Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
Crowd control should not be based on RNG
Guli
Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
i just dont like the idea where you pray that your CC actually hits or not, and im not talking about balancing right now, this is about CC. Not what class has it or not, but if it should be guaranteed hit or not.
if its guaranteed = skills matter more than RNG
if its not (like it is now in alpha) = if you have bad luck you will die to the on who has better luck.
toughts?
if its guaranteed = skills matter more than RNG
if its not (like it is now in alpha) = if you have bad luck you will die to the on who has better luck.
toughts?
11
Comments
If it is RNG with no modifiers, I agree it is bad.
However, if there are modifiers that players have control of (specific stats that increase the chance for CC to land, and other stats to increase your chances of having them not), then it is no longer just about RNG and is now about player preparation and build - two key things that set RPG's above other games.
im sorry but, even if you increase the % for the CC to land its still rng unless its 100%. it will be painful in pvp if you do everything perfectly but your 1 and only CC does not land.
Yes it will be painful.
So create a better build.
If you are playing a game where there is reason for CC not landing, and you run a build with only one CC, when it fails, you only have yourself to blame.
uhhh? what?
Which part did you not understand?
I'm ok with that level of RNG, because you can mitigate a core fundamental to RPGs - dice.
Nvm
RPGs weren't designed for PvP.
And, yeah, if it's gonna come down to character skills v player twitch skills - character skills should trump.
Ashes combat will always have some RNG - because it's an RPG.
Action combat will have less RNG than Tab Target.
not sure what it has to do with it being an RPG, at least when you play DND you maybe get a story for why your CC missed.
That’s what you get for wanting pvp in an RPG, wtf is that supposed to mean? PvP is core to AoC design.
I’m also not totally onboard with the percent chances especially tied to gear. Unless PvE mobs frequently are using CC this would basically be creating PvP gear. Feels a lot like resilience from WoW but with CC instead of crit/dots.
I really preferred my initial assumptions on how they would do CC where it would be primarily skill shot based. At least that way if it misses you got outplayed.
MMORPGs typically had PvP in them as an after-thought.
MMORPGs are RPGs before they are PvP games... and RNG is a fundamental element of RPGs.
Gamers wanted MMORPGs to have PvP - which they weren't really designed for - and that's why there are then complaints about class nerfs and re-balancing of 1v1 PvP combat....and RNG.
So, since PvP is one of the first things in Ashes, does that mean it is not an RPG?
But i will have to add that its not only:
"if its guaranteed = skills matter more than RNG
if its not (like it is now in alpha) = if you have bad luck you will die to the on who has better luck."
But also:
if its guaranteed = it's predictable and your next skill is guaranteed which makes Hard CC lock a thing
(Not considering Instant CC removal or CC immunity skills)
if its not = if you have bad luck you have to improvise on the fly, maybe use another CC right after? follow-up? Disengage? Reposition? Do you try to build more CC chance or more CC resist?
Aren't we all sinners?
all im trying to say tbh is the game will be less frustrating the less rng there is.
I've never been a subscriber to the notion that removing RNG makes player skill matter more.
The only way this is accurate is if you consider "player skill" and "player ability to memorize one specific combination of abilities and then reproduce that" to be synonymous with each other.
As you state above, with an element of RNG in combat, players need to think, re-evaluate, calculate. Any one of these demonstrates more player skill than repeating an ability combination.
Involving an element of RNG in to the game also means players are given more options on how to create a build than without it, as I have yet to come across an RNG element in an RPG's combat system that both the attacker and defender couldn't influence.
Games with hit chance RNG allow players to increase their chance to hit, and to increase their chance to avoid. Games with crits allow players to increase their crit chance, and often the amount of additional damage a crit does. Players often also have the ability to increase their resistance to crit hits, both in terms of reducing the chance they will take one, and reducing the additional damage they do when the player does get hit by one.
The same is often the case for CC.
This added RNG doesn't reduce the need for player skill at all. What it does is it enhances the value of player skill in building their character (do I want a higher chance of my CC's landing, a higher chance of others CC's not landing on me, more CC's to cast, more CC breaks, etc). In terms of RPG's, character build is a key aspect of player skill (even if in some popular games it is expected that you just follow someone else's build).
However, that RNG, coupled with that build strategy, combine to give the player options in combat. With no RNG, the "option" is to cast their CC on the target. Not a lot of player skill in that. With RNG, they have the option of casting their CC on their target, but then need to have a backup plan in mind for if that fails.
How people can say the no RNG situation elevates player skill is beyond me.
Less frustrating I can agree with.
But - if the game gives players the means to increase the chances of there CC's landing, that gives players an avenue to deal with that frustration.
I mean, it's frustrating when I don't have good enough gear to kill a mob I want to kill. Rather than complaining about that, I go out and get better gear, then kill the mob.
If CC's not landing is often a source of frustration to you, go out and get better gear to make your CC's land, or create a better build for that than what you have.
Player frustration isn't something to be designed out of a game, it is something to give players a means to progress around.
we can agree to disagree, ty tho
Another way to look at this would be - the same uncertainty you're attempting to mitigate for a stun to land (or a stun to fail) can also work in your favor.
An adventure is a journey with an uncertain outcome. As such, I'd rather figure out how to mitigate uncertainty instead of the world/game becoming more certain.
This, you got it!
RNG isn't a detriment to player skill at all, but a test for player adaptability and fast judgement to unpredictable possibilities and outcomes, aswell as properly building your character to improve your odds.
No RNG in MMORPGS is just bland and predictable.
Aren't we all sinners?
I can see where you are coming from but in practice, i disagree. It's more something you have to deal with then something you get to react to. it's not like being hit by an rng stun means you get to change up your whole playstyle.
Noaani's 'solution' of 'get better gear/builds' won't get you to 100%. And if you can get to 100% then it is 'mandatory' to build because hard cc is just that strong.
Gear reducing stun chance or length is just a bandaid solution that quickly becomes mandatory in most games with hard cc (or worse, pure attack gear so you can burst before the stun happens.) Rng on stun is also a bandaid. If the stun had more prerequisites such as team skill combinations, or was simply not hard cc, there would be real adaptations to consider. But otherwise? Stale boring meta and gameplay.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Yhr9WpjaDzw
I like having 100% chance of stunning a target but the target should have a 100% chance of dodging/parrying or blocking it too with an ability
Also prefer crits not being rng but having a ability ''Your spells critically hit for 3 seconds'' or ''your next attack will be a critical hit'' stuff like that
Nothing makes me hulk smash my table harder than using an ability that requires aiming and the target RNG% dodge/block/parrying it
Every game I have played has had specific player actions cause stuns. There is RNG in terms of whether it lands on you or not, but that is not the same thing as being hit by an RNG stun (it is simply being hit by a stun that another player specifically used on you).
I would agree that RNG stuns would be a poor game design choice, but as I said, I have not seen them.
Indeed it won't.
And it shouldn't.
When i think rng stun, i'm reminded of mace spec warriors from wow where their auto attacks had a ~5% chance to stun their targets. In bc, there was also a mace that that had a similar effect built onto the weapon.
I'd like to hear where you are coming from.
To me, if a ability has a chance to stun, it should just stun, not have a chance.