation of old games, but it has no place in this new age where we can make combat more fluid.
When you try to punch someone, do you first "select your target" or do you simply swing? And if one enemy gets out of your way, why should your swing not hit the other dude behind him?
I played wow since original vanilla before TBC, I gladly move away from this old system.
Hi, clearly you are not very good at tab target games.
Almost all tab target games in existence have options for selecting a target other than tab. The following is a list of options most games allow you to bind to which ever key you like.
Target next enemy (usually pre-set to tab, and is the function tab target is named after)
Target previous enemy.
Target next enemy healer (in games where this is known)
Target previous enemy healer
Target highest HP enemy
Target lowest HP enemy
Target most recent enemy to damage me
Target most recent enemy to damage my friendly target
Target next enemy that is targeting me
Target previous enemy that is targeting me
Target next ally
Target previous ally
Target next ally healer
Target previous ally healer
Target lowest HP ally
Save current enemy target
Save current friendly target
Call back to saved enemy target
Call back to saved friendly target
Now, your post seems to suggest that you think pressing tab is all there is to targeting in a tab target game, and you have passed judgement on tab target as a whole based on this. I would suggest that this very clearly false assumption has caused you to come to an inaccurate conclusion as to what tab targeting can be - you are clearly not using a tab target system to it's fullest potential.
Now, I know WoW doesn't have many of the options above, but it does have a good number of them - far more than just pressing tab. As such, even though you play a very simple example of a tab target game, you are even then still not using that simple system to it's fullest.
You should at least understand a game system you are passing judgement on before passing said judgement. What you have said above is akin to someone saying they don't like action combat systems because it takes them too long to aim their abilities using the arrow keys. In both that scenario and in your case, it is clearly a case of people that simply don't know how to use the system properly, yet think they are and so assume the system in question is poor.
@mr n0body
Target highest HP enemy
Target lowest HP enemy.
so you want a cheat code to blindly select the target that is almost dead, instead of using your skill to hit the target you want?
how boring. that's exactly what I don't want, you don't seem to have understood the criticism.
Edit: and the worst part, this gives an unfair advantage to players who have set up all those keybinds, while new players stay at a disadvantage because of a counterintuitive combat system.
Edit: and the worst part, this gives an unfair advantage to players who have set up all those keybinds, while new players stay at a disadvantage because of a counterintuitive combat system.
It isn't an unfair advantage.
It is literally built right in to the game.
This is like saying you have an unfair advantage if you use all of your abilities and I only use 1. We both have access to them all, me opting to not fully use them is on me - it doesn't make you a cheater or mean that there is an unfair advantage.
All it means is I am not using everything the game has given me to use.
You don't even know most of this exists in tab target MMO's - I bet you couldn't even list which of the options WoW has (you claim to have been p[laying it for 15 years) without looking.
TL;DR: It's all about taste. Ashes will hopefully be good enough for either taste.
When I want to focus on aiming and being precise (with my mouse) when playing a game, I don't go play an MMORPG, I go play CS:GO. When I don't want to have to aim and be as precise (with my mouse), I don't go play an FPS game, I go play some good old MMO.
Personally, because of the fact that I enjoy both FPS games and MMORPGs, I do not see the need to have action combat in MMORPGs. However, that doesn't mean I only enjoy MMOs where positioning and mobility are meaningless, on the contrary: I believe tab target with high mobility are not mutually exclusive and are, in my opinion, both essential to make combat fun and fluid.
I feel like folks want to have some of the aspects of FPS games in MMORPGs or some of the aspects of MMORPGs in FPS games. If that's good or bad, who knows, all I know is what my preference is.
However, simply because a game has action combat, it doesn't mean its combat is better than a game with tab target and vice-versa. I'd rather have good tab target combat than bad action combat - and we have many examples of both.
I believe the approach Ashes is taking might just hit the spot. I'll probably use the 75% tab target/25% action combat option and it will hopefully be good enough for my preferences. I also hope the opposite option is good enough for people who crave for action combat.
