Greetings, glorious testers!

Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.

To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.

A Compromise between action and tab target combat systems. Getting only the best from both!

13»

Comments

  • George_BlackGeorge_Black Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited August 2021
    A modernized tab target mmo with tab target exactly as you know it with: dash/teleport
    Leap back or teleport (dragoon)
    Active roll dodge(not as you know it in action combat. It would be a class skill for a few classes. Cooldown and mp cost Small evasion stat boost to the maximum while the character performs a roll dodge animation).
    Active block (not as you know it in sction combat. Class skill for some classes. Cooldown and mp cost. Character performs a shield, dual wield, two handed block animation. Greatly boosts p defence for a very short period. You cant hold it to have it active. Doesnt affect magic attacks. Now there should be an additional block for tanks, requiring a shield. Same mechanics but blocks all types of dmg for a bit more. The animation lasts more. Imagine knight with shield blocking mage prysm atk or dragon firebreath).

    Not action combat. Modernized tabtarget with animations tied to simulated "action block/dodge" p. def boosts and evasion boosts.
    Class locked a must.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Merek wrote: »

    I don't know about that, no matter how well they're made, most tab-target games feel like garbage. They're the definition of mindlessly spam space while running your 1-5 attack rotation. I had fun with them, as I mentioned above, but they don't come close to action games in the slightest.

    Take the most basic part of an MMO, a boss fight and just look how half-assed they are in tab-target MMO's. They will either turn them into some puzzle piece game like in FFXIV or just a "move out of the circle to not die" like in others.
    If you are able to use the word "rotation", you are playing a bad example of the genre.

    I totally agree with you that games with rotations are mindless spam. However, that is not inherent to tab target games, it is just common in poorly developed ones.

    Also, the two videos you links, I have a very specific issue with. We just finished stating that tab target games are not designed to look good, action games are.

    Comparing this to the discussion that was on these forums about the games website. Someone wanted more bright colors, and flashy animations and such. Basically, they wanted Fortnites web design for Ashes. The Ashes website is more muted in tone, more gritty even.

    Those bright colors and that animation, that is designed to appeal to kids. It's visual, attention grabbing, but
    often completely lacking in any information being conferred. Ashes website has all the information that Intrepid want to give players in a fairly easy format - the website is functional.

    In terms of combat, action combat is flashy, there's a lot of movement going on. That doesn't make it deep, it doesn't mean it is good to play, it makes it interesting to look at.

    A tab target game doesn't care what it looks like. It doesn't care because the genre was invented at a point in time where the only way you could show someone what it looked like was to have them literally sitting next to you while you played it, so that person wasn't looking at the game, they were looking at the enjoyment that player was having playing the game.

    When you have a game that is like this, you can't just show a video of that game and say "see what this looks like?".

    This is akin to filming a game of chess (a game not designed for a televised audience) and then comparing it to a game of football (any kind, they are all designed for a televised audience now) and then pointing out how boring that game is chess is.

    One is designed to be a spectator sport, one is designed purely, 100% for the enjoyment of the person playing it.
  • OkeydokeOkeydoke Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    @Merek They both look kinda boring to me, but killing AI doesn't do much for me. The DDO action one looks a lot better though. I don't see why more tab target games don't use boss mechanics like that. You give a tab target game a block and a dodge or the right kinds of active abilities, I don't see why it's bosses can't have those same kinds of mechanics.
  • CypherCypher Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Okeydoke wrote: »
    I'm fine with light/heavy attacks and blocking Cypher. I'd almost expect them, whether in hybrid or what people call enhanced tab. Especially blocking. Light and heavy attacks I just wouldn't want them to be the focus of combat in an mmo though, moreso used as filler or mana saving attacks, opportunistic attacks in the case of heavy attacks.

    I prefer tab in mmos, but I play the hybrid/action ones too. I've loved some and hated some, same with tab mmos, loved some and hated some. WoW was incredibly boring to me. I had never played it before until the WoW classic relaunch a couple years ago. Raiding killed it for me. It was hours of standing still casting frostbolt over and over, until occasionally you have to go stand somewhere else and cast frost bolt.

    It was like country line dancing, best analogy I can think of. I enjoyed the 5 man dungeons more than the 40 man content.

