The first paragraph in the spoiler part mostly sounds like Chivalry or Mordhau. Everything else you start referencing abilities more. And that all sounds about right to me. Most of what you're talking about there sounds like standard mmo fare. Using the right ability at the right time, luring out the opponents strong offensive abilities into your strong defensive abilities or a dodge. Using the right abilities against the right opponent (class).
I'm fine with light/auto attacking having a combo effect, as in if you land 3 hits in a row it applies some kind of effect. What I don't want to see is abilities getting combo chains because that just takes away build diversity for no reason. I can create my own "combos" with the abilities I can choose from. Or I can be a bad player and pick an assortment of abilities that have absolutely no synergy. Or I can be a prodigy that picks an assortment of abilities that seemingly have no synergy or at least not the optimal synergy, but make it work spectacularly for specific use/combat situation cases. (Without being penalized because I'm not picking the games arbitrarily chosen "combos")
The game should have a dodge. It already does. There could maybe be more to it. We don't even know how prevalent light/auto attacking is really going to be. I think we have at least 10 abilities on our bar? That should be enough to where something is always off cooldown. But we don't know how long cooldowns will end up being, or how hard resource(mana) management will be. We do know the ttk is supposed to be 30 seconds to a minute.
But I, and I think many people, are not looking to play Chivalry. We want abilities and generally free movement (with some exceptions), and some blocking and dodging. But not infinite dodging with 5 different variations of dodges, rooted forward motion, left click spam combos.
Indeed. Many people are not, and many people are. And Intrepid is in the unenviable position of eventually having to tell one of those sets of people 'sorry, you're not getting what you want'.
But according to the last Dev Discussion on Hybrid Combat, the 'score' is somewhere between 75-36, and 60-51, depending on how you count certain perspectives.
You can check here if you want. It's counted already, and you can decide how to count them yourself and what they mean. Here's the link to the Dev Discussion.
Most of those people didn't say what combos they wanted to do or not do.
No one has said anything about having a ton of dodges. The key points here for one type of attack vs another are 'to offer one additional dodge', 'to offer one guaranteed lunge', 'to offer some number of additional threats from melee when opponents make mistakes and not need to use an ability for it'.
Some people just like hitting buttons and combos. There's no reason they shouldn't have that if it doesn't affect your gameplay, and it doesn't have to.
Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
0
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited August 2021
Why would anyone be expecting Ashes to be a first-person hack and slash??
The game has billed itself from the start as being a hybrid combat game, but that if they can't create a good system then 100% tab. I want hybrid, most probably do. Hybrid doesn't mean Chivalry or Black Desert Online. Those are not hybrid at all. Things can be taken from them of course, just like things can be taken from WoW.
Intrepid is in a rough position with this and they're not going to please everyone. But watch the last monthly live stream update where Steven unveiled the free movement auto attacking. Based on the reactions you'd think he had just announced everyone in there was getting a million dollars.
The forums are a very small sample. And anyone who doesn't align with the full action combat left click spam crowd get's browbeat and told they're boomers and have no skill. Which isn't true, just intimidation. But it keeps a lot of people from speaking up. Doesn't work on me.
In the current game there already is a lunge that doesn't require an ability. Offensively used roll dodge. I used it many times in the last siege test I was in to pick people off. You roll dodge towards someone and in half a second you're in melee range to use abilities that you weren't in range for before.
From my understanding of how Combos work during combat for games in general is: the ability for a player to successfully perform a series of landing attacks and or abilities within a reasonable timeframe without being interrupted or dropped.
Also from my understanding of Synergies in gaming is: status, effects and functions of abilities or attacks that complement each other when used together.
@Okeydoke you gave great examples of Synergies like casting Fire Reduction onto an enemy to throwing Fireball to deal extra damage. However, that sequence would not "Combo" if you quickly casted Fire Reduction but it took more than 2 seconds to channel Fireball as a follow up attack.
I also agree AoC shouldn't play like Chivalry because its Melee Weapon Combat looks very similar to the Split Body Animation Combat implemented in AoC's recent Alpha Testing, ESO, and Guild Wars 2. These games have Melee Weapon Combat that feel responsive because players are able to turn and move their character mid weapon swing similar to shooting a machine gun and strafing in COD or Fortnite(or gathering materials with a pickaxe in this case) This I feel removes the commitment to starting an attack and visually looks inconsistent.
When it comes to Melee Weapon Root Motion Combat players should briefly be committed to an attack and trajectory. If I attack once with a sword without directional inputs I should expect one sword attack in place but I briefly shouldn't be able to move my character's position until the attack animation is finished or decide to do another attack, dodge or an ability. However the direction of the same sword attack can briefly be changed in one direction during the start up animation on the character's pivot by quickly changing the camera position. This pivot can happen for each individual sword attack during the weapon combo animation. If I press W and attack once with a sword I should expect one sword attack stepping forward and the same rules previously described should be applied. Replace W with other directional keys and same rules and scenarios should apply. This style of combat incentivizes players to think about their decisions and if they choose wrong then they either get punished or have to spend additional resources to correct themselves.
I know Melee Weapon Root Motion Attack rotation and trajectories based on mouse position may be contradicting my previous quote from @Cicaeda about using WASD to implement this, but I think it may be one way to solve people's issue about having to commit to a trajectory while performing an attack.
The game has billed itself from the start as being a hybrid combat game, but that if they can't create a good system then 100% tab. I want hybrid, most probably do. Hybrid doesn't mean Chivalry or Black Desert Online. Those are not hybrid at all. Things can be taken from them of course, just like things can be taken from WoW.
Intrepid is in a rough position with this and they're not going to please everyone. But watch the last monthly live stream update where Steven unveiled the free movement auto attacking. Based on the reactions you'd think he had just announced everyone in there was getting a million dollars.
The forums are a very small sample. And anyone who doesn't align with the full action combat left click spam crowd get's browbeat and told they're boomers and have no skill. Which isn't true, just intimidation. But it keeps a lot of people from speaking up. Doesn't work on me.
So it is, I was pretty surprised at it too. If it really is the more popular way, or if the Hybrid Combat gets removed, I can only hope that they allow those people who no longer want to play, to refund something, but there's no obligation for them to do that. Same for people who understood something else based on what they said and opted in based on it.
I'm glad that you don't feel intimidated by those who say things like that.
Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
0
CypherMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
The game has billed itself from the start as being a hybrid combat game, but that if they can't create a good system then 100% tab. I want hybrid, most probably do. Hybrid doesn't mean Chivalry or Black Desert Online. Those are not hybrid at all. Things can be taken from them of course, just like things can be taken from WoW.
Intrepid is in a rough position with this and they're not going to please everyone. But watch the last monthly live stream update where Steven unveiled the free movement auto attacking. Based on the reactions you'd think he had just announced everyone in there was getting a million dollars.
The forums are a very small sample. And anyone who doesn't align with the full action combat left click spam crowd get's browbeat and told they're boomers and have no skill. Which isn't true, just intimidation. But it keeps a lot of people from speaking up. Doesn't work on me.