Each type of combat has its pros and cons. I hope games are able to either mix both options like Ashes is trying to. Consumers will tell companies what they want, and if people get bored of action combat, tab target will always be there. Regardless, I believe good games with tab target will still be developed, because they are easier to make and the combat can be "just as good" (in the opinion of a lotta people like ourselves).
🎶Galo é Galo o resto é bosta🎶
0
Options
FuryBladeborneMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I have the opposite opinion. This TT is not going away, is it?
For me AC is far more engaging, interesting, and enjoyable. Also, it provides a skill that can be honed to the point of being a strong advantage over others. This is different than the focus of TT in gaining an advantage by learning the best rotation for a situation. Rotations can be looked up online and practiced to a reasonable degree of skill in no more than a few hours. Many games even allow such rotations to be run on a macro.
To get really good at AC takes years to develop; and, short of cheating with an aimbot or something, the time to develop cannot be replaced.
Personally, I am ok with combining TT and AC. Hopefully they do it well. It would be nice if I was not required to have 25% of my skills as TT. However, as long as the game is good then in the end I will enjoy Ashes whether it I have to use TT or get to use AC.
I've already told you that New World is not an RPG. Just as American football is not soccer.
Also, kickball is not soccer and kickball is not baseball.
New World is a hardcore PvP-centric MMO survival game that the devs are trying to tone down so it has greater appeal to MMORPG fans.
It's like taking Pineapple Fanta and adding cola to try to attract more Coke fans. But, that doesn't mean it's going to become Coke.
New world have nothing of hardcore pvp centric, even AOC have more hardcore features then new world.....
I've already told you that New World is not an RPG. Just as American football is not soccer.
Also, kickball is not soccer and kickball is not baseball.
New World is a hardcore PvP-centric MMO survival game that the devs are trying to tone down so it has greater appeal to MMORPG fans.
It's like taking Pineapple Fanta and adding cola to try to attract more Coke fans. But, that doesn't mean it's going to become Coke.
New world have nothing of hardcore pvp centric, even AOC have more hardcore features then new world.....
Yea exactly, which is why I asked if he played either of the recent betas or if his opinion is entirely shaped by the original planned concept.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited July 2021
I didn't say that New World is now what it started out to be.
Just as if you add Coke to Fanta Pineapple it's not going to be very Pineappley.
It's also not going to be Coke.
Adding a soccer ball to baseball doesn't make the result soccer.
Both of those analogies fail to represent game design lmao
It would be more apt to say if you Changed the rules of baseball to make 3rd and first base the goals and replace the baseball with a soccer ball and have everyone play like regular soccer it would be more like soccer.
If you want to argue that New World is not an RPG, you functionally are setting up for a massive legal battle on the tier of 'what is a sandwich', when the real question is 'is this so-called sandwich delicious?'
I didn't say that New World is now what it started out to be.
Just as if you add Coke to Fanta Pineapple it's not going to be very Pineappley.
It's also not going to be Coke.
The two drinks may seem very different to you, but they are 99% the same.
If you take out that 1% that makes it fanta and replace it with the 1% that makes it coke, what you have now is coke.
All you need to do this is a working still. You can distill a drink like this down, take the remains of it, re-carbonate it, and re-flavor it (and probably replace an amount of volume). Then you have turned your fanta in to a coke that is imperceptible from coke made normally.
Sure, it's more work, but if you have a volume of fanta that needs to be coke, you can still do it.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
If you want to argue that New World is not an RPG, you functionally are setting up for a massive legal battle on the tier of 'what is a sandwich', when the real question is 'is this so-called sandwich delicious?'
Chess is a delicious game but it is not backgammon, nor is checkers backgammon.
Kickball is fun, but it's not soccer.
American football is fun, but it's not soccer.