    Yeah totally. I wouldn’t expect the basics to be the focus either, just have to be more engaging thsn holding a button and letting the game play for you. And you said it perfectly about heavy attacks, use them opportunistically which creates more player choice and slightly more skill gap (when to use and when to not). So we agree on this.

    Your example of WoW combat is basically how I felt as well, along with all the other tabs I have played. So to a degree I think we agree here too. More incentive to make hybrid work since you do prefer tab but you don’t care for the “boring” aspect of it. I think you’d appreciate if the tab target skills would auto-aim, and be able to be dodged or blocked by the opponent? You still get auto aim which is basically what tab is, but it simply changes how the opponent gets to react. This could be the common ground the community needs, which is what the OP wants (me too). Based on your even more recent reply to Merek, I’d say yes we’ve reached common ground.
    Azherae wrote: »
    Cypher wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Cypher wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Cypher wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Cypher wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Cypher wrote: »
    Once again, if player uses tab, it just means they do not have to aim the ability. It aims for them. There is no hit chance or evade chance. Only Attack vs Defense stats in this scenario.
    The problem here is that means all players are restricted to using action based defenses all the time.

    That is as acceptable as making it so players have to use tab target defenses all the time - which is to say completely unacceptable.

    You can't have a combat system in which you give players the choice between being largely tab or largely action for attacks, and then tell them they have to be action for defense - especially not when tab target is your stated fallback.

    Again, this is why it is a design nightmare.

    Are you saying tab players want to stand still and click buttons and not even worry about being hit because presumably their equipment has a high enough evade stat? Sounds absolutely miserably boring and totally un-immersive. There’s just no other way to do it than what I suggested. Tab players have to leave their comfort zone a bit just like action players have to leave theirs.

    I don't think that's quite what is being said.

    For example, a Tab Target player is already going to having to dodge things like Ground AoE and telegraphs. So there's no direct argument to be made for 'well I don't want to have to move', so that's a thing. There isn't currently a 'stat that protects you from Hallowed Ground' other than 'getting off the light show'.

    More accurately it would mean that a certain type of ability would need to have a different startup, or indicator, to tell the player 'you need to do something to move your character so that this person does not have perfect line shot to you', which reduces the 'snappy' and 'speed' of certain combat.

    That's where Action Combat players would have to meet TT players in the middle, actually. If TT players are going to be forced to 'move to increase their Evasion against Abilities', they will need more indicators that this is necessary.

    Game already mostly has these (except Javelin sorta). What's harder is 'exactly how much', 'what players will think of it', etc.

    EDIT: Also, some Tab Target fans want exactly that. Depending on the complexity of the requirements, it's less boring, if you're a person that isn't bored by a lack of kinetics in your games.

    Yeah, there is a misconception among many people that haven't played good tab target games that you can just stand still all the time, this is obviously not the case. It isn't as mobile as an action game, but that is by design, and is what defensive stats are a thing.

    Where something like what you are talking about here would fall down though, is when you have 3 or 4 people all attacking you at a time.

    It would work really well in 1v1 situations, and perhaps even when you have two people on you. However, as soon as you have more than that, it simply wouldn't cope as a system - despite the fact that a tab target system still allows you to defend against 3+ other players effectively.

    Tell me what you consider a good tab target MMO. I’ve tried about 3, maybe 4 tab games so I’m curious. I’ll save some time in case one of them is FF14 because the movement is barely needed, it’s tacked on through glowing stuff on the ground telling you to wake up from your coma and move a few steps over. I spent most of my time in that game (and WoW) standing still and pressing through a long list of hotkeys unless the spot I was standing on started to glow.

    The difference between a person with 320ms reaction time and one with 170ms reaction time is so meaningful in high octane action gaming and fighters that one has to literally build systems from the ground up to give players with slower reaction times fair ways to compensate, that can't be easily utilized (or aren't worth it) to fast reaction time players.

    And so, Evasion Stat or iFrames. Faster players get the same benefits as slower ones within an acceptable range, and then they capitalize faster and harder on mistakes, tilting their playstyles toward riskier plays. Win-win... sorta.