So it is, I was pretty surprised at it too. If it really is the more popular way, or if the Hybrid Combat gets removed, I can only hope that they allow those people who no longer want to play, to refund something, but there's no obligation for them to do that. Same for people who understood something else based on what they said and opted in based on it.
I'm glad that you don't feel intimidated by those who say things like that.
Oh, 100% if they decide to not go through with the task of making a combat system for both tab and action players like they originally said in Kickstarter (every poll has shown action is more desired by the way), I will absolutely pursue a full refund if they offer it. I doubt they would offer them, but if they did? Yep yep. I'm sorry, I just cannot play a tab target game. They're dreadfully boring. I'm only sinking money in because I'm invested in the dream of a good combat system in an otherwise nearly perfect game.
I'm not necessarily against (but definitely not for either) successive hits giving some kind of bonus, I just don't want the game to decide for me which successively hitting abilities give that bonus. Give it to all abilities, where any combination of the same amount of abilities can proc the bonus.
I still don't see the need though. If I land 3 abilities in a row I'm already getting everything I need from the abilities themselves, damage, a gap closer or opener, a cc, a long cast time or long wind up heavy damaging ability. Again a combo for me is, I opened with a fast cast moderate damage spell, he gap closed me, I fire blast stunned him, (I'm just making shit up here) I gap open teleported away, and then turned and cast a longer cast time meteor on him, dead. Simplistic example but I landed all of that perfectly, countered whatever he did, got my abilities off in the perfect time with perfect accuracy before he did, whether action or tab, and he's dead. Or seriously hurt. That's literally all I need. Each of the 4 actions/abilities I used against him either did damage, applied an effect to him, or to me, everything a combo would do. Except the combo was just the abilities. And each successive one I landed did more damage or set up the fight in a way that increased the chances I won, just like a combo would. Because it WAS a combo, in effect. I landed the shots. If I didn't the whole plan would have been screwed up or delayed.
The reward for hitting the initial fireball was his health hurt. The reward for getting the fireblast stun off was the ability to teleport away. The reward for teleporting away was the opportunity to get off a long cast time meteor before he could get to me. If I missed the initial fireball, the later meteor wouldn't have killed him and he'd be on me again. If I missed the stun or didn't get it off before he got his cc off, I'd probably be dead. If I teleported and hit a tree I wouldn't have had the distance to get the meteor off. If I screwed up any part of that combo, I'd probably die. I had to hit every shot successively, like a combo, because in effect it IS a combo.
I'm not necessarily against (but definitely not for either) successive hits giving some kind of bonus, I just don't want the game to decide for me which successively hitting abilities give that bonus. Give it to all abilities, where any combination of the same amount of abilities can proc the bonus.
I still don't see the need though. If I land 3 abilities in a row I'm already getting everything I need from the abilities themselves, damage, a gap closer or opener, a cc, a long cast time or long wind up heavy damaging ability. Again a combo for me is, I opened with a fast cast moderate damage spell, he gap closed me, I fire blast stunned him, (I'm just making shit up here) I gap open teleported away, and then turned and cast a longer cast time meteor on him, dead. Simplistic example but I landed all of that perfectly, countered whatever he did, got my abilities off in the perfect time with perfect accuracy before he did, whether action or tab, and he's dead. Or seriously hurt. That's literally all I need. Each of the 4 actions/abilities I used against him either did damage, applied an effect to him, or to me, everything a combo would do. Except the combo was just the abilities. And each successive one I landed did more damage or set up the fight in a way that increased the chances I won, just like a combo would. Because it WAS a combo, in effect. I landed the shots. If I didn't the whole plan would have been screwed up or delayed.
The reward for hitting the initial fireball was his health hurt. The reward for getting the fireblast stun off was the ability to teleport away. The reward for teleporting away was the opportunity to get off a long cast time meteor before he could get to me. If I missed the initial fireball, the later meteor wouldn't have killed him and he'd be on me again. If I missed the stun or didn't get it off before he got his cc off, I'd probably be dead. If I teleported and hit a tree I wouldn't have had the distance to get the meteor off. If I screwed up any part of that combo, I'd probably die. I had to hit every shot successively, like a combo, because in effect it IS a combo.
Would you mind giving an example tailored more to a class like Cleric or Bard where the attack abilities might be more limited, who have a higher reliance on physical attacks with their weapons, so that we can align better?
I really am sorry but I admit that I end up feeling kind of biased/negative against Mage based examples for these things, because it so often feels like Mage players don't see the game the same way as others and don't always empathize.
I know this is my own shortcoming and has nothing to do with you, but if you don't mind, please try one of those classes.
Everything else in your post Ugoogee, I agree with a lot of it, not all. People can swing a sword while in a full sprint, it's been done for thousands of years. Many thousands of people have been killed by sprinting people with swords, and hammers, and axes. They were killed by light attacks. You can't get the same torque you would while sprinting. If you were standing still you could do a heavy attack.
I don't think the game should root you in place or lunge you every time you swing a sword. But those attacks should be lighter damage. Heavy attacks should root or slow you in some kind of way. You have to line those up, wait for the right opportunity. I hope they test all of the different options, from roots to slows.
Same with abilities. I expect some abilities to have longer cast times or animations and various degrees of rooting dependent on how powerful the ability is. If I'm a mage, and a warrior gap closes me and I take off running away and the guy is right up on me moving as fast as I am while simultaneously executing his most powerful jumping backflip 2h sword overhead pulverizers without losing a step on me that's silly. Maybe the first one hits as I'm running away, but after that the brief either slow or root from his ability has made him lose a step on me and now he either needs to use a speed boost or a gap closer to line up another swing.
@Okeydoke Lmao I'm picturing the scenario of a mage running in fear from a warrior gap closing with that backflip attack.
I understand your views on how a Combo would work in an MMO and apologize if I came off too patronizing with my viewpoint. I come from a history of playing fighting games and just recently Monster Hunter Rise and Dark Souls 3 so I tend to view combat scenarios through those lens.
Ok I'm a warrior fighting a cleric. My damage is a lot better, but the cleric can outlast me unless I hit him with the wham bam combo at the right time. At one point the cleric flaming speared me from range, X damage, X damage from burning over X seconds, but I got up on him and started unloading, but then the cleric holy striked me, X damage and applies a slow to burning targets and the cleric backed off and healed up some while I was slowed. Cleric was using combinations of abilities (combos) to allow himself to heal. Burn, into slow because of burn, into back off and heal.
So now were back toe to toe, I know I'm running out of time, my health is slowly dropping and I have no heals, he does though. He's hurt a bit, but he intends to just keep whittling away at me and he has his best CC still. He's saving his stun to either land it on me and hit me with his hardest wind up ability, or land the stun and back off to heal.
But my damage is absolutely legit with my build when I land the right combination of abilities(combolol). He's around 75%. I hit him with penetrating strike, X damage, X damage over time from bleeding, then I hit him with no mercy, X damage with 100% more damage to bleeding targets. Cleric know's whats coming, trys to land his CC so he can get a big heal off, but I know he knows, I roll dodge out of his stunning strike, charge gap close, knock him down, he's a still bleeding throughout the knockdown, and about to get hit with my hardest wind up ability while he's knocked down cc'd. dead. The whole fight was a combo or the setting up of a combo.