Well anyone trying to escape eso lag. If rng an tab targeting wins we'll be screwed. I can't understand having my hand held. I'd much rather play based on skill in a fast paced action combat then boring Pokémon battles. This isn't mmorpgs 20 years ago. This is mmorpgs today. Ashes could pull a good amount of the eso community if they make the combat feel similar without the lag. I'm 34 years old and do fine against the 17yo no lifers. That fast paced, low cooldown, animation canceling combat is awesome. Don't forget the amount of pvp that's supposed to be present in ashes. Pvp gets boring fast when it lacks skill.
Debating if New World is an RPG or not isn't going to solve anything, nor does it really matter. It's doesn't prove anything either way. To me the NW combat looks pretty meh tbh. Been watching the PvP streams and the combat seems laggy, messy and uninspired, but I need to actually try it myself to really form an opinion.
The current combat in Ashes fits the genre completely. I think that's important. I hope they implement a good hybrid system, but if it turns out to be impossible to get it right for launch, tab target (and stat-based evade/block chance) is the way to go on top of the active dodge mechanic we also get.
More importantly, the technology just isn't there for pure action combat in Ashes. I mean, it's currently not even there for New World, and they only do 50v50 in their wars. It's clearly laggy and desync-y in NW at the moment. Hopefully they can improve that, but the problem with any action based PvP game is that if you have a ping of 150+ or so, and your opponent has 70 ping, you're at a real disadvantage.
Ashes is going for 250v250 as a minimum, and trying to push towards 500v500. There is just no way in hell we are going to get acceptably smooth pure action combat with 500-1000 players in a relatively small area with the type of weapons and skills Ashes has. Not even Planetside 2 manages that without issues.
Tab target mitigates a lot of the issues in large scale combat and for people with sub-optimal ping, and makes it playable. If Intrepid went with pure action combat, it would be an absolute shitshow in the most important events in the game, and that would probably kill the game.
Edit: the animation cancelling combat of ESO is a horrible way to do combat IMO. It just leads to people trying to use macros to help with the weaving, and it's still just rotation based combat when you boil it down.
@Nerror The New World being an RPG debate does actually matter, because people are arguing that an MMORPG is only an MMORPG if it isn't an entirely skill-based combat system, like New World is.
New World is obviously an MMORPG to anyone who's played it or actually understands what it is.
You're right about latency stuff, as that can ruin any skill-based combat system. New World's combat is very good (and doesn't have any random elements in it), it's just that when there is lag it is bad.
But this thread is about why people are seeking action combat over the traditional Tab Targeting systems, not about which is more viable.
You're right about latency stuff, as that can ruin any skill-based combat system. New World's combat is very good (and doesn't have any random elements in it), it's just that when there is lag it is bad.
I've not played the game yet,but even I know it has random elements.
The game has crits, and there is a chance of them occurring.
This is a random element, much the same as random elements in tab target based MMO's. In fact, crit is arguably the biggest factor in terms of RNG in MMO's
You're right about latency stuff, as that can ruin any skill-based combat system. New World's combat is very good (and doesn't have any random elements in it), it's just that when there is lag it is bad.
I've not played the game yet,but even I know it has random elements.
The game has crits, and there is a chance of them occurring.
This is a random element, much the same as random elements in tab target based MMO's. In fact, crit is arguably the biggest factor in terms of RNG in MMO's
The game has crit points and crit angles.
You crit by headshotting or attacking from behind.
But yes, all attacks do have a minor random base chance to crit, but it's minor enough to be negligable.
It's nothing like "chance for your attack to completely be negated by dodge chance" levels of ridiculousness. It's literally just enough for people to still get that "Gamba dopamine hit" when big numbers pop up.
And even so, the game would still be entirely viable and still also be an MMORPG if there was no crit chance. There would be almost no difference whatsoever.
It's nothing like "chance for your attack to completely be negated by dodge chance" levels of ridiculousness.