    I mean I wouldn’t like it but at the absolute very least if it was the way you described before with having the general attack cone still matter in addition to an evasion stat it could work. I’m just not willing to make massive concessions when I haven’t seen any tab players give anything up or meet in the middle. I haven’t heard a single tab-only player say they would be willing to even tolerate the simple proposals I made today about blocking and light/heavy basics. Best I’ve seen was George say a pure tab target game with blocking and movement.

    But in the end, that's not really an argument you need to make at all. Present Intrepid with the best possible way of doing what you're asking for, and they're already at least considering it. The goal would be to 'get to a system that has no obvious flaws', not 'negotiate aspects', per se.

    So, on that note, I point out something you're familiar with. Vindictus has moves that range from 10 to 15 frames (EDIT: of 'startup', before they hit) on average. These are, by most standards, borderline unreactable for the average person, actually unreactable for about 20-30% of people, and 'normal or slow' to a superhuman few. Learning or knowing the moves does not change this much. At least, not more than 'random biology'. Did you drink enough water in the last hour? No? Unreactable.

    This means that to a nontrivial portion of the population, there is actually no skill involved in them playing Vindictus. It's mashing and guessing the whole way. And for a similarly sized portion of the population, it's nice, pushes on their mind, makes them feel engaged and active.

    But it means one other interesting thing above all that.

    For some people, they are never actually dodging based on seeing something in Vindictus. Not even 'guessing, expecting, then seeing and reacting'. Because biologically they cannot.

    Some get caught up in the flashiness and think it's super fun and play anyway. Some don't, label it silly and don't play. That's not something that optical processing biology decides.

    But those people need their Evasion Stat, because 'skill' only goes so far when you see things 4 frames slower than other people and the game is tuned to feel good rather than 'be completely fair' (potential Ashes problem, not talking about Vindictus)

    I haven’t had issues with reacting to enemies, including other players, in Vindictus. Or heard of any before. I think there’s a flaw in your data, kind of anyway. The initial strike might be super fast, but that’s not the full picture. In Vindictus, to do any reasonable amount of damage to your opponent you’d have to land a smash attack (a heavy attack, at the end of a combo). For the example, I will use Fiona who is a tank and is very easy to describe the combos for and we’ll also say “L” is a basic sword swing while “R” is a smash. You do these one after another, not at the same time (so longer strings take a lot more time, spanning the buttons will not make it go faster).
    You could do L,R which would be a swing and then a fast spin with an upward slash. It’s quick but it’s still not a lot of damage.
    You could do L,L,R which is two swings and then a shield bash. You can even do R twice, for two shield bashes in a row. More damage than the first, took longer to do.
    Let’s skip ahead to L,L,L,R which is three swings followed by a windup into a very powerful kick. This does the most damage but at the cost of getting through 3 uninterrupted swings, all of which were opportunities for your opponent to get distance, stagger you which would make you have to start from scratch, or be damaging you with their own attacks while you’re trying to get through your swings to your big hit.
    So sure, each individual basic attack is very fast and borderline uncounterable, but you’re not looking to counter basic attacks, you’re looking to avoid or block or counter your enemies heavy (smash) attacks.

    I hope this was enlightening, I didn’t mean to make it so long but I figured we were overdue for getting into some of the details of that game.

    I understand it actually, but that's kind of the point. Ashes abilities aren't likely to be 'third hit of a sequence that gives you a hint of what is about to happen'. Tanks are going to Javelin you 'right now', and your ability to do anything about it might just be zero.

    Also, in a way you might have missed my point, but I'm not sure. If you are saying 'I can respond to the third strike, that's not a problem, the design is fine', then yeah, I can see that easily., because the third strike in a Vindictus combo is quite late. Were you saying that the data on reaction time itself was flawed? The data on 'the reaction time's likely effect on Vindictus'?

    Conceded entirely, that was a poor way to make the point and derailed from it, since I was trying not to go directly into fighting game stuff again.

    Where do you want me to elaborate on this, from? Vindictus is, technically, too slow of a game to be relevant, I guess.