If I had to guess, somewhere in the fine print it says no refunds outside of extraordinary circumstances. But I wouldn't even worry about that. To some extent were probably all going to be disappointed about certain things and happy about others. They're trying to do a hybrid system, it's been done before by other games, they'll probably get it done.
I'm just not sold on some of the more fighter game action mechanics talked about here. And I could be the one disappointed in the end. Steven can do whatever he wants, change whatever. But hopefully we get a good compromise middle ground.
To make the Hybrid Combat System better I feel like players should be able to freely toggle which form of combat to use similar to what they're testing in the Alpha. If a player wants to play with Root Motion Melee Combat while using Tab Targeting mode then they should be able to. If players want to use Split Body Melee Combat while using Action Combat mode then they should also be able be to.
Of course balancing abilities and weapons around that sort of game design would be difficult and necessary. The main focus should be making both forms of combat satisfying and responsive to use for their respective audience. The player should feel that if they ever randomly had one mode of combat chosen for them to play for the rest of their life, they would be satisfied with that given choice.
0
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Combos will most likely be via Weapons Skills rather than from Active Skills.
0
CypherMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
To make the Hybrid Combat System better I feel like players should be able to freely toggle which form of combat to use similar to what they're testing in the Alpha. If a player wants to play with Root Motion Melee Combat while using Tab Targeting mode then they should be able to. If players want to use Split Body Melee Combat while using Action Combat mode then they should also be able be to.
Of course balancing abilities and weapons around that sort of game design would be difficult and necessary. The main focus should be making both forms of combat satisfying and responsive to use for their respective audience. The player should feel that if they ever randomly had one mode of combat chosen for them to play for the rest of their life, they would be satisfied with that given choice.
Instead of allowing split body, we just need to do what’s been said several times which is make root motion attacks Omni-directional. Meaning if I press A while attacking my character will step left and slash for example. And the forward (W) attack should be a step instead of a ridiculous lunge. With these changes people won’t feel so out of control of their character and will barely notice being rooted. It’ll just feel like the character is swinging a sword. Combine this concept with combos and strings of attacks and you could still get a lot more movement if you wanted to, to different degrees based on the weapon you’re using.
Instead of allowing split body, we just need to do what’s been said several times which is make root motion attacks Omni-directional. Meaning if I press A while attacking my character will step left and slash for example. And the forward (W) attack should be a step instead of a ridiculous lunge. With these changes people won’t feel so out of control of their character and will barely notice being rooted. It’ll just feel like the character is swinging a sword. Combine this concept with combos and strings of attacks and you could still get a lot more movement if you wanted to, to different degrees based on the weapon you’re using.
@Cypher Like I suggested, I think we should allow Split Body combat AND we should also allow the Root Motion Combat that you just posted. Players can toggle between these two choices at a press of a button (with a cool down to prevent exploitable techs) and players should also freely be able to choose in tandem Tab Target Combat or Action Combat.
My thoughts to balancing this game design would require having weapon's and abilities' stats and effects adjusted depending on which form of combat is chosen.
To make the Hybrid Combat System better I feel like players should be able to freely toggle which form of combat to use similar to what they're testing in the Alpha. If a player wants to play with Root Motion Melee Combat while using Tab Targeting mode then they should be able to. If players want to use Split Body Melee Combat while using Action Combat mode then they should also be able be to.
Of course balancing abilities and weapons around that sort of game design would be difficult and necessary. The main focus should be making both forms of combat satisfying and responsive to use for their respective audience. The player should feel that if they ever randomly had one mode of combat chosen for them to play for the rest of their life, they would be satisfied with that given choice.
Instead of allowing split body, we just need to do what’s been said several times which is make root motion attacks Omni-directional. Meaning if I press A while attacking my character will step left and slash for example. And the forward (W) attack should be a step instead of a ridiculous lunge. With these changes people won’t feel so out of control of their character and will barely notice being rooted. It’ll just feel like the character is swinging a sword. Combine this concept with combos and strings of attacks and you could still get a lot more movement if you wanted to, to different degrees based on the weapon you’re using.
Bear in mind that it's not intuitive for everyone to understand why combos or combo systems matter. Developers don't expect people to think about 'recovery frames' because most people don't.
So even if you mention things like this, there's so much 'missing' in the model of a certain segment of the player population that there's no way to make the point. Even many action game players don't actually 'know how these things work', only how it feels to them.
Risk vs Reward in movement can't be understood without understanding 'the tradeoff of why I have to be unable to move for X fraction of a second after something'.
Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
2
CypherMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
That’s why we luckily have you compiling much of this stuff @Azherae =D
It’s far far far too much to include every aspect every time. I think for the bulk of the paragraph though, it’s pretty understandable to the average player how I described the movements.
Also, @Ugoogee I’m not sure how having both would be viable. There’s so many unforeseen issues that could arise from having both. I was proposing to do away with split body completely because the general consensus is it’s too floaty, but people complaining about the root motion need to be educated on why it feels bad currently instead of just scrapping it entirely. We’ve gone into that at length in previous pages and other threads if I recall.
@Cypher There are many unforeseen issues that can happen but AoC is still early in enough development where we are able to test these ideas and improve mistakes along the way.
Also some of our posts advocating for Root Motion Melee combat may come off as an ultimatum rather than education so we should all be conscious on how we type our posts, myself included.
Assuming Intrepid Studios create servers that are stable and responsive, here are my few suggestions to balancing toggled RMMC (Root Motion Melee Combat) and SBMC (Split Body Melee Combat):
Melee weapon attacks during RMMC need to be able to animation cancel into dodging and abilities. This allows players to regain some control and have skill expression with their characters. Animation canceling with a large two-handed battle axe should feel responsive but different compared to animation canceling with twin daggers.
Players actively dodging using RMMC will have increased I-Frames calculated by converting total Evasion stats from gear and attributes IE: Normal base I-Frames being 12 and every 20% a player has in Evasion, one I-Frame is increased and total Evasion is decreased by 15% for every I-Frame gained.
Player's melee weapon attacks using RMMC will slow players using SBMC by a rough percentage and time with possible variables being based on the weapon used to attack IE: Two-handed battle axe slows by 15% for 1 second because it's slower between attacks and less mobile, while twin daggers slow by 5% for 0.5 seconds because they attack faster and lunge a bit further during attacks. Also slows still proc at a slightly reduced percentage when attacks miss caused from the Evasion stat.
Players using SBMC can also animation cancel with dodges and abilities but the cost of doing so may increase resource usage IE: Players dodging after melee attacking use 10% more stamina compared to players using RMMC. Similar scenario can apply to canceling with abilities but with mana
Players actively dodging when using SBMC will have decreased I-Frames calculated by converting Evasion stats from gear and attributes IE: Normal base I-Frames being 12 and every 20% a player has in Evasion, one I-Frame is reduced.
It may sound like I'm nerfing players using SBMC but I'm factoring how they are more mobile while attacking, and I also have to make players using a certain mode of combat to still feel viable.