Tab target games pretty much only ever see this happen if you are improperly geared, or taking on an enemy that is too high a level. It is not a normal part of "good" tab target games.
You can't really misuse a game system (improperly gearing yourself in a tab target game) and then pass judgement on it.
As I said to another poster, this is like me saying action combat systems are bad because it takes so long to aim using the cursor keys.
In both cases, if you misuse the system, you are going to be left with a bad taste.
Also, I am not interested in the debate as to whether New World is an RPG or not - as far as I am concerned that is one of the stupidest debates I have seen on these forums. I mean, the fact that New World does indeed have RNG elements to it completely negates the discussion anyway, but it is still a pointless, stupid discussion (Dygz bought it up, didn't he?).
The entire reason I dislike basic Tab Target is because I don't like the skilllessness of it. There's no "I need to practice my aim", it's entirely "I need to practice the order I press buttons in". The latter being something extremely dull to me. I liken it to learning a guitar hero song, and every fight is just repeating that same guitar hero song every time forever.
Granted I know tab target could be less about rotations and have all situational abilities, but nearly every tab target game is about rotations.
Either you need to define what exactly "rotations" are or you need to accept that action combat can be just as much about "rotations" as tab-targeting.
Assuming you would define "rotations" the same as I am thinking you would, it is not tab-targeting systems that you have a problem with. It is "rotation" """gameplay""" that you have a problem with.
I also despise the thought of leaving whether I win or lose up to RNG, even if it's minor. Dodge chance, accuracy change, etc. are all trash mechanics to me. I want to win on my own merits, not on the merits of the Mathf.Random() function.
Are you saying that Poker is a skill-less game; where winning is all left to the luck of the draw? That no poker tournemnent winners ever won on their own merits?
And again, assuming you are not saying that; then what you have a problem with is not RNG in itself, but the manner it is used.
The entire reason I dislike basic Tab Target is because I don't like the skilllessness of it. There's no "I need to practice my aim", it's entirely "I need to practice the order I press buttons in". The latter being something extremely dull to me. I liken it to learning a guitar hero song, and every fight is just repeating that same guitar hero song every time forever.
Granted I know tab target could be less about rotations and have all situational abilities, but nearly every tab target game is about rotations.
Either you need to define what exactly "rotations" are or you need to accept that action combat can be just as much about "rotations" as tab-targeting.
Assuming you would define "rotations" the same as I am thinking you would, it is not tab-targeting systems that you have a problem with. It is "rotation" """gameplay""" that you have a problem with.
I also despise the thought of leaving whether I win or lose up to RNG, even if it's minor. Dodge chance, accuracy change, etc. are all trash mechanics to me. I want to win on my own merits, not on the merits of the Mathf.Random() function.
Are you saying that Poker is a skill-less game; where winning is all left to the luck of the draw? That no poker tournemnent winners ever won on their own merits?
And again, assuming you are not saying that; then what you have a problem with is not RNG in itself, but the manner it is used.
Why would I need to define rotations? We all have a good understanding of what that means.
But if you insist, it's "The optimal sequence in which to use your abilities for maximum desired class effectiveness in the majority of scenarios"
And you're right, it is rotation-based gameplay that I have a problem with... like I said... in the comment you quoted me on. I literally say it right there, assuming you're not going to be incredibly pedantic about how I worded it.
"Nearly every tab target game uses rotations". There are a few that don't have standardized rotations by making sure abilities have creative uses or by limiting the number of abilities you have or various other means.
As for your second "gotcha" comment, Poker (just like basic Tab Target combat) requires a level of skill, but whether you win or lose could be entirely up to the gamble. Even if you play perfectly you could be dealt a bad hand.
And no, I do have a problem with RNG itself.
I think if you can build a competent combat system without RNG, it's far superior to any RNG-based combat system. Less interesting in some cases yes, but winning or losing is entirely dependent upon the winners merits.