    Yeah the two aren’t entirely comparable, especially based on what might be getting us close to a good compromise. Your frame data seems sound, I shouldn’t have said data before. I meant the concept of being unable to react to your opponent was wrong. But I think we’re on the same page now. I’m not sure what you should elaborate on next. My main goal I think is going to be doing what the OP is doing and campaigning for what seems to be something multiple people are agreeing on in this thread so far (yay!)
    Merek wrote: »
    Cypher wrote: »
    Tell me what you consider a good tab target MMO. I’ve tried about 3, maybe 4 tab games so I’m curious. I’ll save some time in case one of them is FF14 because the movement is barely needed, it’s tacked on through glowing stuff on the ground telling you to wake up from your coma and move a few steps over. I spent most of my time in that game (and WoW) standing still and pressing through a long list of hotkeys unless the spot I was standing on started to glow.

    Personally, the only tab-target MMO I ever truly enjoyed was ArcheAge. There are so many things about it that made me forget that it was tab-target, not only did the game have a great setting, interesting life skills and a ridiculous array of content, the tab-target felt good. It was the small things that made it feel more action oriented than it truly was, such as gap-closers traversing height/plane differences, general attack animations feeling quite weighted, etc. But, even after saying that, I loathe it. Because no matter what gimmicks they put into those games, they always end up as you said, a "standing still and pressing through a long list of hotkeys unless the spot I'm standing on starts to glow" simulator.
    Noaani wrote: »
    Cypher wrote: »
    @Noaani Thank you for the thoughtful explanation. I’ll look into some videos of EQ2 based on what you’ve said about it being essentially the cream of the crop. I also find it an interesting point you make about the content vs the combat. I guess I’ve always been more of a “if I can’t actively enjoy playing, I may as well be watching the story as a movie” type of people. Hoping we can sort this combat out so we get about 50% combat 50% content, just using your own scale :)

    EDIT: so I looked up some EQ2 gameplay and I unfortunately can’t see the difference between it and other tab games.

    From the perspective of videos, you wont. Tab target games are not made to look good, they are made to play good.

    Remember, back when most tab target games were made (especially the ones that formed the style), YouTube didnt even exist. Action combat exists in no small part to make it more attractive to watch, rather than to play.

    This is why I do agree that a compromise for adding more movement to a tab target game is a good way to start modernizing it.

    I don't know about that, no matter how well they're made, most tab-target games feel like garbage. They're the definition of mindlessly spam space while running your 1-5 attack rotation. I had fun with them, as I mentioned above, but they don't come close to action games in the slightest.

    Take the most basic part of an MMO, a boss fight and just look how half-assed they are in tab-target MMO's. They will either turn them into some puzzle piece game like in FFXIV or just a "move out of the circle to not die" like in others.

    Would you say the system we seem to be forging an alliance on in this thread might work for you then? Without going over each facet in too much detail we essentially are talking about having an active/dedicated block, light and heavy basic attacks, tab target abilities operate as auto aimed abilities but can be blocked or dodged by the opponent, possible crit chance / crit resist / or other RNG stat as a replacement for evasion stat since you’ll be actively dodging or evading by moving (jury is still out on this last idea).
    Cnuppels1 wrote: »
    Merek wrote: »
    Cypher wrote: »
    Tell me what you consider a good tab target MMO. I’ve tried about 3, maybe 4 tab games so I’m curious. I’ll save some time in case one of them is FF14 because the movement is barely needed, it’s tacked on through glowing stuff on the ground telling you to wake up from your coma and move a few steps over. I spent most of my time in that game (and WoW) standing still and pressing through a long list of hotkeys unless the spot I was standing on started to glow.

    Personally, the only tab-target MMO I ever truly enjoyed was ArcheAge. There are so many things about it that made me forget that it was tab-target, not only did the game have a great setting, interesting life skills and a ridiculous array of content, the tab-target felt good. It was the small things that made it feel more action oriented than it truly was, such as gap-closers traversing height/plane differences, general attack animations feeling quite weighted, etc. But, even after saying that, I loathe it. Because no matter what gimmicks they put into those games, they always end up as you said, a "standing still and pressing through a long list of hotkeys unless the spot I'm standing on starts to glow" simulator.
    Noaani wrote: »
    Cypher wrote: »
    @Noaani Thank you for the thoughtful explanation. I’ll look into some videos of EQ2 based on what you’ve said about it being essentially the cream of the crop. I also find it an interesting point you make about the content vs the combat. I guess I’ve always been more of a “if I can’t actively enjoy playing, I may as well be watching the story as a movie” type of people. Hoping we can sort this combat out so we get about 50% combat 50% content, just using your own scale :)

    EDIT: so I looked up some EQ2 gameplay and I unfortunately can’t see the difference between it and other tab games.