NOTE!: Scenarios and statistics are hypothetical to provide better examples.
For the PVE side of things, enemies should to be a bit more dynamic to make combat more engaging and complement the combat structure that Intrepid Studios aims to create. The crab that Steven fought during the recent Development Update could've been more nimble and scrappy similar to dogs seen in Dark Souls 3. The Ice Elder Dragon could've been more imposing and fierce with its attack similar to Nergigante in Monster Hunter World, but to a reasonable amount for an MMO.
Assuming Intrepid Studios create servers that are stable and responsive, here are my few suggestions to balancing toggled RMMC (Root Motion Melee Combat) and SBMC (Split Body Melee Combat):
Melee weapon attacks during RMMC need to be able to animation cancel into dodging and abilities. This allows players to regain some control and have skill expression with their characters. Animation canceling with a large two-handed battle axe should feel responsive but different compared to animation canceling with twin daggers.
Players actively dodging using RMMC will have increased I-Frames calculated by converting total Evasion stats from gear and attributes IE: Normal base I-Frames being 12 and every 20% a player has in Evasion, one I-Frame is increased and total Evasion is decreased by 15% for every I-Frame gained.
Player's melee weapon attacks using RMMC will slow players using SBMC by a rough percentage and time with possible variables being based on the weapon used to attack IE: Two-handed battle axe slows by 15% for 1 second because it's slower between attacks and less mobile, while twin daggers slow by 5% for 0.5 seconds because they attack faster and lunge a bit further during attacks. Also slows still proc at a slightly reduced percentage when attacks miss caused from the Evasion stat.
Players using SBMC can also animation cancel with dodges and abilities but the cost of doing so may increase resource usage IE: Players dodging after melee attacking use 10% more stamina compared to players using RMMC. Similar scenario can apply to canceling with abilities but with mana
Players actively dodging when using SBMC will have decreased I-Frames calculated by converting Evasion stats from gear and attributes IE: Normal base I-Frames being 12 and every 20% a player has in Evasion, one I-Frame is reduced.
It may sound like I'm nerfing players using SBMC but I'm factoring how they are more mobile while attacking, and I also have to make players using a certain mode of combat to still feel viable.
NOTE!: Scenarios and statistics are hypothetical to provide better examples.
For the PVE side of things, enemies should to be a bit more dynamic to make combat more engaging and complement the combat structure that Intrepid Studios aims to create. The crab that Steven fought during the recent Development Update could've been more nimble and scrappy similar to dogs seen in Dark Souls 3. The Ice Elder Dragon could've been more imposing and fierce with its attack similar to Nergigante in Monster Hunter World, but to a reasonable amount for an MMO.
Canceling animation mid-air will hurt in mmo cuz of high latency
@TomaszJaworski As I said, assuming Intrepid Studios create servers that are stable and responsive. It's also up to them if they allow canceling animations mid-air and to program and balance that around game design and internet connection strengths of players
@TomaszJaworski As I said, Assuming Intrepid Studios create servers that are stable and responsive. It's also up to them if they allow canceling animations mid-air and to program and balance that around game design and internet connection strengths of players
I think they've stated explicitly that they will not support animation cancellation.
@CROW3 Wow, thanks for posting that link. I've been posting my thoughts for Root Motion Combat in a way that's inconsistent to AoC's game design philosophy and have been cluttering up the comments. My bad everybody
It's all a work in progress Ugoogee, things could change. But I think what most of the community has asked for at this point is free flowing, fast paced combat. I know people have asked for previous animation time's to be reduced and previous animation iterations to be made less gaudy. Intrepid has listened to that some and made some changes.
That link that CROW3 posted is interesting though. If you click the little "70" notation by it it pulls up the live stream where that statement was made. "This is not a fighting game." That should clue a lot of people in to what's going on here and what the game is trying to be.
Nevertheless, he says no animation cancelling, which is not necessarily an exclusively fighting game mechanic anyway. "You're not going to be locked into animations for the most part." Well how would I unlock myself from an animation if there's no animation cancelling? Or are the animations just going to be that short?
I dunno, I'm a little unclear heh. That was Jeffrey Bard talking. He recently left the company to pursue his virtual reality work passion.
That’s why we luckily have you compiling much of this stuff @Azherae =D
It’s far far far too much to include every aspect every time. I think for the bulk of the paragraph though, it’s pretty understandable to the average player how I described the movements.
Also, @Ugoogee I’m not sure how having both would be viable. There’s so many unforeseen issues that could arise from having both. I was proposing to do away with split body completely because the general consensus is it’s too floaty, but people complaining about the root motion need to be educated on why it feels bad currently instead of just scrapping it entirely. We’ve gone into that at length in previous pages and other threads if I recall.
Totally fair, my point was moreso that we hadn't actually talked about that sort of thing at all, partially because it gets deep into theory that no one had engaged on yet. But I should answer @Okeydoke and since that's a smaller thing directly related to it, I'll cover it now.
Classes with few attack abilities need melee combos so that they don't just fall into the dreaded 'rotations'.
AoC doesn't plan to have too many hotbar skills, as I understand it, so we have to assume (hopefully at least) that they somewhat care about nuance in melee.
So, the reason why we care about Combos. Let's assume that my opponent has made a mistake and used an ability when they thought I was down or too far away, and they were wrong.
Split Body means I do a set amount of damage based on my weapon. The same damage I would have done if they stood there. But if I use an ability which I have the skill to hit with at another time, without having to wait for them to make a mistake, or they do this after I've used my abilities and they are on cooldown, then I can't take advantage of mistakes.
A new player can just 'mash the button and accept the set amount of damage'. This isn't terrible, they can learn later. They'll probably think 'this game is boring rotations' until someone shows them 'if you did one of these other two sequences of melee attacks, you'd do 15% more damage in the same amount of time, or put yourself in a good defensive position at the end instead of just being close, and without sacrificing damage'.
If my lunging Q, followed by my 'S+Q', followed by 'S+Q' again, does a sequence that ends in a big hit that does slightly more damage but has a longer windup/startup time on the third hit, it means that I can choose to risk 'my opponent evading this or stopping me' to get more damage.
Alternately I could still do lunging Q, S+Q, but then feel 'they are going to dodge and counterattack, I think they will dodge to my left, I will finish with A+Q instead'. With a large enough 'A+Q' travel distance, if I am right, I get to keep attacking. Bonus if this sequence causes a 'combo' where I go diagonally forward instead of just directly sideways. Maybe I can get behind them.
In both these cases, the combo animation offered me an option that Split Body animation doesn't offer, at the risk of 'being wrong, losing damage, having to recover and being unable to move while recovering, allowing my opponent to do their own things'.
If I don't have something like this, as a Cleric, then my 'combo' is just 'my rotation'. 'Use X skill to cause Y, use Y skill to cause Z'.
Except that Ashes doesn't require me to take any of those skills. I don't level Judgement in the Alpha now, and Castigation is a utility style skill that has a longer cooldown so I can't rely on it. I either 'save it for my rotation' or 'lose my only rotation'.