Sure, RNG gives that chance for things to turn out in unexpected ways, but you can never be 100% sure whether you won of your own merits, or you just rolled the dice poorly.
If I'm looking to have fun and not take things seriously, I'm ok with RNG, because it creates unique scenarios through random interactions.
If I'm looking to take something seriously, why would I allow any considerable amount of RNG?
Competitive Smash Bros. players play with items turned off and on basic stages for a reason.
When they want to have fun, they turn them back on.
Before you get pedantic, obviously it's not black and white, and a little bit of chance doesn't tilt the balance too much.
The entire reason I dislike basic Tab Target is because I don't like the skilllessness of it. There's no "I need to practice my aim", it's entirely "I need to practice the order I press buttons in". The latter being something extremely dull to me. I liken it to learning a guitar hero song, and every fight is just repeating that same guitar hero song every time forever.
Granted I know tab target could be less about rotations and have all situational abilities, but nearly every tab target game is about rotations.
Either you need to define what exactly "rotations" are or you need to accept that action combat can be just as much about "rotations" as tab-targeting.
Assuming you would define "rotations" the same as I am thinking you would, it is not tab-targeting systems that you have a problem with. It is "rotation" """gameplay""" that you have a problem with.
I also despise the thought of leaving whether I win or lose up to RNG, even if it's minor. Dodge chance, accuracy change, etc. are all trash mechanics to me. I want to win on my own merits, not on the merits of the Mathf.Random() function.
Are you saying that Poker is a skill-less game; where winning is all left to the luck of the draw? That no poker tournemnent winners ever won on their own merits?
And again, assuming you are not saying that; then what you have a problem with is not RNG in itself, but the manner it is used.
Why would I need to define rotations? We all have a good understanding of what that means.
But if you insist, it's "The optimal sequence in which to use your abilities for maximum desired class effectiveness in the majority of scenarios"
And you're right, it is rotation-based gameplay that I have a problem with... like I said... in the comment you quoted me on. I literally say it right there, assuming you're not going to be incredibly pedantic about how I worded it.
"Nearly every tab target game uses rotations". There are a few that don't have standardized rotations by making sure abilities have creative uses or by limiting the number of abilities you have or various other means.
As for your second "gotcha" comment, Poker (just like basic Tab Target combat) requires a level of skill, but whether you win or lose could be entirely up to the gamble. Even if you play perfectly you could be dealt a bad hand.
And no, I do have a problem with RNG itself.
I think if you can build a competent combat system without RNG, it's far superior to any RNG-based combat system. Less interesting in some cases yes, but winning or losing is entirely dependent upon the winners merits.
Sure, RNG gives that chance for things to turn out in unexpected ways, but you can never be 100% sure whether you won of your own merits, or you just rolled the dice poorly.
If I'm looking to have fun and not take things seriously, I'm ok with RNG, because it creates unique scenarios through random interactions.
If I'm looking to take something seriously, why would I allow any considerable amount of RNG?
Competitive Smash Bros. players play with items turned off and on basic stages for a reason.
When they want to have fun, they turn them back on.
Before you get pedantic, obviously it's not black and white, and a little bit of chance doesn't tilt the balance too much.
To be clear, when you say this, you mean 'RNG outside of the human element', correct?
Like, if your opponent can 'dodge left', 'dodge right', or 'stand still', and you can't possibly react in time to actually know which will happen, but you guess correctly or through understanding of their psychology or something, this is still 'random', but it's obviously not 'RNG' because the 'number generator' part is 'missing'. It's a person, not a program counter or a dice roll.
Comments
To be fair here, Fantasy MMORPGs technically 'need' some RNG because otherwise they have to build a fair combat system on a level that most players absolutely would not put up with.
If you want to 'drag people kicking and screaming into the modern era', that's a stance to have, but the combat systems in an Action MMORPG without RNG are not for the faint of heart, and anything less than approximately Absolver is just 'RNG with extra steps to mask it'.