    From the perspective of videos, you wont. Tab target games are not made to look good, they are made to play good.

    Remember, back when most tab target games were made (especially the ones that formed the style), YouTube didnt even exist. Action combat exists in no small part to make it more attractive to watch, rather than to play.

    This is why I do agree that a compromise for adding more movement to a tab target game is a good way to start modernizing it.

    I don't know about that, no matter how well they're made, most tab-target games feel like garbage. They're the definition of mindlessly spam space while running your 1-5 attack rotation. I had fun with them, as I mentioned above, but they don't come close to action games in the slightest.

    Take the most basic part of an MMO, a boss fight and just look how half-assed they are in tab-target MMO's. They will either turn them into some puzzle piece game like in FFXIV or just a "move out of the circle to not die" like in others.

    ArcheAge (tab-target) -
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FzpwPd0394

    DDO (action combat) -
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKS25IM-NXg

    I think the main disadvantage of an Action Combat system, is that it have to rely on some sort of active blocking mechanism. If you look closely without byas, this DDO gameplay is about pressing a button for block, waiting for enemy attack, than attacking when the enemy is vulnerable for a short time window. There were not that many skill uses, and the focus of the gameplay is constant motion. This too could apply in the system Intrepid is trying to make, just take out the blocking, and add in multiple skill uses and attacks. :)

    I was under the impression you were of the mindset that an active block is a good thing? I fail to see the problem with what you described. If a player with a shield stays in their block until after an attack and then taking advantage of the small opening to attack, that sounds like exactly what that role is supposed to be doing. It sort of baffles me you end by saying “take out the blocking” because that’s the whole point of having a shield in the game, or any other weapons that can block an attack like a greatsword. In Ashes there will be plenty of abilities, so I don’t think you’ll have to worry about it being too similar to the Dragons Dogma footage. Hopefully we’re pretty close to common ground here. Hopefully Steven and Co are quietly paying attention to all of this and taking notes because I have no idea how else to get these mostly-unanimous ideas to them.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Cypher wrote: »

    Would you say the system we seem to be forging an alliance on in this thread might work for you then? Without going over each facet in too much detail we essentially are talking about having an active/dedicated block, light and heavy basic attacks, tab target abilities operate as auto aimed abilities but can be blocked or dodged by the opponent, possible crit chance / crit resist / or other RNG stat as a replacement for evasion stat since you’ll be actively dodging or evading by moving (jury is still out on this last idea).
    Almost, but this is a much harder thing to single out than many of us here would think.

    One of the key aspects of a combat system for top end raid content is that the encounter needs to be able to be kept still. Without this one aspect being true, there is a massive limitation on what mechanics you can implement - this one thing in itself is responsible for most of the difference in content quality and variety between tab and action combat games. It's worth noting here that a game with a combat system where a tank can hold a mob still can still implement content where the tank and mob move, but a combat system where the tank moves and thus the mob moves can't really implement an encounter where both are still.

    In order to hold a mob still, a tank needs to remain still. In order to remain still, a tank needs to have defenses that don't require him to move. This is why if you look up a video of competent raiders from a tab target game, everything will look perfectly boring. The more boring it *looks*, the better it is going. Videos for entertainment purposes in tab target games are generally people screwing up, or purposefully doing things wrong (Leeroy Jenkins, etc).

    Now, obviously, this doesn't hold true for solo or small group content, and is absolutely not the case in PvP. In fact, I have yet to see a PvP game where standing still is anything other than suicide, and I don't expect to ever see it - regardless of action or tab combat. This type of content NEEDS movement to be interesting, and the lack of it is why I said above that solo content is mind-numbingly boring in most tab target games.

    This is something that can be fixed - adding movement to the game in solo and small group situations, but without adding it in top end PvE content.

    This is why I wouldn't just say adding dodge to a tab target game is a good idea - it needs a lot more nuance than that. I mean, adding more movement is good, it just needs to be done in a way that doesn't ruin the aspects of tab target games that make (some of) them great.

    I mean, if someone were to make a tab target game that didn't have the capacity for interesting and varied top end content - I think both of us would just look at that thinking "what the fuck is this...?"
Sign In or Register to comment.