The boredom would kill me faster than my opponents (because Cleric OP). You can add Weapon Skills to this mix, to help the process, but if those are spammable, we have one type of problem, and if they are not, we have the same problem as Castigation.
The (so far) minimalistic intention of Ashes' abilities and more importantly the way they hope to give people freedom in their builds, practically requires some form of advanced melee combat for people who get bored doing simple rotations or 'waiting for the perfect moment to do their rotations' (and this one leads to bad balance).
So the 'recovery time' as a whole becomes important. Specifically 'the fact that you can't move during the recovery time'. It doesn't have to be overcomplicated. Games like this don't even support more than five combos per weapon, the depth comes from 'quickly deciding which of those to use' alongside all your abilities.
In fact, we could assume we only have 3 attack 'types'. Standing Q, Lunging Q, Strafing Q. And that easily gives us... a whopping 13 combos in most designs (because Strafing Q doesn't combo into itself or Standing Q sensibly). That's quite a lot, but unlikely to all be implemented for all weapons, depends on the combo system.
I'm going to go overboard again and list a bunch of things, but the part I request you focus on is the fact that you don't have to care about most of it at all.
Lunge, Lunge, Lunge - Risk: Fails on any opponent side movement unless you are super good. Reward: Long chase. Has long recovery, very risky. No special damage, might even be less.
Stand, Stand, Stand - Risk: Fails on opponent backing out of range. Reward: Short recovery. Maybe a little special damage so that it's popular and easy for beginners.
Stand, Stand, Lunge - Risk: Nearly none. Probably a default in PvP. Reward: This is the default, so technically nothing. No special damage, probably just looks like a regular lunging Q anyway.
Lunge, Lunge, Stand - Risk: Can still miss or be sidestepped early. Reward: Shorter recovery than triple lunge so you're safer. Also probably common. Basic PvE combo for a lot of people.
Lunge, Stand, Lunge - Risk: Probably has a long windup on the third hit and longer recovery, easy to sidestep. Reward: Bigger damage
Stand, Lunge, Stand - Risk: Variable depending on how Intrepid implements it, if at all.
Lunge, Stand, Stand - Risk: Basically nothing, this is a chase and the reward for succeeding. Might not even be implemented.
Stand, Strafe, Lunge - Risk: Strafing the wrong way, missing the lunge part after, both more likely. Also creates a big gap for opponent to do stuff. Reward: Dodges close range abilties and gets right back in. No special damage, probably looks like a regular lunging Q.
Strafe, Lunge, Stand - Risk: Depending on implementation, this is either the same as Lunge, Lunge, Stand, or specifically intended to take long so that you are vulnerable. Another PvE staple against dynamic enemies.
Lunge, Strafe, Lunge - Risk: Nothing, this is what Split Body vs any retreating Opponent would feel like now. Reward: Nothing, for the same reason. Maybe something cool for swords.
Stand, Lunge, Strafe - Risk: This is a predictive attack that can fail and leave you in recovery by your opponent doing nothing at all. Reward: Catches them if you're correct, maybe gets slightly behind them if diagonal.
Lunge, Stand, Strafe - Risk: Another predictive attack, same outcomes, or not implemented so you can just dodge with a normal Strafe.
Action Gamers are thinking 'yeah! More stuff!'. RPG players who don't like Action Games or don't like Action Game stuff in their RPGs probably think moreso 'Why do I have to care about all that?'.
But you don't. It's intuitive mostly and only two of these give bigger damage. One (Lunge, Stand, Lunge) is easy to dodge, the other (Stand, Stand, Stand) requires you to be in range for the whole three swings, and doesn't move the attacker forward.
So what looks 'complicated', 'unnecessary', or for some people 'annoying'/'overwhelming', barely affects them unless they really don't like trying to dodge. At which point, they 'shouldn't' care about Split Body either. If these sound 'unnecessary', great. Don't use them. The depth they add is a specific type of thing which is enjoyed by people who literally 'just like to press more buttons and see more cool stuff happen'. That's what Action Combat is primarily about. Giving the player the feeling that they are the one doing the things and that the things they do matter in the way they expect.
That's where I expect Split Body to fail, actually. I feel that it will eventually get to the point where you are doing more things, but they won't matter in the way most people expect, for balance reasons (as well as making mobs more boring because mobs won't have combos either).
Which is why I personally would accept it if I was wrong about that. Just because I've never personally seen it done doesn't mean it can't be.
But boredom is the enemy of an MMO's longevity, right there on the list after 'balance problems'.
Finally had a chance to play the game with the split body combat (I've been out of town). This game feels LIGHT YEARS better with free movement. I don't care how fat the swing feels compared to how fun free movement will be in the end product. I'm a simple dude. Let me move, hit people and mitigate damage for my raid. People out here talking about intricate combo systems, heavy movements, "immersion through combat" in an mmo........come on. All aboard the freedom train.
Free movement during combat, the "hybrid" combat can include left click to attack, right click to block (or possibly a secondary style of attack based on classes/weapons?), and a dodge while attacks deal damage based on an arc or some sort of pattern (again, based on classes and weapons). This right here would keep me in game for years.
Well it all depends on what their final combat iterations end up like. We have a 10 slot bar now, will that increase? How long will cooldowns be on average? How important is resource management going to be in the equation? For instance ESO had 10 abilities, 2 ultimates, no cooldowns on the 10 abilities. Resource management (stamina, magicka) was the focus, not cooldowns. Will Ashes be like that or the opposite, or a mix of both?
Ashes is all a work in progress right now with those questions unanswered. You definitely know what you're talking about with this stuff but some of your points are dependent on the answers to those questions. I'd like to point you to this. https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Weapon_use_combo_system
It's probably not entirely what you're after, but auto attacks will have meaning in the game.
All I can talk about is the vision that the developers have laid out (which is subject to change at any time). But they've laid out a general vision and it would require large changes to incorporate some of the things talked about in this thread. Fundamentally game changing changes. And it could happen, just doubtful.
And I can talk about my own opinions, which are just opinions. Much of root motion combat is not based in reality. In real life, humans have split body motion and are fully capable of swinging melee weapons with reasonable accuracy and lethal force while in a full sprint. But there is a lot of nuance too, of course the act of swinging something can slow, root, or mildly alter a human's otherwise normal movement, dependent on that person's strength and dexterity. So how much should be simulated by a game? Some probably. Sprinting creates inertia, some games simulate that.
But a lot of the root movement action combat I see is from Eastern games. And they LOVE to heavily over stylize their combat. It's not based in any type of reality that has ever existed. You see it in their games, in their movies, and in their anime. (Not that any of this has to be based in reality, they're games, movies, and anime, the point is that it's just to the extreme far from reality.)
I personally am open to some root movement combat mechanics, but very mild forms of it. As far as combos, I've talked about how the abilities are combos. Yes, if abilities are lacking or on such high cooldowns that were left with dead time then there's a problem. But all of that remains to be seen.
Most MMO players want ability focused combat. Even a game like New World, it's cool, it's fun, I'm going to play it. But ability wise it's so simple, graphics aside, mechanically, it could probably be ported to mobile. A lot of MMO players want more than 6 abilities.