And about the RNG mini-debate within this topic, RNG doesn't make or break an 'RPG'. If you're so determined to have RNG go back to the tabletop.
You're completely right and I also completely agree with you.
I'm just arguing the point people are making that an RPG isn't an RPG without RnG lmao
Are the Soulsborne series games RPGs?
And have you actually tried New World? Because that's a huge oversimplification based on the original pre-rework concept and not what the current game is at all.
I completely agree with you that Rust and Conan Exiles aren't RPG's, although Conan leans very slightly towards RPG.
New World however is.
it is annoying to have multiple enemies and have to press tab 342432 times until you are facing the right one. And clicking with the mouse limits your camera movement.
Especially in pvp: targeting one enemy that gets out of range, just for another one to come close and your hero does nothing.
Tab targeting was a limitation of old games, but it has no place in this new age where we can make combat more fluid.
When you try to punch someone, do you first "select your target" or do you simply swing? And if one enemy gets out of your way, why should your swing not hit the other dude behind him?
I played wow since original vanilla before TBC, I gladly move away from this old system.
Hi, clearly you are not very good at tab target games.
Almost all tab target games in existence have options for selecting a target other than tab. The following is a list of options most games allow you to bind to which ever key you like.
Target next enemy (usually pre-set to tab, and is the function tab target is named after)
Target previous enemy.
Target next enemy healer (in games where this is known)
Target previous enemy healer
Target highest HP enemy
Target lowest HP enemy
Target most recent enemy to damage me
Target most recent enemy to damage my friendly target
Target next enemy that is targeting me
Target previous enemy that is targeting me
Target next ally
Target previous ally
Target next ally healer
Target previous ally healer
Target lowest HP ally
Save current enemy target
Save current friendly target
Call back to saved enemy target
Call back to saved friendly target
Now, your post seems to suggest that you think pressing tab is all there is to targeting in a tab target game, and you have passed judgement on tab target as a whole based on this. I would suggest that this very clearly false assumption has caused you to come to an inaccurate conclusion as to what tab targeting can be - you are clearly not using a tab target system to it's fullest potential.
Now, I know WoW doesn't have many of the options above, but it does have a good number of them - far more than just pressing tab. As such, even though you play a very simple example of a tab target game, you are even then still not using that simple system to it's fullest.
You should at least understand a game system you are passing judgement on before passing said judgement. What you have said above is akin to someone saying they don't like action combat systems because it takes them too long to aim their abilities using the arrow keys. In both that scenario and in your case, it is clearly a case of people that simply don't know how to use the system properly, yet think they are and so assume the system in question is poor.
so you want a cheat code to blindly select the target that is almost dead, instead of using your skill to hit the target you want?
how boring. that's exactly what I don't want, you don't seem to have understood the criticism.
Edit: and the worst part, this gives an unfair advantage to players who have set up all those keybinds, while new players stay at a disadvantage because of a counterintuitive combat system.
It is literally built right in to the game.
This is like saying you have an unfair advantage if you use all of your abilities and I only use 1. We both have access to them all, me opting to not fully use them is on me - it doesn't make you a cheater or mean that there is an unfair advantage.
All it means is I am not using everything the game has given me to use.
You don't even know most of this exists in tab target MMO's - I bet you couldn't even list which of the options WoW has (you claim to have been p[laying it for 15 years) without looking.
When I want to focus on aiming and being precise (with my mouse) when playing a game, I don't go play an MMORPG, I go play CS:GO. When I don't want to have to aim and be as precise (with my mouse), I don't go play an FPS game, I go play some good old MMO.
Personally, because of the fact that I enjoy both FPS games and MMORPGs, I do not see the need to have action combat in MMORPGs. However, that doesn't mean I only enjoy MMOs where positioning and mobility are meaningless, on the contrary: I believe tab target with high mobility are not mutually exclusive and are, in my opinion, both essential to make combat fun and fluid.
I feel like folks want to have some of the aspects of FPS games in MMORPGs or some of the aspects of MMORPGs in FPS games. If that's good or bad, who knows, all I know is what my preference is.
However, simply because a game has action combat, it doesn't mean its combat is better than a game with tab target and vice-versa. I'd rather have good tab target combat than bad action combat - and we have many examples of both.
I believe the approach Ashes is taking might just hit the spot. I'll probably use the 75% tab target/25% action combat option and it will hopefully be good enough for my preferences. I also hope the opposite option is good enough for people who crave for action combat.
Each type of combat has its pros and cons. I hope games are able to either mix both options like Ashes is trying to. Consumers will tell companies what they want, and if people get bored of action combat, tab target will always be there. Regardless, I believe good games with tab target will still be developed, because they are easier to make and the combat can be "just as good" (in the opinion of a lotta people like ourselves).
For me AC is far more engaging, interesting, and enjoyable. Also, it provides a skill that can be honed to the point of being a strong advantage over others. This is different than the focus of TT in gaining an advantage by learning the best rotation for a situation. Rotations can be looked up online and practiced to a reasonable degree of skill in no more than a few hours. Many games even allow such rotations to be run on a macro.
To get really good at AC takes years to develop; and, short of cheating with an aimbot or something, the time to develop cannot be replaced.
Personally, I am ok with combining TT and AC. Hopefully they do it well. It would be nice if I was not required to have 25% of my skills as TT. However, as long as the game is good then in the end I will enjoy Ashes whether it I have to use TT or get to use AC.
New world have nothing of hardcore pvp centric, even AOC have more hardcore features then new world.....
Yea exactly, which is why I asked if he played either of the recent betas or if his opinion is entirely shaped by the original planned concept.
Just as if you add Coke to Fanta Pineapple it's not going to be very Pineappley.
It's also not going to be Coke.
Adding a soccer ball to baseball doesn't make the result soccer.
It would be more apt to say if you Changed the rules of baseball to make 3rd and first base the goals and replace the baseball with a soccer ball and have everyone play like regular soccer it would be more like soccer.
If you want to argue that New World is not an RPG, you functionally are setting up for a massive legal battle on the tier of 'what is a sandwich', when the real question is 'is this so-called sandwich delicious?'
If you take out that 1% that makes it fanta and replace it with the 1% that makes it coke, what you have now is coke.
All you need to do this is a working still. You can distill a drink like this down, take the remains of it, re-carbonate it, and re-flavor it (and probably replace an amount of volume). Then you have turned your fanta in to a coke that is imperceptible from coke made normally.
Sure, it's more work, but if you have a volume of fanta that needs to be coke, you can still do it.
Kickball is fun, but it's not soccer.
American football is fun, but it's not soccer.
The current combat in Ashes fits the genre completely. I think that's important. I hope they implement a good hybrid system, but if it turns out to be impossible to get it right for launch, tab target (and stat-based evade/block chance) is the way to go on top of the active dodge mechanic we also get.
More importantly, the technology just isn't there for pure action combat in Ashes. I mean, it's currently not even there for New World, and they only do 50v50 in their wars. It's clearly laggy and desync-y in NW at the moment. Hopefully they can improve that, but the problem with any action based PvP game is that if you have a ping of 150+ or so, and your opponent has 70 ping, you're at a real disadvantage.
Ashes is going for 250v250 as a minimum, and trying to push towards 500v500. There is just no way in hell we are going to get acceptably smooth pure action combat with 500-1000 players in a relatively small area with the type of weapons and skills Ashes has. Not even Planetside 2 manages that without issues.
Tab target mitigates a lot of the issues in large scale combat and for people with sub-optimal ping, and makes it playable. If Intrepid went with pure action combat, it would be an absolute shitshow in the most important events in the game, and that would probably kill the game.
Edit: the animation cancelling combat of ESO is a horrible way to do combat IMO. It just leads to people trying to use macros to help with the weaving, and it's still just rotation based combat when you boil it down.