Comments
Indeed. Many people are not, and many people are. And Intrepid is in the unenviable position of eventually having to tell one of those sets of people 'sorry, you're not getting what you want'.
But according to the last Dev Discussion on Hybrid Combat, the 'score' is somewhere between 75-36, and 60-51, depending on how you count certain perspectives.
You can check here if you want. It's counted already, and you can decide how to count them yourself and what they mean. Here's the link to the Dev Discussion.
Most of those people didn't say what combos they wanted to do or not do.
No one has said anything about having a ton of dodges. The key points here for one type of attack vs another are 'to offer one additional dodge', 'to offer one guaranteed lunge', 'to offer some number of additional threats from melee when opponents make mistakes and not need to use an ability for it'.
Some people just like hitting buttons and combos. There's no reason they shouldn't have that if it doesn't affect your gameplay, and it doesn't have to.
Intrepid is in a rough position with this and they're not going to please everyone. But watch the last monthly live stream update where Steven unveiled the free movement auto attacking. Based on the reactions you'd think he had just announced everyone in there was getting a million dollars.
The forums are a very small sample. And anyone who doesn't align with the full action combat left click spam crowd get's browbeat and told they're boomers and have no skill. Which isn't true, just intimidation. But it keeps a lot of people from speaking up. Doesn't work on me.
Also from my understanding of Synergies in gaming is: status, effects and functions of abilities or attacks that complement each other when used together.
@Okeydoke you gave great examples of Synergies like casting Fire Reduction onto an enemy to throwing Fireball to deal extra damage. However, that sequence would not "Combo" if you quickly casted Fire Reduction but it took more than 2 seconds to channel Fireball as a follow up attack.
I also agree AoC shouldn't play like Chivalry because its Melee Weapon Combat looks very similar to the Split Body Animation Combat implemented in AoC's recent Alpha Testing, ESO, and Guild Wars 2. These games have Melee Weapon Combat that feel responsive because players are able to turn and move their character mid weapon swing similar to shooting a machine gun and strafing in COD or Fortnite(or gathering materials with a pickaxe in this case) This I feel removes the commitment to starting an attack and visually looks inconsistent.
When it comes to Melee Weapon Root Motion Combat players should briefly be committed to an attack and trajectory. If I attack once with a sword without directional inputs I should expect one sword attack in place but I briefly shouldn't be able to move my character's position until the attack animation is finished or decide to do another attack, dodge or an ability. However the direction of the same sword attack can briefly be changed in one direction during the start up animation on the character's pivot by quickly changing the camera position. This pivot can happen for each individual sword attack during the weapon combo animation. If I press W and attack once with a sword I should expect one sword attack stepping forward and the same rules previously described should be applied. Replace W with other directional keys and same rules and scenarios should apply. This style of combat incentivizes players to think about their decisions and if they choose wrong then they either get punished or have to spend additional resources to correct themselves.
I know Melee Weapon Root Motion Attack rotation and trajectories based on mouse position may be contradicting my previous quote from @Cicaeda about using WASD to implement this, but I think it may be one way to solve people's issue about having to commit to a trajectory while performing an attack.
So it is, I was pretty surprised at it too. If it really is the more popular way, or if the Hybrid Combat gets removed, I can only hope that they allow those people who no longer want to play, to refund something, but there's no obligation for them to do that. Same for people who understood something else based on what they said and opted in based on it.
I'm glad that you don't feel intimidated by those who say things like that.
Oh, 100% if they decide to not go through with the task of making a combat system for both tab and action players like they originally said in Kickstarter (every poll has shown action is more desired by the way), I will absolutely pursue a full refund if they offer it. I doubt they would offer them, but if they did? Yep yep. I'm sorry, I just cannot play a tab target game. They're dreadfully boring. I'm only sinking money in because I'm invested in the dream of a good combat system in an otherwise nearly perfect game.
I still don't see the need though. If I land 3 abilities in a row I'm already getting everything I need from the abilities themselves, damage, a gap closer or opener, a cc, a long cast time or long wind up heavy damaging ability. Again a combo for me is, I opened with a fast cast moderate damage spell, he gap closed me, I fire blast stunned him, (I'm just making shit up here) I gap open teleported away, and then turned and cast a longer cast time meteor on him, dead. Simplistic example but I landed all of that perfectly, countered whatever he did, got my abilities off in the perfect time with perfect accuracy before he did, whether action or tab, and he's dead. Or seriously hurt. That's literally all I need. Each of the 4 actions/abilities I used against him either did damage, applied an effect to him, or to me, everything a combo would do. Except the combo was just the abilities. And each successive one I landed did more damage or set up the fight in a way that increased the chances I won, just like a combo would. Because it WAS a combo, in effect. I landed the shots. If I didn't the whole plan would have been screwed up or delayed.
The reward for hitting the initial fireball was his health hurt. The reward for getting the fireblast stun off was the ability to teleport away. The reward for teleporting away was the opportunity to get off a long cast time meteor before he could get to me. If I missed the initial fireball, the later meteor wouldn't have killed him and he'd be on me again. If I missed the stun or didn't get it off before he got his cc off, I'd probably be dead. If I teleported and hit a tree I wouldn't have had the distance to get the meteor off. If I screwed up any part of that combo, I'd probably die. I had to hit every shot successively, like a combo, because in effect it IS a combo.
Would you mind giving an example tailored more to a class like Cleric or Bard where the attack abilities might be more limited, who have a higher reliance on physical attacks with their weapons, so that we can align better?
I really am sorry but I admit that I end up feeling kind of biased/negative against Mage based examples for these things, because it so often feels like Mage players don't see the game the same way as others and don't always empathize.
I know this is my own shortcoming and has nothing to do with you, but if you don't mind, please try one of those classes.
I don't think the game should root you in place or lunge you every time you swing a sword. But those attacks should be lighter damage. Heavy attacks should root or slow you in some kind of way. You have to line those up, wait for the right opportunity. I hope they test all of the different options, from roots to slows.
Same with abilities. I expect some abilities to have longer cast times or animations and various degrees of rooting dependent on how powerful the ability is. If I'm a mage, and a warrior gap closes me and I take off running away and the guy is right up on me moving as fast as I am while simultaneously executing his most powerful jumping backflip 2h sword overhead pulverizers without losing a step on me that's silly. Maybe the first one hits as I'm running away, but after that the brief either slow or root from his ability has made him lose a step on me and now he either needs to use a speed boost or a gap closer to line up another swing.
I understand your views on how a Combo would work in an MMO and apologize if I came off too patronizing with my viewpoint. I come from a history of playing fighting games and just recently Monster Hunter Rise and Dark Souls 3 so I tend to view combat scenarios through those lens.
So now were back toe to toe, I know I'm running out of time, my health is slowly dropping and I have no heals, he does though. He's hurt a bit, but he intends to just keep whittling away at me and he has his best CC still. He's saving his stun to either land it on me and hit me with his hardest wind up ability, or land the stun and back off to heal.
But my damage is absolutely legit with my build when I land the right combination of abilities(combolol). He's around 75%. I hit him with penetrating strike, X damage, X damage over time from bleeding, then I hit him with no mercy, X damage with 100% more damage to bleeding targets. Cleric know's whats coming, trys to land his CC so he can get a big heal off, but I know he knows, I roll dodge out of his stunning strike, charge gap close, knock him down, he's a still bleeding throughout the knockdown, and about to get hit with my hardest wind up ability while he's knocked down cc'd. dead. The whole fight was a combo or the setting up of a combo.
I'm just not sold on some of the more fighter game action mechanics talked about here. And I could be the one disappointed in the end. Steven can do whatever he wants, change whatever. But hopefully we get a good compromise middle ground.
Of course balancing abilities and weapons around that sort of game design would be difficult and necessary. The main focus should be making both forms of combat satisfying and responsive to use for their respective audience. The player should feel that if they ever randomly had one mode of combat chosen for them to play for the rest of their life, they would be satisfied with that given choice.
Instead of allowing split body, we just need to do what’s been said several times which is make root motion attacks Omni-directional. Meaning if I press A while attacking my character will step left and slash for example. And the forward (W) attack should be a step instead of a ridiculous lunge. With these changes people won’t feel so out of control of their character and will barely notice being rooted. It’ll just feel like the character is swinging a sword. Combine this concept with combos and strings of attacks and you could still get a lot more movement if you wanted to, to different degrees based on the weapon you’re using.
@Cypher Like I suggested, I think we should allow Split Body combat AND we should also allow the Root Motion Combat that you just posted. Players can toggle between these two choices at a press of a button (with a cool down to prevent exploitable techs) and players should also freely be able to choose in tandem Tab Target Combat or Action Combat.
My thoughts to balancing this game design would require having weapon's and abilities' stats and effects adjusted depending on which form of combat is chosen.
Bear in mind that it's not intuitive for everyone to understand why combos or combo systems matter. Developers don't expect people to think about 'recovery frames' because most people don't.
So even if you mention things like this, there's so much 'missing' in the model of a certain segment of the player population that there's no way to make the point. Even many action game players don't actually 'know how these things work', only how it feels to them.
Risk vs Reward in movement can't be understood without understanding 'the tradeoff of why I have to be unable to move for X fraction of a second after something'.
It’s far far far too much to include every aspect every time. I think for the bulk of the paragraph though, it’s pretty understandable to the average player how I described the movements.
Also, @Ugoogee I’m not sure how having both would be viable. There’s so many unforeseen issues that could arise from having both. I was proposing to do away with split body completely because the general consensus is it’s too floaty, but people complaining about the root motion need to be educated on why it feels bad currently instead of just scrapping it entirely. We’ve gone into that at length in previous pages and other threads if I recall.
Also some of our posts advocating for Root Motion Melee combat may come off as an ultimatum rather than education so we should all be conscious on how we type our posts, myself included.
Melee weapon attacks during RMMC need to be able to animation cancel into dodging and abilities. This allows players to regain some control and have skill expression with their characters. Animation canceling with a large two-handed battle axe should feel responsive but different compared to animation canceling with twin daggers.
Players actively dodging using RMMC will have increased I-Frames calculated by converting total Evasion stats from gear and attributes IE: Normal base I-Frames being 12 and every 20% a player has in Evasion, one I-Frame is increased and total Evasion is decreased by 15% for every I-Frame gained.
Player's melee weapon attacks using RMMC will slow players using SBMC by a rough percentage and time with possible variables being based on the weapon used to attack IE: Two-handed battle axe slows by 15% for 1 second because it's slower between attacks and less mobile, while twin daggers slow by 5% for 0.5 seconds because they attack faster and lunge a bit further during attacks. Also slows still proc at a slightly reduced percentage when attacks miss caused from the Evasion stat.
Players using SBMC can also animation cancel with dodges and abilities but the cost of doing so may increase resource usage IE: Players dodging after melee attacking use 10% more stamina compared to players using RMMC. Similar scenario can apply to canceling with abilities but with mana
Players actively dodging when using SBMC will have decreased I-Frames calculated by converting Evasion stats from gear and attributes IE: Normal base I-Frames being 12 and every 20% a player has in Evasion, one I-Frame is reduced.
It may sound like I'm nerfing players using SBMC but I'm factoring how they are more mobile while attacking, and I also have to make players using a certain mode of combat to still feel viable.
NOTE!: Scenarios and statistics are hypothetical to provide better examples.
For the PVE side of things, enemies should to be a bit more dynamic to make combat more engaging and complement the combat structure that Intrepid Studios aims to create. The crab that Steven fought during the recent Development Update could've been more nimble and scrappy similar to dogs seen in Dark Souls 3. The Ice Elder Dragon could've been more imposing and fierce with its attack similar to Nergigante in Monster Hunter World, but to a reasonable amount for an MMO.
Canceling animation mid-air will hurt in mmo cuz of high latency
I think they've stated explicitly that they will not support animation cancellation.
Edit: Yep, here.
That link that CROW3 posted is interesting though. If you click the little "70" notation by it it pulls up the live stream where that statement was made. "This is not a fighting game." That should clue a lot of people in to what's going on here and what the game is trying to be.
Nevertheless, he says no animation cancelling, which is not necessarily an exclusively fighting game mechanic anyway. "You're not going to be locked into animations for the most part." Well how would I unlock myself from an animation if there's no animation cancelling? Or are the animations just going to be that short?
I dunno, I'm a little unclear heh. That was Jeffrey Bard talking. He recently left the company to pursue his virtual reality work passion.
Totally fair, my point was moreso that we hadn't actually talked about that sort of thing at all, partially because it gets deep into theory that no one had engaged on yet. But I should answer @Okeydoke and since that's a smaller thing directly related to it, I'll cover it now.
Classes with few attack abilities need melee combos so that they don't just fall into the dreaded 'rotations'.
AoC doesn't plan to have too many hotbar skills, as I understand it, so we have to assume (hopefully at least) that they somewhat care about nuance in melee.
So, the reason why we care about Combos. Let's assume that my opponent has made a mistake and used an ability when they thought I was down or too far away, and they were wrong.
Split Body means I do a set amount of damage based on my weapon. The same damage I would have done if they stood there. But if I use an ability which I have the skill to hit with at another time, without having to wait for them to make a mistake, or they do this after I've used my abilities and they are on cooldown, then I can't take advantage of mistakes.
A new player can just 'mash the button and accept the set amount of damage'. This isn't terrible, they can learn later. They'll probably think 'this game is boring rotations' until someone shows them 'if you did one of these other two sequences of melee attacks, you'd do 15% more damage in the same amount of time, or put yourself in a good defensive position at the end instead of just being close, and without sacrificing damage'.
If my lunging Q, followed by my 'S+Q', followed by 'S+Q' again, does a sequence that ends in a big hit that does slightly more damage but has a longer windup/startup time on the third hit, it means that I can choose to risk 'my opponent evading this or stopping me' to get more damage.