New World is obviously an MMORPG to anyone who's played it or actually understands what it is.
You're right about latency stuff, as that can ruin any skill-based combat system. New World's combat is very good (and doesn't have any random elements in it), it's just that when there is lag it is bad.
But this thread is about why people are seeking action combat over the traditional Tab Targeting systems, not about which is more viable.
The game has crits, and there is a chance of them occurring.
This is a random element, much the same as random elements in tab target based MMO's. In fact, crit is arguably the biggest factor in terms of RNG in MMO's
The game has crit points and crit angles.
You crit by headshotting or attacking from behind.
But yes, all attacks do have a minor random base chance to crit, but it's minor enough to be negligable.
It's nothing like "chance for your attack to completely be negated by dodge chance" levels of ridiculousness. It's literally just enough for people to still get that "Gamba dopamine hit" when big numbers pop up.
And even so, the game would still be entirely viable and still also be an MMORPG if there was no crit chance. There would be almost no difference whatsoever.
You can't really misuse a game system (improperly gearing yourself in a tab target game) and then pass judgement on it.
As I said to another poster, this is like me saying action combat systems are bad because it takes so long to aim using the cursor keys.
In both cases, if you misuse the system, you are going to be left with a bad taste.
Also, I am not interested in the debate as to whether New World is an RPG or not - as far as I am concerned that is one of the stupidest debates I have seen on these forums. I mean, the fact that New World does indeed have RNG elements to it completely negates the discussion anyway, but it is still a pointless, stupid discussion (Dygz bought it up, didn't he?).
Assuming you would define "rotations" the same as I am thinking you would, it is not tab-targeting systems that you have a problem with. It is "rotation" """gameplay""" that you have a problem with. Are you saying that Poker is a skill-less game; where winning is all left to the luck of the draw? That no poker tournemnent winners ever won on their own merits?
And again, assuming you are not saying that; then what you have a problem with is not RNG in itself, but the manner it is used.
Why would I need to define rotations? We all have a good understanding of what that means.
But if you insist, it's "The optimal sequence in which to use your abilities for maximum desired class effectiveness in the majority of scenarios"
And you're right, it is rotation-based gameplay that I have a problem with... like I said... in the comment you quoted me on. I literally say it right there, assuming you're not going to be incredibly pedantic about how I worded it.
"Nearly every tab target game uses rotations". There are a few that don't have standardized rotations by making sure abilities have creative uses or by limiting the number of abilities you have or various other means.
As for your second "gotcha" comment, Poker (just like basic Tab Target combat) requires a level of skill, but whether you win or lose could be entirely up to the gamble. Even if you play perfectly you could be dealt a bad hand.
And no, I do have a problem with RNG itself.
I think if you can build a competent combat system without RNG, it's far superior to any RNG-based combat system. Less interesting in some cases yes, but winning or losing is entirely dependent upon the winners merits.
Sure, RNG gives that chance for things to turn out in unexpected ways, but you can never be 100% sure whether you won of your own merits, or you just rolled the dice poorly.
If I'm looking to have fun and not take things seriously, I'm ok with RNG, because it creates unique scenarios through random interactions.
If I'm looking to take something seriously, why would I allow any considerable amount of RNG?
Competitive Smash Bros. players play with items turned off and on basic stages for a reason.
When they want to have fun, they turn them back on.
Before you get pedantic, obviously it's not black and white, and a little bit of chance doesn't tilt the balance too much.
To be clear, when you say this, you mean 'RNG outside of the human element', correct?
Like, if your opponent can 'dodge left', 'dodge right', or 'stand still', and you can't possibly react in time to actually know which will happen, but you guess correctly or through understanding of their psychology or something, this is still 'random', but it's obviously not 'RNG' because the 'number generator' part is 'missing'. It's a person, not a program counter or a dice roll.
As always, gotta check.