Alternately I could still do lunging Q, S+Q, but then feel 'they are going to dodge and counterattack, I think they will dodge to my left, I will finish with A+Q instead'. With a large enough 'A+Q' travel distance, if I am right, I get to keep attacking. Bonus if this sequence causes a 'combo' where I go diagonally forward instead of just directly sideways. Maybe I can get behind them.
In both these cases, the combo animation offered me an option that Split Body animation doesn't offer, at the risk of 'being wrong, losing damage, having to recover and being unable to move while recovering, allowing my opponent to do their own things'.
If I don't have something like this, as a Cleric, then my 'combo' is just 'my rotation'. 'Use X skill to cause Y, use Y skill to cause Z'.
Except that Ashes doesn't require me to take any of those skills. I don't level Judgement in the Alpha now, and Castigation is a utility style skill that has a longer cooldown so I can't rely on it. I either 'save it for my rotation' or 'lose my only rotation'.
The boredom would kill me faster than my opponents (because Cleric OP). You can add Weapon Skills to this mix, to help the process, but if those are spammable, we have one type of problem, and if they are not, we have the same problem as Castigation.
The (so far) minimalistic intention of Ashes' abilities and more importantly the way they hope to give people freedom in their builds, practically requires some form of advanced melee combat for people who get bored doing simple rotations or 'waiting for the perfect moment to do their rotations' (and this one leads to bad balance).
So the 'recovery time' as a whole becomes important. Specifically 'the fact that you can't move during the recovery time'. It doesn't have to be overcomplicated. Games like this don't even support more than five combos per weapon, the depth comes from 'quickly deciding which of those to use' alongside all your abilities.
In fact, we could assume we only have 3 attack 'types'. Standing Q, Lunging Q, Strafing Q. And that easily gives us... a whopping 13 combos in most designs (because Strafing Q doesn't combo into itself or Standing Q sensibly). That's quite a lot, but unlikely to all be implemented for all weapons, depends on the combo system.
I'm going to go overboard again and list a bunch of things, but the part I request you focus on is the fact that you don't have to care about most of it at all.
Stand, Stand, Stand - Risk: Fails on opponent backing out of range. Reward: Short recovery. Maybe a little special damage so that it's popular and easy for beginners.
Stand, Stand, Lunge - Risk: Nearly none. Probably a default in PvP. Reward: This is the default, so technically nothing. No special damage, probably just looks like a regular lunging Q anyway.
Lunge, Lunge, Stand - Risk: Can still miss or be sidestepped early. Reward: Shorter recovery than triple lunge so you're safer. Also probably common. Basic PvE combo for a lot of people.
Lunge, Stand, Lunge - Risk: Probably has a long windup on the third hit and longer recovery, easy to sidestep. Reward: Bigger damage
Stand, Lunge, Stand - Risk: Variable depending on how Intrepid implements it, if at all.
Lunge, Stand, Stand - Risk: Basically nothing, this is a chase and the reward for succeeding. Might not even be implemented.
Stand, Strafe, Lunge - Risk: Strafing the wrong way, missing the lunge part after, both more likely. Also creates a big gap for opponent to do stuff. Reward: Dodges close range abilties and gets right back in. No special damage, probably looks like a regular lunging Q.
Strafe, Lunge, Stand - Risk: Depending on implementation, this is either the same as Lunge, Lunge, Stand, or specifically intended to take long so that you are vulnerable. Another PvE staple against dynamic enemies.
Lunge, Strafe, Lunge - Risk: Nothing, this is what Split Body vs any retreating Opponent would feel like now. Reward: Nothing, for the same reason. Maybe something cool for swords.
Stand, Lunge, Strafe - Risk: This is a predictive attack that can fail and leave you in recovery by your opponent doing nothing at all. Reward: Catches them if you're correct, maybe gets slightly behind them if diagonal.
Lunge, Stand, Strafe - Risk: Another predictive attack, same outcomes, or not implemented so you can just dodge with a normal Strafe.
Action Gamers are thinking 'yeah! More stuff!'. RPG players who don't like Action Games or don't like Action Game stuff in their RPGs probably think moreso 'Why do I have to care about all that?'.
But you don't. It's intuitive mostly and only two of these give bigger damage. One (Lunge, Stand, Lunge) is easy to dodge, the other (Stand, Stand, Stand) requires you to be in range for the whole three swings, and doesn't move the attacker forward.
So what looks 'complicated', 'unnecessary', or for some people 'annoying'/'overwhelming', barely affects them unless they really don't like trying to dodge. At which point, they 'shouldn't' care about Split Body either. If these sound 'unnecessary', great. Don't use them. The depth they add is a specific type of thing which is enjoyed by people who literally 'just like to press more buttons and see more cool stuff happen'. That's what Action Combat is primarily about. Giving the player the feeling that they are the one doing the things and that the things they do matter in the way they expect.
That's where I expect Split Body to fail, actually. I feel that it will eventually get to the point where you are doing more things, but they won't matter in the way most people expect, for balance reasons (as well as making mobs more boring because mobs won't have combos either).
Which is why I personally would accept it if I was wrong about that. Just because I've never personally seen it done doesn't mean it can't be.
But boredom is the enemy of an MMO's longevity, right there on the list after 'balance problems'.
Aaaand this turned into an essay again. Fine...
Free movement during combat, the "hybrid" combat can include left click to attack, right click to block (or possibly a secondary style of attack based on classes/weapons?), and a dodge while attacks deal damage based on an arc or some sort of pattern (again, based on classes and weapons). This right here would keep me in game for years.
Ashes is all a work in progress right now with those questions unanswered. You definitely know what you're talking about with this stuff but some of your points are dependent on the answers to those questions. I'd like to point you to this. https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Weapon_use_combo_system
It's probably not entirely what you're after, but auto attacks will have meaning in the game.
All I can talk about is the vision that the developers have laid out (which is subject to change at any time). But they've laid out a general vision and it would require large changes to incorporate some of the things talked about in this thread. Fundamentally game changing changes. And it could happen, just doubtful.
And I can talk about my own opinions, which are just opinions. Much of root motion combat is not based in reality. In real life, humans have split body motion and are fully capable of swinging melee weapons with reasonable accuracy and lethal force while in a full sprint. But there is a lot of nuance too, of course the act of swinging something can slow, root, or mildly alter a human's otherwise normal movement, dependent on that person's strength and dexterity. So how much should be simulated by a game? Some probably. Sprinting creates inertia, some games simulate that.
But a lot of the root movement action combat I see is from Eastern games. And they LOVE to heavily over stylize their combat. It's not based in any type of reality that has ever existed. You see it in their games, in their movies, and in their anime. (Not that any of this has to be based in reality, they're games, movies, and anime, the point is that it's just to the extreme far from reality.)
I personally am open to some root movement combat mechanics, but very mild forms of it. As far as combos, I've talked about how the abilities are combos. Yes, if abilities are lacking or on such high cooldowns that were left with dead time then there's a problem. But all of that remains to be seen.
Most MMO players want ability focused combat. Even a game like New World, it's cool, it's fun, I'm going to play it. But ability wise it's so simple, graphics aside, mechanically, it could probably be ported to mobile. A lot of MMO players want more than 6 abilities.